Another thought on Sparabara | Fanaticus

jim1973
Senator

Posts: 1,037

Another thought on Sparabara Mar 1, 2019 12:54:54 GMT

Quote

Post by jim1973 on Mar 1, 2019 12:54:54 GMT

The robust discussion I've had on another thread had me re-reading the accounts of Hoplites v Sparabara. One thing that was clearly missing was the struggle "at the shields". Ruminating on this I did a little experiment with 4 on 4. The only rule change I made was that the sparabara did not recoil. This is quite plausable if they fought behind pavise-like shields.
The hoplites have a 1 in 6 of destroying the sparabara but can't get the help of overlaps from recoils. I gave the Greeks 2 PIPs to reform their line on their bound. The Persians got to shoot but didn't advance (why would they?)
A quick 10 play test gave an average survival of the Persians 5.5 turns. The Persians did get both bow and cc kills.
This is not playtesting in game situation but I'd be interested in your thoughts.

Cheers

Jim

davidjconstable
Centurion

Posts: 318

Another thought on Sparabara Mar 1, 2019 16:55:08 GMT

Quote

Post by davidjconstable on Mar 1, 2019 16:55:08 GMT

It is possible/probable that the Persians fought from behind the wall of shields more often than we realise.

If you look at the extent of the Persian empire at the time of Marathon, you will realise that an awful lot of the enemies on their frontier were some form of light horse/horse archer.
The thought intrudes that in fact what we see at Marathon and other battles in the West was typical fighting for the Persian army.

David Constable

Last Edit: Mar 3, 2019 9:48:52 GMT by davidjconstable: The word "NOT" intruded, my error, "was not typical" should just read "was typical".

greedo
Tribune

Posts: 833

Another thought on Sparabara Mar 1, 2019 17:25:59 GMT

Quote

Post by greedo on Mar 1, 2019 17:25:59 GMT

Mar 1, 2019 12:54:54 GMT jim1973 said:

The robust discussion I've had on another thread had me re-reading the accounts of Hoplites v Sparabara. One thing that was clearly missing was the struggle "at the shields". Ruminating on this I did a little experiment with 4 on 4. The only rule change I made was that the sparabara did not recoil. This is quite plausable if they fought behind pavise-like shields.
The hoplites have a 1 in 6 of destroying the sparabara but can't get the help of overlaps from recoils. I gave the Greeks 2 PIPs to reform their line on their bound. The Persians got to shoot but didn't advance (why would they?)
A quick 10 play test gave an average survival of the Persians 5.5 turns. The Persians did get both bow and cc kills.
This is not playtesting in game situation but I'd be interested in your thoughts.

Cheers

Jim

I actually really like this. It makes the new 8Bw into something unique instead of just new 4Ax with bowfire.
It also syncs well with EAP's existing Horde elements. 8Bw become Hd with bowfire and lower PIP requirement (QK will be different too).

The only thing we were running into from a game perspective is making sure that each Bow element (3/4/8) was worthwhile taking, and it wasn't an "autotake" to take 1 over the other.

I will try to playtest this in my next tests. Certainly a very simple change.

Last Edit: Mar 1, 2019 18:01:25 GMT by greedo

Contribute to the DBA Wiki!
It'll ensure none of these discussions/suggestions/battle reports/army pics get lost!

fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Fanaticus_DBA_Wikia

To quote Two Fat Lardies "Play the history. Not the rules!"

stevie
Emperor

Posts: 3,195

Another thought on Sparabara Mar 1, 2019 22:56:34 GMT

Quote

Post by stevie on Mar 1, 2019 22:56:34 GMT

It’s certainly a worthy idea Jim.
I assume that in your mini play-test you had 8Bw with a combat factor of 3 against side-supported spears CF of 5.
It would allow the Persian Sparabara to at least stand up to Hoplites, as they did at Ephesus.
But what about the other wider considerations?

For many years people have complained that both 4Ax and 4Bw are too weak in DBA to perform as the histories said they did.
Primuspilus’ proposal of giving both solid Ax and solid Bows a +1 when fighting Bd/Sp/supported Pk (because under the DBA
combat system a combat factor of 3 cannot stand up to a combat factor of 5) cures both weakness in one neat package.
How will your suggestion affect other armies in other periods?
Will all 8Bw elements in all periods get this no recoil...or are you simply looking at the Persians and ignoring everyone else?
(See here for a list of all the 8bw users in DBA: fanaticus.boards.net/post/15918/ )

Plus it won’t do anything for the Hundred Years War English 4Bw to help them stand against dismounted French men-at-arms
(which is what most players are bothered with), so we will still need the +1 for 4Ax and 4Bw when fighting heavy foot.
Do you really want 8Bw to have a potential CF of 4 and no recoil as well?
Isn’t that making 8Bw far too powerful, when they were not credited as such by the historical accounts?

Some Helpful Downloads can be found here: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
And here is the latest Jan 2019 FAQ: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ_2019_1st_Quarter

jim1973
Senator

Posts: 1,037

Another thought on Sparabara Mar 2, 2019 12:11:08 GMT

Quote

Post by jim1973 on Mar 2, 2019 12:11:08 GMT

Mar 1, 2019 17:25:59 GMT greedo said:

Mar 1, 2019 12:54:54 GMT jim1973 said:

The robust discussion I've had on another thread had me re-reading the accounts of Hoplites v Sparabara. One thing that was clearly missing was the struggle "at the shields". Ruminating on this I did a little experiment with 4 on 4. The only rule change I made was that the sparabara did not recoil. This is quite plausable if they fought behind pavise-like shields.
The hoplites have a 1 in 6 of destroying the sparabara but can't get the help of overlaps from recoils. I gave the Greeks 2 PIPs to reform their line on their bound. The Persians got to shoot but didn't advance (why would they?)
A quick 10 play test gave an average survival of the Persians 5.5 turns. The Persians did get both bow and cc kills.
This is not playtesting in game situation but I'd be interested in your thoughts.

Cheers

Jim

I actually really like this. It makes the new 8Bw into something unique instead of just new 4Ax with bowfire.
It also syncs well with EAP's existing Horde elements. 8Bw become Hd with bowfire and lower PIP requirement (QK will be different too).

The only thing we were running into from a game perspective is making sure that each Bow element (3/4/8) was worthwhile taking, and it wasn't an "autotake" to take 1 over the other.

I will try to playtest this in my next tests. Certainly a very simple change.

Hi greedo.

What I envisage is the Persian player deciding where to place his line, marching to it and then hunkering down. They'll get 2 chances at 1-in-9 (20% cumulative) to get a bowfire kill, provided they get the Greeks to come to them. Then they will get more time to try and work away around the flanks. They may get a kill but this is rare. But they won't need to waste PIPs reforming/adjusting this line, allowing them more options on the flanks. In contrast, the Greek general will hopefully have to make decisions about whether to use PIPs to adjust the flanks or reform the hoplite line. This will hopefully create the game tension lacking currently. We'll see.

Cheers

Jim

jim1973
Senator

Posts: 1,037

Another thought on Sparabara Mar 2, 2019 12:27:11 GMT

Quote

Post by jim1973 on Mar 2, 2019 12:27:11 GMT

Mar 1, 2019 22:56:34 GMT stevie said:

It’s certainly a worthy idea Jim.
I assume that in your mini play-test you had 8Bw with a combat factor of 3 against side-supported spears CF of 5.
It would allow the Persian Sparabara to at least stand up to Hoplites, as they did at Ephesus.
But what about the other wider considerations?

For many years people have complained that both 4Ax and 4Bw are too weak in DBA to perform as the histories said they did.
Primuspilus’ proposal of giving both solid Ax and solid Bows a +1 when fighting Bd/Sp/supported Pk (because under the DBA
combat system a combat factor of 3 cannot stand up to a combat factor of 5) cures both weakness in one neat package.
How will your suggestion affect other armies in other periods?
Will all 8Bw elements in all periods get this no recoil...or are you simply looking at the Persians and ignoring everyone else?
(See here for a list of all the 8bw users in DBA: fanaticus.boards.net/post/15918/ )

Plus it won’t do anything for the Hundred Years War English 4Bw to help them stand against dismounted French men-at-arms
(which is what most players are bothered with), so we will still need the +1 for 4Ax and 4Bw when fighting heavy foot.
Do you really want 8Bw to have a potential CF of 4 and no recoil as well?
Isn’t that making 8Bw far too powerful, when they were not credited as such by the historical accounts?

Some Helpful Downloads can be found here: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
And here is the latest Jan 2019 FAQ: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ_2019_1st_Quarter

Hi stevie.

I think the title of the thread pretty much describes where my thoughts are centred. I don't profess to an encyclopaedic knowledge of global warfare spanning 4500 years. Just saying that makes my brain hurt! I am envious of people like PB and their amazing store of knowledge. But that's not my lot in life.
I'm just trying to get something to work a bit better for the areas I'm most interested. (I do have other armies, like Saxons and Vikings. But I'm not getting into the whether the Vikings fought in shield/spearwall argument).
Mostly, I'm trying to get some House Rules for a fifth century campaign I want to create. That's where I can use some thoughts I have about Spartans (they get a bonus but you get less real Spartiates the further you are from Sparta and the higher the helot unrest level) and Immortals, amateur militia, etc. Looking at the maths of -1 factors to help. Maybe even d8.
I leave the 100 years war to others. As you know, I'd love to see a set of tournament rules with optional period specific rules in the future.

Cheers

Jim

davidjconstable
Centurion

Posts: 318

Another thought on Sparabara Mar 2, 2019 13:12:44 GMT

Quote

Post by davidjconstable on Mar 2, 2019 13:12:44 GMT

The problem with knowledge is that it gets out of date very quickly.
I eliminated a lot of my early books, only a few years later to realize it was a mistake, ending up replacing them when I could with in some cases ex library books.

What we believe, and what happened stand a very good chance of being very different.
Scott will tell you about the medical book that belonged to my Grandfather, his wife used it as bedtime reading, she was horrified that some of the treatments were more likely to kill than to cure.

Be very careful about being certain you are correct, use a very wide range of sources, and always ask "WHY", assume you are wrong until you are fairly sure you are correct.
If lucky you might be slightly more than 50% correct.

David Constable

stevie
Emperor

Posts: 3,195

Another thought on Sparabara Mar 2, 2019 14:51:32 GMT

Quote

Post by stevie on Mar 2, 2019 14:51:32 GMT

Mar 2, 2019 12:27:11 GMT jim1973 said:

I think the title of the thread pretty much describes where my thoughts are centred. I don't profess to an encyclopaedic knowledge of global warfare spanning 4500 years. Just saying that makes my brain hurt! I am envious of people like PB and their amazing store of knowledge. But that's not my lot in life.
I'm just trying to get something to work a bit better for the areas I'm most interested. (I do have other armies, like Saxons and Vikings. But I'm not getting into the whether the Vikings fought in shield/spearwall argument).
Mostly, I'm trying to get some House Rules for a fifth century campaign I want to create. That's where I can use some thoughts I have about Spartans (they get a bonus but you get less real Spartiates the further you are from Sparta and the higher the helot unrest level) and Immortals, amateur militia, etc. Looking at the maths of -1 factors to help. Maybe even d8.
I leave the 100 years war to others. As you know, I'd love to see a set of tournament rules with optional period specific rules in the future.

Fair enough Jim.

I’ll add this thread to the “House Rules Index” when I get a chance to update it.

Some Helpful Downloads can be found here: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes
And here is the latest Jan 2019 FAQ: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ_2019_1st_Quarter
[/quote]