|
|
Post by timpollard on Jul 6, 2022 21:03:08 GMT
Am I reading this correctly?
If my British infantry are Shooters firing at approaching Zulus (Warband) they'd both have a Combat Factor of 3.
So everything else being equal the 3 vs. 3 CF's would mean the British have no effect on the Zulus (unless being aided by one or two more elements which would boost their CF to 4 or 5, which would force a Recoil from the warband - but there'd be no way to actually destroy them). Is this correct?
(If the Zulus were Hordes, CF2 they'd be destroyed by a CF of 4 though, right?).
|
|
|
|
Post by davidjconstable on Jul 7, 2022 0:03:02 GMT
At Isandlwana the British formed up as a skirmish line initially, roughly one man every two yards, you could see it on the battlefield.
The continuous firing caused barrels to overheat and rounds to jam in them, causing the final defence line nearer the camp to be about one man every three to four yards.
The British might have held it to an even fight with three times the number, but simply did not have the firepower for a long fight, the Martini Henry was not designed for it.
It is not a bad rifle out to about 500 yards for slow single round firing, and if you hit the stomach area the round can even carry on into the person behind.
David Constable
|
|
|
|
Post by timpollard on Jul 7, 2022 6:14:57 GMT
At Isandlwana the British formed up as a skirmish line initially, roughly one man every two yards, you could see it on the battlefield. The continuous firing caused barrels to overheat and rounds to jam in them, causing the final defence line nearer the camp to be about one man every three to four yards. The British might have held it to an even fight with three times the number, but simply did not have the firepower for a long fight, the Martini Henry was not designed for it. It is not a bad rifle out to about 500 yards for slow single round firing, and if you hit the stomach area the round can even carry on into the person behind. David Constable Many thanks for your reply, and yes, I've visited Isandlwana (and all of the other battlefields in the Anglo-Zulu War). Despite the tactical situation in that instance there were many instances of the British holding back tenacious Zulu assaults with withering firepower - my question was that this doesn't seem to be modelled in the HOTT/HotE rules. It was a question about my rules interpretation really - was my example correct that on open ground Shooters can't defeat a Warband? |
|
|
|
Post by martin on Jul 7, 2022 7:27:11 GMT
Am I reading this correctly? If my British infantry are Shooters firing at approaching Zulus (Warband) they'd both have a Combat Factor of 3. So everything else being equal the 3 vs. 3 CF's would mean the British have no effect on the Zulus (unless being aided by one or two more elements which would boost their CF to 4 or 5, which would force a Recoil from the warband - but there'd be no way to actually destroy them). Is this correct? (If the Zulus were Hordes, CF2 they'd be destroyed by a CF of 4 though, right?). Hi Tim You haven’t added on the respective dice rolls. Each side rolls a D6 and adds it to their combat factor… EG - so if Shooters rolled 6 the end figure is (3+6 =) 9. If the warband rolled 1 the end figure is (3+1=) 4….so Zulus ‘doubled’ and destroyed. If the Zulus had rolled anything from 2 to 5 in this case then they would be ‘beaten’ (with an accumulated score of 5, 6, 7, or 8) and therefore recoil. Also the Shooter could concentrate fire. eg if one shooter is aided by a second then the target receives a -1….so even more likely to recoil or be destroyed. With a third shooter at the same target it gets even more risky for the Wb, with 2 x -1 factors. NB in the Hordes of the Empire intro the rules variant authors do suggest (p2 para 3) that once the ‘regulars’ are being armed with breechloaders or better then the massed warriors are better played as warband or hordes, reducing their effectiveness from previous classifications as eg spears/blades. |
|
|
|
Post by timpollard on Jul 7, 2022 11:15:46 GMT
Oh my word, how did I miss that?
Thank you so much, that makes *much* more sense. And I'm an idiot!
|
|
|
|
Post by martin on Jul 7, 2022 19:08:57 GMT
Oh my word, how did I miss that? Thank you so much, that makes *much* more sense. And I'm an idiot! Nope…just not used to DBx 🙃 |
|
