|
Post by kugener on Sept 26, 2023 16:06:13 GMT
Can anyone explain me the rational behind Auxilia being immune to Wb impetuous charge quick kill. I understand the quick kill as being the result of impetus breaking the unit cohesion. One could argue that they are immune due to their loose formation, but 4Aux are declared the perfect counter to Wb.
Any historical/tactical explanation?
|
|
|
Post by skb777 on Sept 26, 2023 17:59:07 GMT
Because apparently they managed to do it in one battle *flippancy* against the Roman's means they can quick kill blade in every round. I personally think the whole 'Celtic Charge' thing is a bit blown out of proportion because of this.
|
|
|
Post by Brian Ború on Sept 26, 2023 19:23:20 GMT
Can anyone explain me the rational behind Auxilia being immune to Wb impetuous charge quick kill. I understand the quick kill as being the result of impetus breaking the unit cohesion. One could argue that they are immune due to their loose formation, but 4Aux are declared the perfect counter to Wb. Any historical/tactical explanation? Hi kugener, welcome to fanaticus! As a kind of welcome gift here you'll find one of the best DBA player aids I know of (by emperor super stevie). Cheers, Brian
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Sept 26, 2023 21:18:45 GMT
Thank you Brian…although modesty prevents me from answering directly. (“Ha! Yeah…as if. Some of us have met and know you Stevie!” )To address Kugenar: it’s all about simulating historical reality. We know that half of the Roman army were ‘Auxilia’, lighter armed than the heavy legionaries. Why did the Romans have these…what function did they perform? Well, Phil Barker (bless him) decided they were a counter to Warbands. And the Battle of Mons Graupius in Northern Britannia in 84 AD is an example of this. The Caledonians were uphill ( a gentle or difficult hill?), and Agricola kept all his legionary Blades in reserve while he sent his Auxilia to confront the Warbands. This is a fundamental feature of wargames… …you make rules to simulate and give the the right effects on the wargames table, and then ‘invent’ justifications for that rule. It’s the effects that matter…not the justifications. You might also be interested in Jim’s “Hint Cards for DBA 3.0” →HERESome Helpful Downloads can be found here: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes And here is the latest Nov 2022 FAQ: ancientwargaming.files.wordpress.com/2022/10/dba_faq_q4_2022_final.pdf
|
|
|
Post by elviro on Sept 26, 2023 21:47:58 GMT
As stevie just said - it's the battlefield behaviour that is to be simulated in DBx games. I personally don't see "Quick Kill" as a superpower of some troop types, but rather as the only combat outcome that could be seen on the battlefield in certain match-ups. In the case of Warband vs Blade (following the logic of Phil Barker (ble... oh, come on )the "standard" combat result of e.g. Warband slowly (!) pushing back Blades would make no sense. Spear vs Blade, yes, Pike vs Blade etc., yes, but not against Warband whose battle doctrin would have been literally to "run over" the enemy. And that either worked, breaking and routing steady enemies (Blade/Spear/Pike) or "bouncing of". You simply cannot push someone back slowly while running into him. Now considering Warband vs Auxilia - Imagine: The Auxila when attacked by Warband might throw javelins against the rushing warband, stopping the attack and forcing the enemy back to regroup (push back), or they might not, and then evade, just like skirmishers. Staying just out of reach of the warband until these are exausted. The auxilia would then regroup and go on the offence, again throwing javelins, maybe forcing the warband back, or provoking another rush, etc. In that case the warband would never break the lines of the auxilia, because they would never even touch their shields. Until the evade started off too late, the warband catched the Auxilia and broke them (-> doubling). This is one possible scenario. Of course, only if you believe in the concept of "Auxilia", and in different "dressing order" of troops (close order, open order etc.) in the first place - but that is a different story. And to your point "4Aux are declared the perfect counter to Wb" - well, I am not an expert player, but I wouldn't know.... I'd rather have a couple of Knights on my side facing Warbands. I see it the other way round - 4Ax are not especially good against Warband, they rather s*ck against everyone else, so you should be happy when fielding lots of 4Ax to fight an army of Warband instead of... well... anything else. Just my two cents
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Sept 27, 2023 0:57:29 GMT
This is an interesting read on the Roman auxiliary units at the battle: www.romanarmytalk.com/rat/printthread.php?tid=16700Note: it's 4 pages, not just 1. (There's some doubt - as is the case with much ancient history - about the Battle of Mons Graupius, and how much of it may have just been useful propaganda.)
|
|
|
Post by kugener on Sept 28, 2023 19:58:27 GMT
Thanks Elviro for your hypothesis that looks to me the most probable. As in Bibracte the pila volley stopped the charge from the Helvetii, in the opposite way the fast charge of Belgae at the Sabis river, was so fast that roman could not throw their pila and had difficulties to contain the Nervii on their right flank. In the same way we can hypothethize that the javelins are playing a similar role than pila on the shield and their loose formation allow them to recoil.
I will take time to read and digest the rest of your links. Thanks all for your very informative comment. It is a pleasure and intellectually stimulating to learn several point of views.
|
|
|
Post by sheffmark on Sept 29, 2023 18:54:52 GMT
Interestingly DBA 2.2 had the opportunity for Wb to move twice, if the PiPs were available, provided the second move was into contact.
I always thought that was a fairly reasonable simulation of a wild charge (if we believe that's how they fought) and it gave the Wb the chance to maybe catch the enemy line unprepared and in that circumstance give them a better chance of success, which would be more realistic.
However this rule disappeared with 3.0 and the change to base width movement.
|
|
|
Post by skb777 on Sept 29, 2023 21:55:28 GMT
Bd didn’t also have to follow up to their doom. They could also break off and make Wb move forward 1 BW. I felt it made WB more realistic against Bd because if they didn’t QK on their initial charge they would tend to lose the advantage.
|
|
|
Post by ozarkorc on Dec 14, 2023 23:28:20 GMT
On Warband Wild Charges. One of the things I miss in 3.0A
And the entire structure of Campaign games disappeared in 3.0, which I have always thought was one of the most appealing aspects of the game.
More potential than actual in my case, it has been 25 years (urk) since I had a group large enough for a campaign.
I offered to run a campaign at the regional convention to a thunderous lack of interest, they would rather just have a 2.2 tournament. Meh.
|
|
|
Post by vodnik on Dec 15, 2023 20:05:17 GMT
...like i understand DBA auxilia this troop type are wild people living in hilly country or jungles or desert. There are also Roman auxilia. There are also a lot of native tribes around the world...
...but according the present rule discussions it could be also poor or fantasy pikes...
...so for me is clear to use DBA2,2 fighing native tribes...
|
|