|
Post by greedo on Apr 18, 2018 22:04:01 GMT
Just jumping in again... I’ve seen several places talking about 4Ax doing a full be recoil when defeated. I don’t quite see what this does. Is it that they break contact with and so force the opposition to expend a pip to regain contact? Is there something more subtle?
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Apr 19, 2018 0:36:12 GMT
Just jumping in again... I’ve seen several places talking about 4Ax doing a full be recoil when defeated. I don’t quite see what this does. Is it that they break contact with and so force the opposition to expend a pip to regain contact? Is there something more subtle? Yes, since Blades and Pike now purse, this means the poor Ax will face another combat next bound. Recoiling a full BW prevents this and forces the opponent to spend pips to close. In effect this would simulate the ability of lighter infantry to skirmish and evade...an ability given in most earlier WRG rules...but not DBA. In essence this will help with Cannae and Clontarf as well. Though in both battles the Ax will underperform history. In DBMx, these troop types are supported by quality factors. Cannae features Ax superior fighting Blades...and quite a few of the Blades are inferior. Clontarf features Ax against inferior Blade. The problem I see with DBA is that we have gone too far. These extremes should be difficult to reproduce, but not impossible. I think...though Tom will disagree to a small extent... that we fixed bow in DBA 3. Yes, English longbowmen will still underperform...but not to the level of 2.2. To put it quite simply, without a grading factor they should underperform. I feel the same with Ax. This modest change will help to allow Cannae as well as Cunaxa. Joe Collins
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Apr 19, 2018 16:46:15 GMT
Just jumping in again... I’ve seen several places talking about 4Ax doing a full be recoil when defeated. I don’t quite see what this does. Is it that they break contact with and so force the opposition to expend a pip to regain contact? Is there something more subtle? Yes, since Blades and Pike now purse, this means the poor Ax will face another combat next bound. Recoiling a full BW prevents this and forces the opponent to spend pips to close. In effect this would simulate the ability of lighter infantry to skirmish and evade...an ability given in most earlier WRG rules...but not DBA. In essence this will help with Cannae and Clontarf as well. Though in both battles the Ax will underperform history. In DBMx, these troop types are supported by quality factors. Cannae features Ax superior fighting Blades...and quite a few of the Blades are inferior. Clontarf features Ax against inferior Blade. The problem I see with DBA is that we have gone too far. These extremes should be difficult to reproduce, but not impossible. I think...though Tom will disagree to a small extent... that we fixed bow in DBA 3. Yes, English longbowmen will still underperform...but not to the level of 2.2. To put it quite simply, without a grading factor they should underperform. I feel the same with Ax. This modest change will help to allow Cannae as well as Cunaxa. Joe Collins Ah, this makes sense. I've seen this in several blogs about specific match-ups. A good simple house rule! Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Apr 19, 2018 18:03:54 GMT
All points mentioned by Joe can be dealt with within DBX mechanics and by just using rules that already exist.
English longbows and heavy crossbows become Shooters (from HOTT - Medium Foot +3 with a +1 bonus v. Mounted) - crossbows shoot only in their own bound.
Aux can become Medium Foot +3 with the Evade Ability (Flee on Doubled rather than Destroyed against opponents with a lower MA). Even better you can use the normal adjustment for "Blades" (+1 v. Foot -1 v. Mounted) for Medium as well as Heavy Foot to create "close fighting" Aux.
You just can't solve them for tournament DBA - here the rules must remain immutable as per Phil's instructions.
TomT
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Apr 19, 2018 21:09:44 GMT
The issue is that 4Ax were not, in any serious sense "light infantry". The troop type includes Auxiliary Legions, Persian Heavy Infantry at Gaugamela, and even proto-Hoplites of the Lydian Kingdom under Croesus. So the "evade" is preventing free follow-up and hit by Bd say, requiring a PIP, however in my experience the effect is minimal. Strengthening 4Ax by upping the CF in certain situations still causes a "fighting withdrawal" (through increased tendency to recoil agains CFs of 5 or 6) but prevents them from simply evaporating in one or two bounds...
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Apr 19, 2018 21:32:22 GMT
The issue is that 4Ax were not, in any serious sense "light infantry". The troop type includes Auxiliary Legions, Persian Heavy Infantry at Gaugamela, and even proto-Hoplites of the Lydian Kingdom under Croesus. So the "evade" is preventing free follow-up and hit by Bd say, requiring a PIP, however in my experience the effect is minimal. Strengthening 4Ax by upping the CF in certain situations still causes a "fighting withdrawal" (through increased tendency to recoil agains CFs of 5 or 6) but prevents them from simply evaporating in one or two bounds... I'm a bit more in favor of using "Superior" 4Ax + 1BW recoil choice. +1 CF on ties and when beaten. Or does that screw up the math? So: Really light fast infantry = 3Ax Light infantry = 4Ax "Heavy" infantry who are still lighter than elite infantry = Sup 4Ax Should LH, and PS also get 1BW recoil choice? Just so it's not a specific Ax special rule?
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Apr 19, 2018 22:09:30 GMT
Greebo, I think you’ll find that LH already can choose their recoil distance. (See page 12 paragraph 3) But you’re right…Ps should also be allowed to do so if 3Ax can. I don’t know if it will help, but some time ago I posted a chart which shows all the combat effects. You can find it here:- fanaticus.boards.net/post/9701/ I’ve found it very useful with not only the current combat factors, but how adding +1 here or there affects things. Some potentially useful player aids can be found here, such as the “Quick Reference Sheets” from the Society of Ancients, and the new “Army List Corrections” file: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Reference_sheets_and_epitomes And this is the latest January 2018 FAQ: fanaticus-dba.wikia.com/wiki/FAQ_2018
|
|
|
Post by macbeth on Apr 19, 2018 23:06:13 GMT
Yes, since Blades and Pike now purse, this means the poor Ax will face another combat next bound. Recoiling a full BW prevents this and forces the opponent to spend pips to close. In effect this would simulate the ability of lighter infantry to skirmish and evade...an ability given in most earlier WRG rules...but not DBA. In essence this will help with Cannae and Clontarf as well. Though in both battles the Ax will underperform history. In DBMx, these troop types are supported by quality factors. Cannae features Ax superior fighting Blades...and quite a few of the Blades are inferior. Clontarf features Ax against inferior Blade. The problem I see with DBA is that we have gone too far. These extremes should be difficult to reproduce, but not impossible. I think...though Tom will disagree to a small extent... that we fixed bow in DBA 3. Yes, English longbowmen will still underperform...but not to the level of 2.2. To put it quite simply, without a grading factor they should underperform. I feel the same with Ax. This modest change will help to allow Cannae as well as Cunaxa. Joe Collins Ah, this makes sense. I've seen this in several blogs about specific match-ups. A good simple house rule! Thanks! To Me - Cannae cannot be replicated while the Carthaginian troops cannot break contact and keep a line as they fall back. In any of the fights the expected result is that the Carthaginian centre will recoil and the Romans will follow up. If however one of the Carthaginians ties, then the Roman chance to destroy this element increases because of overlaps. As a gap opens in the centre, the Romans can exploit it and Hannibal loses his rep
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Apr 20, 2018 21:24:59 GMT
I think you will find in ancient texts that even peltasts could be described as HI, since LI were "evadey" types. Hannibal's centre did not in any sense "evade" they didn't even set out to "give ground". They fought hard as they could, but Hannibal knew they would slowly give ground to the superior Roman centre. He did not appear to order them to do a controlled retreat. He ordered them to hold the centre, knowing they would do so with difficulty.
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Apr 20, 2018 23:09:36 GMT
I think you will find in ancient texts that even peltasts could be described as HI, since LI were "evadey" types. Hannibal's centre did not in any sense "evade" they didn't even set out to "give ground". They fought hard as they could, but Hannibal knew they would slowly give ground to the superior Roman centre. He did not appear to order them to do a controlled retreat. He ordered them to hold the centre, knowing they would do so with difficulty. I agree with primuspilus on this. I also think it's dangerous to take single battles (i.e. Marathon, Cannae) and extrapolate that that's how "ancient battles were". Luck also plays a part, which is why we use dice in the games. So the question is would the Cannae giving ground have happened 8/10 times or was simply luck that time? I do like the idea of units that will "tend" to do this kind of behavior, but not modify rules so that we can be SURE that Cannae will be duplicated. It might inadvertently break another battle at a different time.
|
|
|
Post by greedo on Apr 22, 2018 4:48:26 GMT
I had a random thought in the car today about the 4Ax 1BW retreat.. An of course I say "we" not as official DBA, but purely as the house 4Ax rule...
1) If 4Ax 1BW, then they are breaking contact with the Bd. 2) There are no longer break contact with 1 PIP rules 3) That means that the Bd will followup, but if the Roman general sees that Cannae is about to happen all over again, he can just NOT advance his legions in his next bound.
An expensive option is that he could actively back up his legions, one element at a time....? Is this what we want to simulate? Having contact constant means that the Roman general has no choice but to advance, and his legions will keep fighting and advancing, whether he wants them to or not?
So unless we can reduce the fragility of the 4Ax/4Wb so that they don't break, but just recoil a lot, is there another option?
Chris
|
|