|
|
Post by davidjconstable on Oct 23, 2018 19:39:41 GMT
LARGE SECTION CUT Panicked fleeing troops do not necessarily have the sense to as a body avoid blocking foes and are quite likely to run into them. Of the various possible behaviors the rule went with the simplest and in many cases most likely. TomT In "Arms and the man" there is a beautiful description of a cavalry charge.
Fleeing troops move as individuals, if they meet a formed body, even if not immediately facing, they will try to avoid it. They will only fight if they feel they have no choice, and then you would expect the odd individuals to survive, but not the unit as a whole.
If you can find it online, it is worth looking at the distribution of finds where the remnants of Varus three legions leave the forest.
David Constable
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Oct 24, 2018 0:31:28 GMT
I agree with David Constable. When people flee for their lives, they don’t run in a straight line smack into a tree! Not when there is a gap just to the left or right of it. And the same applies when trying to escape from an enemy standing in their path. (They may panic as individuals and are only concerned with self-preservation...they don’t suddenly become blind!) Just because something is allowed in the DBA rules, that doesn’t mean that it is what happens in reality. Anyway, there is already a precedent for fleeing troops to change direction...when they pivot to avoid running off a table side edge. Ah, but DBA has a rule for that, so it’s allowed. DBA has no rule for fleeing troops to avoid contact with the enemy, so they can’t. Soooo, while fleeing for their life from one enemy, they run in straight line right into the arms of another enemy...?! They might as well stay where they are! 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 primuspilus on Oct 24, 2018 2:18:47 GMT
Since no one here has participated in a fleeing ancient military outcome, we have to guess what troops would do.
Are we clear on the difference between a ROUT (where the element ceases to exist) and a FLEE where the element co tinues to exist.
The problem you have Stevie is inertia. When you flee as an INDIVIDUAL you can do all manner of amazing things. A fleeing formation of LH I see having trouble even clearly identifying friend from foe in the dust, fear and blind sweat of battle. Any Vietnam Vets here? You'd know what I mean.
So no, sorry, having minimal "guidance" is accurate. A FLEEING ELEMENT as opposed a ROUTING MOB. And the pivoting when fleeing to the edge of the table is a quirk to allow the small 2 foot table to continue to be usable in the age of BW-based higher move rates. It was that or have complex mechanics for allowing an element to return to the board at a later bound for PIPs, a la HotT.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Oct 24, 2018 9:28:24 GMT
Hmmm...so when a group of protesters runs from a police baton charge, they do so in a straight line, and won’t change direction to avoid solid brick walls. Bit harsh on the brick walls to have all those people blindly smashing into them face first... ...especially when there is an open street to run down if they just change direction slightly. But you are quite right about the difference between a permanent ROUT and a temporary FLEE. In DBA, when an element is ‘destroyed’, it doesn’t mean that they are all killed. It just means that their cohesion and will to fight as an organised body has been destroyed, so they individually run off the table in different directions as an uncontrolled scattered mob. A FLEEING element on the other hand is only temporarily panicked, and will regain its cohesion and the will to fight at the end of the bound as the military officers and tribal leaders regain control. (Other rule-sets have rather complicated ‘rallying’ rules and dice rolls...DBA quite rightly see these as unnecessary and fleeing troops automatically rally, while routed troops never can)
Nonetheless, while panicked, fleeing troops main concern is self-preservation. And self-preservation is not helped by running as disorganised individuals into the arms of a ready-and-waiting formed body of the enemy! You're also right about the fleeing pivot rule to avoid running off the table side edges (a rule I very much like). I don’t see anybody complaining about this rule, and how fleeing troops should move in a straight line and leave the battlefield. So I wonder how many people would have complained if DBA had incorporated the following rule:- “Fleeing troops change direction to avoid making contact with the enemy. If they cannot, they will stop short and halt before making contact. If unable to move at all, they will surrender and be counted as lost.”I strongly suspect that the answer to my question is that no-one would complain, because the rule makes sense.  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 davidjconstable on Oct 24, 2018 11:21:13 GMT
LARGE SECTION CUT Nonetheless, while panicked, fleeing troops main concern is self-preservation. And self-preservation is not helped by running as disorganised individuals into the arms of a ready-and-waiting formed body of the enemy! You're also right about the fleeing pivot rule to avoid running off the table side edges (a rule I very much like). I don’t see anybody complaining about this rule, and how fleeing troops should move in a straight line and leave the battlefield. So I wonder how many people would have complained if DBA had incorporated the following rule:- “Fleeing troops change direction to avoid making contact with the enemy. If they cannot, they will stop short and halt before making contact. If unable to move at all, they will surrender and be counted as lost.”I strongly suspect that the answer to my question is that no-one would complain, because the rule makes sense. 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
In general I think your suggestion works, however I am not sure about elephants and scythed chariots that are probably out of control. They probably need a die throw to determine if they go left, hit the element in the way, or go right.
David Constable
P.S. - Mons Graupius has a good account of the effect of the Caledonian scythed chariots (yes they did have scythes). Get a version after 1970 (I think), it will be revised and contain some useful corrections.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Oct 24, 2018 13:34:51 GMT
Ha! Good points again David.  However, even panicked animals (such as stampeding elephants and horses harnessed to chariots) are likely to avoid a solid obstacle in their path if there is an area of open unimpeded ground next to the obstacle. Although if there is no open area or gap nearby, they’d probably just smash directly into the obstacle rather than halt before contacting it. And they certainly wouldn’t surrender either. Maybe El and SCh should flee in a straight line...and only have other fleeing troops avoiding contact with the enemy. 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 davidjconstable on Oct 24, 2018 14:11:08 GMT
The elephant and scythed chariots might flee into a formed body, they might flee into a bog or marsh. This is why something like a single die thrown by the opponent could be used, 1&6 they go left of the blocking element, 3&4 they hit the blocking element, 2&5 they go right of the blocking element.
You could measure to the blocking element, add a free slide to miss or make a legal contact, then if a miss measure the remaining distance.
I have never seen troops flee, I did in Natal once see a group of women who disturbed a sleeping lion flee, one went so close that the lion would have to have been blind not to be able to stop her, she died horribly and mercifully quickly.
David Constable
|
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Oct 24, 2018 16:29:40 GMT
Useless example Stevie - buildings are way, way, way easier to see and avoid than bodies of troops that may be partly obscured by dust and chaos, some ofnwhom may actively be trying to "ambush" some of your fleeing men. (it's not like members of ancients armies even knew at all times who was actually on their own side. "Uniforms" per se were often not as clearly discernible, or in many cases even worn, and tribes switched sides constantly, sometimes mid battle!). If you think building in q modern city are as easy to identify as which of the 80,000+ wiry, scrambling thugs may or may not be on our side in this fight in dust and grassland along a 2 mile front, well then there's just no hope for ya I'm afraid ...  Seriously, ancient battlefields were not football pitches... And if you think the "troops who would fight in real life must do so in the game" is hard to implement, wait till Arnopov, me and Stevie start debating what "avoid" means... |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Oct 24, 2018 19:25:36 GMT
Well Primuspilus, defining what ‘avoid’ actually means in practise is perhaps easier than defining what ‘stopping short’ means. When an element ‘stops short’, does it halt 1mm from contact, 10mm from contact, half a base width away, or what? I’m just pointing out that fleeing “(quote) representing a panic individual rush to the rear (unquote)”, doesn’t really make much sense when they make a panicked run from one enemy contact straight into another enemy contact. Breaking-off and running away from all enemy contact does make sense. Still, for now it might be best if I ‘avoid’ ( ) speculating about any possible future rules and just concentrate on the existing ones. Fleeing contact appears fairly straightforward. Page 12 paragraph 7 says:- “It stops before completing its move and lines up if its front edge (or front corner only) contacts any of: (a) enemy (whom it will fight next bound)...” Seems clear...just so long as the fleeing element has enough movement to line up. But what if it doesn’t? If it can’t line up because it hasn’t enough movement, then I suppose it will have to ‘stop short’ (whatever that means). Pursuing contact is the same. If the pursuing troops don’t have enough movement to line up...and pursuing foot never have...they too will just have to ‘stop short’ somehow. Things might be better if Fleeing and Pursuing contact could line-up and conform for free (oops...here I go again, speculating about possible future rules ).Neither of the two issues above are enough to break the rules of course, but they are a bit irritating. 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 medievalthomas on Oct 24, 2018 21:53:51 GMT
Also bear in mind that enemy troops are not inert and will adjust position to block flees. A flee assumes some sort of organized withdraw (even feigned). We are confusing routs with Flees probably my use of "panic" was not wise. The board edge is purely abstract to avoid flanking Cav being constantly destoryed by the cramped boards. Probably should just have had them stop at side edge (but Flee off back edge).
Once a body of troops begins behaving as individuals and going hither and yon its gone for DBX purposes.
TomT
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Oct 25, 2018 9:40:59 GMT
Oh, now I come think about it, there is one more thing. (I promise this is my last comment on this subject, and I’ll let the matter drop after this...honest... )Both Fleeing and Pursuing moves are made in a straight line, with no changes of direction allowed. But both also say they must line-up and conform if they contact a new enemy element. So how can you move in a rigid straight line, yet also change direction when you shuffle sideways to conform? The two statements contradict each other! Unless lining-up and conforming is not actually a part of movement, but is a separate sub-routine that occurs after moving. Page 9 paragraph 9 does say that “Contactors conform using their tactical move...”, so the conforming action must be paid for out of their movement allowance (with an extra sideways slide bonus if they contact the enemy front-edge)...but often it is the non-moving element’s duty to conform, and they get to conform for free, even when its not their bound. This reinforces my argument that Fleeing and Pursuit contacts should be allowed to conform for free. Both are involuntary actions, which players have no control over. So why not make the conforming, which is also an involuntary action, in these particular situations free as well? It would make things easier (by making 'stopping short' unnecessary), and plug another hole in the rules. 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 crazycaptain560 on Oct 26, 2018 4:38:09 GMT
Not an answer to the question: My friend thinks it is odd that fleeing troops stop when they meet an enemy while recoils and other outcomes cause destruction. I feel that fleeing troops should be destroyed if they impact an enemy element. This would add to the morale effect of the game. Clearly this could never be implemented, but I do find the combat outcomes interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by davidjconstable on Oct 26, 2018 7:31:40 GMT
The outcome moves, like the troop types are an oversimplification.
The problem is that PB wished to keep to a certain length, and this produces an oversimplified set of rules.
David Constable
P.S. - If you want to see a simplified ancient set look at the Tony Bath set in "Wargames" by Don Featherstone, published 1962. It belongs to a game friendlier time. |
|
