A Call for Play Testing

If I remember correctly the discussions on the "medium foot" problem (the absence thereof in DBA), one of the proposals for Ax (and Bw) was to split the behaviour of Fast and Solid versions:

- Fast Auxilia, 3Ax (and Fast Bows, 3Bw) get to optionally recoil 1 BW from Blades, Pikes or Spears.
- Solid Auxilia, 4Ax (and Solid Bows, 4Bw and 8Bw) get a +1 factor in close combat against Blades, Pikes or Spears.

It would be interesting to have some play test feedback on this too.

Here is my re-fight of Cannae to play-test another of Joe’s rule suggestions

When Auxilia Score Less: Destroyed by Knights if in good going. Recoil 1 BW from all Pike or all Blade, else recoil as normal.
Here is my deployment, with the Carthaginian ‘Spearmen’ as Blades, partly because they used Roman equipment, partly because their
battlefield behaviour was not that of passive spearmen huddling in a defensive shield-wall, but mainly because they were veterans...and
veteran spearmen would fight better than ordinary spearmen, and not need side-supporting (read Polybius).

                          T1  T2
     *
    C1                                             C2
              B1  V1              V2  B6                    (T = triarii, V = velites, * = general)
                    B2  B3  B4  B5


M1  M2  S1                           S2  L1  L2        (M = mounted/cav, S = vet Sp fighting as 4Bd,
         *         A1  A2  A3  A4                            L = Numidian LH,  A = 4Ax, P = Psiloi)

                          P1  P2


Hannibal’s Deployment
The Carthaginian centre has been held back instead of projecting forwards in a crescent as Polybius said it was in order help prevent
overlaps on the Ax, because overlaps-kill-auxiliaries. Also, being held back like this allows A1 and A4 to get overlaps from S1 and
S2 on any attacking Blades...which, hopefully, will help the auxiliaries to survive a little longer.


Rome’s Deployment
Note that C1* is positioned in such a way it is not aligned with M1-M2, but covers both Carthaginian Cavalry elements. This is to prevent
M1 from ‘hard flanking’ them, as M1 is not beyond the flank-line of C1* (see figure 8 of the rules). Being a single element, it will have to
conform when hit by the M1-M2 group, but is arranged so that it does so by sliding to its left, allowing B1 to overlap M2 and thus increase
its chances in close combat. C2 on the left wing is arranged likewise to snuggle up to B6 when hit by group L1-L2.
Elements B1 to B6 form a large single group thanks to the velites, and can still advance even on a PIP roll of 1.


Initial Skirmishing
There is no point in Rome having their velite Psiloi out in front. They may be destroyed by the Ax, and they would get in the way.
The Romans know their wings will be turned, and any delay that prevents the legionaries from getting stuck in just helps Hannibal.
Likewise, the Carthaginian skirmishers will just bounce off the Roman Blades. If you like, you can just assume that the Psiloi were out
in front at the start of the battle, but have since fled back behind the Carthaginian centre.


The Roman Triarii
Now I have some very serious grievances about how DBA treats this battle (basically, it gets EVERY-SINGLE-THING WRONG!)...
...but I’ll save it all for another thread so that I don’t go off-topic here. However, there is one thing that I cannot avoid mentioning:-
Auxiliaries have no bite! That’s right...they have no teeth, no bite, and no punch. Even though Duncan Head in “The Armies of the
Macedonian and Punic Wars” says on page 56, paragraph 5, of the 1982 edition, that the Spanish 4Ax “initial charge was often powerful
enough to break through even a Roman line”. Well, you try that with DBA. A CF of 3 v CF 5, with only 6 chances out of 36 of recoiling a
Blade, Ax have no chance whatsoever of “breaking through”. Even if the Ax perform a miracle and get a double overlap (1 chance in 36),
they then only have 2 chances out of 36 of getting a double...and the same 2 chances of being doubled themselves.

So because the Ax are so pathetically weak, and have as much chance as firing a rifle at a battleship, the Romans don’t need reserves.
The Ax are no threat whatsoever to Bd...so why bother having reserves? You might as well put the legionaries in one long line.
And ask yourself this: if the Romans are in one long line, with no reserves...
            ...does it look like a Roman army?
            ...does it feel like you’re commanding a Roman army?
Or is it more like a bunch of Greek Hoplites, standing in a line...

All this means that I can find no incentive for a Roman player to keep any reserve when facing Ax. It’s just a waste of manpower.
Therefore the Triarii will not be in the positions I have shown. No, they’ll be on the wings, where their spears will have most effect.
So the Carthaginians will not outflank the Romans...the Romans are not enveloped on both wings...they are not surrounded...and
the whole battle bears no resemblance at all to Polybius’ detailed account.

And all this because auxiliaries have no bite.


The Solution
Even if Joe’s suggestion, which I like, did keep Ax alive for a little longer (which unfortunately it doesn’t), then you still have the
problem of trying to force the Romans into keeping a reserve instead of just forming a Hoplite line. The only way to achieve both
more survival, and more bite so they are a bit of a threat, is to change the combat difference from being +2 to the Blades to just +1.
Either reduce all heavy foot factors by 1, or give 4Ax a +1 tactical factor against heavy foot because they can form-up in close
formation when facing heavy opponents.
Anything else is just putting a small plaster on a serious knife wound.
Cure the cause of the problem, and the symptoms will also be cured.



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

Would giving 4Ax side support with 4Sp and other 4Ax yield similar results? In effect making the light spear?

3Ax would not get the side support since they are fast, but you could give them the 1BW option BW recoil to compensate?

Thanks Nangwaya and to clarify, 4Ax would represent more medium type troops (Roman aux, Proto hoplites, Alex’s elite light troops etc) whereas 3Ax would represent true peltast light troops who harass but aren’t quite skirmishes. The side support isn’t supposed to be a shield wall so much as a more formed up line of battle formation. A bit of a gimmick but one that fits I with the existing rules easily.

I'm no expert on Romans but if the 4Ax prototype is the Roman Auxilia then it doesn't seem to hit the mark (it completely misses the mark in relation to Hypaspists but that's another story!) Side support when in the main battleline in good going with other solid infantry seems reasonable. Others may be able to tell me if Roman Auxilia were at risk from mounted when formed.

Of course, we should follow Joe's example and play test!

Cheers

Jim

What does a full BW recoil do for Ax?

While some have stated that it does nothing, this ignores the bigger picture.

Over one bound in a Bd vs Ax match it certainly is true. The Bd has a 1/6 chance of a kill. Over two bounds however there is a difference.

Under RAW the Ax will survive roughly 71% of the time. With a BW recoil, the survival rate is roughly 84%.

This is same percentage as under 2.2 and I would argue significant.

The 2 BD vs 2 Ax is much more complicated to calculate. I will leave it to brighter and more industrious folks than I to do it. Off-hand however I estimate about 20% of the time you will have a better outcome with a full BW recoil. The chance of getting both Ax destroyed is much less.

This again is the same outcome as under 2.2 where few complained.


Joe Collins