2.2 to 3 reasoning for no psiloi rear support

Actually, snowcat, et al., ROUGH Going by affecting movement gives more time (bounds) for the LB to shoot so it does affect shooting and combat by creating more chances for disruption of the English line leading to piecemeal attacks with consequent overlaps.

As I have suggested before the only scenario specific condition/rule aside from rough needed to recreate Agincourt and Poiters (although medievalthomas has stated that new analysis moves Poiters and Agincourt to new sites with different terrain), is that the French dismounted knights must attack the English dismounted knights in preference to any other element if given a choice.

As to the remainder of the HYW after Agincourt, stevie, snowcat dealt with that in a previous discussion.

Following Agincourt there was the Battle of Baugé where it is true the English attacked without taking time to deploy their archers and were defeated.

But then at Battle of Verneuil which the English did win -

"At about 4pm, Bedford ordered his men to advance.[26] The English soldiers shouted "St. George! Bedford!" as they slowly began to cross the field.[26] A short archery duel between English and Scottish archers took place, with inconclusive results. At the same time, as if by some pre-arranged signal, the 2,000 Milanese mounted men-at-arms charged through the English front line.[28][26] The Lombards brushed aside the English wooden stakes that could not be secured in ground baked hard by the summer sun.[29] The English arrow storm proved ineffective against the Italian mercenaries' superior armor.[29] The shock effect of the Milanese charge terrified the English, with men-at-arms and archers knocked over, gaps torn in the English ranks as they tried to avoid the onrushing horsemen and some throwing themselves to the ground and being ridden over by the Milanese cavalry.[28][29] The Milanese rode through and penetrated the entire English formation.[28][29] The longbowmen on the English right were dispersed.[24][29]"

The longbowmen did prevent the French cavalry from flanking the battle after the English men-at-arms rallied and engaged the French men-at-arms. They also joined the battle which ensured an English victory. Of course in DBA this would be the LB doing hard flanks on the French BD as they were engaged with the English BD.

Then at the Battle of Patay the French mounted charged through an incomplete ambush by English longbowmen and rolled up the rest of the force.

Not sure where any of this makes the English longbowmen any better than any other archers though.

I have re-awakened and am ready to re-join this interesting discussion.

Here is a list of some of the battles following Agincourt (ignoring sieges and skirmishes):-

1421 Battle of Bauge = the French-Scots defeat a rash attack by English men-at-arms with few archers across a bridge.
1423 Battle of Cravant = the English-Burgundians fight their way over a river to defeat the French-Scots.
1423 Battle of La Brossiniere = A smaller French force defeats the English by attacking one disordered wing.
1424 Battle of Verneuil = the English defeat the French-Scots, although Milanese Knights broke through their right wing.
1429 Battle of Patay = the French Knights defeat the English, who were spread-out trying to form an ambush.
1435 Battle of Gerberoy = the French Knights defeat the English in street fighting in a town.
1450 Battle of Formigny = the French-Bretons defeat the entrenched English who advanced to capture guns but were flanked.
1453 Battle of Castillon = the French-Bretons used cannons to defeat the piecemeal advancing English and flank them.

                    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Some thoughts on simulating the Hundred Years War
What follows are a few of the things that I think are pertinent to this conflict.
I am only attempting to point out what I consider to be deficiencies of the current rules, and can only offer a
few possible solutions to these perceived problems.

In the whole war, the English only won ONE battle by shooting
And that was the Battle of Crecy in 1346, where the English Longbows decimated the advancing French Knights.
In all the other battles, all of them, from Poitiers, to Agincourt, to those English victories mentioned above, victory
was due to hand-to-hand combat, not shooting.
Now I’m not saying that the arrow storm was unimportant...it was crucial in braking-up the dismounted French
men-at-arms, and forced them to make piecemeal attacks where they would be overlapped in close combat.
Therefore Longbowmen, with side-support and an overlap, should be at least roughly equal to Blades.
But a CF of 2 +1 for side support stands no chance against a CF of 5 in close combat.
There’s the first problem.

The English were (usually) the defenders on the battlefield
Yes, it was the English that mostly chose the field of battle, and should have control over the terrain.
But because of their high aggression of 3 compared to the French aggression of 1, it is the French that
gets to choose the terrain. So say goodbye to the English defending up a gentle hill at Crecy, to defending
behind a hedge at Poitiers, and to the English defending beyond a muddy field at Agincourt...
...because the French are not going to give you such terrain. No, you’ll be fighting on a billiard table.
Therefore, the English should have an aggression of 2 to the French aggression of 3.

The French were (usually) the ones to make rash attacks
Having a victory condition that said “The invaders must defeat the defenders, or at least sack the defender’s
camp, before nightfall or the defenders will win the battle” would encourage the French to make rash attacks
as they did at Crecy, Poitiers, and Agincourt, or as the defenders the English will win (by also adjusting the
aggression for Hannibal’s army it would also encourage the Romans to make rash attacks as they did at the
River Trebia in 218 BC, at Lake Trasimene in 217 BC, and at Cannae in 216 BC, during the Second Punic War).

Bowfire is utterly useless against heavy foot at close range
The shooting priority on page 10 paragraph 4, whereby Bows and WWg must shoot at target in their
Threat Zone, completely knackers Bows at close range, as it prevents the Bows from concentrating
their shots. And a shooting CF of 2 against a Blade (or Spear) CF of 4 has only 6 chances out of 36 of
even causing a recoil, and no chance of causing a double on the heavy infantry.
This is in stark contrast to the historical accounts of Agincourt, when the dismounted plate armoured
French men-at-arms would often shy-away or veer-off from a close range arrow storm of Longbows.

Now consider the following diagram:-

　                                      █ █
                     ---█ █       █ █---
                     ---▓ █ ▓ ▓ █ ▓---
                                                  Lb   Bd   Lb  Lb   Bd  Lb

Here the two centre Longbows have (somehow!) managed to recoil two Blades in close combat.
Next bound they’ll overlap the blue Blades (which is nice), but before that they get to shoot, even
when overlapping. But what good will shooting do? They can’t combine their shots, so at best they
have just 6 chances out of 36 of recoiling the individually targeted Blades. And even if they DO get 
lucky and recoil the Blades, the Blades will just fall back another ½ BW, and still be able to advance
1 BW next bound to resume contact (PIPs permitting of course).

Now wouldn’t be nice if such close range shooting had some sort of effect, instead of being a complete
waste of time...such as having a slight chance of a kill maybe, or perhaps cause the Blades to recoil
(or maybe even flee?) so much that the Blades were too far away to reach the Bows next bound.

Conclusion
Honestly, if a game designer really, Really, REALLY hated the English Longbowmen sooooo much that
he wanted them to be utterly useless against the French, then all the things mentioned above would
be a good way of going about it!
                     

That might work Snowcat...but only:-
        a) if such terrain is actually on the table (unlikely if the French gets to choose the terrain).
        b) if the English can ensure that the French will make rash frontal attacks (instead of
            outflanking such a position, or simply refusing to advance).
...and I don’t see how it will help the English to fight their way over a river like they did at
the Battle of Cravant in 1423.