Cataphracts...

I have some historical examples of Light Horse fighting Cataphracts Tom:-

Battle of Immae/Orontes in 272 AD
The Roman Emperor Aurelian had his light cavalry break ranks to make a ‘false flight’,
which the Palmyran Cataphracts pursued. When they they were exhausted and
disordered the Roman light horsemen turned, surrounded and destroyed them.
(Again this could just indicate the personality of the Palmyran commander)

Battle of Emesa in 272 AD
Aurelian tried the same tactic as at the battle of Immae but something went wrong
and the Cataphracts rode down his light horsemen.

Battle of Augusta Taurinorum (Turin) in 312 AD
The Roman Emperor Constantine used his lighter horsemen to defeat the Cataphracts
of his rival Maxentius by drawing them in and surrounding them.

Battle of the Milvian Bridge in 312 AD
Constantine again used his light horsemen to defeat the Cataphracts
of his rival Maxentius (but we are not told exactly how they did this).

I would speculate that Light Horsemen facing Cataphracts would be similar to that of
‘Peltasts’ facing heavy Hoplites...in both cases the faster, lighter, and more nimble men
would evade and run away from the charges of the slower, heavier, more ponderous
troops, all the while pelting them with missiles (either javelins or arrows).
It’s hard to catch someone who is lobbing stuff at you when they move faster and they
already have a dozen or so paces head start...

Interestingly the mounted Knights of the Crusades didn’t seem to have the same problem
against the Saracen light horsemen...perhaps because the Knights charged impetuously
and pursued them (something that Spears and 4Kn don’t do in DBA).

As for combat factors, I think that a CF 4 against foot (but no ‘quick kill’) and a CF 4
against mounted (all that armour has to make them better than mere Cv), with 4Kn
never pursuing but recoiling from 3Kn, is about right...although I’ve not play-tested
this to see if there are any unwanted play-balance or knock-on effects.
(All the above are “House Rules” of course)

It would make them a sort or mounted equivalent of Spearmen, and having a CF of
4 against foot makes them more resistant to shooting (otherwise what’s the point of
all that heavy armour for the horses if they are just as vulnerable as Cv when shot at?).




Yikes it sounds like they should Pursue LH so that they would in fact get surrounded and killed.

These seem more like tactical pursuits by individual "units/elements".  I think the same thing did happen to Crusaders.  But of course both types seem to have from time to time defeated the LH but this could have come from Hard Flanks where at least some LH foolishly stood their ground.

I'm not fond of the mechanic of have LH Shock Knights but would prefer a rash Pursuit followed by being "surronded".  But for this to happen to Cats I need them to Pursue something which they don't do.
Not at all sure why we didn't give "ignore corner to corner overlaps" to LH.

Maybe we will have to have Cats Pursue Mounted but not Foot.  Perhaps Cats took the sensible view that they needed to keep closing the range v. missile armed foes.

TomT

I have ridden horses since childhood (My Father owned a stables). Horses can sustain a gallop for sometime and if heavily armoured I can see them having no problem charging into combat over a short distance. If you charge into an enemy the horse can then become a weapon, kicking, biting and trampling. In fact modern Dressage is derived from the training horses received for battle. The most difficult thing to train a horse to do is to trample something, horses will do to extraordinary length to avoid treading on someone. The reason being horses legs are their most vulnerable and weakest part.

Last year I attended the Lifeguards open day here in Norfolk. The Cavalry horses being bought to Norfolk once a year for two weeks for relaxation and to swim in the sea. 

The open day is a chance for the Army to show off their horses.

The best bit was the display of "Skill at Arms".

The modern British Lifeguards man must still be able to ride a horse and is trained to handle a horse in combat conditions (I believe the British Army is the last modern Army to do this.

Exercises included six horses and riders abreast armed with lances. They set off at the gallop upon command of their Corporal of Horse lower lances and impaled at the end of the field a tent peg knocked into the ground. Team event. The winner being the team with the most lifted pegs at the end.

Then the Corporal of Horse Set off at the gallop around the field which now had jumps set up, each jump had balloons tied to the left and right of the jump. 

He started with a lance and impaled a peg on the way to the first jump, he then threw down the lance and upholstered his pistol, as he cleared the jumps he shot the balloons left and right, at the end the balloons were re-tied and he set off again this time drawing his Sabre as he cleared the fences he cut the balloons or stabbed them. Throughout the whole exercise not one balloon was missed. 

This Cavalryman had only just returned from Afghanistan a few weeks previously! He was not a ceremonial only soldier by any level. Apparently all Troopers are taught these skills in their basic training.

Afterwards we were able to visit the horses in their stables. I was interested when I saw one called, if I remember correctly, Sevastopol, after his name were the initials M.C. I asked the Trooper about it. Apparently the horse was the mount of a one Major "Spud" Murphy who had been awarded the Military Cross in Iraq.

By tradition his horse gets M.C. after his name harking back to the days when a horse and rider shared the same dangers. Obviously Sevastopol was safely tucked up in his Knightsbridge barracks whilst the good Major "Spud" was facing shot and shell!
 

Richard Bodley Scott and 12 years of gaming?

Am I incorrect in understanding that they recoil against 3Kn on ties?