|
|
Post by snowcat on Oct 22, 2020 11:36:13 GMT
Ah, but that raises the question of what do you do with extra Spears Snowcat. Take away the Spear side-support and you have CF 4 v CF 6, and the Spear long single line is no longer effective. They’d have no choice but to form-up in multiple lines in order to fill in the inevitable gaps the Pikes will punch in their battleline... ...which ends up looking more like a Roman formation than a Greek one. Allowing Spears to have +1 for rear-support instead would cure the problem. They’d have a CF of 4+1 (the same as Blades), so would still be inferior to the Pikes CF, but at least they’d still ‘look’ like a Greek formation (albeit deeper), and their frontage would be the same as that of the Pikemen. This is the approach taken by Shirmplyamazing’s “Everyone gets rear-support with reduced heavy foot combat factors”, which I think is a better solution. Yes, I like Shrimply's idea too. But not everyone is keen on the idea of *universal* rear support, especially as DBA 3.0 was designed with the clear intent of doing away with as much rear support as possible. However, perhaps it is fair for Sp to be allowed rear support in a similar manner to Wb, but only against enemy Pk or Sp. Do away with side support vs 4Pk and allow Sp +1 for rear support vs enemy Pk or Sp. It's just a handful of words to easily adjust what is already written. |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Oct 22, 2020 12:30:46 GMT
Perhaps the simplest and best answer is MedievalThomas’ suggestion:- “Spears receive +1 for side OR rear support, but not both together”. (See fanaticus.boards.net/post/32751/ for details) It’s not the Pikes that need fixing by making them even stronger... ...it’s the fact that Spears have no choice but to form-up in one long line. |
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Oct 23, 2020 1:44:15 GMT
Yes, that's similar, but still favours the Sp. With MedievalThomas' suggestion, the Spear player can go deep with rear support at CF5 vs CF6. So same factor as with side-support, but now when any front rank Sp element is destroyed, there is a rear element available to take its place, and the Spear player doesn't have to be as worried about preserving the integrity of his line to get the +1 support bonus. A grinding match of attrition that the Pk player *could/should* still win but will take longer than with just 3 x Sp to oppose the Pk block.
But if the Spear player decides to face the Pike block with a line of 3 x Sp claiming side-support, he can still effectively hope to hold half the opponent's army with a 1/4 of his own (and possibly even win the combat), at a minimum leaving him to use 3 more elements than his opponent has available somewhere else to win. IIRC this is what nerfs Pk. Either this is true or it isn't. If it is true, then why would you not take this option? Why would you bother taking the rear-support Sp option vs Pk? Unless you had to...see below:
With my proposal, there is no side-support available to Sp vs 4Pk, BUT there is rear-support available to Sp vs Pk. So the Spear player can only get to CF5 vs Pk by using rear-support, and it will be a tough fight that still possibly narrowly favours the Pk depending on how the Pk compulsory pursuit overlaps turn out.
This de-nerfs Pk and gives the Spear player a *reasonable* chance against Pk.
|
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Oct 23, 2020 2:55:34 GMT
' Rear support factors' would gain: Spears add +1 when in frontal close combat against enemy Spears or Pikes. ' Flank support factors' would be changed to: Spears add +1 if supported by Spears or "Solid" Blades, except vs 4Pk. "Solid" Bows add +1 if supported by "Solid" Blades, except vs 4Pk.
That's it.  |
|
