|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 24, 2022 11:43:13 GMT
When looking at Deployment and terrain placement it has irked me little that some armies that rightly or wrongly having high aggression cannot influence the terrain choice despite having a large scouting potential.Horse armies are forced to fight in close terrain or Ps are caught in the open.
The Mongols are a good example of this with an Aggression of 4 despite being all Cav or LH.Mountain & Hill/Forrest tribe armies all well at home in their home terrain but little chance of fighting in it because their opposition have a lower aggression.
I have two trains of thought here that go a little way to balance the choice of attacker/defender or the choice of terrain a bit more competitive.
Option 1 is to leave the Aggression factors alone and dice for attacker/defender as usual but to modify the dice roll for terrain.
The modifier is assessed by each armies composition in the following way defenders add the modifier and attackers minus the modifier...
Each army with a total of 4+ elements of Cav/Cm or LH/LCm apply a +/-1 modifier.
Each army with a total of 6+ elements of Ps,Ax,3Bd,3Pk or Wb apply a +/-1 modifier.
Each army with a total of 8+ elements of
Ps,Cav/Cm,LH/LCm,Ax,3Bd,3Pk or Wb add a further +/-1 modifier.
This gives each army up to a maximum +/-3 modifier to the roll for choosing terrain giving an army with greater scouting potential a better chance of placing terrain with scoring on a sliding scale with a 6+ chance of the attacker placing terrain.
Option 2 is to simply use the same difference in the above modifiers to determine the attacker/defender and then continue the rules as normal.
Each way is a different way of allowing an army with potentially greater scouting strength using its value to be able to fight in more favourable terrain.
Any thoughts welcome.đ
|
|
|
|
Post by vodnik on May 24, 2022 12:22:33 GMT
...for me it looks a bit complicated. I would prefer thematic tournaments. For example: Mongol Conquests In Europe(the home terrain is for all armies arable) oder etwas enger; Crossing of the Rhine 406(any Germanic tribes or Alans against settlet Germanic tribes or Romans) or any other date or locations...
|
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 24, 2022 13:34:41 GMT
...for me it looks a bit complicated. I would prefer thematic tournaments. For example: Mongol Conquests In Europe(the home terrain is for all armies arable) oder etwas enger; Crossing of the Rhine 406(any Germanic tribes or Alans against settlet Germanic tribes or Romans) or any other date or locations... Hi Vodnik hope you are well? Locality of historical battles can easily help decide the topagrophical features available for the gaming battlefield.I was sort of leaning towards games where you not always fighting historical opponnents. I may have over-complicated my ideas by the way I set out my post.Thevidea is to have each army check how many qualifying elements they have to gain each modifier and then the modifier is applied to their dice role.In the case of the dicing of the placement of terrain it can modify who choses the placement of each piece. In option 2 the modifier is only to determine if high aggression armies can use their scouting potential(value) to modify their chance of becoming the defender and choose terrain. |
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on May 24, 2022 18:23:33 GMT
We are experimenting with aggression scouting based on army composition as to who sets up terrain (still would come from defenders choices).
Will get back with results.
Thomas J. Thomas
Fame & Glory Games
|
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 24, 2022 18:40:18 GMT
We are experimenting with aggression scouting based on army composition as to who sets up terrain (still would come from defenders choices). Will get back with results. Thomas J. Thomas Fame & Glory Games That is good news.đ |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 25, 2022 13:53:02 GMT
This is such a complex topic given the number of armies in DBA. But the simple Aggression factor does quite well considering the complexity. As an example, I'll take two Ax heavy armies I own, Welsh and Thracians. The Welsh, at Ag 3, are often in terrain they don't like. But if you cross into Wales then you're in trouble. This seems to fit history quite well. Thracians at Ag 1 stay home a lot but then they didn't really go and conquer anyone historically.
Looking at the enemies list for Mongol conquest shows that a large majority would prefer open terrain so again, the factors seem to work. But perhaps what would be useful is the ability to adjust the terrain by displacing them a certain number of BW provided the terrain remains legal. That way you could create a section of the field that suits your troop types.
But don't expect much luck if you take cavalry into the Zagros mountains or Psiloi onto the steppe!
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 25, 2022 15:01:25 GMT
This is such a complex topic given the number of armies in DBA. But the simple Aggression factor does quite well considering the complexity. As an example, I'll take two Ax heavy armies I own, Welsh and Thracians. The Welsh, at Ag 3, are often in terrain they don't like. But if you cross into Wales then you're in trouble. This seems to fit history quite well. Thracians at Ag 1 stay home a lot but then they didn't really go and conquer anyone historically. Looking at the enemies list for Mongol conquest shows that a large majority would prefer open terrain so again, the factors seem to work. But perhaps what would be useful is the ability to adjust the terrain by displacing them a certain number of BW provided the terrain remains legal. That way you could create a section of the field that suits your troop types. But don't expect much luck if you take cavalry into the Zagros mountains or Psiloi onto the steppe! Cheers Jim Hi Jim this was part of what I was suggesting, by including Ax,Wb,3Bd and 3Pk I was trying to count indigenous people in their native territories to count.Your right in saying that displacing the terrain can make a huge difference and allowing the attacking player more chance of influencing the placement could make terrain placement fairer. |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on May 25, 2022 15:37:45 GMT
Here is something I have tried:-
â Out-scouting your opponent.
Immediately after the Aggression Roll, both players announce their total scouting points.
Each Light Horse, Cavalry (but not Chariots), Camelry, Auxiliary and Psiloi is worth 1 scouting point.
If you have 50% more scouting points than your opponent then they have been out-scouted.
⥠The effect of out-scouting.
The player with 50% more scouting points gets to pick a single terrain feature.
This feature must be one allowed to the defender, OR, be an area of Good Going called âopen groundâ.
(I use a piece of string 18 BW long for the âopen groundâ, with the ends looped together to vary its shape)
âą Placement of the scouted terrain.
The player with the most scouting points places their chosen terrain before the defender places any.
Use the usual placement die roll, but like Gentle Hills âopen groundâ can extend into an adjacent quarter.
Once placed no other terrain (not even Roads or Rivers) can be placed in or on âopen groundâ.
The defender now chooses and places their terrain as normal, but are limited to a maximum of 4 pieces only.
This allows those that out-scout their opponents to have at least some say in what the battlefield will look like,
as an all mounted army is unlikely to invade an enemy country at the point where it is unsuitable for their army,
and an all Aux or Ps army is unlikely to seek a totally open field. Generals often seek terrain that suits their troops.
Note that a defender out-scouting the invader has very little effect, as the defender already chooses all the terrain.
But if the defender has the scouting advantage, or neither side has, then they can prevent the enemy from having it.
(Clever use of âopen groundâ can also cause other terrain features to be discarded, due to a lack of room)
|
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 25, 2022 15:43:02 GMT
Here is something I have tried:- â Out-scouting your opponent. Immediately after the Aggression Roll, both players announce their total scouting points. Each Light Horse, Cavalry (but not Chariots), Camelry, Auxiliary and Psiloi is worth 1 scouting point. If you have twice as many scouting points than your opponent then they have been out-scouted. ⥠The effect of out-scouting. The player with twice as many scouting points gets to pick a single terrain feature. This feature must be one allowed to the defender, OR, be an area of Good Going called âopen groundâ. (I use a piece of string 18 BW long for the âopen groundâ, with the ends looped together to vary its shape)âą Placement of the scouted terrain. The player with the most scouting points places their chosen terrain before the defender places any. Use the usual placement die roll, but like Gentle Hills âopen groundâ can extend into an adjacent quarter. Once placed no other terrain (not even Roads or Rivers) can be placed in or on âopen groundâ. The defender now chooses and places their terrain as normal, but are limited to a maximum 4 pieces only. This allows those that out-scout their opponents to have at least some say in what the battlefield will look like, as an all mounted army is unlikely to invade an enemy country at the point where it is unsuitable for their army, and an all Aux or Ps army is unlikely seek out a totally open field. General often seek terrain that suits their troops. Note that a defender out-scouting the invader has very little effect, as the defender already chooses all the terrain. But if the defender has the scouting advantage, or neither side has, then they can prevent the enemy from having it. (Clever use of âopen groundâ can also cause other terrain features to be discarded, due to a lack of room)I like what you've done Stevie, but what about mountain tribesmen,Germans or Gauls in Forrest's,etc.? Surely they count in their own terrain? |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on May 25, 2022 15:53:44 GMT
Well, if mountain peoples and forest inhabitants are defending their homeland, theyâll choose all the terrain anyway... ...unless they happen to be out-scouted. And if these peoples are invading, then their local knowledge ainât gonna do them much good (and itâs all down to scouting an unfamiliar country looking for a suitable battlefield).  By the way, I was typing this from memory and got the scouting advantage wrong. It should be 50% more, not twice as many, so that the Polybian Romans (6 scouting points) can be out-scouted by the Carthaginians (9 scouting points...4 mounted, 2 Ps, and 3 Ax). |
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 25, 2022 16:02:41 GMT
Well, if mountain peoples and forest inhabitants are defending their homeland, theyâll choose all the terrain anyway... ...unless they happen to be out-scouted. And if these peoples are invading, then their local knowledge ainât gonna do them much good (and itâs all down to scouting an unfamiliar country looking for a suitable battlefield).  Would they not count if fighting in other hilly or Forested country?Would foot tribes not count for scouting in dry? This is part of the problem as so many types of terrain are listed in several types of terrain...you can have woodland and hilly terrain in arable terrain so these troop types do have something to add if the terrain available is similar to their home territory? |
|
|
|
Post by stevie on May 25, 2022 16:08:37 GMT
Keep it simple...  ...scouting is scouting, whether playing at home or away. |
|
|
|
Post by Haardrada on May 25, 2022 16:21:01 GMT
Keep it simple... ...scouting is scouting, whether playing at home or away. Exactly, that's the whole idea of the rules.Thats why I considered adding such troop types for that very reason. The WRG rules used to count Cav,LH and Ps but it often bugged me that indigenous tribesmen in their own or similar terrain didn't count when there is tons of evidence that they did...the Romans were a clear example of it using indigenous natives to scout and combat in enemy territory.Several armies recruited troops that could fight in bad terrain. That's why I suggested the modifiers as a means for large numbers of bad going troops to be able to influence terrain choice or placement. I'm not suggesting my ideas are better, I just think all things need considering whatever methods are taken up. |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on May 26, 2022 9:26:03 GMT
Ahh, the old WRG loop of string! I can see why 18BW as it gives a circle slightly less than 6BW in diameter.
Maybe we're over thinking this? If we add the good going loop of string as an option for each terrain region as a non-compulsory item and let the attacker choose the first/second non-compulsory piece then perhaps we overcome a lot of the issues. It'll usually give the attacker at least one piece of terrain that suits their army.
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on May 26, 2022 10:12:05 GMT
Ahh, the old WRG loop of string! Ha! âA good idea is still a good idea...no matter the source.â  I like your thinking Jim, but the âopen groundâ piece of string, and any other piece of 'scouted terrain', should be placed first, even before a Waterway. Otherwise the defender could decide to place it last of all, and it be discarded due to a lack of space (thereby neutralizing the scouting advantages). Another little trick Iâve found with this âscouted terrainâ concerns Littoral Landings. If you are Littoral, and ensure you have lots of light troops, youâll have a good chance of out-scouting your opponent...so can choose a Waterway as the âscouted terrainâ if the defender is Arable, even when you are the attacker! Of course, to do this requires having lots of light scouting troops and fewer heavies. (Every advantage should have a corresponding disadvantage...ah, decisions, decisions...)And remember, if your weak Illyrians (aggression 3) are fighting the Greeks (aggression 1 or zero), youâll have about 5 chances out of 6 of being the attacker, and fighting on a flat open billiard table. With the âscouted terrainâ you can ensure that there is at least one large piece of terrain to hide in, AND, being the attacker, can chose the table base-edges so get to grab it before the enemy can. Now weak Auxiliary/Psiloi armies with high aggression have a bit more of a chance...which is nice.  |
|
