|
|
Post by proximocoal on Nov 19, 2022 7:51:11 GMT
Like many people, it seems, my regular opponent Jason has a real issue with the current rules for Pikes. Mainly that they seem at a disadvantage to spears which they largely replaced in Ancient times. The solution was to replace solid Pike with deep spear. It looks like an imposing Pike block, it gives them a slight edge over regular spear, they still suffer in terrain due to lack of support bonus. The cost of an additional element lost for the first casualty seems reasonable (if the Pike block begins to crumble often that was the point of armies fleeing) and means their flanks are vulnerable. We had a practice game of Alexandrian Macedonian against Later Achaemenid and it went 5-4 to the Alexandrians, so very close. Probably the main issue is that it looks like Alexandrians massively outnumber the Persians, but actually game play wise it simply meant that the Pike were stronger against the spear centre but vulnerable against the Persian flanks.
We don't really have a solution for fast Pikes, which I personally don't understand anyway. One test game is also not many, but might be interesting for people to try.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Nov 19, 2022 9:54:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by dpd on Apr 18, 2023 14:52:06 GMT
"Many players know that I dislike the idea of 8Pk"
Whence comes this hatred?
Lots of historical examples of deep, double-based pike formations (Spanish tercio, Swiss kiel, Scottish schiltrons, Landsknecht pike blocks, Macedonian syntagma, Hellenistic syntagma, etc.).
In fact, AFAIK 8pk is historically the norm for pike formations, and individual 4pk being the exception.
Perhaps we should get rid of army roster designated deep units (8sp - Thebans only, 6bd - Swiss only, 6cv, 6kn) but allow any unit, 3 figures or 4, the option to deploy as deep double-based units with appropriate bonuses (like 8pk or 6wb).
This ability would of course be part of the army description as an option (for well trained armies) or a required formation (for barbarian armies)
For example allow "6bw" to symbolize English longbowmen in deep wedge formations on the flanks of dismounted knights.
The only army roster designated deep unit we should keep would be the 8bw mixed formation of spear/pike and bowmen as there are so many historical examples (Persian Immortals, Ottoman Janissaries, Burgundian ordnance, etc.)
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Apr 18, 2023 17:13:34 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Apr 20, 2023 0:23:51 GMT
Like many people, it seems, my regular opponent Jason has a real issue with the current rules for Pikes. Mainly that they seem at a disadvantage to spears which they largely replaced in Ancient times. The solution was to replace solid Pike with deep spear. It looks like an imposing Pike block, it gives them a slight edge over regular spear, they still suffer in terrain due to lack of support bonus. The cost of an additional element lost for the first casualty seems reasonable (if the Pike block begins to crumble often that was the point of armies fleeing) and means their flanks are vulnerable. We had a practice game of Alexandrian Macedonian against Later Achaemenid and it went 5-4 to the Alexandrians, so very close. Probably the main issue is that it looks like Alexandrians massively outnumber the Persians, but actually game play wise it simply meant that the Pike were stronger against the spear centre but vulnerable against the Persian flanks. We don't really have a solution for fast Pikes, which I personally don't understand anyway. One test game is also not many, but might be interesting for people to try. Re Fast Pikes, I've always thought they should NOT receive rear support. They're basically Ax armed with very long spears (pikes). They did not fight in deep formations. So they could/should be a variant of Ax that stands up better vs mounted.
|
|
|
|
Post by kaiphranos on Apr 20, 2023 0:44:16 GMT
Defends better, maybe, but Auxilia can kill Cavalry whereas they just flee from Pikes...
|
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Apr 20, 2023 1:22:01 GMT
Defends better, maybe, but Auxilia can kill Cavalry whereas they just flee from Pikes... Yup. And this is because the outcomes for Pk previously reflected *real historical* Pike formations, not also these fantasy deep Pk(F) formations shoehorned into still behaving like Pk.
Perhaps Pk(F) *should* be allowed to kill Cavalry (like Ax), BUT NO REAR SUPPORT (like Ax).
|
|
