|
|
Post by hodsopa on Aug 11, 2023 12:21:24 GMT
The armies I know a bit about historically don't include many Bw. But the armies I play with in games are always getting pasted by opponents with 4 or 6 of them. In particular, three or more Bw in a row are killers not just pushers-back. Is this reasonable historically? I don't think the main problem the Lithuanians caused the Teutonic Knights came from their massed archers, for example, as opposed to their all-round hit-and-run-ness, but a rational Lithuanian set-up with the current dismounting rules probably includes five elements of them.
The ability to shoot a whole base width to either side, so that three Bw in a row can nearly always hit a single target, seems in particular to suggest more volition in targeting than elements would really have had.
Interested in others' views.
Paul H
|
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Aug 11, 2023 13:36:51 GMT
Depends a bit on what they're facing. With a mounted target, a couple of friends shooting as well means 4v3 becomes 4v1 (or even 4v0!). On the other hand, a shieldwall or a line of Bd shouldn't be too bothered.
One could reduce the Bw factor v mounted to 3, but then 3v3 in close combat with a QK makes them a bow-armed speed-bump. (Unless one keeps the factor of 4 for CC v mounted.)
There is an analysis of Bw v Pk in DBA in the latest edition of Slingshot. No great revelations, but it does crunch the numbers.
|
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Aug 11, 2023 13:44:58 GMT
The armies I know a bit about historically don't include many Bw. But the armies I play with in games are always getting pasted by opponents with 4 or 6 of them. In particular, three or more Bw in a row are killers not just pushers-back. Is this reasonable historically? I don't think the main problem the Lithuanians caused the Teutonic Knights came from their massed archers, for example, as opposed to their all-round hit-and-run-ness, but a rational Lithuanian set-up with the current dismounting rules probably includes five elements of them. The ability to shoot a whole base width to either side, so that three Bw in a row can nearly always hit a single target, seems in particular to suggest more volition in targeting than elements would really have had. Interested in others' views. Paul H Paul H I found my Lithuanian troops dismount at the wrong time or have their field of fire quickly blocked. Need more practice. |
|
|
|
Post by hodsopa on Aug 11, 2023 13:52:47 GMT
I failed that way too the last time I fought with them, and my conclusion was they might just as well start on foot.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian Ború on Aug 11, 2023 14:03:18 GMT
Everytime I encountered armies with many bows I lost when
I attacked them and I won when I avoided them...
|
|
|
|
Post by skb777 on Aug 11, 2023 18:28:06 GMT
Yes i think so, against CV at least. They just kill horsies far too easily for my liking
|
|
|
|
Post by paulisper on Aug 11, 2023 18:38:34 GMT
Close quickly and they then really don’t like it up ‘em… I think the balance is right.
P
|
|
|
|
Post by hodsopa on Aug 11, 2023 20:26:10 GMT
Cv and LH are better placed to close quickly than Kn and Cm (and infantry), all of which are liable to undergo two rounds of shooting before contact rather than one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian Ború on Aug 11, 2023 20:41:21 GMT
Cv and LH are better placed to close quickly than Kn and Cm (and infantry), all of which are liable to undergo two rounds of shooting before contact rather than one. Attacking bows with light horse is no good idea.  |
|
|
|
Post by menacussecundus on Aug 11, 2023 21:09:17 GMT
Cv and LH are better placed to close quickly than Kn and Cm (and infantry), all of which are liable to undergo two rounds of shooting before contact rather than one. Only if the Bw are prepared to hang back and do nothing. Otherwise the Bw advance into range and shoot once, but then face being charged and contacted by any Kn/Cm/Fast foot/El. |
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Aug 11, 2023 21:13:12 GMT
Bows are actually quite vulnerable. They are +2 v. Foot and unlike Ps they can't evade and take corner Overlaps so vaporize on contact (we put in lots of stuff to keep Ps alive in 3.0 but not Bows).
All Mounted sweep them away in Close. Once inside a TZ they mush shoot 1-1 (so 4 V. 3). Mounted can move from out of range into a TZ and hence limit pile on shooting. So they are pretty well balanced against Mounted with perhaps a slight edge but very feeble v. Foot who have a decided edge.
Historically mounted charges into masse bow were disasters which must also be considered in an historical wargame.
TomT
|
|
|
|
Post by skb777 on Aug 12, 2023 10:24:33 GMT
Bows are actually quite vulnerable. They are +2 v. Foot and unlike Ps they can't evade and take corner Overlaps so vaporize on contact (we put in lots of stuff to keep Ps alive in 3.0 but not Bows). Once inside a TZ they mush shoot 1-1 (so 4 V. 3). Mounted can move from out of range into a TZ and hence limit pile on shooting. So they are pretty well balanced against Mounted with perhaps a slight edge but very feeble v. Foot who have a decided edge. Historically mounted charges into masse bow were disasters which must also be considered in an historical wargame. TomT It can't be both - 'All Mounted sweep them away in Close.' 'Historically mounted charges into masse bow were disasters.'
I have always been under the impression that solid BW in DBA 3.0 is to satisfy the HYW effect of the French conveniently charging a prepared defensive position (behind stakes etc) into BW and doesn't actually fit any other historical modelling. Of course they can be decimated CV, but only under a particular set of circumstances. Poor Alexander's 3 KN can only move 3 BW would have to sit there for a turn taking fire and then at least one more if he was able to charge, possibly more if he kept getting recoiled.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Aug 12, 2023 11:15:33 GMT
You could always put skirmishing Psiloi out in front of your mounted elements.
These cannot be killed by bowshot…they merely flee.
And mounted can pass through Psiloi to charge…
|
|
|
|
Post by skb777 on Aug 12, 2023 11:46:44 GMT
Yep, there are ways around it, but still other factors to consider not least you have more CV than PS.
|
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Aug 13, 2023 8:38:31 GMT
I'll ask a slightly different but related question...
Why is it easier for Bw to shoot LH than Cv?
Cv are a formation of horsemen clumped together - a target rich environment if ever there was one. They will usually be wearing armour, often but not always with shields - but many may still be riding unarmoured horses.
LH operate in small dispersed groups moving at faster speeds than Cv as they approach the enemy - so not as target rich an environment by comparison. But they will be wearing very little to no armour on unarmoured horses.
I would have thought the pros/cons of each would cancel each other out.
So CF 3 vs distant shooting each.
No?
|
|
