|
|
Post by Baldie on Aug 14, 2023 18:31:18 GMT
Or why are guys with mail and shields less worried about missiles than guys in PJ's and bobble hats
|
|
|
|
Post by evilgong on Aug 15, 2023 2:47:46 GMT
Somewhere in PB's writings (it could be in a Dbx troop definitions or similar) he talks about LH despising / fearing massed foot bows because they out-ranged them and out-shot them.
Foot bows negate LH's ability to ride up to point blank and shoot, in small groups, at slower enemy or weak points. They negate it by making it a suicidal tactic.
Cv differs, in some cases the ghulam-style shower-shooters put out enough missiles to match foot (insert accounts of such ghulams shooting 7 arrow in five seconds or similar and Roman stlye javelin cav using Cantabrian circle to focus missiles on an enemy point to degrade it and perhaps open a gap) but they also are willing, expected and equipped to charge home.
Remember the key DBx philosophy that combat dice represent both the physics of the clash, and critically, also the troops' reaction to it. So LH are weaker because they have no good response to the Foot Bow threat and being scared must bugger off or die, sometimes the bugger off is more or less controlled (recoil or flee) others it becomes a rout - element lifted.
Having just typed that out you could make the case that LH should always flee rather than recoil from Bw - but would that be worth the change?
Regards
David F Brown
|
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Aug 15, 2023 3:14:18 GMT
I guess vodnik wonders what your initial statement means "Why is it easier for Bw to shoot LH than Cv?" - at least I do. Bw have a factor of 4 against any mounted, be it LH or CV (yet CV has a better factor against Bw than LH), so the question is in what way is it easier for Bw to shoot LH than CV?
Yes, that's what I said.
It's easier for Bw to shoot LH than Cv because: Bw CF 4 vs LH CF 2, vs Bw CF 4 vs Cv CF 3.
I then listed the pros and cons of Cv and LH vs Bw shooting at them. Better protection possessed by Cv is offset by their higher density formation (harder to wound but easier target to hit). Worse protection possessed by LH is offset by their dispersed formation and greater speed (easier to wound but harder target to hit).
I then proposed that as the pros and cons for each case appeared to even out, that both LH and Cv be CF 3 vs distant shooting.
(Bw vs LH is especially deadly due to LH's CF 2 being closer to a '1' and a '0' than Cv's CF 3. The way the doubling math works in DBA makes it much easier to destroy elements when they start with low CFs, and much harder when they start with high CFs. When you add Bw's 'combined shooting' to this, several Bw at CF 4 combining their shooting could reduce a LH target element by -1 or -2 to an effective CF of 1 or 0, which nearly always results in a destroyed element. It's much safer being the Cv starting at CF 3.)
It has been recommended in a different thread that LH treat 'destroyed' results from Bw as 'flee' results instead.
|
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Aug 15, 2023 3:15:46 GMT
Or why are guys with mail and shields less worried about missiles than guys in PJ's and bobble hats See above. |
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Aug 15, 2023 3:18:50 GMT
Somewhere in PB's writings (it could be in a Dbx troop definitions or similar) he talks about LH despising / fearing massed foot bows because they out-ranged them and out-shot them. Foot bows negate LH's ability to ride up to point blank and shoot, in small groups, at slower enemy or weak points. They negate it by making it a suicidal tactic. Cv differs, in some cases the ghulam-style shower-shooters put out enough missiles to match foot (insert accounts of such ghulams shooting 7 arrow in five seconds or similar and Roman stlye javelin cav using Cantabrian circle to focus missiles on an enemy point to degrade it and perhaps open a gap) but they also are willing, expected and equipped to charge home. Remember the key DBx philosophy that combat dice represent both the physics of the clash, and critically, also the troops' reaction to it. So LH are weaker because they have no good response to the Foot Bow threat and being scared must bugger off or die, sometimes the bugger off is more or less controlled (recoil or flee) others it becomes a rout - element lifted. Having just typed that out you could make the case that LH should always flee rather than recoil from Bw - but would that be worth the change? Regards David F Brown Brilliant response. Thank you.
(Yes, the bit about LH despising massed foot bows is in the LH troop definition on pg 3 of the DBA Rules.)
And re the last - possibly 'yes': LH should always flee rather than recoil from Bw, but perhaps equally they should also flee rather than be destroyed by Bw...?
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Aug 15, 2023 8:00:49 GMT
Having just typed that out you could make the case that LH should always flee rather than recoil from Bw - but would that be worth the change? Regards David F Brown For LH fleeing when double by shooting, see fanaticus.boards.net/post/26732/  |
|
|
|
Post by elviro on Aug 15, 2023 9:18:59 GMT
I guess vodnik wonders what your initial statement means "Why is it easier for Bw to shoot LH than Cv?" - at least I do. Bw have a factor of 4 against any mounted, be it LH or CV (yet CV has a better factor against Bw than LH), so the question is in what way is it easier for Bw to shoot LH than CV?
Yes, that's what I said.
It's easier for Bw to shoot LH than Cv because: Bw CF 4 vs LH CF 2, vs Bw CF 4 vs Cv CF 3.
Ah, well, thanks snowcat for pointing out what's actually obvious - I claim temporary (hopefully) insanity on my part. |
|
|
|
Post by eg407 on Sept 15, 2023 15:09:11 GMT
Brilliant response. Thank you.
(Yes, the bit about LH despising massed foot bows is in the LH troop definition on pg 3 of the DBA Rules.)
And re the last - possibly 'yes': LH should always flee rather than recoil from Bw, but perhaps equally they should also flee rather than be destroyed by Bw...?
Apologies, I have just found the time to go through the thread, so a little out of date with the discussions.
On the point above, if the Bw didn't kill Lh in CC, then I fear we would loose the rock to the Lh scissor. In game play terms it is a good balance and punishes the Lh for getting too "close" to the Bw. And in that same direction, I don't think Bw are overpowered in anyway. In a recent games day here (a total of 6 games played), the Bw elements of the opponents were always the targets for my 3Pk....If I found them I won, and lost when hitting more solid foot  Now a question would be if 3Pk are too much, but I also don't think this is the case. DBA 3 is a game where 95% of the elements have their balance pretty spot on, IMHO, only 4Ax suffer, but even they can be useful!
Additionally, I had a question to the original logic of the topic. In one of the first points on the Lh-Bw discussion, Snowcat mentioned about the target richness of the environment. How do we know that Lh were not as target rich as Cv in reality?
|
|
|
|
Post by snowcat on Sept 16, 2023 2:05:28 GMT
Apologies, I have just found the time to go through the thread, so a little out of date with the discussions.
On the point above, if the Bw didn't kill Lh in CC, then I fear we would loose the rock to the Lh scissor. In game play terms it is a good balance and punishes the Lh for getting too "close" to the Bw. And in that same direction, I don't think Bw are overpowered in anyway. In a recent games day here (a total of 6 games played), the Bw elements of the opponents were always the targets for my 3Pk....If I found them I won, and lost when hitting more solid foot Now a question would be if 3Pk are too much, but I also don't think this is the case. DBA 3 is a game where 95% of the elements have their balance pretty spot on, IMHO, only 4Ax suffer, but even they can be useful!
Additionally, I had a question to the original logic of the topic. In one of the first points on the Lh-Bw discussion, Snowcat mentioned about the target richness of the environment. How do we know that Lh were not as target rich as Cv in reality?
LH being *as* target rich as Cv vs Bw shooting is one thing; *more* target rich is another.
Have another read of what I originally wrote.
What I was seeking was an 'equivalency' for Cv and LH vs Bw shooting (i.e. both having the same CF 3 vs Bw shooting), based on the reasoning I provided. Evilgong assuaged this somewhat with his own take on PB's rationale for the current CFs of Cv and LH vs Bw shooting .
|
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Sept 20, 2023 18:06:54 GMT
Somewhere in PB's writings (it could be in a Dbx troop definitions or similar) he talks about LH despising / fearing massed foot bows because they out-ranged them and out-shot them. Foot bows negate LH's ability to ride up to point blank and shoot, in small groups, at slower enemy or weak points. They negate it by making it a suicidal tactic. Cv differs, in some cases the ghulam-style shower-shooters put out enough missiles to match foot (insert accounts of such ghulams shooting 7 arrow in five seconds or similar and Roman stlye javelin cav using Cantabrian circle to focus missiles on an enemy point to degrade it and perhaps open a gap) but they also are willing, expected and equipped to charge home. Remember the key DBx philosophy that combat dice represent both the physics of the clash, and critically, also the troops' reaction to it. So LH are weaker because they have no good response to the Foot Bow threat and being scared must bugger off or die, sometimes the bugger off is more or less controlled (recoil or flee) others it becomes a rout - element lifted. Having just typed that out you could make the case that LH should always flee rather than recoil from Bw - but would that be worth the change? Regards David F Brown LH (well Light Mounted) will now Flee from Doubled in Ranged Combat in DBF (and we hope going forward in general) so this issue is solved. TomT |
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Sept 20, 2023 18:11:10 GMT
Apologies, I have just found the time to go through the thread, so a little out of date with the discussions.
On the point above, if the Bw didn't kill Lh in CC, then I fear we would loose the rock to the Lh scissor. In game play terms it is a good balance and punishes the Lh for getting too "close" to the Bw. And in that same direction, I don't think Bw are overpowered in anyway. In a recent games day here (a total of 6 games played), the Bw elements of the opponents were always the targets for my 3Pk....If I found them I won, and lost when hitting more solid foot Now a question would be if 3Pk are too much, but I also don't think this is the case. DBA 3 is a game where 95% of the elements have their balance pretty spot on, IMHO, only 4Ax suffer, but even they can be useful!
Additionally, I had a question to the original logic of the topic. In one of the first points on the Lh-Bw discussion, Snowcat mentioned about the target richness of the environment. How do we know that Lh were not as target rich as Cv in reality?
LH being *as* target rich as Cv vs Bw shooting is one thing; *more* target rich is another.
Have another read of what I originally wrote.
What I was seeking was an 'equivalency' for Cv and LH vs Bw shooting (i.e. both having the same CF 3 vs Bw shooting), based on the reasoning I provided. Evilgong assuaged this somewhat with his own take on PB's rationale for the current CFs of Cv and LH vs Bw shooting .
Likewise we are going to fix the Aux(S) problem in DBF and finally create a functional Medium Foot (they get a +1 in Close v. Foot). Tougher versions of "Bow" are also included so this should solve the issues in general.
TomT |
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Sept 20, 2023 19:48:07 GMT
I am really looking forward to DBF. But we'll need a new section in the forum to discuss these rules once they pass through the fiery crucible of mass release! 😉
Cheers
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by Brian Ború on Sept 20, 2023 20:05:54 GMT
By the way, my latin is very rusty–did you ever check your new rules' title, grammar, casus, modi, etc?
|
|
|
|
Post by jim1973 on Sept 20, 2023 20:17:24 GMT
stevie does have John Cleese's centurion as his profile pic!
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by stevie on Sept 20, 2023 21:57:55 GMT
By the way, my latin is very rusty–did you ever check your new rules' title, grammar, casus, modi, etc?
he is caught in the act by a centurion who gives him a Latin grammar lesson]Centurion: What's this, then? "Romanes Eunt Domus"? "People called Romanes, they go the house"? Brian: It says "Romans, Go Home". Centurion: No it doesn't. What's Latin for "Roman"? Come on! Brian: "Romanus". Centurion: Goes like? Brian: "Annus"? Centurion: Vocative plural of "annus" is? Brian: "Anni"? Centurion: "Romani". [the centurion takes the paintbrush and corrects the first line of Brian's graffiti]Centurion: "Eunt". What is "eunt"? Brian: "Go". Centurion: Conjugate the verb "to go". Brian: "Ire, eo, is, it, imus, itis, eunt". Centurion: So "eunt" is? Brian: Third person plural present indicative. "They go". Centurion: But "Romans, go home" is an *order*, so you must use the...? Brian: The imperative! Centurion: Which is? Brian: Um, oh, oh, "i". Centurion: How many Romans? Brian: Plural. "Ite". Centurion: "Ite". [the centurion corrects the second line of Brian's graffiti]Centurion: "Domus"? Nominative? "Go home". This is motion towards, isn't it, boy? Brian: Dative! [the centurion suddenly draws his sword and holds it to Brian's neck]Brian: No, not dative! Accusative! Accusative! "Domum", sir. "Ad domum". Centurion: Except that "domus" takes the... Brian: The locative, sir. Centurion: Which is? Brian: "Domum". Centurion: "Domum". [the centurion corrects the last line of Brian's graffiti]Centurion: Understand? Brian: Yes, sir. Centurion: Now write it out a hundred times. Brian: Yes, sir. Thank you, sir. Hail Caesar, sir. Centurion: Hail Caesar. And if it's not done by sunrise, I'll cut your balls off. |
|
Now a question would be if 3Pk are too much, but I also don't think this is the case. DBA 3 is a game where 95% of the elements have their balance pretty spot on, IMHO, only 4Ax suffer, but even they can be useful! 
