|
|
Post by bluestone28 on Sept 29, 2017 20:52:34 GMT
Hi!
Maybe there was an old topic somewhere about that,
but as i understood, Knights are destroyed at egal by Blades or Lb, Cb in contact
and not if the opponent win with +1, (at this case Kn just recoil right?)
is it a logical reason for that?
thanks
Eric.
|
|
|
|
Post by Antoine on Sept 29, 2017 21:02:03 GMT
I think the logical reason might be that, if loosing they recoil out of immediate danger, but if the combat is a tie, then they are bogged down in these dangerous troops and are killed. Hope it makes sense  |
|
|
|
Post by scottrussell on Sept 30, 2017 8:14:49 GMT
Correct Antoine.
I think the idea was a PB original when 3.0 was being developed.
It is intended to simulate some of the occasions in mediaeval battles when knights were brought to a halt in a complex melee, and, being essentially immobile, were sitting ducks for their more agile opponents. Where they bounced off and were forced to fall back and regroup they were much safer.
Whether it applies to earlier periods, or whether it actually works as a rule is, in my opinion, something of a moot point.
Scott
|
|
|
|
Post by bluestone28 on Sept 30, 2017 20:23:47 GMT
yeah 'cause Kn Kignts is here a very generic term, and i think that i could be lot of difference between French medieval knights and Alexander ones!  but ok it's logical in some point so... |
|
|
|
Post by Antoine on Sept 30, 2017 20:34:45 GMT
True: Alexander companions were pretty agile |
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Oct 1, 2017 12:54:08 GMT
yeah 'cause Kn Kignts is here a very generic term, and i think that i could be lot of difference between French medieval knights and Alexander ones! but ok it's logical in some point so... Given DBA has no traditional combat results table, it is a way to get a bit more granularity in results. |
|
|
|
Post by bob on Oct 1, 2017 17:24:01 GMT
Considering Phil thought games would be between historical enemies, the Companions of Alexander would not be facing many Cross Bows/Long Bows, or Blades.
|
|
|
|
Post by bluestone28 on Oct 1, 2017 18:26:03 GMT
yes... apart the Classic Indian 4Lb... |
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Oct 2, 2017 16:43:17 GMT
yeah 'cause Kn Kignts is here a very generic term, and i think that i could be lot of difference between French medieval knights and Alexander ones! but ok it's logical in some point so... Given DBA has no traditional combat results table, it is a way to get a bit more granularity in results. Yes, this... The historical justification is fun...but this is the reason. Joe Collins |
|
|
|
Post by medievalthomas on Oct 2, 2017 17:37:06 GMT
"Mussale power" combat can be viewed in this manner:
Troops advance into combat with these three results: Side A gets the worst of it and falls back/breaks off; Side B gets the worst of it and falls back/breaks off. In ether case causlties are limited but lots of bumps and bruises. Third situation: neither side breaks off/falls back and an intense melee results. A highly dangerous situation with a likely hood of heavy losses. One side may be staying in the combat based on a misprecption of the situation or inherent stubborness. Not because its tactially smart.
Some weapon/troop combinations thrive in such situations. Swords come to mind with their close fighting capacity. Likewise archers protected by a thicket of (unseen) stakes.
Somewhat conunter intuative but causalties and "sudden collapse" syndrome are more likely on an "Equal Result" than where one side wisely falls back. Its a breakthrough mechanic that Phil invented for DBA 3.0 (though needing a bit of designer notes). We should fully exploit its effects. We call it Cry Havoc. So a troop type with Cry Havoc v. X would Destroy X on Equal results in Close Combat.
As to whether it should apply to Alexander's Companions is a period specific issue. DBA is not a period specific game. Whether any troops in the "Alex" period should have Cry Havoc v. Companions is up to the scenario/period rules designer. The mechanic is there to use as you best see fit.
TomT
|
|
|
|
Post by goragrad on Oct 3, 2017 10:09:21 GMT
Palestinian clubs versus Palmyran cats seems to be the near period equivalent - would they have done as well against Companions?
|
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Oct 3, 2017 11:49:27 GMT
Given DBA has no traditional combat results table, it is a way to get a bit more granularity in results. Yes, this... The historical justification is fun...but this is the reason. Joe Collins Actually, when you think of it, a traditional CRT would have to be a cube, not a table, since the A vs B dynamic is much richer than a mere comparison of fighting strength. That or a billion modifiers and column shifts. The opposed dice rolls not being a perfect mechanic, are however a bit cleaner and more direct than the alternatives... |
|
|
|
Post by lkmjbc on Oct 3, 2017 16:48:19 GMT
And more fun I think... Perhaps this is silly, but I like head to head rolls.
Joe Collins
|
|
|
|
Post by primuspilus on Oct 3, 2017 18:26:48 GMT
And more fun I think... Perhaps this is silly, but I like head to head rolls. Joe Collins Agreed, even if this means we frequently explain why Knights die on ties with certain troop types... " It all comes out in the wash".... Sal Vasta, co-developer of "Totaler Krieg". |
|
|
|
Post by bluestone28 on Oct 3, 2017 20:28:30 GMT
pawn take knight at C-5! ... checkmate... ! |
|
)
