Author Topic: Rules issues out of Wollongong  (Read 5034 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Barritus

  • Guest
Rules issues out of Wollongong
« on: April 17, 2007, 07:34:46 AM »
Some interesting issues rose out of the rules, which have been sparsely discussed on the DBMM list, but little seems to have come from it.

1. Teleporting columns. Take 16 heavy foot elements in a single rank (64 cm wide). Turn 90 degrees into column, with the lead element moving 160 paces, and the remaining elements filling in behind. The last element will move a total of 880 paces to close up the gap (44 centimetres if my maths is right). If the line is wider, the last element will move even further. People will note this is more than twice the speed of Light Horse.
 
1a. Assuming the heavy foot above are Pike, this suggests a deployment system for Later Swiss, especially if you have to deploy first: Deploy your three commands front, centre and rear, with the Pike in single ranks. To concentrate your troops, turn into column, so the extended line becomes a shorter column. Then turn 90 degrees from column back into line, in 2, 3 or 4 ranks. And because you have Regular generals, this maneuver can be carried out for 1 PIP for each command.
 
2. Inept Irregulars hitting enemy. If Inept Irregulars (everyone except Light Troops, Cv (O) or a general) move other than straight ahead, they always pay +1 PIPs. This makes it impossible to move to contact for 1 PIP if  some degree of maneuver is required (say, moving around terrain or friends).
 
3. Death zones to the rear. When Warband kill an enemy foot element, they also kill the element behind it. But if the Warband hit the rear of a two rank line, the contacted element doesn't turn. Assuming the hit element is destroyed, all elements within a base depth of the destroyed element's rear edge are also destroyed. The space within a base depth to the rear of an element hit in the rear is the space the element itself occupies. This means that Warband can kill two elements at a time if they attack the front of enemy infantry, but only one at a time if they attack the rear of enemy infantry.
 
I predict there will be circumstances in which a player will deliberately order his infantry to do a 180 degree turn, in order to reduce the rate at which enemy Warband can plough through them. In other words, Rort with a capital Cheese.
 
4. Cv (S)/Kn (F) Mexican stand-off. When Cv (S) and Kn (F) face each other, whoever contacts has a tremendous advantage. The problem is that, in order to move into contact, you must be within reach of your enemy. If you move into reach, you're giving your opponent the chance to contact you. In other words, moving to contact gives your opponent the advantage. It's safer to sit still and wait for your opponent to make the first move. Yes, impetuousity can affect things, but not all such match-ups will involve impetuous troops. Yes, your opponent might not get the PIPs to move to contact, but you won't know that when you move within charge reach.

4a. The same situation arises with Warband (S/O) facing heavy foot, especially Blade. The warband need to be in such depth that they'll almost certainly be more expensive per element frontage that the Blade.

Sgt Steiner

  • Guest
Re: Rules issues out of Wollongong
« Reply #1 on: April 17, 2007, 11:02:11 AM »
Hi Barritus (ta for Baggage info btw)

> 1. Teleporting columns.
Not sure and its odd that in the relevant rule it does say 'It may take more than 1 move..........' which implies some sort of restriction ?
Would this apply (rule on Pg29 just after the list of Column forming) ie 'Unless expanding FROM a column a group move can include ONLY these changes of direction' the key one being '1 wheel of 2-8 elements of up to 90d'  ie the limit is 2-8 elements ? a clutch at a straw maybe :-)

> And because you have Regular generals, this maneuver can be carried out for 1 PIP for each command.
If I am on right lines would this increase ?

>2. Inept Irregulars hitting enemy. If Inept Irregulars (everyone except Light Troops, Cv (O) or a general) move >other than straight ahead, they always pay +1 PIPs. This makes it impossible to move to contact for 1 PIP if  >some degree of maneuver is required (say, moving around terrain or friends).
I think this is correct as per the rules except it gives an exception 'if along a road,river ot terrain feature edge' but not friends.
I dont have a problem with it as such (Impt troops more attractive in this regard) but can forsee some cheese ensuing with formation dancing by Regs in front of oncoming Irrs to cause this +1 ? bit like kinking in DBM.
PB certainly seems to want force a lot more Armati style ahead only moves which is certainly differnt to DBM but not unreasonanble. My only gripe with this is why Irr Cv(S) 'suffer' ?

> 3. Death zones to the rear.
>I predict there will be circumstances in which a player will deliberately order his infantry to do a 180 degree turn, >in order to reduce the rate at which enemy Warband can plough through them. In other words, Rort with a >capital Cheese.
Odd one that and one wonders how it was missed in playtests ? a re-wording needed

>4. Cv (S)/Kn (F) Mexican stand-off. When Cv (S) and Kn (F) face each other
> 4a. The same situation arises with Warband (S/O) facing heavy foot, especially Blade. The warband need to be > in such depth that they'll almost certainly be more expensive per element frontage that the Blade.
Personally I dont have a problem with this as its not unreasonable ? or maybe it is ?
Pips are the key with Irr/Imp types as potentially hard to keep them stationary or even to stop them short of enemy charge reach.
Not sure how it could be resolved as any increase in relative moves will give big advantage to faster type ?
Wb(F) may be a much more useful type now (thought they were pretty awful in 3.1) as they have speed  'advantage' despite brittleness ? Bd(F) of course as well.

Hmmm......................

Gary











DaveMather

  • Bd(O)
  • ***
  • Posts: 133
    • View Profile
Re: Rules issues out of Wollongong
« Reply #2 on: April 20, 2007, 04:06:57 PM »
Hi Barritus (ta for Baggage info btw)

> 1. Teleporting columns.
Not sure and its odd that in the relevant rule it does say 'It may take more than 1 move..........' which implies some sort of restriction ?
Would this apply (rule on Pg29 just after the list of Column forming) ie 'Unless expanding FROM a column a group move can include ONLY these changes of direction' the key one being '1 wheel of 2-8 elements of up to 90d'  ie the limit is 2-8 elements ? a clutch at a straw maybe :-)

> And because you have Regular generals, this maneuver can be carried out for 1 PIP for each command.
If I am on right lines would this increase ?

DM - this one changed at the last minute and there is some doubt as to why - just before the rules were published there was a 400pace maximum - i suspect this will be sorted soon

>2. Inept Irregulars hitting enemy. If Inept Irregulars (everyone except Light Troops, Cv (O) or a general) move >other than straight ahead, they always pay +1 PIPs. This makes it impossible to move to contact for 1 PIP if  >some degree of maneuver is required (say, moving around terrain or friends).
I think this is correct as per the rules except it gives an exception 'if along a road,river ot terrain feature edge' but not friends.
I dont have a problem with it as such (Impt troops more attractive in this regard) but can forsee some cheese ensuing with formation dancing by Regs in front of oncoming Irrs to cause this +1 ? bit like kinking in DBM.
PB certainly seems to want force a lot more Armati style ahead only moves which is certainly differnt to DBM but not unreasonanble. My only gripe with this is why Irr Cv(S) 'suffer' ?

DM - this one got debated to death and PB wasnt budging a 12th hour attempt to change it was quashed - its based on Irr Cv (S) being "shower shooters" eg heavy cavalry with bow - going in close and blasting the enemy and if successful charging straight forward into them to exploit the damage the "shower shooting" caused  -

> 3. Death zones to the rear.
>I predict there will be circumstances in which a player will deliberately order his infantry to do a 180 degree turn, >in order to reduce the rate at which enemy Warband can plough through them. In other words, Rort with a >capital Cheese.
Odd one that and one wonders how it was missed in playtests ? a re-wording needed

DM probably because (certainly in this "playtesters" opinion) nobody was stupid enough to do it - If someone did it to me I would be delighted - take the example of Spear - if you turn the spear round to avoid losing 2 ranks - the warband hit you in the rear they then fight at 3-1 WITHOUT any risk of being killed or recoiled - if the first one wins its 3-0 for free down the whole line - result pretty much entire front line wiped out for no risk to the the warband

If you are that concerned why not step the spear first line forward and fight at 3-3 and at least have a chance of killing/recoiling warband

Better use other troops like Ps/Cv/LH to thwart the warband

 
>4. Cv (S)/Kn (F) Mexican stand-off. When Cv (S) and Kn (F) face each other
> 4a. The same situation arises with Warband (S/O) facing heavy foot, especially Blade. The warband need to be > in such depth that they'll almost certainly be more expensive per element frontage that the Blade.
Personally I dont have a problem with this as its not unreasonable ? or maybe it is ?
Pips are the key with Irr/Imp types as potentially hard to keep them stationary or even to stop them short of enemy charge reach.
Not sure how it could be resolved as any increase in relative moves will give big advantage to faster type ?
Wb(F) may be a much more useful type now (thought they were pretty awful in 3.1) as they have speed  'advantage' despite brittleness ? Bd(F) of course as well.

Hmmm......................

DM the Wb (O) at only 1/2 ME can take the Bd charge - The Bd if Roman should be looking to blunt the Warband with his support troops Ax(S) are good at this


Gary












Sgt Steiner

  • Guest
Re: Rules issues out of Wollongong
« Reply #3 on: April 20, 2007, 09:24:47 PM »
Hi DM

DM - this one changed at the last minute and there is some doubt as to why - just before the rules were published there was a 400pace maximum - i suspect this will be sorted soon

One would hope so

DM - this one got debated to death and PB wasnt budging a 12th hour attempt to change it was quashed - its based on Irr Cv (S) being "shower shooters" eg heavy cavalry with bow - going in close and blasting the enemy and if successful charging straight forward into them to exploit the damage the "shower shooting" caused  -

Hmmm not so sure that Reg Cv(S) would be any different as regards the shower shooting ? I can see his reasoning in some cases but its leads to apparent oddities when for example an Avar is Reg Cv(S) and yet his fellow Turkish types (Kahazars Bulgars Ogk Magyar etc) are Irr and therefore Inept with same (?) tactics and fighting styles equipment etc.

DM the Wb (O) at only 1/2 ME can take the Bd charge - The Bd if Roman should be looking to blunt the Warband with his support troops Ax(S) are good at this

Ax(S) are very good troop type in Dbmm (better than Spears Imho)

Cheers









Aloysius the Gaul

  • Guest
Re: Rules issues out of Wollongong
« Reply #4 on: April 22, 2007, 11:49:18 PM »
Umm....I'd have thought it fairly obvious why Regulars are better than irregulars at manouvre - it's because they are regular!!

Now you may not think much of the regular/irregular dichotomy, but it is there - it's not exactly hidden away!

Sgt Steiner

  • Guest
Re: Rules issues out of Wollongong
« Reply #5 on: April 24, 2007, 12:08:40 PM »
Hi

Yep no problem with Regulars costing less Pips to move but bit more confused by why Irr Cv(O) move as if Regs but Irr Cv(S) dont certainly in some if not all cases

A design dsecision I know but am interested as to reason/s and validity thereof

Cheers

Doug M.

  • Guest
Re: Rules issues out of Wollongong
« Reply #6 on: April 24, 2007, 01:32:31 PM »
The impression i get was that Phil wanted to reserve the Irr Cv(S) class principally for stationary shower shooters such as Mamluks and Sassanians. So in effect Irr Cv(S) isn't a superior type of Cv(O), it is a distinct class that fights in a different way, in massed formations that are relatively immobile compared to looser formations of Cv(O).

Check the DBMM list for discussions on this. At the time I argued strenuously for a different classification for Sassanians but it would appear that Phil's conception is immovable.

regards

Doug

Aloysius the Gaul

  • Guest
Re: Rules issues out of Wollongong
« Reply #7 on: April 25, 2007, 11:53:31 PM »
I concur with Doug on this one.

Cv(O) and Cv(S) fight differently - Cv(O) are looser, can use circulating shooting formations, and are pretty much "just" heavy light horse.

Cv(S) are a different beast entirely - they "fight" by maintaining close formation and shooting en masse.


bunwin63

  • Guest
Re: Rules issues out of Wollongong
« Reply #8 on: April 26, 2007, 03:07:07 AM »
It would have been interesting having CvS shooting, say at a range of 160p

Aloysius the Gaul

  • Guest
Re: Rules issues out of Wollongong
« Reply #9 on: April 27, 2007, 05:37:37 AM »
It would be 80p max - I believe there are Persian & Mamluk manuals that state that that is about the limit of accuracy for mounted shooting.

For a while the playtest versions ahd troops in the TZ of Cv(S) being impetuous - the idea being that they wouldn't stand around being shot at, but that'sobviously not there anymore.