Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

[joncleaves]

If the Swiss/Germans come after the LB with a 4E unit, sure, they'll be
disordered and lose. No argument there.

J


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Ed Forbes]

Jon,

Swiss recoil issues

First, lets take the example of German P attacking Burundian LB behind stakes.
The German HI P charges the LB. The P probably lose due to support shooting at
a 4 and -2 for the stakes. As P, they do not recoil, but are disordered in
place. The next bound supporting Kn charge in without the front rank of LB able
to support shoot as the front rank is a rank eligible to fight. The Kn and P
should win this bound, pushing the LB back disordered. This example will still
work if you substitute the Kn for just about anything for charges in the second
bound.


Now lets take the example of Swiss vs these same Burundian LB behind stakes. The
Swiss charge will probably lose to the LB and will be forced to recoil (or break
off). The LB holds as they are not required to follow up or pursue. Any charge
by supporting Kn or P against the LB the next bound will take full supporting
fire and also probably lose.


As the rule stands, Germans , and other medieval armies with P are better able
to crack a Burundian line than the Swiss. A bit out of the historical results
with armies that all fought each other at one time or another.


Ed

[joncleaves]

Both the Germans and Swiss lock in such a fight on even dice.

No change is planned.

Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: eforbes100@... <eforbes100@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 19:10:27 GMT
Subject: [WarriorRules] Jon: Swiss recoil issues


Jon,

Swiss recoil issues

First, lets take the example of German P attacking Burundian LB behind stakes.
The German HI P charges the LB. The P probably lose due to support shooting at
a 4 and -2 for the stakes. As P, they do not recoil, but are disordered in
place. The next bound supporting Kn charge in without the front rank of LB able
to support shoot as the front rank is a rank eligible to fight. The Kn and P
should win this bound, pushing the LB back disordered. This example will still
work if you substitute the Kn for just about anything for charges in the second
bound.


Now lets take the example of Swiss vs these same Burundian LB behind stakes. The
Swiss charge will probably lose to the LB and will be forced to recoil (or break
off). The LB holds as they are not required to follow up or pursue. Any charge
by supporting Kn or P against the LB the next bound will take full supporting
fire and also probably lose.


As the rule stands, Germans , and other medieval armies with P are better able
to crack a Burundian line than the Swiss. A bit out of the historical results
with armies that all fought each other at one time or another.


Ed






Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Ed Forbes]

The German P locks in all cases. The Swiss P lock at about 50/50. The Swiss P
charge is about 1/2 as effective as the German in a charge against Burgundian
LB. Not quite the same.

Ed

-- JonCleaves@... wrote:

Both the Germans and Swiss lock in such a fight on even dice.

No change is planned.

Jon

[joncleaves]

The Swiss and German P lock in all the same cases. What is different about them
in this hand to hand? They are both (L)HI P as far as the hand to hand is
concerned. Even better to be Swiss as when they lock, they will change to 2HCT
and when they win, they will not be disordered by the obstacle.
Show me numbers, please, to continue this discussion, so I can see where the
error is?

J

-----Original Message-----
From: eforbes100@... <eforbes100@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 20:56:49 GMT
Subject: Re: [WarriorRules] Jon: Swiss recoil issues


The German P locks in all cases. The Swiss P lock at about 50/50. The Swiss P
charge is about 1/2 as effective as the German in a charge against Burgundian
LB. Not quite the same.

Ed

-- JonCleaves@... wrote:

Both the Germans and Swiss lock in such a fight on even dice.

No change is planned.

Jon







Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Ed Forbes]

Jon,

My mistake, both Swiss and other shieldless P lose to the Burgundian and recoil.
I forgot that as the shieldless P were disordered by support, that they would
recoil. They only disorder in place if they were not already disordered.

If disordered in support, and in hth the P roll up +3 for an 8, and the
Burgundian rolls down -3 for 8, they lock. No chance for a win or lock unless
the Burgundian rolls down -2 in support or hth.

I know stakes were very effective against mounted, but are you sure you are
conforable with stakes being this effective againt foot in its historical
context? I know neither the Germans or the Swiss had this much trouble with the
Burgundian.

Example:
P, 16 figs in 3 ranks P,1 rear rank 2hct, front rank (L)HI, rear ranks (L)MI,
counting 12 for cpf, charge Burgundian of 12 figs LMI, LB, Sh in front rank and
12 figures LMI, CB in rear rank, defending stakes

The Swiss hit an end stand.

support shooting is 8 LB at a 4 and 8 CB at a 3. even dice causes 44, which
disorders the Swiss. Down -1 causes 36, which still disorders the Swiss. Up +1
causes -4 to the Swiss for hth.

In HtH, the Burgundian is 4 at 5. They count the Swiss MI, shildless HI, and do
not take the -2 vs P. 4 at a 5 is 16. If down -1, 4 at 4 is 12, all 1 per.

The Swiss in return have 8 at -3= 2 (3MI -1 disordered-3 support-2 obstacle).
The Swiss recoil disordered.


Ed

-- JonCleaves@... wrote:

The Swiss and German P lock in all the same cases. What is different about them
in this hand to hand? They are both (L)HI P as far as the hand to hand is
concerned. Even better to be Swiss as when they lock, they will change to 2HCT
and when they win, they will not be disordered by the obstacle.
Show me numbers, please, to continue this discussion, so I can see where the
error is?

J

[Mark Stone]

--- On December 13 Jon Cleaves said: ---

> The Swiss and German P lock in all the same cases. What is different about
them
> in this hand to hand?

No, Jon, they don't lock in all the same cases. That is what Ed is concerned
about. Perhaps an example will help explain.

Let's suppose I'm playing Germans, and I have a unit of HI pikemen and a unit of
SHK. Here's my recipe for pounding the crap out of longbowmen:
- Bound N, the pikes charge the longbowmen. The pikes may well lose, because
they have no shields and the longbowmen are going to shoot the crap out of
them. I don't care, though, because even if the pikes lose -- and here's the
key -- THEY DON'T RECOIL. They just sit there disordered.
- Bound N+1, the SHK charge, no longer having to worry about support shooting
from the longbowmen since the front rank of longbowmen are now involved in hand
to hand combat and count as a rank that has previously fought. Under these
circumstances, the SHK should win easily.

Now let's try this with the Swiss, using a unit of LHI pikemen and a unit of
SHK.
- Bound N, the pikes charge in, lose the combat and... wait for it... RECOIL.
- Bound N+1 the SHK stand around looking confused, as they can no longer charge
in free from the fear of support shooting.

Ed's question, I believe, is this: in the situation described above if both the
German pikes and the Swiss pikes lose, why are the Swiss being more greatly
penalized than the Germans? And is that really the way you intended Swiss
interaction to work?

Personally, I have no opinion one way or the other on what the right outcome is
here. But I think Ed is just trying to see if the actual outcome is the
intended outcome.


-Mark Stone

[Ed Forbes]

Jon,

This still comes down to 2 main issues. Swiss / German P are not as good in many
cases as militia LTS, sh, and the power of stakes vs foot.

Change the example to a 4 element unit of Swiss vs 4 elements of LB/CB and the
factors do not change.

Change the attackers to militia MI LTS, sh and the results change again. You
have 4 element militia LTS units 1 wide x 4 deep able to lock onto the 4 or 6
elements of LB and the Swiss and German P can not.

So the best inf in Europe needs to outnumber militia in order to win or lock an
open field combat that militia LTS can do one on one? I do not believe this
reflects historical results.

Neither the Swiss or the German foot paid much attention to foot behind minor
field defenses such as stakes. Stakes were used as a defense vs mounted and I
see little in the historical record that shows they were as effective vs foot as
they were vs mounted.





Ed

-- JonCleaves@... wrote:

If the Swiss/Germans come after the LB with a 4E unit, sure, they'll be
disordered and lose. No argument there.

J


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





Yahoo! Groups Links

Greetings Ed,
Your math is flawed LB is 2 shieldless is 2 CONTACT is -2 for a 2 so you
only do 16 plus 12 = 28 no disorder so your HTH is completely different. I
think its 12 @ the 2 for 24 vs 4 @ a 0 =4 recoiling the Burgundians (this
is done from memory so I could be off). The germans have it tougher in that
they will be disordered by the obstical so suffer a minus 2 on the next bound.

TD

> The Swiss hit an end stand.
>
> support shooting is 8 LB at a 4 and 8 CB at a 3. even dice causes 44, which
disorders the Swiss. Down -1 causes 36, which still disorders the Swiss. Up +1
causes -4 to the Swiss for hth.
>
> I

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "scsabrecoach" <scsabrecoach@y...> wrote:
Or I could forget the support fire and it could be 10 @ 0 still more.

>
> Greetings Ed,
> Your math is flawed LB is 2 shieldless is 2 CONTACT is -2 for a 2 so you
only do 16 plus 12 = 28 no disorder so your HTH is completely different. I
think its 12 @ the 2 for 24 vs 4 @ a 0 =4 recoiling the Burgundians (this
is done from memory so I could be off). The germans have it tougher in that
they will be disordered by the obstical so suffer a minus 2 on the next bound.
>
> TD

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "scsabrecoach" <scsabrecoach@y...> wrote:
Or I could forget the support fire and it could be 10 @ 0 still more.

>
> Greetings Ed,
> Your math is flawed LB is 2 shieldless is 2 CONTACT is -2 for a 2 so you
only do 16 plus 12 = 28 no disorder so your HTH is completely different. I
think its 12 @ the 2 for 24 vs 4 @ a 0 =4 recoiling the Burgundians (this
is done from memory so I could be off). The germans have it tougher in that
they will be disordered by the obstical so suffer a minus 2 on the next bound.
>
> TD

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "scsabrecoach" <scsabrecoach@y...> wrote:
Or I could forget the support fire and it could be 10 @ 0 still more.

>
> Greetings Ed,
> Your math is flawed LB is 2 shieldless is 2 CONTACT is -2 for a 2 so you
only do 16 plus 12 = 28 no disorder so your HTH is completely different. I
think its 12 @ the 2 for 24 vs 4 @ a 0 =4 recoiling the Burgundians (this
is done from memory so I could be off). The germans have it tougher in that
they will be disordered by the obstical so suffer a minus 2 on the next bound.
>
> TD

You don't count the down 2 for support shooting across an obstacle -
look at the wording.

I used this last week with my Early Achaemenid Persians with Spiked
Pavise.

It didn't help much, but does make the support shooting a lot better

ANW

--- In WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com, "scsabrecoach"
<scsabrecoach@y...> wrote:
>
> Greetings Ed,
> Your math is flawed LB is 2 shieldless is 2 CONTACT is -2 for
a 2 so you only do 16 plus 12 = 28 no disorder so your HTH is
completely different. I think its 12 @ the 2 for 24 vs 4 @ a 0
=4 recoiling the Burgundians (this is done from memory so I could
be off). The germans have it tougher in that they will be
disordered by the obstical so suffer a minus 2 on the next bound.
>
> TD
>
> > The Swiss hit an end stand.
> >
> > support shooting is 8 LB at a 4 and 8 CB at a 3. even dice
causes 44, which disorders the Swiss. Down -1 causes 36, which
still disorders the Swiss. Up +1 causes -4 to the Swiss for hth.
> >
> > I
>

[Greg Regets]

Good Morning Ed ...

I don't know if you will find this helpful, but with issues like
this, it has been helpful to me.

Rather than looking at specific troop matchups, one-on-one, look at
the armies in general to see how they match up.

My new army is Early Byzantine in 15mm, and when the Sassanid Persian
list came out, and I looked at the SHC/HC formation that were given
to that army, I naturally cried foul. These formations are cheaper
than my "Biscut Eaters", and usually beat them one-on-one. Not very
historical, to be sure.

Then again, when you match the armies against each other, the Early
Byzantine is more than a match for the Sassanids, as a matter of
fact, they usually beat them in battles very similar to the
historical models ... low casualty conflicts with emphasis on
maneuver.

If you look at this logically ... FHE has a very difficult job just
getting these armies to match against historical opponents. If you
tried to take that to a unit by unit level ... well, that sounds like
an impossible task.

In the instance of the Swiss, they would seem to me to match very
well against all their opponents in the types of battles that history
gives us. To me, that passes the acid test.

Thanks ... g

[joncleaves]

Gosh, Greg, that was a home run...

Oh wait - touchdown. lol

Thanks
Jon

-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Regets <greg.regets@...>
To: WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 15:02:56 -0000
Subject: [WarriorRules] Re: Jon: Swiss recoil issues


Good Morning Ed ...

I don't know if you will find this helpful, but with issues like
this, it has been helpful to me.

Rather than looking at specific troop matchups, one-on-one, look at
the armies in general to see how they match up.

My new army is Early Byzantine in 15mm, and when the Sassanid Persian
list came out, and I looked at the SHC/HC formation that were given
to that army, I naturally cried foul. These formations are cheaper
than my "Biscut Eaters", and usually beat them one-on-one. Not very
historical, to be sure.

Then again, when you match the armies against each other, the Early
Byzantine is more than a match for the Sassanids, as a matter of
fact, they usually beat them in battles very similar to the
historical models ... low casualty conflicts with emphasis on
maneuver.

If you look at this logically ... FHE has a very difficult job just
getting these armies to match against historical opponents. If you
tried to take that to a unit by unit level ... well, that sounds like
an impossible task.

In the instance of the Swiss, they would seem to me to match very
well against all their opponents in the types of battles that history
gives us. To me, that passes the acid test.

Thanks ... g







Yahoo! Groups Links






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]