Art De La Guerre

simontimothy0 · Javelinier Inscrit le: 29 Juil 2015 Messages: 10

Where in the rules does it say that Spearmen only deny mounted Impact if they receive a mounted charge (and they don't if they charge the mounted unit)?

Commodore · Post� le: Ven Oct 14, 2016 9:06 am Sujet du message:

P 17 "Impact"
_________________
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead"
Cdr Farragut,Mobile 1864

simontimothy0 · Javelinier Inscrit le: 29 Juil 2015 Messages: 10

I still can't see where p.17 states that Spearmen do not deny mounted Impact if they charge the mounted unit. From the 4 Bullet points, it's clear that they lose their own Impact ability if they charge the mounted unit but where do the rules state that they do not still deny the mounted unit's Impact?

Commodore · Post� le: Ven Oct 14, 2016 9:42 am Sujet du message:

for the special spear effect, p 13 (medium spearmen) and 14 (heavy spearmen):
"They have the capability to cancel mounted troop impact if they are receiving the charge in their front"
(translation from french rule book)
_________________
"Damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead"
Cdr Farragut,Mobile 1864

simontimothy0 · Javelinier Inscrit le: 29 Juil 2015 Messages: 10

Commodore, Thanks for that reference to p.13. I see that it does indeed state the Impact denial when "receiving" a charge as you point out.

It might still be worth an explanatory addendum in any rules revisions to highlight that this is the case; for instance similar to "Furious Charge" on p. 58 where it is stated specifically that the Furious Charge bonus is received "if the unit charges OR IS CHARGED" on its front edge.

There is an possible inconsistency in the logic here. Whether this is intentional to reflect infantry limitations in the face of mounted or an accidental artefact, I don't know but the resultant overall penalty on Spearmen (and Pikes) in this situation appears to be arguably, a bit severe (i.e., they lose their own Impact, lose their ability to deny the mounted Impact whereas the mounted unit; if it has the Furious Charge ability, will retain it's own Furious Charge bonus; even though it didn't actually "Charge").

Commodore

simontimothy0 · Javelinier Inscrit le: 29 Juil 2015 Messages: 10

Yes, I can see the reasoning but:

1. A 'swing' of 3 Factors seems a bit severe for a situation involving the two basic troop types just because of which side initiates the contact; even when from short range (1UD)
2. If you are Hoplites facing Cataphracts OR Cataphracts facing Hoplites, are you going to be the one that charges (takes the initiative)?
3. The rules tend to promote a 'stand-off' or 'stalemate' situation; which isn't good (particularly when it involves 2 troop types designed/equipped for melee contact).

Commodore

footslogger · Vétéran Inscrit le: 12 Jan 2015 Messages: 166

simontimothy0 · Javelinier Inscrit le: 29 Juil 2015 Messages: 10

The Cataphracts will not wish to charge the Hoplites because they will lose their Impact against the Hoplites and also therefore, their Furious Charge Bonus. The Hoplites if charged will receive Impact against the Cataphracts. (-2 dice factors and loss of Furious Charge - 3 factors deterring Charge)

Conversely, the Hoplites will not want to charge the Cataphracts because they will lose their Impact but the Cataphracts will retain theirs and therefore also the Furious Charge bonus (-2 dice factors and triggering the Cataphracts Furious Charge Bonus - 3 factors deterring Charge).

Conclusion: Both sides face very significant penalties if they charge even across open ground with no terrain effects. This deters both sides from initiating combat.

Opinion: This is an undesirable artefact of the rules as they stand. All things being equal, units should NOT be penalised for charging unless at a significant tactical (terrain) disadvantage.

Solution: Infantry should be permitted to charge mounted without penalty (loss of Impact) from close range (1 UD). Cavalry which let infantry charge them from close range (1 UD) should lose their Impact (if any) and associated Furious Charge benefits. The infantry are just too close.

Hazelbark · Magister Militum Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1669

The FAQ tends to explain all this as well.

Hazelbark · Magister Militum Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1669

Hazelbark · Magister Militum Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1669

simontimothy0 · Javelinier Inscrit le: 29 Juil 2015 Messages: 10

Hqazelbark

OK in FAQ then the Furious Charge is not denied (the Cataphracts) just because their Impact is cancelled when they charge Hoplites (Spearmen).

Sorry but I only have read the Rulesbook and so I wasn't aware of this 'clarification' (among many others - I see).

OK this seems fair enough for the Cataphracts then but sorry, I still have reservations about the overall representation of the Hoplites' situation and the general principal of 'penalising' charges in 'normal' circumstances. I still think that cavalry should not be able to effectively prevent infantry from contacting them if they get too close.

If the Cataphracts are 'assumed' to 'countercharge', why not similarly 'assume' that the Hoplites then halt and "receive" the countercharge that they have 'triggered'?

Why have any complications at all about 'who charges who'? Just assume both sides do what's best for them when either initiates a combat.

Thanks

Hazelbark · Magister Militum Inscrit le: 12 Nov 2014 Messages: 1669

It is pretty generally viewed that in all periods even up to the 19th century that infantry that was not prepared and highly disciplined was incredibly vulnerable to serious mounted attacks.

To reduce the defensive power of infantry when it seeks to engage is not un warranted based on that fact.

I have seen other rules authors have an out right prohibition on foot attacking mounted. There is a pretty good historical case for that, which the possible exception of Pike. Who tend to come in with pretty good odds.

Are there examples of Hoplite-like troops charging mounted that are prepared to charge them?

Also you are looking at Cataphracts which are a powerful anti-infantry weapon. But if you shift the mounted to heavy cavalry then the situation because much less enjoyable for the cavalry.

Other factors to consider is the difference in costs. The likely number of units in the area (generally mounted are les numerous than foot, but that is situational) and the cohesion factors. Also the most likely succeeding turn of melee.

The difference between 4 hits and 3 is actually far more profound in game play than I realized when I had just read the rules. So there is almost a situation that if the Cataphract loses the initial combat it will be destroyed in short order on average compared to the Heavy foot which will take longer to reduce. It seems odd, but I think that is many players real world experience.