Muses on Heavy Weapons

[TheGrayMouser]

Just some thoughts on heavy weapons, not neccasarily a complaint or criticism of the system. However I must say heavy weapons appear to be the square peg in the round hole. This is due the the very broad description in game terms of what a HW is. IE it ranges from those small 2 handed scythes used by the Thracians, polaxes used by knights, to the halberds used in the later middle ages.

Perhaps there should be 2 weapons classes?

Firstly there are the shorter weapons that really required an agressive mindset to use effectively : these would be the Danish axes, the Rhompias (or whatever theyr were called) the pole axes used by dimsounted knighs etc.
These all had 2 similar charactoristics, short hafted and a cleaving/chopping action

Secondly , you have the other class of heavy weapons which would cover all the longer shafted weapons, be they halberd, glaive, bill, etc Thes weapons , despite minor differnces all share the following: they are long hafted weapons ( 6-12 feet) , have a sharp spike or blade (like a spear) and finally some device, whether a blade for slashing or chopping, a hammer like area for crushing or a hook or spike for ensnaring…

Basically these pole arms in my opinion are a completely different weapon than the ist group in usage and utility..

Idea for game terms

Create a new class for the long hafted: They would be treated like Offensive spears for the impact phase and heavy weapons for the melee phase. ( I do have a tough time in game terms why knights charging heavy weapons troops do so with far better reults than attacking spears, especially since most halberds were as long as most spears and easily could be presented point end toward the enemy , just like a spear)

Maybe keep the heavy weapon slot as is for the short hafted weapons, but not to devalue them too much perhaps an additional boost when they are charging into imapct (to emphasize most axemen were very aggressive and really couldn’t hold the line like a spearman or sword and shield man could)

I doudt Slitherine will change this but just for some discourse

[deeter]

Good suggestions, but don't see much use for them in any case.

Deeter

[TheGrayMouser]

Good suggestions, but don't see much use for them in any case.

Deeter

I agree, the only HW troops that are worth it are the dismounted knights, but i think their usefullness is that they are generally superior and more often than not get a POA for better armour

[Triarii]

Good suggestions, but don't see much use for them in any case.

Deeter

I agree, the only HW troops that are worth it are the dismounted knights, but i think their usefullness is that they are generally superior and more often than not get a POA for better armour

Feel free to come and debate tgis point with the Anglo-Irish Gallowglass

[Chillimaster]

It's an interesting point. My understanding of the medieval Halberd's use, is that was meant as an anti cavalry weapon. Use it as a spear at impact and then hook or chop the rider after that. The other issue would be that they are virtually useless against a sword armed opponent on foot, who can simply step inside and chop you to bits. I would have thought that a bonus on impact is appropriate against mounted and then nothing afterwards.

[TheGrayMouser]

Good suggestions, but don't see much use for them in any case.

Deeter

I agree, the only HW troops that are worth it are the dismounted knights, but i think their usefullness is that they are generally superior and more often than not get a POA for better armour

Feel free to come and debate tgis point with the Anglo-Irish Gallowglass

He he, well I do hate fighting the Anglo Irish armies , but its the medium foot kerns I fear. I find knights can usally bowl over heavy foot/heavy weapons types relatively easily

[davouthojo]

The second class of troop you mention were also some of the most aggressive, and should be prone to anarchy.
Maybe have them as impact foot, and HW a melee weapon only?

Currently HW troops are among the best for defending a hill or river - they can't be lured across it.

[deeter]

The problem with HW troops is that they're only really good against superior armor. Knights have the best armor, so them having HW gives them no advantage. Thracian HW are more likely to get the POA, but require a lot of tinkering to get them into a combat where it applies.

Deeter

[batesmotel]

The problem with HW troops is that they're only really good against superior armor. Knights have the best armor, so them having HW gives them no advantage. Thracian HW are more likely to get the POA, but require a lot of tinkering to get them into a combat where it applies.

Deeter

This is not entirely true. The other big advantage of heavy weapons is that the melee POA for them is not cancelled by steady spears or pikes, only by skilled swordsmen. So this is a definite plus for knights facing opposing spears and pikes. This is a substantial advantage for medieval armies .

Chris

[batesmotel]

I agree, the only HW troops that are worth it are the dismounted knights, but i think their usefullness is that they are generally superior and more often than not get a POA for better armour

Feel free to come and debate tgis point with the Anglo-Irish Gallowglass

He he, well I do hate fighting the Anglo Irish armies , but its the medium foot kerns I fear. I find knights can usally bowl over heavy foot/heavy weapons types relatively easily

My experience is that superior, heavy weapon galloglaichs stand up to knights quite well, especially if they have rear support to pass the initial cohesion test if they do lose at impact. MF Kerns serve this purpose quite well. And the protected, superior Galloglaichs cost about half what knights cost. While the galloglaichs are doing that. The remaining MF Kern swarm will proceed to assimilate you .

Chris