Swordsman question

Xiggy · Post by **Xiggy** » Thu Oct 28, 2010 4:03 pm

I noticed that MF can be charged a point for being swordsman. (Classic Indian Bows, SW) You get charged an extra point for that, but I dont see an + in any of the combat logs. I know Swordsman + get a +1, but what is the advantage of being swordsman? As of now I don't see one. What am I missing?

deeter · Post by **deeter** » Thu Oct 28, 2010 4:36 pm

The sword POA will only apply in certain circumstances. For example, swordsmen don't get their POA against steady spears and pikes. Foot swordsmen don't get their POA against mounted. The questionable benefit for Swordsmen + only applies against standard swordsmen. So your superior legionaires will benefit against Gallic types in melee only and hardly ever against anything else.

Deeter

batesmotel · Post by **batesmotel** » Thu Oct 28, 2010 6:10 pm

Sw and Sw+ POAs only count in melee, not in impact.

Sw counts against any except against: Sw, Sw+. Elephants or steady Pike/Spear.
Sw+ counts against any except against Sw+, Mounted Sw, Elephants or steady Pike/Spear.

Chris

Xiggy · Post by **Xiggy** » Thu Oct 28, 2010 6:13 pm

I guess from the above, that SW is a very limited bonus. It explains why the Gupta Indian is more popular then the Classical Indian.

batesmotel · Post by **batesmotel** » Thu Oct 28, 2010 6:45 pm

Xiggy wrote:I guess from the above, that SW is a very limited bonus. It explains why the Gupta Indian is more popular then the Classical Indian.

Much of the value in having Sw is that it neutralizes opposing troops Sw. For example, cavalry with light spear, sword should beat cavalry with light spear and the same grade and armour most of the time. MF with light spear are generally a good deal less useful than ones with light spear, sword. The problem with Indian MF archers with sword is that they are still unprotected so usually at a disadvantage in melee vs most non-skirmisher troops. IN the case of MF archers, in general getting a light spear POA instead of Sw is a preferable option.

Chris

Xiggy · Post by **Xiggy** » Wed Nov 03, 2010 1:35 pm

Does having a sword make them more likely to charge? If so there is some utility to that.

CheerfullyInsane · Post by **CheerfullyInsane** » Wed Nov 03, 2010 4:52 pm

Xiggy wrote:Does having a sword make them more likely to charge? If so there is some utility to that.

Nope, anarchy-charges apply to shock-troops (impact inf, Off spears, pikes, and lance-armed mounted).
Whether or not they're carrying swords has no effect.

Lars

Xiggy · Post by **Xiggy** » Wed Nov 03, 2010 8:47 pm

I am not talking about anarchy charges. It is hard to get bows to charge flanks or rear. So wondered if the sword as a weapon would improve that.

TheGrayMouser · Post by **TheGrayMouser** » Wed Nov 03, 2010 10:14 pm

Xiggy wrote:I am not talking about anarchy charges. It is hard to get bows to charge flanks or rear. So wondered if the sword as a weapon would improve that.

I believe not , if their "main weapon" (ie impact) is a missle they need to test to charge, regardless if they have swords ( had a game where 3 steady superior immortals refused to charge dirsupted enemy troops, the survivors , (i lost the battle), were impaled for treasonous cowardess.

CheerfullyInsane · Post by **CheerfullyInsane** » Thu Nov 04, 2010 12:48 am

TheGrayMouser wrote:
Xiggy wrote:I am not talking about anarchy charges. It is hard to get bows to charge flanks or rear. So wondered if the sword as a weapon would improve that.
I believe not , if their "main weapon" (ie impact) is a missle they need to test to charge, regardless if they have swords ( had a game where 3 steady superior immortals refused to charge dirsupted enemy troops, the survivors , (i lost the battle), were impaled for treasonous cowardess.

Sorry, misunderstood that one.
TGM is right. If the main weapon is missile you'll need to pass a complex manouver test to charge, no matter if they're carrying swords.

Oh, and........Given that they're Immortals isn't impaling them sorta.....well, redundant?

Lars

TheGrayMouser · Post by **TheGrayMouser** » Thu Nov 04, 2010 3:19 pm

CheerfullyInsane wrote:
TheGrayMouser wrote:
Xiggy wrote:I am not talking about anarchy charges. It is hard to get bows to charge flanks or rear. So wondered if the sword as a weapon would improve that.
I believe not , if their "main weapon" (ie impact) is a missle they need to test to charge, regardless if they have swords ( had a game where 3 steady superior immortals refused to charge dirsupted enemy troops, the survivors , (i lost the battle), were impaled for treasonous cowardess.
Sorry, misunderstood that one.
TGM is right. If the main weapon is missile you'll need to pass a complex manouver test to charge, no matter if they're carrying swords.

Oh, and........Given that they're Immortals isn't impaling them sorta.....well, redundant?

Lars

Ha ha, wasnt aware the Immortals had similar, uh, interests as the Sacred Band