Aggresiveness

jre · Post by **jre** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:07 am

Shouldn't Shock troop status for pikemen and spearmen depend on depth? I can see those Swiss feeling unbeatable in a deep hedgehog, but if deployed thinly to block some skirmishers I doubt they will feel the urge to push forward. I suppose something similar should happen with offensive spearmen.

This comes from my concern about the Burgundian mixed bow and pike formation. If you place pikes up front, are they shock troops? It seems a very bad idea. I can see them deploying stakes and then charging uncontrolled the dismounted men-at-arms that come to butcher them...

Jos?©

shall · Post by **shall** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:45 am

Except that keeping it as is makes you want to make sure they are the right depth.

Its a good mechanism the other way - if you go too thin then they may get carried away and end up in trouble.

So you will want to keep them deep.

Its the overall behvaiorual effect we are most interested in each time rather than tha micro effect if you see what I mean.

Put another way - if you said they were'nt shock troops 3 deel than all the gamers would deploy 3 deep and contract to 4 deep when necessary to avoid taking any tests. This then creates odd behaviour.

Si

jre · Post by **jre** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:55 am

That does not solve the problem of the mixed pike-bow BG, where you have no choice but deploy them one thick, and which I doubt would aggresively engage other pike blocks.

If the idea is to avoid using cheap troops (pikes) as filler I could agree, but I still feel shallow formation hoplites would be less aggresive. Still, it probably will not come often.

The obvious solution would be then to use defensive spearmen rather than pikemen as a rating for mixed BGs.

Jos?©

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 10:02 am

jre wrote:That does not solve the problem of the mixed pike-bow BG, where you have no choice but deploy them one thick, and which I doubt would aggresively engage other pike blocks.

If the idea is to avoid using cheap troops (pikes) as filler I could agree, but I still feel shallow formation hoplites would be less aggresive. Still, it probably will not come often.

The obvious solution would be then to use defensive spearmen rather than pikemen as a rating for mixed BGs.

Jos?©

You may well have discovered how such formations are curently represented

jre · Post by **jre** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 10:08 am

Well, the problem is that the Burgundian Ordonnance mixed formation is pikes at front and longbows in the back. That has an added advantage of cost compared to defensive spearmen and does not give other defensive spearmen (plentiful in the period) a + POA charging you. They are HF as well, with many effects as well.

So it is not exactly the same and I see why the designers preferred it if they did not want to give the Burgundians a super-troop (defensive spearmen-longbow)

The drawback is the aggresiveness of the pikes, totally out of place for troops that usually just deployed stakes and stayed put the whole battle (unless crushed by the Swiss pikes).

Jos?©

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Fri Mar 30, 2007 10:22 am

jre wrote:Well, the problem is that the Burgundian Ordonnance mixed formation is pikes at front and longbows in the back. That has an added advantage of cost compared to defensive spearmen and does not give other defensive spearmen (plentiful in the period) a + POA charging you. They are HF as well, with many effects as well.

So it is not exactly the same and I see why the designers preferred it if they did not want to give the Burgundians a super-troop (defensive spearmen-longbow)

The drawback is the aggresiveness of the pikes, totally out of place for troops that usually just deployed stakes and stayed put the whole battle (unless crushed by the Swiss pikes).

Jos?©

I agree Jose. We probably need to count them as DSp when fronting longbowmen. Thanks for pointing it out.

This would be consistent with how we have graded other "pikemen" who did not form up in deep formations.

sagji · Post by **sagji** » Mon Apr 09, 2007 7:29 pm

My concern is that these mixed formations are only marginly better than 1 deep Bw Def Sp but cost nearly twice as much, and that you are probably better off putting the Sp/Pk 2 deep with the Bow 2 deep on either side - like a Pike and Shot formation.

jre · Post by **jre** » Wed Apr 11, 2007 8:22 am

It is not really attractive if you have all the projectile troops you may need, but if they are limited in number (and as a Burgundian I probably will take always the maximum number of longbows) the mixed formations, even if lacking punch against melee foot, are really powerful against mounted. And give you a slightly longer frontage to play with.

As they stand I still favour separate pikes and longbows, but if I knew beforehand I was going against a cavalry/LH army I would probably take the mixed ones. Depending on how the list ends up, of course.

Jos?©