Shooting Question

[stevoid]

Hi,

This question is related to an answer given on the following thread:

viewtopic.php?t=4118

Ok, here goes.

1. A 4x2 MF BG with Bow shoots at a single BG in front of it - it gets 6 dice.
2. A 3x2 MF BG with Bow shoots at a single BG in front of it - it gets 4 dice (due to round down).
3. A 4x2 MF BG with Bow shoots at 4 different 1 base wide BGs directly in front - it shoots with one dice at each of them (based on answer in above referenced thread). Which leads to...

Q1. Would two 3x2 MF BGs shoot at a single BG in front of both of them with 9 dice? That is, are the dice calculations done BG by BG or are they based on the total number of eligible shooting bases before applying fractions and rounding?

Q2. Given the difference in cost-effectiveness between points 1 and 2 (6 bases = 4 shots, add 2 bases and get 2 more shots), are people tending to have foot in BGs of 8 rather than 6s?

Cheers,

Steve

[rbodleyscott]

Q1. Would two 3x2 MF BGs shoot at a single BG in front of both of them with 9 dice?

Yes

That is, are the dice calculations done BG by BG or are they based on the total number of eligible shooting bases before applying fractions and rounding?

The latter. (i.e. Target BG by target BG, not Shooting BG by shooting BG)

Q2. Given the difference in cost-effectiveness between points 1 and 2 (6 bases = 4 shots, add 2 bases and get 2 more shots), are people tending to have foot in BGs of 8 rather than 6s?

Yes

[nikgaukroger]

Although, of course, as dice are totalled by bases shooting at target BGs the efficiency of 8 over 6 is not always realised

[rbodleyscott]

Although, of course, as dice are totalled by bases shooting at target BGs the efficiency of 8 over 6 is not always realised

There, I suspect, speaks the voice of bitter (if brief) experience. (Anglo-Irish)

[stevoid]

Richard, thanks for the quick response - will be useful for a beta game tomorrow night when the Yuan hit the table.

Nik, of course! One of the great things about gaming is the disconnect between that perfect-on-paper army and the reality of the wargame table.

One presumes that when there is a rounded rear rank base eligible to shoot, that the owning player gets to decide which of the two front rank bases it supports when those two front rank bases have different targets.

[rbodleyscott]

One presumes that when there is a rounded rear rank base eligible to shoot, that the owning player gets to decide which of the two front rank bases it supports when those two front rank bases have different targets.

No he doesn't. The rounding is done separately for each target. It is part of the game design that split fire should be less effective.

Hence:

3. A 4x2 MF BG with Bow shoots at 4 different 1 base wide BGs directly in front - it shoots with one dice at each of them (based on answer in above referenced thread). Which leads to...

[stevoid]

Whoops, my mistake - that point was already covered above

[nikgaukroger]

Although, of course, as dice are totalled by bases shooting at target BGs the efficiency of 8 over 6 is not always realised

There, I suspect, speaks the voice of bitter (if brief) experience. (Anglo-Irish)

Oddly no - in the course of the 3 games I've played with them using 3 BGs of 6 Longbows there have been only 2 occasions where being 3 frontage meant I rounded down and I could have avoided 1 of these by, as I realised later, deploying as 4+2 rather than 2 ranks of 3.

On the other hand against Brian Holmes' Indians Sunday PM his 8's did not always get their theoretical full effect due to having to shoot at multiple BGs - mind you he didn't need it as his bowmen slaughtered me in close combat despite being a PoA down evey time, if you can roll 7 5's or 6's from 9 dice with no rerolls you know its your day

[davidandlynda]

It 'll be interesting to see how your Yuan go,I've just had 4 games with them at Warfare ,whilst everyone agreed they were very pretty they struggled in not having enough of anything,I used 3 BG cavalry,4 LH,the rest a mixture of foot,The cavalry/LH were outclassed by cavalry armies and the foot by the foot ones ,in the end I won one (Daves 1st game so dosn't really count ) and drew against Dominate Romans by managing to keep out of the legions way most of the game.
The game against Richards Lithuanians was anouther of those where you sit down and everything in front of you will ride you down,in DBM I could probably have fudged a draw but in FOG theres no chance,this is one of my minor concerns of the game as this is the 3rd time I've suffered this. I compounde it with dreadful dice as Richard will testify
All in all though a good weekend rounded off with Lynda brilliantly finishing 5th in one of the DBM comps only losing to Graham Evans at the end,the best performance by a lady to date I believe
David

[hazelbark]

One presumes that when there is a rounded rear rank base eligible to shoot, that the owning player gets to decide which of the two front rank bases it supports when those two front rank bases have different targets.

No he doesn't. The rounding is done separately for each target. It is part of the game design that split fire should be less effective.

This also means that 1 BG of 4 LH meets two BG each of 4 LH. Is in real trouble.

It can either meet one so it can fire at it with some chance of effect, but then let the other round its flank. Or it meets the two at the joint between them and its fire is ineffective and their fire is normal. So instead of being out shot 2-1 you are outshot 2 to nothing. Do I have this right?

[nikgaukroger]

Isn't there something in the rules about always getting 1 dice? Might be melee though.

Mind you 1 dice shooting at 4 can't do anything anyway so its as good as no dice

[terrys]

Isn't there something in the rules about always getting 1 dice? Might be melee though.

Mind you 1 dice shooting at 4 can't do anything anyway so its as good as no dice

You will always get one dice in melee, because of the rounding up. It is possible with LH, rounding down etc, that you get no dice.
When firing, you don't roll dice if you haven't enough total dice at a target to make them test. Against a BG of 4 bases you need to roll at least 2 dice.

The point is that in melee, even if you only roll 1 dice you could still win.
In shooting, one dice usually isn't enough to cause a test - so it's a waste of time rolling.

[rbodleyscott]

One presumes that when there is a rounded rear rank base eligible to shoot, that the owning player gets to decide which of the two front rank bases it supports when those two front rank bases have different targets.

No he doesn't. The rounding is done separately for each target. It is part of the game design that split fire should be less effective.

This also means that 1 BG of 4 LH meets two BG each of 4 LH. Is in real trouble.

It can either meet one so it can fire at it with some chance of effect, but then let the other round its flank. Or it meets the two at the joint between them and its fire is ineffective and their fire is normal. So instead of being out shot 2-1 you are outshot 2 to nothing. Do I have this right?

Yes. The single BG has its shooting divided and its shooting is hence ineffective. (It exists but is not worth calculating). This is intentional.

However it is possible to position your LH so that one of its files is facing both enemy BGs but more facing the same one as its other file than the other. (Barkerese). Both will then shoot at the same enemy BG, but the other enemy BG cannot slide past the flank.

A single BG of 4 LH shooting it out with 2 such BGs should lose, shouldn't it?

[hazelbark]

However it is possible to position your LH so that one of its files is facing both enemy BGs but more facing the same one as its other file than the other. (Barkerese). Both will then shoot at the same enemy BG, but the other enemy BG cannot slide past the flank.

Clever.

A single BG of 4 LH shooting it out with 2 such BGs should lose, shouldn't it?

Without a doubt, but it seemed a game mechanic that make it worse. Not a big deal. Just an interaction that is easily noticed.

[rbodleyscott]

A single BG of 4 LH shooting it out with 2 such BGs should lose, shouldn't it?

Without a doubt, but it seemed a game mechanic that make it worse. Not a big deal. Just an interaction that is easily noticed.

The very strict target priorities in FoG (which result in the above interaction) are designed to prevent "ganging up" shooting on selected enemy when the historical situation would not justify it.

Ganging up is the best way to make shooting effective. This is why we don't have additional negative cohesion modifiers from extra hits beyond 1 per 3. We tried that initially but it made ganging up shooting far too effective.

The real advantages of ganging up shooting are
1) Force the enemy to test cohesion every turn.
2) Chance of inflicting base losses - there is very little chance of inflicting base losses without ganging up.

[stevoid]

Excellent - I've had all my questions answered and the philosophy behind the mechanisms explained.

As per Richard's comment - the one BG of LH should get done by twice their numbers shouldn't they! As they are skirmishers, standing around to take that would be silly on their part.

David, I'll post my thoughts on the Yuan later. You might also read this thread which I found entertaining: viewtopic.php?t=4083