Why are only the first three ranks....

Jason_Langlois · Post by **Jason_Langlois** » Sat Jun 21, 2008 8:23 am

If I'm working this out right...

Your 4 base of LH shoot with 2 dice, needing 4+ to hit (assuming at least protected). So 25% of the time, they'll get the 2 hits they need to hit the HP3B on the 2x4 deep pike BG. Assuming a Commander is within range, the pike BG fails its cohesion check and loses a morale level 27.8% of the time (rolling 5 or less). Which means your 2x4 BG loses a cohesion level roughly 7% of the time its shot at by the LH.

Admittedly, it's 7% more likely than if the LH were shooting at a 3x3 (2 in the back) formation (which has 0% chance of losing a cohesion level)... but it mostly suggests to me that you better screen your foot formations with skirmishers to keep 'em safe from shooters.

carlos · Post by **carlos** » Sat Jun 21, 2008 11:55 am

In the short amount of time it takes most HF to go across the table and actually fight something, the 7% of going down a cohesion level doesn't keep me awake at night. And the 7% is not taking into account the fact that a lot of pikemen are superior. Also, next turn your opponent needs to do one of those 7% again otherwise you can just bolster them quite easily. In all my games so far (15 or so), I've never had any success shooting HF of any kind if it's formed into a battleline. You need lots of dice to reliably put away HF formations. It's only when they start breaking apart and losing formation when I can concentrate 6 or 8 dice on them that I start getting a return for my investment (ie a LH w/ a bow costs double what a pikeman costs)

OhReally · Post by **OhReally** » Sat Jun 21, 2008 12:06 pm

Jason_Langlois wrote:If I'm working this out right...

Your 4 base of LH shoot with 2 dice, needing 4+ to hit (assuming at least protected). So 25% of the time, they'll get the 2 hits they need to hit the HP3B on the 2x4 deep pike BG. Assuming a Commander is within range, the pike BG fails its cohesion check and loses a morale level 27.8% of the time (rolling 5 or less). Which means your 2x4 BG loses a cohesion level roughly 7% of the time its shot at by the LH.

Admittedly, it's 7% more likely than if the LH were shooting at a 3x3 (2 in the back) formation (which has 0% chance of losing a cohesion level)... but it mostly suggests to me that you better screen your foot formations with skirmishers to keep 'em safe from shooters.

I was using the 4 LH to show how kind of crazy it can be. It's nuts they can even cause a check against a max sized, superior pike formation when they have zero chance of causing one against an 8 man Poor, naked lets say swordsman unit.

It's all due to the fact that the rules do not take into account that fourth rank of the pike, even though that is the optimal formation for them.

Dice games are dice games, and no rules system is perfect but the only real reason anyone has given as to why this is a rule is to keep cheesy players from marching in column then expanding into combat. If this is the only reason, then their is a problem with the rules that needs to be addressed instead of having something that only punishes pike players.

Overall this is just a conversation on my opinion of a rule that in this instance does not make sense, or could have been thought out better. The FoG rulebook isn't the Torah ya know, it can be wrong and it can be changed to be better.

Lance
-----------------
"I talk loudly and deliver a solid liver kick"

carlos · Post by **carlos** » Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:09 pm

OhReally wrote:It's all due to the fact that the rules do not take into account that fourth rank of the pike, even though that is the optimal formation for them.

It's already been explained that this was done on purpose, playtested extensively and accepted by most players as a clever simulation of a real life effect. And naked, poor swordsmen get shot to pieces as the are hit on a 3+, re-roll 6s when doing cohesion tests and are likely to present a large frontage therefore taking more shooting dice in general. How many games have you played yet, btw?

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Sat Jun 21, 2008 1:37 pm

their is a problem with the rules that needs to be addressed instead of having something that only punishes pike players.

Easy then. Only allow pike to deploy 4 deep and increase the points cost of pike so that they are not punished.

babyshark · Post by **babyshark** » Sat Jun 21, 2008 2:24 pm

OhReally wrote:I was using the 4 LH to show how kind of crazy it can be. It's nuts they can even cause a check against a max sized, superior pike formation when they have zero chance of causing one against an 8 man Poor, naked lets say swordsman unit.

Just to make sure we're all on the same page here: a four base BG of LH cannot force a CT from a max sized (twelve base) unit of pike. Assuming--not unreasonably--that the Pk are deployed 3 wide by 4 deep, the Pk need to suffer three hits to force a test and the LH can deliver a max of two hits.

Marc

willb · Post by **willb** » Sat Jun 21, 2008 3:09 pm

OhReally wrote:
Seldon wrote:I don't really agree that it is tough, all in all points for effectivness I still think pikes are tougher than other units. I know I've enjoyed the good benefits of these troops in my army so I wouldn't complay that they are treated in an unfair way.

but opinions are opinions

cheers
Francisco
If I were to field a 0-8 superior pike unit at 8 bases in 2x4, how many shooting hits would it take to cause a cohesion test? A four man LH unit being able to javelin/bow a 8 man superior pike unit down in morale seems a tad silly I'm sorry.

.

although they were not using light horse the athenians did this twice to the spartans with light infantry at sphacteria and lechaeum. also, the romans at carrhae would probably have benefited from forming up in deep formations to avoid being shot to pieces

. i field pike armies also and if need be will use skirmishers to protect my pike from being shot to pieces. at least the rule about only counting the first three ranks keeps players from using unhistorical deep formations.

OhReally · Post by **OhReally** » Sun Jun 22, 2008 2:45 am

philqw78 wrote:
their is a problem with the rules that needs to be addressed instead of having something that only punishes pike players.
Easy then. Only allow pike to deploy 4 deep and increase the points cost of pike so that they are not punished.

I would be fine with this or any other logical fix.

The only real reasons I've seen for the way things are is because players will abuse the rule by deploying in long columns then expanding out the massive columns for free in melee. This is a game design error that should have been fixed or addressed in a different way IMO. If this is something people were doing in beta and playtesting it should have been addressed with how expanding into combat works.

Now I'm still a FoG novice, but I have experience in testing games. I worked for GW for a few years when I was younger and had the honor of testing a version of Warhammer and Battlefleet Gothic from the early stages through release.

Any game will have flaws and I will admit that is something you just have to deal with, but that doesn't mean you should not try to fix them or address them.

All that being said, thusfar FoG is by far the best historical system I have played to date. I'm still not going to drink the Kool Aid though, and see nothing wrong with pointing out with what I perceive is flaws when I see them.

I think we should all share flaws we see so that things that the developers might not have seen are fixed in future versions of the product.

babyshark wrote:
OhReally wrote:I was using the 4 LH to show how kind of crazy it can be. It's nuts they can even cause a check against a max sized, superior pike formation when they have zero chance of causing one against an 8 man Poor, naked lets say swordsman unit.
Just to make sure we're all on the same page here: a four base BG of LH cannot force a CT from a max sized (twelve base) unit of pike. Assuming--not unreasonably--that the Pk are deployed 3 wide by 4 deep, the Pk need to suffer three hits to force a test and the LH can deliver a max of two hits.

Marc

I think we are on the same page, but there are pike units that are only allowed 0-8 units, so to get max POA you would have to field them 2x4. In this case you only have six bases in the first three ranks so a four base LH unit can cause a CMT.

SirGarnet · Post by **SirGarnet** » Sun Jun 22, 2008 3:46 am

I think the 3 ranks is OK. Having 3 rather than 2 ranks count makes 3 deep formations practical for more solidity in replacing losses. It also makes very deep formations more vulnerable to loss of cohesion from shooting, which is credible. This is a modes weakness of Pikes.

Alvaro · Post by **Alvaro** » Mon Jun 23, 2008 1:47 am

Oh Really,
I agree with the 3 rank deep rule for the following reasons:

-On a battle line formation you cannot concentrate fire because of the target priority rule. Consequently if you allow 4th ranks to count skirmishers become downright irrelevant in their traditional role of skirmishing before the battle as it is impossible for them to have any effect, making it ridiculous to put them in that role and making FOG battles less similar to real ones.

-From the soldier perspective it makes sense that a single rank unit will require less hits as the ranks really provided more staying power. On the other hand after a point it probably stops mattering in your mind if you have 16 or 24 ranks of friends behind you. 3 ranks deep in the game should represent around 12 ranks which in my mind is a good max but of course this is arbitrary.

-game balancewise four ranks of pikemen cost 24 points and two of hvy off spearmen 20 with one less poa on impact and identical melees, plus the off spearmen lose more fighting power for each stand lost. I dont think the pikes need the extra advantage of being invincible to skirmishing and almost never suffer the -1 CT hit modifier in combat.

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Mon Jun 23, 2008 7:55 am

It is not an oversight. It is intended that 4 rank deep pikes should not be largely immune to missile shooting, which they would be if all 4 ranks counted.

As posters above have commented, it has all been extensively play-tested and gets the effect we intend. (Originally the pre-beta rules allowed all 4 ranks to count).

These are a "top-down" set of rules and the overall effect is what we are aiming at. Theoretical "bottom-up" considerations don't really come into it.

jre · Post by **jre** » Mon Jun 23, 2008 2:41 pm

As well, if the only thing facing the pikes are LH or LF, I would consider an advance in three files (3-3-2 ranks), as contracting with an advance is green for drilled BGs. So even my poor pikemen can form up when they get close to the real enemy without having to roll.

José

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Mon Jun 23, 2008 2:44 pm

But only if they move the full 3 MU IIRC

terrys · Post by **terrys** » Tue Jun 24, 2008 12:53 pm

That would certainly have stopped the ludicrous situation where a BG of 6 bow facing 3 BGs, all in single file, may as well wave flowers at the enemy rather than shoot them at 1 dice only since they have no chance of doing damage.

You've hit the nail on the head......

The reason for only the first 3 ranks counting is that it stops single file units being invulnerable to shooting.

Basically if you have 1 shooting dice per frontage you can always cause a test - if the dice come up OK.

We considered both 2 and 4 ranks counting as well, but beta tests showed that 3 ranks gave us the result we wanted. It gives an incentive for poor & average troops to form up in 3 ranks, even though the 3rd cannot take part in combat, and as such reduces their potential width advantage over more expensive troops. It also gives players an interesting decision to make about how best to deploy their troops..... There is no optimum choice!