No POAs for mounted fighting disrupted foot?

[expendablecinc]

For example, if your opponent in a normal situation would have a +POA, and something happens which negate this POA so you fight at even, it's the same if such situation give you a +POA.

Yeah, exactly. That was my original question. Regardless of the mechanism - plus POA for me or minus for you - it seemed, and this was confirmed by everybody, that there was very little of this +/- that was specific to unsteady foot versus mounted.

FWIW, IMO disorder don't upgrade killing power of mounted troops, but downgrade power of foot to stop them.

I had always thought it was both based on the following picture of combat:

Unsteady foot, instead of presenting a solid wall into which mounted had to charge, were broken into little groups of guys trying to fend off the lances and sword strokes of the thundering mounted in their midst. So foot ability to kill was downgraded by their disorganization and their terror, and mounted ability to kill was upgraded because they could do what they do best, ride down isolated guys and skewer them or chop their heads off.

But like I said, I'm not an expert. That was just what I had read and reasoned out trying to understand other rule sets and accounts of ancient battles.
Jonathan

I think therein lies the difference. The only troops that present such a "Steady Wall" to which lancers must break upon are pike and spearmen. The effective +1POA vs these types is lost once they become unsteady. The other foot types bow, Lt spearmen and so on. are just as vulnerable.

[shall]

Acutally what you are mainly missing is two fundamental of FOG game desing:

• The cohesions states in FOG. DISRed troopsa re not in disarray - far from it. They are just showing initial cracks and all POA effects are calibrated to that. Ona 1-10 scale you have SDY 10 DISR 8 FRG 3 BROK 1. So it is FRGed troops who are highly vulnerable - losing all POAs that would be any use against mounted for example. DISR is a wobble.
  What matters is not the POAs or number of dice dropped, but how this changes your odds of winning or losing a combat. Losing is what matters as this forces CT's. A drop for 4 to 3 dice in an even fighy is very very significant. 4 dice soce 2 hits on average, 3 score 1.5 ... but this is not what matters. The odds of losing have moved from about 30% each, to something like 40% to 20% which is a big shift.

So if your mounted charge spears who normally have a POA and cancel your lance. If the SP are steady and at 4 dice each you get Sp at + will cause 2 hits, Cavalry on - 1.33 - big advatage the spears; if DISRed you get Sp +, Lance + so evens and Sp have pnly 3 dice so its 1.5 exp hits for the sp and 2 for the Cv - big advantage Cav; if the Sp are FRG its + for the Cv and 2 dice vs 4 for 0.67 exp hits for the foot and 2 for the Cv - almost certain death for the Sp. These then compound in melee as the Sw skill counts vs non-stdy sp and pk.

So bacially you are massively underestimating the effects of all these things in the game. They are big swings. The balance seems a very good match to history in its outcomes. Note also that if you are not lance Cv then DISred foot at not so bad at stopping you with Sp and Pk - which we want to be the case.

Si

[hammy]

My understanding of WRG 6th/7th is that a figure (very, very roughly) represents about fifty dudes. So for, say, close order infantry that means about 200 soldiers per base. I play 7th/Warrior a lot and the mechanisms/scale of abstractions are pretty similar to FoG - which makes sense if the scales are as equivalent as you say they are.

It's BECAUSE the scales are so similar that I was curious about the discrepancy in the way the authors of the two sets deal with unsteady foot v. mounted combat.

When I played 6th (and I think the same was true of 7th) it was scaled at 20 men per figure. In 6th every 20 casualties removed a model. I can't remember how bases died in 7th but the number of casualties on the combat chart was I think much the same.

You are right though in thinking that in FoG there are no specific penalties for unsteady foot against mounted apart from the loss of the lance POA negation if your foot are spear.

That said mounted lancers charging steady spear are looking for trouble. Mounted lancers charging disrupted spear are in a good situation.

One of the key design philosophies of FoG was no (or at least very few) double whammys, if you are disrupted you are already penalised, do you need to be penalised further if you are foot vs mounted?

[jonathankosread]

That was a very helpful answer. Thanks. After I play a few more games I'm sure I'll have a better feel for the game.


Jonathan

[rbodleyscott]

When I played 6th (and I think the same was true of 7th) it was scaled at 20 men per figure. In 6th every 20 casualties removed a model. I can't remember how bases died in 7th but the number of casualties on the combat chart was I think much the same.

IIRC, 6th was 1:20, 7th was 1:50. Hence why the 6th edition lists didn't work too well for 7th.

[marioslaz]

When I played 6th (and I think the same was true of 7th) it was scaled at 20 men per figure. In 6th every 20 casualties removed a model. I can't remember how bases died in 7th but the number of casualties on the combat chart was I think much the same.

IIRC, 6th was 1:20, 7th was 1:50. Hence why the 6th edition lists didn't work too well for 7th.

I'm happy to see my memory isn't so bad. I never played 7th edition, but I was pretty sure 6th edition was in 1:20 scale, like many other rules of first '80 (Mamma mia! How many years ago... I start to become aged )

[grahambriggs]

With mounted charging disrupted foot there are, as you say, a number of small disadvantages for the foot. However, added up they're quite a big deal. To check this out, set up two identical mtd v foot combats, one where the foot starts disrupted and one where they don't. Use the same die rolls for each and see wht happens. I think you'd be surprised how ofen the results differ.

[batesmotel]

The big difference between Fog and 7th/Warrior is that the latter does have specific factors for mounted versus disrupted/unsteady foot. In FoG it really is true that most of the penalties for being disrupted/fragmented apply to a unit whether it is fighting opposing foot or mounted. The one place where this isn't true is that mounted must break off from steady foot in the JAP. The interaction between mounted and foot in Fog has felt about right in games I've played so far but it is a bit different than what 7th gave.

Chris

p.s. 7th is nominally 50:1 figure scale while all the previous editions (1st-6th) were 20:1. This is just one of the changes that made 7th significantly different from 6th.

[Polkovnik]

Remember also that LH get full dice against fragmented enemy. So that's a specific disadvantage for fragmented vs mounted.

[madaxeman]

My understanding of WRG 6th/7th is that a figure (very, very roughly) represents about fifty dudes.

Aaaah - yes, there are apecific POAs for mounted fighting Dudes, but they are only in the Cowboys vs Indians, and 1950's-themed Jets vs Sharks (Streetfighting) user-modded editions.

[jonathankosread]

Ha ha ha ha ha

[philqw78]

Jonathan, the writers of your previous rules have obviously got the interaction wrong. Just because you are used to it does not make it right. And just because I have written it does not make it true.

[hazelbark]

Generally speaking once foot is disrupted the mounted tend to start grinding them down. It is a question of win. The "If" is only if the dice are very extreme, the mounted have other problems or are very weak.