Defensive Spear

[Scrumpy]

Following up from my point about DS possibly having the + for DS v non-shock troops....

Could they not cost an extra 1/2 point to cover the ability ?

Just seems strange they would let missile troops sit infront of them, shooting them down without doing anything about it.

[lawrenceg]

Following up from my point about DS possibly having the + for DS v non-shock troops....

Could they not cost an extra 1/2 point to cover the ability ?

Just seems strange they would let missile troops sit infront of them, shooting them down without doing anything about it.

More likely they would charge in, hang on in the impact at evens, then mop up in melee at ++ for as long as it takes.

The thing I find bizarre is that 2 ranks of DS charge 2 ranks of bow at evens, but if they charge 1 rank of DS with a 2nd rank of bow they are at +. So having a front rank of spearmen protecting the bowmen makes you more vulnerable.

I did flag this up in beta testing, but the authors decided addressing it would be more complicated than it was worth.

[hammy]

It is a touch odd but at least if you have HF spear in the front rank you won't suffer the -1 on CT if you lose the impact.

It changes 2 dice on 4 and one on 5 with a -1 on CT if you lose to 3 dice on 5 with no -1 or put another way you are more likely to lose but less likely to be hurt by losing.

[lawrenceg]

It is a touch odd but at least if you have HF spear in the front rank you won't suffer the -1 on CT if you lose the impact.

It changes 2 dice on 4 and one on 5 with a -1 on CT if you lose to 3 dice on 5 with no -1 or put another way you are more likely to lose but less likely to be hurt by losing.

Are you saying the increased odds of taking a test, or taking a test with -1 for difference of 2 or 1HP3B are outweighed by the extra -1 for MF in contact ? Or are you just flagging it up as a mitigating factor?

Has anyone run these cases through a simulator to find the effect on final result? I imagine the spearmen would increase the survivability in melee compared to both ranks unprotected bow enough to compensate for the disadvantage at impact, but the route to the final result is counter-intuitive.

[MCollett]

More likely they would charge in, hang on in the impact at evens, then mop up in melee at ++ for as long as it takes.

That's the trick against plain unprotected Bw. If the Bw are better equipped - well, sometimes offensive spear really are better than defensive.

The thing I find bizarre is that 2 ranks of DS charge 2 ranks of bow at evens, but if they charge 1 rank of DS with a 2nd rank of bow they are at +. So having a front rank of spearmen protecting the bowmen makes you more vulnerable.

The combination of defensive spear and bow does seem underpowered to me, especially compared to an alternative front rank of light spear & sword, which costs the same. As far as I can tell, the only time when the defensive spear are better is against skilled swordsmen; against lance, spear, pike or ordinary sword they are normally the same. The light spear & sword are better against other opponents (and of course against all opponents if you are not steady).

Best wishes,
Matthew

[Scrumpy]

Against MF bow they would be 6 dice on 4s v 6 dice on 4s with 3 dice on 5s, suggesting the spear should lose on average against bowmen. The Spear do 3 hits and take 4 hits on average. The Spear would probably lose a base, and have a 50/50 ct or drop to disrupted.

Is that really historically accurate ?

[hammy]

Against MF bow they would be 6 dice on 4s v 6 dice on 4s with 3 dice on 5s, suggesting the spear should lose on average against bowmen. The Spear do 3 hits and take 4 hits on average. The Spear would probably lose a base, and have a 50/50 ct or drop to disrupted.

Is that really historically accurate ?

??

Assuming unprotected bow, protected dspear and a 3 base frontage the impact is 6 dice on 4 and 3 dice on 5 vs 6 dice on 4 so at impact the spear should lose. If the spear remain steady then the melee is 6 dice on 5 vs 6 dice on 3, even if the spear disrupt at impact it is 6 on 5 vs 6 on 4. Either way the spear should lose the impact and win the melee.

[Robert241167]

Hammy - if the spear disrupt is it not 4 on 4?

Or are you assuming an overlap can be created and you have 2 spare spear to move into it?

Rob

[philqw78]

If disrupted then yes, then the spear should be 4@4, therefore drawing the combat, but much worse off on the CT as already disrupted, and a good chance of having lost a base if they lost the impact. If those unprotected bow are superior and have a general to spare they will wipe the poor defencelss spear out, or was that average defensive spear.

[Ghaznavid]

Following up from my point about DS possibly having the + for DS v non-shock troops....

Could they not cost an extra 1/2 point to cover the ability ?

Just seems strange they would let missile troops sit infront of them, shooting them down without doing anything about it.

As Lawrence said, besides there are examples of spears allowing themselve to be shoot up (one or two battles of the Scots vs. English come to mind).
You do propose a much wider change though. What's the reasoning for allowing Def. Spears to charge, Light Spears, HW, Non-Shock Cv. etc. with a combat POA?

That aside their are no 1/2 points (luckily) and I still think what you propose would make Def. Spears the equal to Off. Spears in terms of advantages to disadvantages, so cost should be the same anyway. Not that I'm in favour of such a change.