Shooting - TESTING MF SHOOTING NOW HIGHEST PRIORITY

[robertthebruce]

I am going to be the discordant voice , I Think 2 Dice per Rank it??s ideal for representig the mass Soohting effect.

That troops arrive disordered at the combat after receiving shooting it??s very logical, and reliable troops in close combat can win perfectly in the mele?© phase still being disordered.

The problem is that some Bows, longbows or crossbows win in the mel?© phase and that the crossbows and longbows has too much shooting power.


Bows or Longbows armed with Sword, would not have +PoA in close combat, they were not trained to fight with sword of the same form that the infantry.

Why not to modify the Longbows and CrossBows PoA?, the Bow troops does not have to pay the excesses of their rich brothers

David.

[jre]

Although we have tested more expensive "melee bowmen" rather than cheap bowmen, even before the change they were quite able of beating equal numbers of any protected foot. With the change they could beat bigger BGs, as once they are disrupted it is suicide to charge the bows unless you have a ++ PoA (for a 6 base BG, 4 dice at 4 vs 9 dice at 5).

With other bowmen you usually have a double advantage in melee, but not with "melee bowmen", when you get at most one (unless you are Roman Legionnaires or deep steady pikes).

So although I like strong shooting armies (English, Burgundian, Persian) I feel this is a good choice for balance.

Cheap bows are terribly vulnerable, but that is why they are so cheap. If they will be unsupported it is better to get LF (and most armies with few bows offer the choice). I find that they have some use in strong groups with close combat foot in support, but they are not an easy troop to balance (yet one of the best line fillers at 10 points per base frontage).

And you get to keep LH at a distance.

Jos?

[jre]

Although we have tested more expensive "melee bowmen" rather than cheap bowmen, even before the change they were quite able of beating equal numbers of any protected foot. With the change they could beat bigger BGs, as once they are disrupted it is suicide to charge the bows unless you have a ++ PoA (for a 6 base BG, 4 dice at 4 vs 9 dice at 5).

With other bowmen you usually have a double advantage in melee, but not with "melee bowmen", when you get at most one (unless you are Roman Legionnaires or deep steady pikes).

So although I like strong shooting armies (English, Burgundian, Persian) I feel this is a good choice for balance.

Cheap bows are terribly vulnerable, but that is why they are so cheap. If they will be unsupported it is better to get LF (and most armies with few bows offer the choice). I find that they have some use in strong groups with close combat foot in support, but they are not an easy troop to balance (yet one of the best line fillers at 10 points per base frontage).

And you get to keep LH at a distance.

Jos?

[jre]

Although we have tested more expensive "melee bowmen" rather than cheap bowmen, even before the change they were quite able of beating equal numbers of any protected foot. With the change they could beat bigger BGs, as once they are disrupted it is suicide to charge the bows unless you have a ++ PoA (for a 6 base BG, 4 dice at 4 vs 9 dice at 5).

With other bowmen you usually have a double advantage in melee, but not with "melee bowmen", when you get at most one (unless you are Roman Legionnaires or deep steady pikes).

So although I like strong shooting armies (English, Burgundian, Persian) I feel this is a good choice for balance.

Cheap bows are terribly vulnerable, but that is why they are so cheap. If they will be unsupported it is better to get LF (and most armies with few bows offer the choice). I find that they have some use in strong groups with close combat foot in support, but they are not an easy troop to balance (yet one of the best line fillers at 10 points per base frontage).

And you get to keep LH at a distance.

Jos?

[rbodleyscott]

Tried the Anglo-Irish (with 24 MF longbowmen, 12 LF javelins and 4 LH javelins) again today vs Seleucids (Damian), using the 1.5 ranks shooting at effective rank.

The Anglo-Irish won with the loss of only 1 BG (of Galloglaigh). I was very happy with the balance on the effect of shooting at 1.5 ranks. (Unlike the previous game where I felt that the longbowmen were far too effective with 2 ranks shooting).

The LF and LH did inflict some temporary disruption but no lasting damage. The longbowmen broke one BG of Thracians by shooting them down to FRAG then charging them. They also, with the help of LF and LH, vapourised a BG of elephants. They also FRAGd 2 BGs of Seleucid LF. Apart from that their main effect was as a threat that forced the enemy to commit himself at a disadvantage to avoid prolonged shooting.

[jre]

I am sorry for the repeated posts, due to error messages as the board now does not accept most unusual characters. As well it seems impossible to delete posts now.

As penance I will try some more longbows to see how they fare.

Jose