Slitherine

david53 wrote:IMO was wrong with V1 the lack of proper movement for Bow/Sword Cavalry, the inability to do anything once the enemy came mm away from you what do you do evade great chance to get caught or in most case fight with a minus.

Agree with you somewhat.

On a slightly different (but similar) tack, I believe that Skirmishers should have NO impact on the movement of formed infantry. A line of skirmishers shooting would VERY minimally impact formed infantry... but the solid line of guys behind them probably would!

So, I believe that formed infantry should move as if the skirmishers aren't there, and then the skirmishers are put in a similar position as if they had fallen back in front of the formed infantry. This is the same with skirmishing cavalry.

ravenflight wrote:

david53 wrote:IMO was wrong with V1 the lack of proper movement for Bow/Sword Cavalry, the inability to do anything once the enemy came mm away from you what do you do evade great chance to get caught or in most case fight with a minus.

Agree with you somewhat.

On a slightly different (but similar) tack, I believe that Skirmishers should have NO impact on the movement of formed infantry. A line of skirmishers shooting would VERY minimally impact formed infantry... but the solid line of guys behind them probably would!

So, I believe that formed infantry should move as if the skirmishers aren't there, and then the skirmishers are put in a similar position as if they had fallen back in front of the formed infantry. This is the same with skirmishing cavalry.

Here I'm afraid I'd have to agree and disagree.

Regarding skirmishers I totally agree - they really should have no effect on movement.

With shooty Cv I'd have to disagree tho' - all that it is doing is allowing them to use Wheel of Cheese and I might add the Cv at least have an option to stand or retire when charged. If you let the opposition get so close then you pays yer money and takes yer choice. I might also add that Sassanian's will get a very unhistoric benefit - up comes the Roman infantry and off go the Sassanian Cv courtesy of WOC - even the current situation makes it very difficult to catch Cv with HF.

zocco wrote:[if you let the opposition get so close then you pays yer money and takes yer choice.

Pray do tell how do you stop an advancing line of say either Lancer/Heavy armoured foot with your shooty Cavalry. Yes you shoot and then what? or even better you get those nasty enemy LF creeping up behind you.

I have been looking for an answer to this for years.

regards

Dave

zocco wrote:I might add the Cv at least have an option to stand or retire when charged.

Yes, (remember this is my opinion only) you made your choice when you selected a formation which is suited to skirmishing rather than fighting.

Lets look at the Hunnic list (and the majority of horse archer style nomads). You get the choice of Cavalry -or- Light horse. They are the same people. They are the exact same troops. Just doing a slightly different job. It's not like a legionary and a slinger. It's a guy with a horse and bow and a guy with a horse and bow.

The rules even make it pretty much identical in shooting. Even melee is the same. Effectively you get 1 dice per front rank width.

So, there is little difference between a skirmishing cavalry line and the equal formation of light horse.

If you wanted to fight, you should have been in a formation that CAN fight.

david53 wrote: Pray do tell how do you stop an advancing line of say either Lancer/Heavy armoured foot with your shooty Cavalry. Yes you shoot and then what? or even better you get those nasty enemy LF creeping up behind you.

I think an idea that won't be in v2 would be to allow friendly CV to declare an evade if at or within 2 MU of enemy troops. Probably have to decalre in own impact phase so you get away but lose one round of firing.

To sum up;

I'm happy to justify my comments on shooty Cv - but at present I think its best to await v2 and then we'll see what's being said officially. The only question I have - does shooty Cv mean non-shock Cv (ie also Cv armed with Lt sper/sword etc) I presume so but would like to clarify.


zocco

I think most people take shooty cav as those that can shoot so do not include Lt Sp/ sword who can't.

Paul

zocco wrote:To sum up;

I'm happy to justify my comments on shooty Cv - but at present I think its best to await v2 and then we'll see what's being said officiallyzocco

Now thats a pity we'll have to wait a while then.

Were'nt you in V2 if you were you'll have a good idea of whats coming down the road.

david53 wrote:

zocco wrote:To sum up;

I'm happy to justify my comments on shooty Cv - but at present I think its best to await v2 and then we'll see what's being said officiallyzocco

Now thats a pity we'll have to wait a while then.

Were'nt you in V2 if you were you'll have a good idea of whats coming down the road.

No - I wasn't in V2. If I had been I would have certainly have given my twopence worth there. But now I'll have to save it until its published officially. And yes I will be writing. But if you want my current prediction - v2 will be anti-Dom and pro Sassanian (gee I wonder why........)

Regarding Lt Cv not being included in shooty for this rule - I'm a little surprised as although Lt spear Cv aren't skirmishers in FOG they were in the real world - and if I recall righly evaded cataphracts on a number of occassions. Unless of course their evade is somehow differnt to a 'shooty' evade..........

nikgaukroger wrote:

zocco wrote:
I should however state that I do believe my original post in this thread regarding HF is correct.

Re elephants a quick browse thro the Sept 2011 Slingshot article 'Legion, Phalanx and Pachyderm' does bring up some interesting questions. One being that were legions more vulnerable to elephants than pikemen ?- after reading the article I'd have to say - probably not. Further if as the rule writers believe legionaries are more vulnerable than pikemen - on what are they basing their conclusion.

cheers

Zocco

Must go and reread that article.

Having now had a look back at it I'd say that it was a strange article on which to base an assessment of the relative effectiveness of legiones and phalanx against nellies IMO as it doesn't really assess that - its whole aim is looking at the legion Vs phalanx, the nellies are mentioned for their involvement in that fight.

zocco wrote:[ But now I'll have to save it until its published officially. And yes I will be writing. But if you want my current prediction - v2 will be anti-Dom and pro Sassanian (gee I wonder why........)

Not sure I agree with the anti Dom thing, I find playing against them are fine.

I don't worry about playing a Dom Rom army I've played the number one seed or number two who had 19 BG's against my 11 and still only lost 12 to 8.

I find they are a hard army to play correctly more BGs don't mean more chance of winning just its harder to lose but they can be beaten.

IMO V2 will not make great changes to the FOG game, take an army you like its all fun you know.....