Slitherine

davouthojo wrote:How can you see the die rolls in FOG?

It has been mentioned several times, but I can't see it in the preferences menu.

I normally use the summary display. U is the keyboard short cut. I think the combat display will also show the combat die rolls. (I think P is the short cut.) See the keyboard shortcuts entry in help for a list of them.

Chris

Crossbowmen can be "Lucky" at times, but to stand toe to toe in a melee situation for multiple turns is a little much for me to understand!!

Ok, ran a little test using the editor

10 units of Average Offensive Spear HF, Protected vs 10 units Medium Crossbows Average Protected

Units were not adjacent to friendlies so no support came into play, CnC's were far enough away so no command bonus

I ran w the Spears immedietly charging into Impact combat, crossbows did not get to fire , i continued the melee portions until one side was destroyed on a unit vs unit basis

Ist run: spears were basically destroyed
2nd and 3rd runs crossbowmen got the worst of it although they definetely did alot of damage
(didnt run any more as bed beckoned)

One thing I did notice, and this i think will apply to all situations where players feel the game isnt working correctly or needs to be adjusted: Dont underestimate the power of the dice, after all no matter what you do to get an advanatge , dice will always only have 6 sides****

I say this because I was watching the die rolls and my crossbowmen were just basically rolling better each and every time over the three runs, the ist run where they routed 8 of the 10 spears vs only 2 crossbows I saw 3 in a row get 4 hits vs 0 or 1 by the attacking spear! (when your hot your hot, as any player of Risk will know)

When the die rolls were the expected values though, the spears did win....

BTW, my understanding is the crossbows should be getting 6 dice when recieving a charge, only 4 die were displayed (perhaps they dont need the xtras after all even if it is a bug!)

My next question is, how would this play out in the TT Game(s)? Generally when I'm playing and have crossbowmen, I try to avoid a melee with them. I would think that their strong point is to be used as a standoff weapon....

TheGrayMouser wrote:Ok, ran a little test using the editor
...

BTW, my understanding is the crossbows should be getting 6 dice when recieving a charge, only 4 die were displayed (perhaps they dont need the xtras after all even if it is a bug!)

They should have 6 as long as you are charging them from a front hex side. Not through rear hexes, I beleive. So sounds like this is probably a bug.

Chris

Mouser's results seem pretty much the same as my in-game results. Suddenly this thread is very quiet, maybe something is--gasp--not right?

Or is there some rationale for men bearing heavy (but presumably by now unloaded) crossbows and daggers be able to regularly prevail in melee against spear-armed heavy foot?

Well, I wouldnt say my test was scientific or anything, and the spears did prevail 2 out of the three runs....

Ok, just ran again as i am posting, 8 crossbowmen routed vs no spears!

Basically, the fact that BG's tested were "crossbowmen" has nothing to do with the results, it all came down to the die rolls.... Each gets 4 die in impact and melee (well the bows should get 6 but the game isnt displaying the xtra 2 so i have no idea if it is factoring those in...) The spears get a POA in both Impact and Melee and so they should generally win in the long run... howver if the crossbows roll 3 6's on the ist impact and the spear only get 1 hit, that unit is toast! In the end the # of die is the crucial factor and i think I have read other players post the same ie if its a choice of gaining a POA or xtra die if you have 2 paths to attack, go for the one that gives the xtra die!

Not exactly on-topic, but related.

Am I right in supposing that Heavy foot have no advantage in combat against medium foot?

So, net net,

Medium foot can move 50% faster and do well in bad terrain
Heavy foot avoid a POA hit against mounted in the open

Is that it, or am I missing something?

[Dusts off his MF army]

TheGrayMouser wrote:Basically, the fact that BG's tested were "crossbowmen" has nothing to do with the results, it all came down to the die rolls.... Each gets 4 die in impact and melee (well the bows should get 6 but the game isnt displaying the xtra 2 so i have no idea if it is factoring those in...) The spears get a POA in both Impact and Melee and so they should generally win in the long run...

Thanks for running another test. I don't understand what you mean when you say that the fact that they were crossbowmen has nothing to do with the combat results--shouldn't it? And why should crossbowmen get six die in melee, when spearmen get four? I'm still having a hard time understanding why crossbowmen--who as far as I can tell are almost pathetically unsuited for melee--stand any chance against HF (or really, even other MF) in melee? Unless someone can share some insights, this all seems, well, rather arbitrary...

davouthojo wrote: Am I right in supposing that Heavy foot have no advantage in combat against medium foot?

I think HF gets its advantages not from being MF or HF, but from various POAs, such as sword++, pike, etc. in my experience, in open terrain, HF generally makes mincemeat of MF (with the possible exception of HF offensive spearmen)...

davouthojo wrote:Not exactly on-topic, but related.

Am I right in supposing that Heavy foot have no advantage in combat against medium foot?

So, net net,

Medium foot can move 50% faster and do well in bad terrain
Heavy foot avoid a POA hit against mounted in the open

Is that it, or am I missing something?

MF do not get a POA disadvanatage vs HF in the open, but they do get an additional -1 on their cohesion test if they lose a combat. So they are equal as long as things are going well, but not so equal if they have a bad round.

76mm wrote:And why should crossbowmen get six die in melee, when spearmen get four?

They don't. They get it at impact if they stand to receive a charge - which represents a volley of crossbow fire as the enemy charge in. As these dice are at a - POA vs HF spearmen, this effectively equalises the impact combat. (6 dice at - POA gives an average of 2 hits, 4 dice at + POA gives an average of 2 hits). After that the crossbowmen are still at - POA and only get 4 dice, so are disadvantaged. (4 dice at - POA gives an average of 1.33 hits, 4 dice at + POA gives an average of 2 hits).

76mm wrote:I'm still having a hard time understanding why crossbowmen--who as far as I can tell are almost pathetically unsuited for melee--stand any chance against HF (or really, even other MF) in melee?

The above may not seem like a massive disadvantage, but most of the time it is. You won't win many games by getting your crossbowmen into such a situation unless you can gang up on the spearmen. (In which case they will lose some of their combat dice).

And note that the above test (which was not repeated often enough to draw much in the way of conclusions) was against one of the least advantaged HF types that could be used. Other types (pikes, armoured offensive spearmen, dismounted men-at-arms etc.) have more of an advantage, and should go through crossbowmen like a hot knife through butter.

76MM:
What I mean by the "the fact that they are crossbowmen" is the fact that they are medium infanty and get dice/ poa's based on that fact alone, there is no consideration that our perception of them being "weaker" since they are missle armed troops factored into the game whatsoever. medium is medium, poa' are poa's


Mr Scott:
That is correct, 4 runs is not nearly enough, and you are corrrect that average protected off spears arent really the best spear types around, my test was to really get a baseline of spear HF vs non spear MEd so I made both types average with the same armour

However even 4 tests indicate spears do win, when they dont it is because the mediums were rolling very well!

Also, the reality is no-one would ever be in a situuation like my example, who ever has 10 units isolated from eachother impacting 10 other units, also in isolation? There are so many things you can do in a real game to increase your odds..

In the end perception is greater than reality.... I feel offensive spear HF in ror (ie those Hoplites that Phryriccs get) appear to be the worst units in game, they get trashed by everyone! The reality is is they should be pretty decent troops, there is no bug, but i clearly role badly with them (or my oppoenet rolls well vs them) in multiple battles time and time again!

BTW has anyone elso notice medium missle dont appear to get any indication that they are getting the 2 xtra dice when they rec a charge in impact?

TheGrayMouser wrote:What I mean by the "the fact that they are crossbowmen" is the fact that they are medium infanty and get dice/ poa's based on that fact alone, there is no consideration that our perception of them being "weaker" since they are missle armed troops factored into the game whatsoever. medium is medium, poa' are poa's

That's what I was afraid you meant! Does this really make sense, though? Why not have a - POA for missile armed troops in melee? They get extra dice on impact (fair enough), but it seems like the inverse should be that once they are in melee they are totally screwed. This might also incentive players to keep their missile units out of melee, which would seem to realistic...

TheGrayMouser wrote: However even 4 tests indicate spears do win, when they dont it is because the mediums were rolling very well!

Also, the reality is no-one would ever be in a situuation like my example, who ever has 10 units isolated from eachother impacting 10 other units, also in isolation? There are so many things you can do in a real game to increase your odds..

OK, but they sure seem to "roll well" pretty darn often! I dont' understand your second point, in fact in a real game your odds would be just as likely to be decreased as increased. Either the HF has been weakened by missile fire, or has already been disrupted when an adjacent spear unit routed, etc. And in my experience, attacking a crossbow unit with two spear units is about as effective as attacking with one--ie, not very!

TheGrayMouser wrote:In the end perception is greater than reality.... I feel offensive spear HF in ror (ie those Hoplites that Phryriccs get) appear to be the worst units in game, they get trashed by everyone! The reality is is they should be pretty decent troops, there is no bug, but i clearly role badly with them (or my oppoenet rolls well vs them) in multiple battles time and time again!

The points about the HF spearmen are all very true, they just don't seem to get any love in this game. most, if not all, of my negative experience with HF vs crossbownen features them, so maybe it is only them. everything from carthag african spearmen, to hoplites, to low country spearmen, they all get spanked by pretty much everyone.

76mm wrote:Why not have a - POA for missile armed troops in melee?

They already do. If the enemy has a melee POA (which all competent melee troops, e.g. Spearmen, do) and they don't (e.g. crossbowmen) then they are on a net -POA.

(Crossbowmen don't get a swordsmen POA even though they have swords, because they were not intended or trained much to fight in melee. Likewise they count as Protected, even though most were armoured, because they lack shields and were not intended to fight in melee).

Here are some images of some fairly typical medieval crossbowmen - they don't exactly look helpless do they?







In the view of the designers the current representation gives them sufficient disadvantage without tying their hands behind their backs and putting a placard round their necks with the words "KILL ME" written on it.

(Good longbowmen do get a melee POA because historically they were more willing to get involved in melee).

I think an issue people might be having with the game mechanics has to do that this , in the end , is a 6 sided dice game for combat resolution.

There is no "graduated" combat rolls, ie you dont hit really good, moderately good average etc , there is no combat resolution charts based on att/def ratios etc

dice are dice and you hit or you dont, poas etc all determine what you need to get a hit but always fear the "rolled four 6's" phenominon that can happen any time....

I think if you watch the dice rolls in the HUD things soon become much clearer on why units that should win often lose
I think there was an entire thread about "the power of dice"

Nice pics!

Some of this guys would merit armoured or even heavy armour in FOG terms, that is if all the men in the unit were euqally as well protected!

TheGrayMouser wrote:Nice pics!

Some of this guys would merit armoured or even heavy armour in FOG terms, that is if all the men in the unit were euqally as well protected!

Well of course I picked some of the heavier equipped guys, but most mercenary crossbowmen would have at least a mail hauberk. Under FOG rules, this is not sufficient to count as armoured without a shield, particularly in the Medieval period where, in order to maintain differentials between troop types, we have upped the armour requirements somewhat compared with earlier periods. And of course many bodies of Medieval troops would have a mixture of well-equipped and less-well equipped men - the best-equipped tend to be the ones that get depicted, giving a false impression of the average armour level. When all is said and done, FOG is a top-down representation, the armour classifications are merely tools to achieve this, not absolute, and having armoured or heavily-armoured crossbowmen units would not improve historical verisimilitude overall.

However, my point was that there isn't really any good reason why they should be as totally helpless in melee as 76mm seems to think.

The rules do, however, put them at a significant disadvantage in melee, and we don't think that that disadvantage needs to be increased.

rbodley, as usual, thanks for your helpful responses and the cool pix! those crossbowmen certainly look well-armored, but I also don't see them being able to inflict large losses on spearmen in melee, especially if they are still schlepping around the crossbow, which would prevent them from wielding any other weapon with any kind of success.

Anyway, maybe as you suggest the problem is limited to HF spearmen, who don't pack much of a punch in the game.

In the end, as mentioned, it comes down to dice rolls.

But it could partly be fixed if the troop type was connected to the % casualties that can be inflicted. A crossbow (or anything right down to LF) unit, if it hits more than its opponent, then goes to that casualties inflicted thinging which is wild in extremes, and said unit can hit said defended (be they knights, Romans, elephants, etc) with 15% casualties. If instead, because of unit type or something, they could only inflict 2%, things would be much different.