Why is heavy weapon not shock

[IanB3406]

So vikings with a spear are shock and with a big axe are not? The axe makes them timid? Really?

Ian

[spikemesq]

Or the axe (and need for sure footing to swing it) suggests that they are not likely to charge on their own, get carried away, etc.

Individually, they may be frothing at the mouth, but they need to be together to make use of their HW. So they'll only go when they know all their lumberjack buddies are going too. That comes from orders.

[Scrumpy]

The only thing shocking about lumberjacks is the following

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zey8567bcg

[IanB3406]

Or the axe (and need for sure footing to swing it) suggests that they are not likely to charge on their own, get carried away, etc.

Individually, they may be frothing at the mouth, but they need to be together to make use of their HW. So they'll only go when they know all their lumberjack buddies are going too. That comes from orders.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sorry, I don't by this, in fact I would argue that vikings with spear in a shield wall would need to keep formation more so than axemen. And really, the vikings where armed with various weapons.....axes swords...whatever....FOG models the shield wall as offensive spear, and gives the option to go to heavy weapon I assume when the majority of them began to carry heavy axes. I just don't by that they are less eager for contact or more likely to stay in formation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm a viking axeman and I'm OK.....even in women's clothing......

[rbodleyscott]

So vikings with a spear are shock and with a big axe are not? The axe makes them timid? Really?

It is FOG policy not to have special rules for different armies. In our view, the bulk of troops with HW historically (mostly halberdiers, billmen and dismounted knights in the Medieval period) did not exhibit shock troop like behaviour. Even that may not be universally true (e.g. early Swiss halberdiers) but we had to jump one way or the other.

[lawrenceg]

So vikings with a spear are shock and with a big axe are not? The axe makes them timid? Really?

It is FOG policy not to have special rules for different armies. In our view, the bulk of troops with HW historically (mostly halberdiers, billmen and dismounted knights in the Medieval period) did not exhibit shock troop like behaviour. Even that may not be universally true (e.g. early Swiss halberdiers) but we had to jump one way or the other.

Did you consider Impact foot for impact and HW for melee?

[rbodleyscott]

So vikings with a spear are shock and with a big axe are not? The axe makes them timid? Really?

It is FOG policy not to have special rules for different armies. In our view, the bulk of troops with HW historically (mostly halberdiers, billmen and dismounted knights in the Medieval period) did not exhibit shock troop like behaviour. Even that may not be universally true (e.g. early Swiss halberdiers) but we had to jump one way or the other.

Did you consider Impact foot for impact and HW for melee?

I cannot see any particular historical justification for Viking huscarles getting ++ in Impact, then the benefits of HW in Melee.

Such combinations of capabilities are against policy anyway because of the danger (certainty) of creating super troops.

[peterrjohnston]

So vikings with a spear are shock and with a big axe are not? The axe makes them timid? Really?

Everyone expects Vikings to bring axes to battle; it's only a shock when they take spears.

[stefoid]

do vikings with axes or mixed spear/axe formations get the option of being impact foot? It would seem to fit my uneducated view of their modus operandi.

[philqw78]

Mixed spear/axe/other stuff count as Offensive Spear, which are shock troops.

Much like the DBM classification really where the earlier vikings were Bd(F), so would advance without orders, and the later vikings would not, Bd(O)

[grahambriggs]

I can't really see that much difference between Vikings and other heavy foot in period tactically. Why do people thinks they should get ++? Is there a battle account where they shattered the enemy at impact? Sure people were scared of them but I thought that was more due to their ability to appear up a river/coast unexpectedly?

[expendablecinc]

I can't really see that much difference between Vikings and other heavy foot in period tactically. Why do people thinks they should get ++? Is there a battle account where they shattered the enemy at impact? Sure people were scared of them but I thought that was more due to their ability to appear up a river/coast unexpectedly?

I think the only justification was in regard to becoming timid - so its no the ++ part of impact foot but the charging without orders and cohesion effect on thier oponents if they win at impact. Ie the loopines factor of shock troops.

anthony

[DaiSho]

Did you consider Impact foot for impact and HW for melee?

Bloody hell!

Huscarls are already pretty top notch against Pike. That would make them the ultimate pike block destroyer!

Not saying I don't like the idea, Ivan over there is all ready sharpening his axe, but I don't think it's reasonable.

Ian

[doctormm]

So vikings with a spear are shock and with a big axe are not? The axe makes them timid? Really?

It is FOG policy not to have special rules for different armies.

I can't see how this can be true. There are army-specific rules scattered through the list books.

[Ghaznavid]

It is FOG policy not to have special rules for different armies.

I can't see how this can be true. There are army-specific rules scattered through the list books.

There are? Unless you count special interpenetration permissions (which are actually mentioned in the rules), I recall only two armies getting 'special rules', both in Immortal Fire. Which ones did I miss?

[shall]

I think its worth taking a step back and I am sure RBS will correct me if I am wrong.

The question is not whether HW is shock or not - as RBS stated most troops we classify that way were not.

What the list writers do each time is to think about the character of the army and see how best to make it feel right in FOG.

On Vikings I think they came to two conclusions:

1. While the berserker legends are real, they were a very small part of a viking army and not worthy of separate representation at this scale - past lists probably over-embellished armies witth these troops;
2. The Vikings behaviour was shock and they formed solid shieldwalls with mixed weapons - so the best representation of them on a FOG bttlefield is Offensive Spearmen rather than HW.

So if you choose HW you are choosing the variant the authors are NOT recommending as the best represenatation of Viking behaviour. Choose the Off Sp option and it makes sense on the tabletop - just finished my 25mm Vikings, anyone for a game?

Si

[Blathergut]

- just finished my 25mm Vikings, anyone for a game?

Si

yep!!...meet you at toronto airport when your flight gets in

[azrael86]

- just finished my 25mm Vikings, anyone for a game?

Si

yep!!...meet you at toronto airport when your flight gets in

Surely Vikings don't FLY to Canada... they would go by boat!

[doctormm]

It is FOG policy not to have special rules for different armies.

I can't see how this can be true. There are army-specific rules scattered through the list books.

There are? Unless you count special interpenetration permissions (which are actually mentioned in the rules), I recall only two armies getting 'special rules', both in Immortal Fire. Which ones did I miss?

I don't see how "a rule that only certain armies can use" is anything but "army-specific".

Unless you want to nitpick and say it's only an army-specific rule if only ONE army gets to use it.

[dave_r]

I don't see how "a rule that only certain armies can use" is anything but "army-specific".

All armies can carry out interpenetration. Just certain armies can peform penetrations that others can't.

That is not an army specific rule, just an army specific ability.

Nitpicking is what I do best