First Game

[robertthebruce]

After the first game, I must say that the first impression is very good, the game is simple without extra difficulties and with a very good historical idea.

I want to treat two main questions, the firing of the MF with Bow and the effect of the firings on the Skirmishers


- I have discovered that the firepower of Bw is much smaller than in DBM, mainly if shoot to armoured troops, but I do not understand why the cohesion test is modified of the same form if troops receive 1 HP2B or 1 HP1B, we are speaking of the double of impacts with the same result for the organization of forces.

I think that the modifier to the cohesion test must increase with the number of impacts.


- Skirmish rol is very well represented in AOW, but I think that when a unit of skirmishers receives firings, the effect to fail a cohesion test and to become disorganized does not reflect the form to act of these on the battlefield.

A unit of skirmishers does not have to conserve a cohesion of the same form that a closed unit, in fact its main characteristic in the skirmishers its lack of cohesion that not of organization. In a real battle when the skirmishers receives fire, they fled, they did not remain disorganized.

could be added the obligation to flee to those Skirmishers who fail their cohesion test by firing??



Cheers


David

[shall]

Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Posts: 27

Posted: 02 Apr 2007 19:33

After the first game, I must say that the first impression is very good, the game is simple without extra difficulties and with a very good historical idea.

Good to hear thanks

I want to treat two main questions, the firing of the MF with Bow and the effect of the firings on the Skirmishers


- I have discovered that the firepower of Bw is much smaller than in DBM, mainly if shoot to armoured troops, but I do not understand why the cohesion test is modified of the same form if troops receive 1 HP2B or 1 HP1B, we are speaking of the double of impacts with the same result for the organization of forces.

I think that the modifier to the cohesion test must increase with the number of impacts.

Could you re-express as I don't really follow what you mean about number of impacts. Thanks.

- Skirmish rol is very well represented in AOW, but I think that when a unit of skirmishers receives firings, the effect to fail a cohesion test and to become disorganized does not reflect the form to act of these on the battlefield.

A unit of skirmishers does not have to conserve a cohesion of the same form that a closed unit, in fact its main characteristic in the skirmishers its lack of cohesion that not of organization. In a real battle when the skirmishers receives fire, they fled, they did not remain disorganized.

could be added the obligation to flee to those Skirmishers who fail their cohesion test by firing??

Cohesion is a mix of morale effects and organisation. It means you are losing the ability to perform your normal role. Don't mix it up with being spread out or not. Thus defined cohesion is as relevant to a skimrisher as it is to a hoplite.

The end result is as you say as once you get DISR you want to get them away before they get WAV or BRK and cost you APs. But by making it a choice we make the game more fun as youhave to decide when to flee rather than them. Also historically it is not clear that they did flee after little damage - they more fled when charged or froced away which is reflected. Some skirmish units suffered very high casualties by sticking around. So "voluntary felling " we treat as under your control and your decision to make and involuntary fleeing is covered by evades and breaking when charged while FRG.

Hope that helps.

Si

[rbodleyscott]

I do not understand why the cohesion test is modified of the same form if troops receive 1 HP2B or 1 HP1B, we are speaking of the double of impacts with the same result for the organization of forces.

This is by design. Early in development we did, of course, try having increasing modifiers for more hits. The problem is that it makes it very hard to balance the effects of skirmishing and massed shooting. After rebalancing, either the skimishing has no effect or the massed shooting has too much effect.

In fact, despite there only being 1 cohesion modifier for hits, the effect of massed shooting is much more significant because

1) It can inflict a cohesion test every turn - which is the way to make the enemy drop right down through the Cohesion Ladder. (Otherwise, every time they don't drop in a turn they get a chance to rally back up).

2) It has much more chance of inflicting base losses. (Because death rolls are against hits minus 2).

So although the massed shooting does not cause extra cohesion modifiers after the initial one, its severe effect is modelled in other ways.

[robertthebruce]

Could you re-express as I don't really follow what you mean about number of impacts. Thanks.

Sorry, read English is easier for my than to write it.

Richard understood to me, increasing modifiers for more hits, in mass Shooting.

In DBM the Bow Shooting it??s overvalued, in AOW better from an historical view. I Understand you Richard, It??s no Easy to balance the effects of skirmishing in massed shooting.


I want to make another question.

Why don??t use the supporting shoot the shooting tables instead of those of impact?, after all it??s shooting don??t fight.

Heavy infantry with Bw Support, will be sticking very strong (Many Dices) thanks to a Bw Support that is not very important.




David.

[hammy]

I want to make another question.

Why don??t use the supporting shoot the shooting tables instead of those of impact?, after all it??s shooting don??t fight.

Heavy infantry with Bw Support, will be sticking very strong (Many Dices) thanks to a Bw Support that is not very important.

I think what you are asking is why don't supporting archers use the shooting POA's. Well that is what they are supposed to do and there is an extra - POA for shooting at chargers. Supporting shooters do however use the impact dice table rather than the shooting one so there is a difference.

If a BG of armoured impact foot charges a BG of 1/2 Sp, 1/2 Bw you get:

Impact foot:- 6 dice at ++ needing a 3 to hit
Mixed formation:- 6 dice (from the spears) at -- needing a 5 to hit and 3 dice (from the archers) at -- also needing a 5

If the archers were just shooting at -- they would need a 6 but if they were shooting normally then they would need a 5. Changing the impact foot to just protected means that the archers are only at - but still need a 5. Unprotected impact foot (like libyans) would be shot at evens so the archers would hit on 4's.

Mixed shooters and spear are good in some circumstances but are not that strong against other decent foot.

Hammy

[lawrenceg]

Why don??t use the supporting shoot the shooting tables instead of those of impact?, after all it??s shooting don??t fight.

Heavy infantry with Bw Support, will be sticking very strong (Many Dices) thanks to a Bw Support that is not very important.

They do use the shooting tables.

In version 5.01 this is stated on p52 at the end of the section "SUPPORT SHOOTING IN THE IMPACT PHASE". It is easily overlooked as it is not mentioned at all in the section "TROOPS ELIGIBLE TO FIGHT IN THE IMPACT PHASE" which occurs mucch earlier in the rules (p47).

Supporting shooters do however use the impact dice table rather than the shooting one so there is a difference.

Hammy's memory is at fault here. The rules say "The dice scores required to hit are as per shooting" (in v5.01 anyway).

[robertthebruce]

I think what you are asking is why don't supporting archers use the shooting POA's

Yes

They do use the shooting tables.

In version 5.01 this is stated on p52 at the end of the section "SUPPORT SHOOTING IN THE IMPACT PHASE". It is easily overlooked as it is not mentioned at all in the section "TROOPS ELIGIBLE TO FIGHT IN THE IMPACT PHASE" which occurs mucch earlier in the rules (p47).

It seems logical to me, because of another the way, the capacity of the supporting shoot is just as the troops who they Support.


Thanks


David