PDA

View Full Version : Bw in 3.0


snowcat
01-13-2012, 12:19 AM
Have Bw been reduced in effectiveness under 3.0 to the point of becoming speedhumps to heavy infantry?

(the following snipped from an unrelated thread that I derailed...)

I don't suppose he'd consider increasing the shooting range for Bw...?

:D

Has never even been raised. Would you like to make a cogent argument and I will raise it...?

Cogent? Right, that's me out then...!

Actually it's the thought of heavy foot sprinting through bow range into close combat that concerns me a bit now (ie Bw are in heavy foot's charge range now if they want to shoot at them) - that combined with reduced target selection options for supported shooting = speedhumps for heavy foot.

Try 300p Bw range (will look better too).

Cogent arguement -

point 1 - what he said above :D (speedbumps)

point 2 - in other DBx games the shooting range vs movent rates in units per turn effectively doubled the shooting range

Okay I admit I haven't checked this with more recent edtions

point 3 - in DBA 1 and 2 this was a problem but less so since the shooting player could concentrate their firea and break up the enemy line.

point 4 - other DBx games had stricter target priorities which allowed for enemy that got through the initial barrage to close in

DBA 3 has inherited the target priorities but not the ability for the shooters to disrupt the enemy from long range.

A refight of Poitiers or Agincourt might be the best way to demonstrate the current naffness of Bw :D

Cheers

To which I will now add: *should* Bw in fact be more akin to speedhumps for Heavy Infantry? ie is this actually more correct historically (in which case the v3.0 adjustments might have things right)?

Macbeth
01-13-2012, 02:06 AM
I am not looking forward to the time when my Sung Chinese have been walked over by so many armies that they are re-classified as a terrain feature ;):p:D

Cheers

snowcat
01-13-2012, 02:30 AM
Perhaps my Wallachian archers should hide in Vlad's forest of the impaled...

:eek

Martyn
01-13-2012, 02:38 PM
The relationship between Hvy Inf and bow range has not changed, both are 200 paces as they were in 2.2. :???

There are changes in for bows with reduced fields of fire and the introduction of target priorities but are they enough to make bow that much worse off.

Bobgnar
01-13-2012, 02:55 PM
Good points by Martyn. Arc cut, but priorities are not much different from 2.2 and perhaps more realistic. Range is relatively same as in 2.2.

The big point not mentioned, that I saw, is
Blades +4 vs shooting.

Also better bad going rules for Bow.

Martyn
01-13-2012, 04:43 PM
Good points by Martyn. Arc cut, but priorities are not much different from 2.2 and perhaps more realistic. Range is relatively same as in 2.2.

The big point not mentioned, that I saw, is
Blades +4 vs shooting.

Also better bad going rules for Bow.

I like the change for Bd as this makes Bd and Sp the same which feels right, not sure why Pk are not also at 4 vs shooting?

Sea Weathered Aketons
01-13-2012, 05:02 PM
I like the change for Bd as this makes Bd and Sp the same which feels right, not sure why Pk are not also at 4 vs shooting?

Pikemen have both their hands occupied when the pikes are lowered and if shielded, the shields are smaller than those used by spears or blades. In many cases (Swiss or Landsknects) pikemen are shieldless. The current factor is appropriate.

SWA

Martyn
01-13-2012, 06:15 PM
Pikemen have both their hands occupied when the pikes are lowered and if shielded, the shields are smaller than those used by spears or blades. In many cases (Swiss or Landsknects) pikemen are shieldless. The current factor is appropriate.

SWA

:o Yes you are right, didn't think that one through properly.

snowcat
01-13-2012, 08:05 PM
The relationship between Hvy Inf and bow range has not changed, both are 200 paces as they were in 2.2. :???

There are changes in for bows with reduced fields of fire and the introduction of target priorities but are they enough to make bow that much worse off.

Yes you're quite right. My apologies, I must have had an extended moment of madness on this point. :silly

David Brown
01-14-2012, 08:26 PM
+1 for Bw in good-going that have not moved this bound and are fighting foot in CC and have an element of Bw extending their front (DBr style).

peleset
01-15-2012, 01:37 AM
If PB is going through the army lists, is it not too late for significant (and interesting) changes to the rules?

Macbeth
01-15-2012, 04:19 AM
The relationship between Hvy Inf and bow range has not changed, both are 200 paces as they were in 2.2. :???

There are changes in for bows with reduced fields of fire and the introduction of target priorities but are they enough to make bow that much worse off.


Good points by Martyn. Arc cut, but priorities are not much different from 2.2 and perhaps more realistic. Range is relatively same as in 2.2.

The big point not mentioned, that I saw, is
Blades +4 vs shooting.

Also better bad going rules for Bow.


Quite right about the Bw range - however in 2.2 and earlier there were no target priorities except for having to shoot and an elemen that shot at you which has dropped below 1st priority I believe

In 2.2 a line of three Bw could concentrate on a single oncoming element and break up a line. The line might reform and approach again but still be broken up a second time.

In 3.0 a line of Bw can concentrate on a single element at Max range and break up a line (forcing the target element back 1/2 a BW). If the line reforms and advances then the next shot by the Bw is as single elements against targets within the DZ. Bw cannot double Sp or Bd when it is +2 vs +4 so the next time the target line moves then the Bw are most likely terrain features :)

A sideways slide of 1 micron > 1/2 a BW is enough to cut one Bw element out of the shooting equation and then a move into contact would still allow the attacking line to slide back into full frontal contact :(

The shooting rules for Bw in Woods and Oasis has improved but the shooting rules for Dunes has become more restrictive I am not saying that this is a bad thing - just that it is incorrect to state that the Bad Gong rules for shooting have not universally improved. At the same time that Wallachian Bw and South Welsh Lb can now hide in their native forests to shoot they are finding it that much harder to enable a forest that they can tactically exploit.

THAT might be the big downside of shooters in DBA 3 - not necessarily being able to take advantage of the places in their native land to hide in and shoot.

Having been a big exploiter of the use of concentrated fire in the past and getting a bit of a laugh out of its visual effect I am not entirely against the latest changes to firing arc and target priorities - rather I am concerned about the unintended consequences of them.

DBM (and I assume DBMM) have these sorts of more restrictive target priorities and firing arcs for shooting - however in those games the movement rate to firing range quantum is different - shooters have in effect double the range and there is some overhead shooting allowed. This allows more concentrated fire over a longer period so that a decent series of archery volleys can break up a line with casualties inflicted.

I am happy for a smackdown here - I played DBM only in its infancy and have never looked at DBMM

Cheers