Drucken

[Wellington]

Hi!

Es gibt nicht viel aber zumindestens kann man aus den Schlachtberichten auf die im neuesten Newsletter verwiesen wird zwei Sachen rauslesen:

Quelle: Schlachtberichte
 
Warband werden schwieriger zu bewegen, keine \"tanzenden\" Warbands mehr:

One of the things we are looking at in WAB is making some units less manoeuvrable. This meant my warband spearmen block really needed to move straight forward or have its move reduced.

Mixed Weapons bei Infantry bekommen einen Reroll, wie Throwings Spears bei der Cavalry:

As the Kushites have “mixed weapons” we introduced the rule (found in Hannibal and Arthur) allowing them to reroll misses in the first round of combat.

GruĂź

Bernhard

[Axebreaker]

Robb said something about infantry not being able to march block cavalry.What does that mean?As if cavalry has a problem with moving around.They don\'t.
He also said large infantry units were too flexible,which they are not.
If anything is too Flexible in the game it\'s shirmishers!They are too unbalanced.I find skirmishers decide to many games in my experience.If anything formed units should be able to just charge or march right on through them and of course ignore them when preforming march moves.Skirmishers should only be a fly biting on a horses butt and nothing else.As it stands now skirmishers can trap whole units by just being there,block lines of sight for charges and stop entire flanks from marching,wayyyyy to strong :thumbdown: .This I hope they decide to correct and put the skirmisher where he  :censored: belongs.
I\'m curious to see what they have in mind.

Just had to vent a little.

[Poliorketes]

Robb said something about infantry not being able to march block cavalry.What does that mean?As if cavalry has a problem with moving around.They don\'t.

It\'s a rule from BtGG

[Axebreaker]

Thank you Poliorketes,

 Now that I\'ve looked it up there is something important to note.They are thinking about making this rule apply to all cavalry and yet I quote from BBTGG \"In out-of-period gaming,these abilities (massed archery and marching cavalry) are liable to become overly powerful,especially when fighting small,infantry-based armies.Therefore,you should either forfeit these two abilities,or increase the cost of each cavalry unit .\"Even the Author understood that this is fine for a cavalry based game and his supplement is dominated by cavalry.If this rule were applied to say Shieldwall where I have alot of experience in playing in,this rule would already make the the cavalry armies in this supplement go from very tough to hell on Earth.
 All systems have skirmishers to large extent and most everyone considers them an important part of their army,because of the power given to them by the rules.For my feelings on this go back to my rant above.Even some of you might say, hey what about the Huns and such.My answer to that would be they did not fight like individual men rather like formed units trained to hit and run and still maintain formation.Therefore when they choose to turn and fight they did so as formed unit more or less.
 So,in the end my feelings are change the rules on skirmishers to lessen their power,leave the cavalry rules alone(they don\'t need help),and get back to the basic of what decided most battles formed units.

[Wellington]

I hope that WAB 2.0 will be more realisitic than WAB 1.0 and 1.5. The change of the Warbands is a signal! Then another necessary change would be to adapt the rule from BTGG for all Cavalry. And as far I know there are changes planned for the skirmisher too ...

I think with WAB 2.0 it will be inevitable to adjust the point costs of most units.

[Axebreaker]

Hello Ghib.

I totally disagree with the BTGG for all cavalry!For the very reason I listed above. :thumbdown:If they change it to that then all infantry armies can just about only set up in a horseshoe formation,oh la de da wonderful.The cavalry are fine the way they are,if they get charged by infantry,it\'s their own fault,they already had the advantage in the first place!etc,etc,etc,etc...................

The rest I agree. :thumbup:

Get rid of all auto breaks,and just give a bonus to the charging warband or ferocious charging cavalry.Battle standards are there for a reason,no need to upset games with auto anything!

Hopefully hatred is lessened to re roll misses only!

Great weapons need to strike first when charging.

Pikes should strike first and in at least 3 ranks.

Elephants.Who isn\'t sick to death of their rules.Impact hits,mobility,terror(fear etc),High strength attacks, that\'s enough.They do not need to take ranks and make them into the royal  pain on the battlefield.

I\'m sure I left out alot,and I hope the rules get cleaned up some
Don\'t get me wrong,it\'s still a good game,it\'s due for a good overhaul that\'s all.

[Mad Mö]

Elephants & Skirmishers

As far as i remember in my last WAB games skirmisher did not prevent a marching move of formed units.
Maybe that is a house rule?
As a persian player myself i normally flood the table with hordes of low-cost skirmishers.
The macedonians counter them with better equiped and higher morale skirmishers / light infantry.
Light cavalry works also and often caused a mass rout of my low morale persians.

Elephants are stopped the same way. Good quality, light infantry in skirmish formation will beat elephants.
As far as i remember elephants and skirmishers never were a big problem in my battles.

[Leondegrande]

Elefants don\'t cause impact hits and can\'t march

[Axebreaker]

@Mad Mö

I quote from the rulebook \"troops may only march if there are no enemy within 8\" of them at the start of their move\" and that is the rule.Perhaps you have a house rule where skirmishers do not stop march moves.Maybe your thinking of a panic test and confusing it with march moves. Nowhere does it state both in movement,skirmish rules,or amendments that skirmishers do not prevent march moves of any type of unit.
For a starter your talking about Macedonians who have an answer for everything built into their list.Enough said about that army.
You know,I knew I was going to get snappy comebacks over specifics,I was talking in general only.I\'ve decided many battles with skirmishers and that just not right and I\'ve seen too many where they have.The army that loses it\'s skirmishers early in the battle and the other still has his is often put in a big disadvantage.I\'ve seen it time and again.
Not every army has light cavalary and that still doesn\'t change what I said etc,etc,etc.....

I\'m happy for you that you have had no problem with elephants,you live a charmed life.Now,back to the rest of us where the damn thing went through all our missles, swatted aside our skirmishers and plowed right into the middle of our army and smashed a hole right through it and watched mass panic erupt,ooops did I leave out the other ones doing the same thing to the flanks blah blah blah.

@Leondegrande
Thank you ,you are indeed correct.I should have been more specific. I was meaning what their rules should be in my humble opinion. ;)The main problem with Elephants is they take ranks,and in WAB that is devastating.My belief is if you wish to take ranks,then you need to use skill and cunning to do it.No cheap rules like Elephants and maybe BTGG rule regarding march moves with cavalry vs infantry allowing you to easily put your cavalry on the flank or rear without breaking a sweat.

[Mad Mö]

@Mad Mö
I quote from the rulebook \"troops may only march if there are no enemy within 8\" of them at the start of their move\" and that is the rule.Perhaps you have a house rule where skirmishers do not stop march moves.Maybe your thinking of a panic test and confusing it with march moves. Nowhere does it state both in movement,skirmish rules,or amendments that skirmishers do not prevent march moves of any type of unit.
For a starter your talking about Macedonians who have an answer for everything built into their list.Enough said about that army.
You know,I knew I was going to get snappy comebacks over specifics,I was talking in general only.I\'ve decided many battles with skirmishers and that just not right and I\'ve seen too many where they have.The army that loses it\'s skirmishers early in the battle and the other still has his is often put in a big disadvantage.I\'ve seen it time and again.
Not every army has light cavalary and that still doesn\'t change what I said etc,etc,etc.....
I\'m happy for you that you have had no problem with elephants,you live a charmed life.Now,back to the rest of us where the damn thing went through all our missles, swatted aside our skirmishers and plowed right into the middle of our army and smashed a hole right through it and watched mass panic erupt,ooops did I leave out the other ones doing the same thing to the flanks blah blah blah.

Dear Axebreaker,
i apologize if i sounded snappy that was not intended.
My experience with WAB armies is somewhat limited to romans, barbarians, persians and macedonians.
Yes, it is a house rule that skirmishers do not prevent a marching move. It works thou.
We limit the use of ballistae because some battles were ballistae shoot-outs. :whistling:
I hope i´m not the only one who live a charmed life witout the fear of elephants. But i´m talking about my personal experiences only.
The WAB rules are only suggestions and we can alter them as we like.
If we ever play a friendly game of WAB i will gladly let my elephants stay at home.

[hallostephan]

sacht ma, könnt Ihr bitte ne deutsche Übersetzung zu euren Antworten liefern? Ich versteh das alles nicht, danke und mfg Stephan

[Angrist]

also bis jetzt ging das doch auch mit dem englischen,
wenn wir eine offene community sein wollen sollte englisch schon ok sein (fĂĽr leute die  kein gutes deutsch schreiben können)  

englisch wird schliesslich von den meisten hier im forum gesprochen,

wenn axebreaker mal einen richtigen bericht oder artikel (wie zb die artikel über pferde etc dies früher gab) schreiben sollte (also nciht normales gesprächsposting)
wĂĽrd ichs fĂĽr dich ja ĂĽbersetzen, aber lass dir versichern das in diesem thread nichts weltbewegendes gesprochen wird,
sind ja eh noch keine sicheren sachen

[hallostephan]

na dann lese ich erst gar nicht nach-Schulenglisch von vor 29 Jahren reicht einfach nicht-meins jedenfalls-mit den regelbĂĽchern hab ich auch Probleme, meist hilft mir ja jemand, na macht was Ihr wollt ?(  :chinese:

[Mad Mö]

@ hallostephan
In aller Kürze das tatsächlich nicht Weltbewegende:
Axebreaker: Elefanten sind zu stark und Skirmisher behindern die Bewegung von Einheiten zu stark. AuĂźerdem sind sie zu oft schlachtentscheidend.
Mad Mö: Ich finde Elefanten nicht zu stark und bei uns verhindern Skirmisher die Marschbewegung nicht (Hausregel). Finde Skirmisher im Allgemeinen nicht zu stark.
Axebreaker: Pffftt, Mö lebt ein glückliches Leben, wenn ihm Skirmisher & Elefanten nicht zu stark sind.
Mad Mö: Tschuldigung, wollte Dir nicht auf die Füße treten, habe aber trotzdem keine Probleme mit Elefanten & Skirmishern. Ebenfalls Pffft.

[hallostephan]

Hi, na geht doch, dankeschön! mfg Stephan