cavalry charges against pikes units
 

I feel that the lack of specific bonus against charging units which mostly use momentum as a mean of attack (initially at least), when you use a longuer weapon, is a feature missing in the tac engine. I dont feel that the 1 hit of a repell attempt model rightly how difficult it would be to charge effectively with horsemen a square of pikemen. In my opinion, if a unit with a shorter weapon move at least xxx squares (xxx to be determined, can be 3) then it should be considered charging, and suffer greatly if attacking a longuer weapon-equipped unit.

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

Making mounted troops lose their 1st attack (lance in the case of knights) ineffectively when striking an opponent with a longer weapon might be a simple way to model this.

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

I like Wendigos idea. Rather simple yet noticable.

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

I like it too. And I like that you see too that something could be done to enhance this aspect of the tac engine. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

Why not add some factor of the number of squares moved prior to attacking to the damage inflicted by the by the repel attack? Then a charging horseman that runs into a pike and eats a repel attack becomes a kebab.

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

I'm trying to envision what it does mean if a man with a shorter weapon move in direction of an enemy. Aside from charging, I dont see any other hypothese. I mean, he wont stop all suddenly before his enemy, then attempt to break his defence by play of sword.

=> so in essence you are right, a unit with a shorter weapon moving toward an enemy is always charging. The faster he moved, the bigger the damages he risks to get from the enemy weapon. Your rule would be cool too.

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

Well I'm sure a cavalry charge would be called off if they see a forest of pikes before them. I'm no expert in medieval warfare but surely pikes were used more like a barrier rather then as a meleeweapon? Can't imagine myself hitting a mounted soldier with a what's essentially a very pointy flagpole.

I thought the damage from polearms was already taking "chargeskewering" into consideration? If they don't then pikes should be worthless against most enemies. A weapon that long is impossible to fight with in melee. It only works if there's a lot of soldiers protecting eachother so the enemy can not slip past the points.

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I actually don't think it's so bad, aside from the inability to model flanking. The only other things that are grossly off are your troop type match ups -- which could be easily fixed.

Most obvious examples:
1) Pike/Spear vs. Cavalry (and flying?)
2) Elephants vs. Light Infantry
3) Missiles vs. Light Infantry
4) Light Cavalry vs. anything

1 & 2 could be addressed with Morningstar style attack/defense bonuses.

2 & 3 could be helped by allowing LI to spread out to 1 unit per "square".

4 is more complicated, and would take the addition of "shoot and avoid", and "shoot then attack" orders.

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Exactly. Some time ago I suggested to remove the repel and instead subtract the sum of the differences between the length of the attacker's weapon and the length of the longest weapon of all the defenders in the attacked square. Thus a single pikeman would have little effect while 3 would inflict a rather severe penalty.

Now with this system, Hoburgs with pikes would be rather formidable. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

This "everyone should use only pikes" approach would give ridiculous results. Pythium legionaires attacking a unit of pike would get -12 to attack!

Pikes most certainly were melee weapons, and a "barrier" only in the sense that units that couldn't fight them didn't come close to them.

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">On the first contact, yes. I've no real problem with that idea, although the malus might be capped. That would perfectly reflect battles like Cynocephale. The Roman army won, but in the initial shock they were completely unable to use their swords and were pushed back for a while. And the legionaries still have their pila anyway.

BTW, I know at least a couple tabletop figs rules that use exactly the same system - huge attack reduction vs pikes on the first contact. So there's nothing new in my proposal.

Quote:

Pikes most certainly were melee weapons, and a "barrier" only in the sense that units that couldn't fight them didn't come close to them.

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Pikes were melee weapons, except unlike other weapons noone would use them outside deep and close formations.

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

A pike is NOT a melee weapon. A pike *formation* is a melee formation, but individually a pike is about the weakest weapon that exists. The advantage of a pike square is that it's impossible to reach the first line of soldiers without THREE or more lines of soldiers being in range of you. When you only have one line, a pike is simple to beat - they're incredibly unwieldy and have no way to handle anything closer than 8 feet or so in front of you.

Pikes have value *only* in a formation, and only in a deep formation at that. A single pikeman has absolutely no strength to repel a cavalry charge, even with just one horseman bearing down on him.

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I wouldn't quite say THAT. A single horseman colliding with a single pointy stick is in for a world of hurt. It'll be that much harder for a single pikeman to connect, but if he does, it's gonna hurt just as much.

Of course, you can model this by having all pikes in a square be able to make a repel attempt against anything that attacks the square...and combine that with my "extra damage for repelling a charger" bonus. A charging cavalryman will thus be looking at 3 sharp pointy stick attacks at once....with extra damage because he charged across the field into them.

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Pikemen were routinely issued small axes (or shortswords) as secondary weapons.

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">There is much that could be enhanced in the tac engine. I could probably write an essay on the matter. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">We'd rather you write code. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon12.gif

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

I'd give spears/pikes a significant attack/defense bonus against cavalry, rather like morningstars get attacking units with against shields. I'd give a similar bonus for light troops vs. trampling.

There's not much point in doing more, since the tactical engine doesn't take into account flanking.

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">The reason pikes are effective against horses is that horses aren't dumb. They won't charge into a field of sharp pointy things that they can't jump over and can't avoid. They won't knowingly commit suicide. A single pikeman doesn't provide that benefit - there's plenty of room for the horse to manuever.

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">Which doesn't negate anything I said at all; indeed, it reinforces it. Pikemen wouldn't be issued alternate arms if the pikes were a viable melee weapon in its own right.

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

Pete Rose is my Pikeman trainer. His famous words, "Choke up on the bat, son, for more maneuverability." I can see them doing so if their formation has broken up or when fatigued.

Aikamun

[ February 17, 2004, 04:46: Message edited by: Aikamun ]

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

I want to be clear here in case people are getting the wrong message (probably are, I'm good at sending the wrong message): I'm not opposed to a pike vs cavalry bonus at all - matter of fact, I was surprised there wasn't one. I simply enjoy debating. I apologize if I seemed overly critical or negative.

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

There is also a problem with how narrow is the deployment area on the battlefield. Against big sized armies (200+ units), you will always find that your cavalry that you put on a wing, with order to attack rear, will fail to do anything 'flanking'-wise, and will stumble against the enemy center (which is a big mass), as soon as they move.

With a wider deployment area, and with a revision to the attack rear, then you would have proper usage for wings of cavalry.

Revision of attack rear:
It has been aknowledged by the devs that the bigger the formations are, in the front of your army, the lower the chances are that an enemy squad on attack rear will really attack rear. I'm unsure its realistic, but gameplay wise I can tell you that against any significant sized army, this 'magnet' effect is so strong that any attack rear order will fail miserably.

damn, I feel my english is worsening each days. Sorry...

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">If you've ever seen a good medieval re-enactment, or held a 14' pike and then tried to actually do what you suggest, you quickly realize the ludicrousness of the idea. Choke up on a 14' pike, indeed! hah http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

Attack rearmost almost never works for me. They always hit the rear of the front formation, ignoring the archers and mages and commanders behind those. This is fliers and cavalry both.

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

Well, Dom doesn't model neither charges nor formation in a very detailed/realistic way...

The current "charge" is not that bad : Lance is used only on 1st melee turn. However it can't be "countered" by pike formations.
Maybe Pikes could be improved to say Dam 18 w/o Str adjust, AND be usable for say 3 turns, then the pikemen will have to draw their sword ? Historically it wasn't completely like that, what mattered was that the phalanx has to remain orderly, but it could be a compromise ...

And I confirm that even when faced with few enemies (say 50 in 3-4 Groups), in 2.06, cavalry ordered to attack rear usually attack the flank of the enemy FRONT units, and does'nt get to the rear... IIRC it DID it correctly in 2.02 http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/shock.gif

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">If they pass close enough to an enemy formation, I find your troops tend to change targets and attack that formation, instead of the rear one they had their sight on http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/icons/icon9.gif They would probably resume their rear attack once they got rid of the one that got on the way (or rather, "near the way"), but by then it doesn't matter anyway...

Re: cavalry charges against pikes units
 

<font size="2" face="sans-serif, arial, verdana">I didn't know we had acknowledged that. AFAIK the attack rear order gives your soldiers a target from one of the rearmost units. If there are many units in the rear when target is selected there might be problems. Big armies in front does not affect the targeting.

The targeting works something like:
1 Select single rearmost unit.
2 Random chance of ignoring.
3 Repeat with second rearmost target etc

Hold and attack rear can be useful if you want enemies to split up a bit to choose more permanently rearmost targets.