cavalry charges against pikes units

[Wendigo]

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.

[Kristoffer O]

I like Wendigos idea. Rather simple yet noticable.

[Pocus]

I like it too. And I like that you see too that something could be done to enhance this aspect of the tac engine.

[Norfleet]

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.

[Pocus]

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.

[Wauthan]

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.

[Kristoffer O]

Originally posted by Pocus:
I like it too. And I like that you see too that something could be done to enhance this aspect of the tac engine.

There is much that could be enhanced in the tac engine. I could probably write an essay on the matter.