After the glorious victory by the Scots in the recent world championship I had a look at the list.
I was wondering why the front rank nobles, whom the list notes states carried pavises, are given shield cover(frontal only) instead of the pavis characteristic.
Is that to deny them the combat bonus in the charge phase vs foot?
Because at Flodden (which is the source for this) the effect appears to have been wholly to be protection against missiles - they were carried as large shields rather than set up as a barrier to defend.
Cheers
They are described as discarding them prior to impact. To be honest the combo of heavy armour and wooden pavise was a belt and braces protection against longbow.
Probably ought to adjust the special rule so that they lose shield cover once they have fought a combat...
I have wondered about slowing their maximum movement distance to 2BW if they choose to retain shield cover (slowing effect of shield cover would still apply - so 1BW unless they prompt through fire), but allowing them to discard shield cover and then they revert to 3BW movement.
If you want to represent Flodden, then the opponent should have the opportunity to place a marsh (swamp?) after the Scots have deployed. I think this is the only way you could get a historical result. James IV was quite scientific about his approach to warfare - it is a pity he didn't understand that any plan falls apart upon contact with the enemy.
Richard
Quote from: lionheartrjc on September 27, 2021, 02:03:09 PM
James IV was quite scientific about his approach to warfare - it is a pity he didn't understand that any plan falls apart upon contact with the enemy.
Richard
and from a family with a nasty habit of dying in battle
Not that many died in bed.
As I recall:
James 1st Murdered in Perth
James 2nd Blown up during an artillery demonstration
James 3rd Murdered after the battle had finished.
James 4th Definitely killed in a battle
James 5th Died in his bed
James 6th and 1st. Died in his bed.
Richard some merit in removing it after first combat but should this also not apply to archers with stakes. At the moment, they get of easy carrying loads of stakes around and then discarding them as they go but miraculously find another set in the middle of the battlefield just at the moment they need them.
As for James the fourth armies having a detrimental piece of terrain placed against them, then presumably Scots Bannockburn armies should be allowed to place a deep non crossable burn behind their opponents as well as areas of boggy ground on the flanks. Oh and let us not forget covering their front with pots.
By the way there is a wonderful Bannockburn song set to the tune of the Battle of New Orleans.
To be completely accurate Flodden was not a swamp but a very sodden steep hillside with a hidden ditch at the bottom. On the one area of the battlefield where the ditch was not present the opposing English flank was swept away in rout. The bordered on both sides then allegedly decided to declare an unofficial truce.
Quote from: marshalney2000 on September 27, 2021, 02:25:43 PM
Not that many died in bed.
As I recall:
James 1st Murdered in Perth
James 2nd Blown up during an artillery demonstration
James 3rd Murdered after the battle had finished.
James 4th Definitely killed in a battle
James 5th Died in his bed
James 6th and 1st. Died in his bed.
Things got safer after his death
Quote from: marshalney2000 on September 27, 2021, 02:31:55 PM
Richard some merit in removing it after first combat but should this also not apply to archers with stakes. At the moment, they get of easy carrying loads of stakes around and then discarding them as they go but miraculously find another set in the middle of the battlefield just at the moment they need them.
As for James the fourth armies having a detrimental piece of terrain placed against them, then presumably Scots Bannockburn armies should be allowed to place a deep non crossable burn behind their opponents as well as areas of boggy ground on the flanks. Oh and let us not forget covering their front with pots.
By the way there is a wonderful Bannockburn song set to the tune of the Battle of New Orleans.
Don't disagree with you about Stakes - but that is a rule change so up to Simon....
To be clear, the terrain piece idea is not a general rule - but for recreating Flodden. Interesting idea - allowing a marshy steep hill.
Indeed for Bannockburn - the Scots certainly can get their own back in terms of terrain.
Richard
Why do these Scots get full armour front ranks while C15th pikes don't get that option? I'm no expert but Heath in his Armies of the Middle ages gives Schilling's Berne Chronicles as a source for fully armoured pikemen in Swiss and Burgundian armies.
Probably because the illustrations in Schilling don't IIRC actually show very many fully armoured men (the old books showing the unusual because they are interesting but inadvertently giving the impression the are common thing), whilst the Scots are described as the front rank (s?) being so armoured and also notes the effect this had which, again, I don't think is mentioned in relation to the Swiss.
I just wonder how many James IV armies we will see on the field in 2022
It does have a lot of flaws as well as some strengths. Not an Uber Army by any means.
Well it seems that 5 players did not find the flaws at LGT
It has weak points but to defeat it is difficult as it is rather numerous , good protection vs shooty armies, good vs cavalry, can have protected flanks ..you need not only skill but also a bit of luck and an opponent willing to make some mistakes
One army had the beating of it in London but did not have the time to see it through.
Its crap against decent foot with melee expert.
I think you forget something.
As long as it has a FARM front, event a sup melee expert will be on green and killing a blok of 8 bases is long work
So how many armies do have enough sup melee experts to tackle the whole scottish line and have the necessary punch to hold against those many phalanxes and tackle some 12 bloks ?
Not many and he does not car to loose 4 or 5 TUGS as long as your good army is killed by numbers ! the swiss failed
Quote from: badhabum on October 21, 2021, 04:10:22 PM
I think you forget something.
As long as it has a FARM front, event a sup melee expert will be on green and killing a blok of 8 bases is long work
So how many armies do have enough sup melee experts to tackle the whole scottish line and have the necessary punch to hold against those many phalanxes and tackle some 12 bloks ?
Not many and he does not car to loose 4 or 5 TUGS as long as your good army is killed by numbers ! the swiss failed
Superior Roman Legionaries Impact weapons with Melee expert,
yellow to white in Legionaries favour on impact
In melee its green V green if no FA pike front ranks have died in the charge phase, possible but unlikely, given yellows
Four deep pikes 290 per file
two deep Legions, though could fight 1 rank deep, 302 points per file of 2
and frankly I'd pay the yellow to break them off , take the green kab dice and then charge back in for at least yellow V whites and probably a red V whites in places if the pikes have lost the 4 rank
Quote from: tarnowski1 on October 21, 2021, 04:58:07 PM
Quote from: badhabum on October 21, 2021, 04:10:22 PM
I think you forget something.
As long as it has a FARM front, event a sup melee expert will be on green and killing a blok of 8 bases is long work
So how many armies do have enough sup melee experts to tackle the whole scottish line and have the necessary punch to hold against those many phalanxes and tackle some 12 bloks ?
Not many and he does not car to loose 4 or 5 TUGS as long as your good army is killed by numbers ! the swiss failed
Superior Roman Legionaries Impact weapons with Melee expert,
yellow to white in Legionaries favour on impact
In melee its green V green if no FA pike front ranks have died in the charge phase, possible but unlikely, given yellows
Four deep pikes 290 per file
two deep Legions, though could fight 1 rank deep, 302 points per file of 2
and frankly I'd pay the yellow to break them off , take the green kab dice and then charge back in for at least yellow V whites and probably a red V whites in places if the pikes have lost the 4 rank
Agreed - I'd fancy my Imperial Roman's chances against it most days.
Oh I think those valid arguments should ensure that no sensible player will ever pick that army again.
Quote from: marshalney2000 on October 21, 2021, 06:16:54 PM
Oh I think those valid arguments should ensure that no sensible player will ever pick that army again.
you'd be surprised how few sensible players are out there :P
You all forget a few things such as numbers .How many SUP, melee expert units will you deploy ? 4 ? , 5 ? and what will protect your flanks ? it is not so easy. 4 rank deep has resilience and he could take you by killing your flanks .
So yes I am willing to try it vs imperial romans .
I also know how I could win with either army .Then you have terrain and dice.
Quote from: badhabum on October 21, 2021, 07:59:32 PM
You all forget a few things such as numbers .
Yeah, we're all so inexperienced and have never fought a tough wider army before so we don't take that into consideration and have no idea on protecting flanks. Or maybe the other thing ... :o
but dont forget when running James IV Scots,
Quote from: badhabum on October 21, 2021, 07:59:32 PM
what will protect your flanks ? it is not so easy.... he could take you by killing your flanks .
Quote from: tarnowski1 on October 21, 2021, 08:41:40 PM
but dont forget when running James IV Scots,
Quote from: badhabum on October 21, 2021, 07:59:32 PM
what will protect your flanks ? it is not so easy.... he could take you by killing your flanks .
;D 8) 8) ;D 8) ;D 8)
A nice healthy debate.
Quote from: nikgaukroger on October 21, 2021, 08:33:28 PM
Quote from: badhabum on October 21, 2021, 07:59:32 PM
You all forget a few things such as numbers .
Yeah, we're all so inexperienced and have never fought a tough wider army before so we don't take that into consideration and have no idea on protecting flanks. Or maybe the other thing ... :o
If your magnificent roman soldier is pinned down frontally by some of the pikes, other less "superior" TUGS might face a very difficult an dloosing battle vs other pike blocs and die before the scottish pinning units die ...so my meaning is that the scots do have enough big tugs, with some pikes in it to sacrifice some and still win the battle . The cots can put pressure on a large front which not all armies can do . The nice LB TUG also helps protect one flank from mounted ,
It is not a foregone conclusion but the scot army has 10 fighting TUGS that are quite protected vs shooting ans you know very well which makes them pretty different from 8 or 9 low countries TUGs which can be slowed down AND will take some loses before contact .
That makes a huge difference
1 TuG of Cav (4 bases) can stop half(?) the army moving more than 3BW per turn.
That's why he has a LB TUG , for such a case so yes you might slow him down that's what Nik tried with his full cavalry army . Still he got crushed
Nik's tactics were somewhat different from that suggested by Ray, you're not comparing like with like.
Also whilst I lost 15-8 it would not have taken much of a swing for the score to have been reversed IMO; it was really only in the final phases of the game that I felt that it was lost, until then I was still in there with a shout.
Actually having played against it when run by a good player gives you a nice perspective on how it plays and its strengths and weaknesses.
Quote from: nikgaukroger on October 25, 2021, 03:22:28 PM
Nik's tactics were somewhat different from that suggested by Ray, you're not comparing like with like.
Also whilst I lost 15-8 it would not have taken much of a swing for the score to have been reversed IMO; it was really only in the final phases of the game that I felt that it was lost, until then I was still in there with a shout.
Actually having played against it when run by a good player gives you a nice perspective on how it plays and its strengths and weaknesses.
I did not say it is unbeatable all depends on time and how quick you play . That army needs time . At Rueil I witnessed infantry games that never finished because one or both players were slow
Yes, Nik could easily have won. Some better shooting dice killing my front ranks could have turned it.
Having said that, if we played the same game again then I would have been less adventurous on my right flank and just tucked the longbows and the mounted crossbows in and around the piece of rough terrain. That bit of offensive spirit on my part cost me two units.
Quote from: badhabum on October 25, 2021, 02:25:22 PM
That's why he has a LB TUG , for such a case so yes you might slow him down that's what Nik tried with his full cavalry army . Still he got crushed
LB is more likely to be protecting the end of the line and sitting in terrain. Don't think you are understanding what I am saying.
Quote from: rayfredjohn on October 25, 2021, 05:18:45 PM
Quote from: badhabum on October 25, 2021, 02:25:22 PM
That's why he has a LB TUG , for such a case so yes you might slow him down that's what Nik tried with his full cavalry army . Still he got crushed
LB is more likely to be protecting the end of the line and sitting in terrain. Don't think you are understanding what I am saying.
;) ;) :) :) ;D ;D
My goodness .... 3 pages of James IV Scots discussion. Who would've thought!