Appendix 1C. point 3
"Devasting charges 2 ranks deep get a claim against certain opponents in any terrain".
If they are in Forest (only 1 rank can fight or shoot) but are 2 ranks deep, can they claim in charge combat both:-
a. DC combat factors
b. Shatter
"Any terrain except Forest" then maybe ;D
So no claim as they are not fighting 2 deep I think, but they get Shatter as this applies in 1 rank as stated except against certain opponents (Appendix wording is a bit circular on this).
Sorry but my reading is a bit different . DC in forest does get the bonus of 2 rank deep as per QRS it is not subject to terrain limitation. It gains +2 if infantry vs infantry and so on .
LS and pikes are marked with an * that says that to make the claim you must not be affected etc...
DC has no * so they do not care ( foot or mounted )
But as Roger says they need to be in 2+ ranks as per Appendix (and QRS) and per the terrain table they can only fight in 1 rank in Forest. If they can only fight in 1 rank can they claim to be 2+ ranks for the claim? I tend to no they cannot.
This is different from the * bit as it is a very specific exception for Forest.
interesting
So DC counts in other terrain that does cause "affected by terrain" but does not limit the number of ranks fighting to 1.
Also foot polearm in melee versus "others".
LSp and Pike don't.
Is there anything else that has to be fighting in 2 ranks to count but ignores "affected by terrain" and not needing to be in good going?
Shieldwall has to be 2 deep to cancel shatter effects, but cannot be if fighting in forest. So a DC won't get +1 preferred claim, but will get a shatter against a Shieldwall in a forest.... Seems reasonable to me.
Again, a pretty rare situation. Troops have to be in close formation to get Shieldwall, so they don't often appear in a forest!
Richard
Shieldwall only works in good going anyway.
So the early German fighting in forest vs Roman would have no claim... ok...
Stick to woods or ambush them on the march ;)
I thought about it and must admit I am not convinced it reflects reality . In the game an average roman would be at least at +2 vs a Germanic or gallic or Thracian DC warrior in a forest ...if SUP at +3 ...
I thought that roman armies tried to go for open spaces and deploy their army, not go into forest to beat the "barbarians"
It does seem strange
Quote from: nikgaukroger on November 15, 2023, 07:31:35 AM
Stick to woods or ambush them on the march ;)
Now in term of rules, a LRR army should go for terrain, forest in order to beat even more easely the germans ...it does not seem right sorry
Quote from: badhabum on November 21, 2023, 11:11:09 AM
Quote from: nikgaukroger on November 15, 2023, 07:31:35 AM
Stick to woods or ambush them on the march ;)
Now in term of rules, a LRR army should go for terrain, forest in order to beat even more easely the germans ...it does not seem right sorry
It isn't quite right. The rules aren't perfect.
I have my own ideas of formations and terrain, but they are not for this topic.
There is an excellent article in a recent Slingshot that covers fighting in forests.
Richard
Given that MeG forest represents a pretty dense terrain (including dense undergrowth) it is not completely off that the much better equipped Romans will do well compared to the more lightly equipped Germans. It is not dissimilar to what Livy (IIRC) says about Romans fighting Celtiberians in rough terrain. No doubt things could be tweaked though.
The Slingshot article rather interestingly mentioned 2 cases of the Romans attacking Germans in "woods" and beating them - including up a wooded hill where they won "decisively".
I think some wargamer beliefs about fighting in terrain do not necessarily hold up under scrutiny.