Chariots

[Simon Meg-Meister]

You are actually missing a few things

so as BCh I just have to get in the right place and you will often have to charge me

No BCH with a bow (which is pretty much all of them) ever has to charge anyone. Charges are always free but never compulsory

You didn't mention bows so I was referring to your version ...
Superior BCh SSp.... so was using those. 
Which do have to charge IIRC ....
... if they have bows then I imagine you don't want to charge ...?
...  soften up first and then charge?

If the Hoplites charge then your Superior Battle Chariot with Short Spear would be +4 instead of +1 (1 for Sup, 1 for BCh, 1 for SSp, 1 for charging foot).  So YELLOW-WHITE?  Where is the other one for RED-WHITE?  Maybe I am missing somethin? Big difference.

BCH is not +1, it is +2. As a result the chariots are red on white. They will also throw either 3 white or 3 green as they charge from their shooting. I'm not saying I would love to fight a wall of longspear (which mounted army would?) but BCH aren't at all bad at it.
[/quote]

Ah apologies I  used the 2018 sheet by accident.   
As I said rather tired from UK travels.
So you would get RED on a charge by LONG SPEAR infantry. 
So PIKES are going to do better as that will the Yellow vs White.
Average Long Spear Red-White has quite a bit of hazard as you say.
That said its about 190pts for your chariot I reckon? and about 70pts for average tribal Long spear from memory?
2.5:1 advantage in numbers. Too tired to rerun it and then need to take shatter risk into account a lot more.
I would probably set up theban style 4 deep and have to charge you or you will sit and shoot all day.

I'm not sure you guys should be making changes to battlechariots if you don't fully appreciate what they do now.

Martin

Indeed, but worry not. I do know really.

Just the effect of 13000 miles, 4 nights in UK, 2 on planes, 34 14 hour days and a total of about 24 hours sleep over 6 days....  I can hardly tell you what a chariot is right now!
Reasons for which will become public soon.

So bottom line is no worse than other mounted vs. long spear and pike.
Worse vs. C Lancers.

What do you find it rides down well?
What will you miss being able to clobber frontally?

As is?

Si

[martymagnificent]

What do you find it rides down well?
What will you miss being able to clobber frontally?

I find they can ride down most infantry without longspear/pike pretty well (especially if loose).

They are devastatingly effective against most non-lancer mounted (cataphracts are a bit iffy). The 2 factors and ability to often catch mounted who run (thanks to shoot and charge) make them really effective against run away mounted. The changes will reduce them from 'predators' to peers in this match up.

I would also point out it isn't as simple as just needing to be able to smash stuff frontally. Battlechariot armies are rarely all battlechariots. I find the chariots in these armies performs an important role in pinning enemy troops in place (either through charging or making them unwilling to charge) so that the accompanying infantry get more time to shoot. The 'new' chariots just can't really do this.

Good player with added punch and it works.

If you need the punch (and most of us do) then don't pick an army without it - simples 

Above are comments from you an Nik in another thread about the need for 'punch' troops in shooty mounted armies (eg cataphracts and elephants in Sassanid). In Chariot armies the chariots are meant to be the 'punch' and none of these armies get anything 'punchier'. I think the changes will leave many of these armies with a very ineffectual overall structure.

Martin

[mad lemmey]

Battle chariots last night ran over one legion, but their friends did not like being flank charged...

[Dru]

Parking aside the overall downgrade to the BCh (in the noble, but perhaps misguided, aim to make everything perfectly historical for the game), the fact that it fundamentally changes lists (and removes that 'punch' that Marty quotes Nik and Simon stating is needed for shooty lists), is a big concern. How unplayable are lists going to become? Are you introducing new 'punch' units (all 100% historically accurate of course) to ensure every affected list remains viable...?

I really don't get the imperative for the changes, from a game balance, play-ability and list viability perspective.

Clearly I must be missing something. Big changes to try and make BCh more like what some think might be more historical, at the expense of the game itself, surely isn't the major driver (I hope), so what's the reason for the change. They work as they are.  Can someone explain the reason for the changes?

Now if Light Chariots got a bump, that's cool by me (and they may with the prompt changes??).

Dru

[nikgaukroger]

Clearly I must be missing something. Big changes to try and make BCh more like what some think might be more historical, at the expense of the game itself, surely isn't the major driver (I hope), so what's the reason for the change. They work as they are.  Can someone explain the reason for the changes?

History is the big driver here. Based on testing it is not at the expense of the game IMO, but it does mean using the armies in question differently.

Now if Light Chariots got a bump, that's cool by me (and they may with the prompt changes??).

The prompting through fire will assist the light chariots as they are shooty types.

[Simon Meg-Meister]

Clearly I must be missing something. Big changes to try and make BCh more like what some think might be more historical, at the expense of the game itself, surely isn't the major driver (I hope), so what's the reason for the change. They work as they are.  Can someone explain the reason for the changes?

Now if Light Chariots got a bump, that's cool by me (and they may with the prompt changes??).

The reason the game is so good is that it puts historical representation first and then uses all the levers to create game balance.  At present Huns feel like Huns, Romans feel like Romans (and different in all periods too).  That's a first for any set.  But Chariots do not feel like Chariots yet.  The last bit from 3000-1500 that doesn't feel right.

So trust is to work it to where the feel is right and the game balance is right as well.  We've done it for everything else really well.

Si

[martymagnificent]

The reason the same is so good is that it puts historical representation first and then uses all the levers to create game balance

There is going to need to be some pretty serious further 'levering' (that we haven't already heard about) to create game balance for many of the chariot armies if the changes proceed.

Martin

[Simon Meg-Meister]

Well once we are settled on all the classifications we can work the point system to balance.
The feel will of course be different as that is the opening intent.
Have to say I am getting happier the more I doodle with armies.

Si

[martymagnificent]

Well once we are settled on all the classifications we can work the point system to balance.
The feel will of course be different as that is the opening intent.
Have to say I am getting happier the more I doodle with armies.

Si

There are limits to what can be achieved with points (especially as a light chariot needs to have a base cost essentially the same as cavalry minus a few points). Points adjustments will do nothing to fix the unfortunate structure/mix of these armies once they don't have battlechariots.

Martin

[JACKB nIMBLE]

if chariots truly did not charge home against foot, they could easily have been slaughtered by a mob of naked bowmen on foot. They were not.

I think thats a pretty dangerous assumption,when you think about it,and diminishes your more potent arguments .Chariot swarms would in my view with all the dust  and gaps in light troops would simply break that mob up into dysfunctional groups,and im sure there would be many collisions,give me speed and protection anytime when that happens

[AntiokosIII]

if chariots truly did not charge home against foot, they could easily have been slaughtered by a mob of naked bowmen on foot. They were not.

I think thats a pretty dangerous assumption,when you think about it,and diminishes your more potent arguments .Chariot swarms would in my view with all the dust  and gaps in light troops would simply break that mob up into dysfunctional groups,and im sure there would be many collisions,give me speed and protection anytime when that happens

What you say is true if the naked bowmen have reason to fear a chariot charge. If the chariots don't or can't charge home, the naked bowmen can shoot away with confidence. Horses are as vulnerable a target as naked bowmen, and the naked bowmen put a LOT more arrows in the air than one or two archers per chariot. That was my point.

[craig.w]

I quoted this in another post, from the Arthasastra, a 2500 year old Indian text:

"...reuniting broken ranks, breaking up unbroken ranks, causing terror, showing magnificence and making a frightful din, these are the functions of chariots."

I can't see even tooled up light chariots causing much terror or breaking up unbroken ranks too easily. For a start to get the devastating charger you have to be two ranks deep, so the frontage of 'terrifying' chariots will be much smaller.

[Simon Meg-Meister]

Well that is really just noise and panic being caused which I considered but rejected as being too fiddly to deal with.  Wondered about a KaB test for chariots coming with 4BW for the first time (and elephants) but creates memory effects so not really ideal.

You get the same type of terror, magnificent and din words from the Romans facing the Ancient Britons so apparently Light Chariots can do that bit too.

I'm happier them being a factor worse.  The stuff they were up against 2500 years ago was hardly the ancient worlds best infantry.  The chariots in new form are deadly against them in the open even without DC.   Most of those would be Ave loose foot vs Sup chariots.  So they would be right to be pretty terrified and find their ranks broken up.  Yellow vs white without DC, Red vs white with... nasty enough I think.

Si

[martymagnificent]

May well be fine in period. Doesn't help much in out of period match ups though. In that context it is most likely the chariot armies that are trying to keep their own loose infantry alive somehow in the open. It's hard to see shoot and evade chariots doing this really well. It would, I think, push army selection towards evade-capable chariots and as little else as possible, which is not terribly historical. Who wants to hinder the chariots with a bunch of dead men walking they can't protect?

Martin

[Simon Meg-Meister]

Hi Marty,

I agree in open periods it will be more those types of chariots. In period the tank like ones will still work.  Which is about spot on really I think.

There isn't much terrain in most of those battles so you tend to find loose in the open a lot.  otherwise the chariots are in a big mess and both sides tend to rely on them.

In terms of rule philosophy we want to get the feel right in period and then use the points to balance out of period. 

As we discussed there is no doubt that it will change the character of late Assyrian battle tanks a bit, but brings other pluses to the armies.  Just a matter of adapting a little, which having now met you I have no doubt you can sir 

How did the FoG N end up at MoaB?  Didn't manage to come visit the last game.

Si