| Author |
 Topic  |
|
drusty
78 Posts |
 Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 08:29:37
|
Page 39: second paragraph from the top. Has anyone any ideas on how a pikeman offers 'protection' to a friendly figure in base-to-base contact? An example would be great.
Many thanks. |
|
|
limbowraith
United Kingdom
6 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 09:06:25
|
i would think that a pike 2" reach would stop an attacker getting to friendly figure with his 1" reach. unless it was cavalry or dragoons within close range then the pikey could push his mate into the line of fire [page 48]quote:
Originally posted by drusty
Page 39: second paragraph from the top. Has anyone any ideas on how a pikeman offers 'protection' to a friendly figure in base-to-base contact? An example would be great.
Many thanks.
|
 |
|
|
Big Al
United Kingdom
117 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 10:01:01
|
Hi Drusty,
To me it is obvious because it has been explained on the rest of the page. The effect happens when the pikeman is in base contact, either to the side or rear of another friendly model. If the Friend is being attacked, the Pikeman will be "On Defence" (further down the page) and can use his Strike First ability. If successful, the Pikeman can declare "Hold Back with Pike" and the enemy will be able to close to attack the Friend.
If the Friend and the Pikeman moved together to attack an enemy, the Pikeman's Strike First ability would come in and, should he be successful, he would drive the enemy back, meaning that the enemy could not attack the Friend. |
|
|
|
drusty
78 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 11:57:17
|
Big Al,
It might be obvious to you (even though the rest of that section only mentions a pikeman alone versus an enemy, and the photo-illustration only shows that); and it should be obvious to the rules' writer, but it's not obvious to me -a rules' reader. That why I asked what I thought was a reasonable question.
Could you also tell me what 'Senior Officer' abilities are? [See Blinder Captain stats, 'Gumption' section, p.60]. |
|
|
|
Paul
United Kingdom
25 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 13:45:59
|
Pikemen do give 'protection' due to their longer weapon range. In effect the phrase 'in base to base contact' is a bit misleading as any enemy figure moving within 2 inches of the front or side of a Pikeman would need to stop and fight him, whether or not he was in base to base with other figures near him.
'Senior' Officer abilities (as far as I can tell) are limited to the advantage given by Officers for self Control/All is lost tests. I think they're called 'Senior' Officers to differentiate them from other unit leaders such as the Veteran Clubman IIRC.
Although I'm happy to be corrected on these points!
May this Samhain cleanse your heart, your soul, and your mind! |
Edited by - Paul on 10 Nov 2011 13:46:45 |
|
|
|
Big Al
United Kingdom
117 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 14:24:18
|
Hey, don't get offended. I'm only a rules reader myself. I wasn't saying it was obvious to anybody other than myself and that doesn't mean I'm right, either. No doubt Black Sheep will read this and confirm what I said or correct my interpretation.
With regard to Senior Officer, I agree with Paul, though I do note that none of the other leaders seem to have Senior Officer listed in their Gumption entries. Should it be correct, does it mean that the Blinders get a cumulative +1 to their Self Control roll if they are also within 6" of a Vampire? Or does the Vampire's Master Gumption take precedence? It would be nice to know that it is Cumulative.
I do have to admit that it would have been nice to have seen a section headed Gumption, where all the abilities were explained rather than scattered around in the various descriptions of the different character types. Maybe that is something that could be posted in a seperate pdf? |
|
|
|
drusty
78 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 18:20:41
|
Big Al,
Apologies: I didn't mean to sound tetchy... But... Say you have a musketeer sheltering under a pike with the pikeman in rear base contact. A cavalryman attacks them; the pike gets 'strike first', rolls, say, a 4, and the cavalryman has a breastplate and rolls a 6 and 'avoids harm'; presumably the cavalrymen then gets to strike the musketeer infront of the pike man (whose defence dice is used?). Say the musketeer is injured ( 1 or 2); the cavarlyman decides to push him back... And here's the crunch: is he pushed out of the way; or do BOTH the musketeer and pikeman get pushed back?
There can be permutations on this: 1 pikeman backing 2 musketeers; 2 pikemen; 2 pikemen backing a musketeer; a block of 4 pikemen in base-to-base contact with each other -think of the 'fighting distance' against a cavalryman, say, daft enough to attack them.
I'm taking it that the normal 'Outnumbered' rules don't apply in the case of the above -but could be wrong. Photo-illustration examples would be very handy here.
I'm happy with just about everything else, but I'd like to get these things clear.
Cheers! |
Edited by - drusty on 12 Nov 2011 10:20:00 |
|
|
|
Paul
United Kingdom
25 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 19:16:47
|
Drusty:
If the letter of the rules is played then the Cavalryman is moved to base to base contact with the Pikeman, so the defence of the Pikeman would be used, but remember that he has always strikes first! I would push the musketeer out of the way to allow for the pikeman to be engaged. The cavalryman only gets to then attack the musketeer (after drawing with the Pikeman) if he has 'Slash and Gallop' I think. As for a push back I would think that just the Pikeman would be pushed back (if the cavalryman managed to do that at all), I would push him back so as to make a clear path to the musketeer for the mounted chap rather than cause his fall back to block the cavalry again, which might then possibly allow the cavalryman to move to engage the Musketeer in his second initiation of Fisticuffs.
The cavalryman should not count as outnumbered unless the combat with the Pikeman is a draw and they remain in fisticuffs and the cavalryman is then attacked by the musketeer when he is given an order.
Thats how it reads from the rules, however I think the situation may be a bit confused by the 'move into base to base contact' when initiating fisticuffs. Personally i'd prefer soldiers with a longer reach weapon to be able to defend a shorter range friend from behind or to the side when the two were in base contact. If that were the case then i'd use the musketeers defence but the pikemans always strikes first and have them pushed back together!
May this Samhain cleanse your heart, your soul, and your mind! |
Edited by - Paul on 10 Nov 2011 19:26:09 |
|
|
|
Big Al
United Kingdom
117 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 23:31:07
|
Don't worry about it, Drusty.
The way I read it, if the attacker wins and is able to close, he can choose to close with the musketeer because he is the nearer model. The Pikeman only came into it because of the reach of his pike and his Strike First ability, once that fails and the attacker gets past that, he would strike at the first model he comes to. If the musketeer is in front of the pikeman, then, naturally, the attacker will come base to base with him and his defence is used. Same if the attack came in from the side and the musketeer was on that side of the pikeman. If the result of a combat was that the musketeer was then pushed back, using the example of the pikeman behind the musketeer, then both figures would be pushed back, surely? The pikeman would have to give way. I am only drawing from experience of other games I have played and common physics to come to some of this conclusion. It isn't all laid out in the rules and some of it is a little open to interpretation. However, I am not saying this is right, just that it makes sense to me. |
|
|
|
Paul
United Kingdom
25 Posts |
Posted - 10 Nov 2011 : 23:46:33
|
I agree Big Al, that's how it should be and is probably how i'll be playing it from now on.
It's the sentence in the rules that says about moving figures into base to base when they engage in fisticuffs after entering the 'Fighting Distance' of the non phasing players figure that causes the slight issue here.
May this Samhain cleanse your heart, your soul, and your mind! |
|
|
|
drusty
78 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2011 : 08:41:56
|
Paul, Big Al,
Many thanks for your insights. I suppose I was thinking too much along the regimented lines of pike-blocks and closed formations. But I see what you mean now: once under the radius of the pike, the attacker can go for whom he wants. In fact there are photographs in the book of musketeers loosely clustered around their pikemen, much as I suppose it should be played.
Thanks again. |
|
|
|
Big Al
United Kingdom
117 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2011 : 08:50:10
|
I didn't realise that was how you were looking at it. Remember that this is a skirmish game, so the troopers have more freedom. I mean, with proper, regimented pike blocks I doubt very much that a pikeman would have the freedom to be able to affect any zone outside of his front 45 degrees. I wouldn't have thought he could have a 2" zone on either of his sides and certainly wouldn't have the room to bring his pike round to bear. Now I understand why you were asking the question. |
|
|
|
Paul
United Kingdom
25 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2011 : 12:45:16
|
Having been mad enough to be involved with re enactment for a couple of years (Albeit Early medieval not ECW)I do know that when in a block of infantry it's virtually impossible to fight anyone apart from the guy directly in front of you.
Thinking about it though we had guys with 9ft spears who would fight from the second rank, protecting the front rank guys in the way suggested for Pikemen here.
May this Samhain cleanse your heart, your soul, and your mind! |
|
|
|
Black Sheep
United Kingdom
263 Posts |
Posted - 11 Nov 2011 : 22:30:39
|
it's not obvious to me -a rules' reader. That why I asked what I thought was a reasonable question.
[/quote]
Good evening everyone. I have enjoyed reading the debate about pikemen etc and the other questions.
I have chosen a quote from ‘Drusty’ because it is of course my job as rules writer to make things clear to the rules reader. With regards to explaining how a pikeman can defend his comrades, I have clearly not done as good a job as intended.
The rules do advise that figures are placed in base-to-base contact to indicate they are engaged in fisticuffs. This is suggested with the intent to make it clear ‘who is fighting who’ and I am sorry if some fellow wargamers find this misleading. The rules do acknowledge that it is not always possible. On page 27 it states “Once within fighting distance the attacking player moves their model into base to base contact with the enemy model or adjacent to any low terrain feature that may separate them”. I omitted to specify a figure that may separate them too.
On page 40 the example of the cavalryman attacking a pikeman does show (photo 2) the cavalryman moved into base contact with the pikeman to indicate they are engaged in fisticuffs. Photo 3 shows how the cavalryman was held back by the pike and the text explains “it can be assumed the cavalryman did not get past the pike during the fisticuffs”. Paul’s approach to the game of not moving a cavalryman, when it is possible, into base-to-base contact with a pikeman would work. However we found in some of our earlier games it could become a bit unclear who was engaged in fisticuffs if we had not moved opponents into base contact – hence the rule in the book.
I now appreciate it would have been helpful to provide an example to support the rule on page 39 that states “a single pikeman positioned in base- to- base contact at the rear or side of a friendly model on foot will offer ‘protection’, due to the pikeman’s larger fighting distance”.
I will create an example, in the same style as page 40, as a free download. In the interim please imagine that on page 40 in photo 1 there is a musketeer positioned in base-to-base contact at the front of the pikeman. Photo 2 would show the cavalryman in base-to-base contact with the musketeer, although at this stage he is in fisticuffs with the pikeman behind him. If the pikeman successfully strikes first the cavalryman would be moved back out of the pikeman’s fighting distance. It would again be assumed that the cavalryman did not get past the pike.
If we then use Drusty’s earlier example of the cavalryman who only sustains a scratch on his breastplate during his attack against a pikeman and a musketeer. The cavalryman could then be in base-to-base contact with the intervening musketeer- although any successful blows that got him that close would be against the pikeman (it can be imagined the real pikeman our static model represents did get in the way of a broadsword during the fight). As the cavalryman has now fought his way past the pike he is now in fighting distance of the musketeer too. This would now either initiate round 2 of a bout of fisticuffs as the attacking cavalryman is outnumbered (page 36) and the musketeer is the ‘second defender’ or (subject to the terrain and route ahead etc) the cavalryman may be able to ‘Slash and Gallop’ and avoid fighting the musketeer if his attack was not ‘head on’. I appreciate some of you have said you don’t like the idea that a cavalryman could be classed as outnumbered in this situation- but he has moved into the fighting distance of two determined foe.
I will share my view on the other questions on Saturday. The screen has died on my PC and my daughter wants her laptop back (Facebook). Time for a pint of Black Sheep. Have a good weekend everyone.
|
|
|
|
Paul
United Kingdom
25 Posts |
Posted - 12 Nov 2011 : 00:13:02
|
Thanks that makes the intention of the rules a lot clearer.
Right now time to go and glue some Heresy Miniatures bits and pieces together!
May this Samhain cleanse your heart, your soul, and your mind! |
|
|
|
drusty
78 Posts |
Posted - 12 Nov 2011 : 10:15:35
|
Black Sheep,
Many thanks for the detailed reasoning; and I'm looking forward to the photo-illustrations. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Pikeman 'protection'
