Suggestion: How to beef up light inf

[Arralen]

Most people say ligth inf isn't worth it - crappy protection, low combat stats and morale, so they're beatn up pretty fast with heavy losses (and the AI building droves of them doesn't help her either).

Here's a fix that (maybe) is easier to implement than "formations" for all troop types:

A Light inf unit shouldn't move into a square where a unit from the same squad is already present - just if they where of oger-size.

This way they
- cover more front line with less troops
- are harder to take out with archery/area effect spells
- could pass through each other (squad-wise), so you could stack them behind each other with "fire and flee"-order and they would charge forward, fire and retreat without getting stuck

Or wouldn't this work for some reason ?

A.

[ November 23, 2003, 07:00: Message edited by: Arralen ]

[Graeme Dice]

Originally posted by Arralen:
A Light inf unit shouldn't move into a square where a unit from the same squad is already present - just if they where of oger-size.

This isn't good for LI that has standards for morale support such as Pythium's, as the effect is not very long ranged. It also would not look right to see legions with large amounts of spacing between troops.

[Keir Maxwell]

Its an interesting idea and perhaps not to hard to action. I think having LI more spread out would look cool and be more accurate.

The problem might be that LI will not be able to interpenetrate other infantry with this restriction. Perhaps LI should only avoid moving into the same square as another LI?

Cheers

Keir

[Nerfix]

I still say that Spearmen were used against Cavalry.

[Arralen]

Originally posted by Graeme Dice:
Originally posted by Arralen:
A Light inf unit shouldn't move into a square where a unit from the same squad is already present

This isn't good for LI that has standards for morale support such as Pythium's, as the effect is not very long ranged.

Dunno about this. Maybe the programmers could give some comment if this would have a severe detrimental effect.
Than, on the other hand, maybe this doesn't apply...

It also would not look right to see legions with large amounts of spacing between troops.

"Legions", or more precise, "legionarii" aren't light inf. - neither in DOM-terms nor in the more precise military/historian/wargamer terms.
E.g. the "War Game Rules, 3000BC to 1485 AD", Wargames Research Group -I can only wholeheartedly suggest reading those - depict them as follows:

Rome since Camillus (275-105 BC)
Velites - LI - regular C - WLS,Sch o. LSP,WLS
Hastati - SI - regular C - SWW,Sch
Principes - SI - regular C - SWW,Sch
Triarii - SI - regular B - LSP,Sch

Rome since Marius (105BC -193AD)
Praetori..(?) - SI - SSW,Sch - regular A
Legionarii - SI - SSW,Sch - regular C
--------------------------------------------
LI:
fight in open formation (closed-"aerated"-open);
move in trott(? - sorry, don't know the correct terms for the different paces), attack while running
SI:
figth in closed formation, move in step(?), attack in trott

... there's also super-heavy, light-heavy, medium and medium-light inf, but i don't want to digress


WLS: Throwing- and light spear, can be 1 or 2 ("ammo:"1 or2; DOMs 3 seems excessive to me)
Sch: shield
LSP: longspear (thrusting)
SWW: heavy throwing weapon (released at the very Last moment before hand-to-hand combat),always used with short-ranged hand weapon

regular ..
commanded by officers, have (at least some) military drill & training, can move in formations

A - highest moral class, absolute elite
B - elite troops
C - standard troops
D - fresh recruits, garrison, 2nd-class units
-------------------------------------------------


So much about "legions don't look right", at least from the historical viewpoint ... .

And I'm strictly talking about LI here .. Velites, Indy light inf., Pangaea Sartyrs etc. .

But what bugges me more is if it would work, i.e. if it is double programm-wise and if it really would give some additional value to light troops by making a difference in combat.

What I envision is the following:
The fast LI chargest forward, throwing javelins and engaging in hand-to-hand, while the heavier inf. rolls up from behind in closed formation. Archers cannot target the heavy inf., as "nearest target" will let them (ineffectivly) shoot at the LI. After some (2..3) turns of battle the LI retreats behind the main line, passing through the HI with relativ ease, and holds, guarding the rear from flyers and break-throughs.

A.

PS: .. you may also check out the WRG's OoBs for "Han Chinese" and "Late Greek Hoplites" .. you'll get a feeling of deja-vu
For info on the rule set chech e.g. http://www.barr.karoo.net/hws/dbx/

[ November 23, 2003, 09:36: Message edited by: Arralen ]

[Arralen]

Originally posted by Keir Maxwell:
The problem might be that LI will not be able to interpenetrate other infantry with this restriction. Perhaps LI should only avoid moving into the same square as another LI?

I though about not moving into the same square with units of the same squad,
so differents squads from one commander or troops from different commanders could interpenetrate each other...

Could the game enigne handle this?

A.

[ November 23, 2003, 09:09: Message edited by: Arralen ]

[Keir Maxwell]

Originally posted by Arralen:
SI:figth in closed formation, move in step(?), attack in trott
[/QB]

Either somehting is coming through odd in the translation from german Stefan or you have an incredibly old WRG set of rules. I've played since 6th which came out in my teens, ~20 years ago, and I've never heard of the abbreviations you use.

Troop types:
LI - light infantry
MI/LMI - medium and light medium infantry
HI/LHI - heavy and light heavy infantry.
etc
and for weapons types:
HTW - heavy throwing weapons (legionaries)
JLS - Javelin and sometimes short spear
LTS - Long thrusting Spear
etc

Now day it mainly DBM and the old abbrevations are no more.

Cheers

Keir

[Keir Maxwell]

I'd just like to add that if this change worked it could go along way towards coping with the HI complex. If you can screen your not so heavily armoured close fighters from archery with skirmishers, who take lighter casualties despite their low protection, then more troop types become useful in a greater variety of roles.

Cheers

Keir

[ November 23, 2003, 09:49: Message edited by: Keir Maxwell ]

[Arralen]

I'd just like to add that if this change worked it could go along way towards coping with the HI complex.
If you can screen your not so heavily armoured troops close fighters from archery with skirmishers who take lighter casualties despite their low protection then a more troop types become useful in a greater variety of roles and deployments.

.. that's what I hope for ...

Originally posted by Keir Maxwell: Either somehting is coming through odd in the translation from german Stefan or you have an incredibly old WRG set of rules.

Both:

2nd german edition, 1990 .. and my dictionary isn't really up to the task
So I didn't bother translating the abbr.

At least you get the picture ..

A.

[ November 23, 2003, 09:51: Message edited by: Arralen ]

[Keir Maxwell]

Originally posted by Arralen:
[2nd german edition, 1990 [/QB]

1990 - I guess that would be the same as english language 7th ed.

I didn't know they were published in german but it makes perfect sense what with germany being the first place wargaming took off in europe.

Time for some therauputic Savaging and then sleep.

Machts gut

Keir