Memoir '44 D-Day Landings Memoir '44 D-Day Landings

Forum

Suche
Forum » BattleLore - English » Archers House Rule
Anzeigen: Heutige Nachrichten 
  
VerfasserThema
kevster
Junior Member

Nachrichten: 20
Registriert:
October 2006
Archers House Rule Mon, 19 February 2007 18:03
My wife got me this game for Valentine's Day and it's the coolest game ever. I've played it 5 times now and just had a comment. My brother in law and I have been thinking about making a house rule that allows archers to fire over other units. It seems like this was the purpose of archers in the medival times was to fire arrows over their charging footman. So i think a good house rule would be to allow archers to fire over friendly units as long as you are not targeting an enemy unit adjacent to a friendly unit. But I was wondering if anybody knew why the game was designed to not allow this? There must have been a reason. ANy ideas? Thanks.
      
Talespinner
DoW Content Provider
Rikugun Taii

Fan-Seite
Nachrichten: 119
Registriert:
March 2006
Re:Archers House Rule Mon, 19 February 2007 18:36
Historically archers did not fire over friendly infantry. They would shoot at the opposing army and then retreat back through the lines before melee. Archers who "fire blind" are completely inaccurate and would have almost no "killing" power. As someone who has fired a bow several hundred times, I can guarantee that you really do not want to just shoot it up into the air and hope it lands somewhere near the enemy.

Archers work best when positioned on hills behind and above the main lines, then they can see where they are shooting. If you insist on having them shoot over friendly troops, my recommendation would be to use a system similar to critical hits before any casualties are actually scored.
      
toddrew
Senior Member
Cadet

Nachrichten: 830
Registriert:
October 2006
Re:Archers House Rule Tue, 20 February 2007 17:27
I like that "critical roll" idea if one is to implement more complex rules with the bowmen, also maybe require that the unit be at full strength to simulate a volley of arrows.
      
blindspot
Senior Member
Cadet

Fan-Seite
Nachrichten: 110
Registriert:
January 2006
Re:Archers House Rule Wed, 21 February 2007 01:08
Talespinner wrote on Mon, 19 February 2007 09:36

Archers work best when positioned on hills behind and above the main lines, then they can see where they are shooting.

Are you supporting a different house rule here that would suspend normal LOS rule for archers when they are positioned on hils? Or are you just stating that that is where they work best?

[Aktualisiert am: Wed, 21 February 2007 01:09]

      
Caboose
Senior Member
First Lieutenant

Fan-Seite
Nachrichten: 1595
Registriert:
May 2004
Re:Archers House Rule Wed, 21 February 2007 15:12
I just wish my darn archers would hit occasionally in BL. I think I have like maybe one hit from them after so many games.

Keep saying "Use the pointed END toward the enemy". Hard to hit when you don't do that! Sad

Cab
      
kevster
Junior Member

Nachrichten: 20
Registriert:
October 2006
Re:Archers House Rule Wed, 21 February 2007 16:39
Okay, now it makes sense so thanks everyone for responding. I think we'll keep away from that house rule now. I appreciate it all!
      
Abner
Junior Member

Nachrichten: 4
Registriert:
February 2007
Re:Archers House Rule Wed, 21 February 2007 23:09
blindspot wrote on Tue, 20 February 2007 19:08

Talespinner wrote on Mon, 19 February 2007 09:36

Archers work best when positioned on hills behind and above the main lines, then they can see where they are shooting.

Are you supporting a different house rule here that would suspend normal LOS rule for archers when they are positioned on hils? Or are you just stating that that is where they work best?



To me, this would be the house rule to consider. Firing blind over friendly troops should be tough to pull off -- but if archers are sitting on elevated ground...

I think the only potential issue with that is one of game balance. Would this in essence make the archers too strong?
      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Nachrichten: 232
Registriert:
August 2005
Re:Archers House Rule Thu, 22 February 2007 01:06
How could they be too strong when you have red cavalry running around the map? And a Hill Giant?
      
blindspot
Senior Member
Cadet

Fan-Seite
Nachrichten: 110
Registriert:
January 2006
Re:Archers House Rule Thu, 22 February 2007 01:14
player142544 wrote on Wed, 21 February 2007 16:06

How could they be too strong when you have red cavalry running around the map? And a Hill Giant?


Well, they are already slightly stronger than green infantry since archers have a very useful ranged attack. Giving such options would make them even stronger (again, relatively speaking here).

People should also remember that we will probably see blue troops with a ranged attack at some point in the near future. So, it may only be green archers that are relatively weak.

[Aktualisiert am: Thu, 22 February 2007 01:15]

      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Nachrichten: 232
Registriert:
August 2005
Re:Archers House Rule Thu, 22 February 2007 02:17
The official scenarios are balanced with the current rules. Of course if you weaken/strengthen any units it will throw off that scenario's balance to a varying degree.

If you're creating a scenario from the ground-up with alternative archer rules, you have the opportunity to make it balanced with your own ranged attack rules or whatever you want to do.

I think one thing that some people get stuck on is the idea of "unit balance" in Battlelore. There really is no such thing. Scenario balance is all that matters.

People post about archers and goblins being too weak, and dwarves and cavalry being too strong. Who cares if there are units with varying power levels, as long as the scenario is balanced? Smile

Your ranged attack rules sound cool to me. Yes, it will potentially throw off the balance of the official scenarios in favor of the player who has more archers. Terrain will also factor into the degree in which balance is disturbed, since there may or may not be access to hills that may empower your archers. If both sides have about the same number of archers and similar terrain, I'd say balance wouldn't be tampered with too much. If one side has 2+ more archers and/or really handy terrain nearby to take advantage of your ranged attack rules, I'd suggest giving the other player a minor unit upgrade. Like a green inf to a blue or give one of their archers a crossbow upgrade.
      
Abner
Junior Member

Nachrichten: 4
Registriert:
February 2007
Re:Archers House Rule Thu, 22 February 2007 05:35
player142544 wrote on Wed, 21 February 2007 19:06

How could they be too strong when you have red cavalry running around the map? And a Hill Giant?


I don't know. Smile

I really haven't played the game enough yet to say either way. I can only assume that the reason why archers cannot fire from elevated ground in the base rules to begin with is due to balance. That's just an assumption on my part, though.
      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Nachrichten: 232
Registriert:
August 2005
Re:Archers House Rule Thu, 22 February 2007 05:58
I listened to a podcast with a DoW staff person a while back (I forget whom). He was talking about how Battlelore is conceived as a close combat game from the start. Ranged attacking is of secondary importance. I suspect that's probably the main reason.
      
FinalAttack
Member

Nachrichten: 64
Registriert:
December 2006
Re:Archers House Rule Thu, 22 February 2007 15:10
I've always liked the idea that archer units on hills may shoot over adjacent enemies/friends/tree hexes. Though I've never really bothered to play with this variant.

[Aktualisiert am: Thu, 22 February 2007 15:11]

      
toddrew
Senior Member
Cadet

Nachrichten: 830
Registriert:
October 2006
Re:Archers House Rule Thu, 22 February 2007 16:16
player142544 wrote on Wed, 21 February 2007 18:17

I think one thing that some people get stuck on is the idea of "unit balance" in Battlelore. There really is no such thing. Scenario balance is all that matters.



I don't think you go far enough Smile Scenario balance isn't even necessary to make a game "fair" - one game of BattleLore is only half of a game Wink

I love playing the imbalanced scenarios, reflecting such underdog situations that I suspect do crop up in battle from time to time.
      
cebalrai
Senior Member

Nachrichten: 232
Registriert:
August 2005
Re:Archers House Rule Thu, 22 February 2007 17:42
Yeah, if you do the Battle Cry thing and play games in pairs, taking a turn with each side, then unbalanced scenarios are balanced. Smile lol.....
      
TribalBeowulf
Junior Member

Nachrichten: 6
Registriert:
January 2007
Re:Archers House Rule Sun, 25 February 2007 10:48
I dunno, people have been making unhappy noises about archers ever since I started reading the forums a couple months ago. I don't really get why people want to change them that much. I find them to incredibly useful as they are for softening up units the are bold since it's free hits. That and pelting unsupported units to make them retreat.

Another way to look at it is that in terms of footmen, they beat red footmen. Put a group of archers on the board, and a group of red footmen on the board and figure a way for the red footmen to win. I personally don't see it. Even if the red footmen start adjacent, the archers will get hit with one attack, run away, and keep running and firing. The red footmen will never catch up. (I'm not saying this is what you'd do in game, I just wanted to point out that they are used differently.)

And before anyone says it, it's not historically accurate to fire over your own troops. If the terrain is more or less level you can't see your targets hidden behind your own allies. In the case of different heights, you still have HUGE chances of stray arrows dropping into your allies. Even with all that aside, once you have an actual skirmish line, the targets would be so close to your allies that you would be hitting they both with equal frequency.

[Aktualisiert am: Sun, 25 February 2007 10:50]

      
player21912
Member

Nachrichten: 34
Registriert:
June 2004
Re:Archers House Rule Sun, 25 February 2007 21:30
Isn't a direct line arrow shot a lot more powerful than an indirect one?

Doing back of the cocktail napkin sketch, I think an indirect shot is limited in the energy it impacts with to just terminal velocity and gravity, whereas a direct shot is more directly related to the pull strength of the bow.
      
Lynx7725
Junior Member

Nachrichten: 12
Registriert:
April 2006
Re:Archers House Rule Mon, 26 February 2007 06:53
My POV is...

Archers are very useful, they just ain't unit killers. They can whittle units down and en masse they are rather painful -- in Agincourt, if you are English, and on the first turn have Green Banners or Darken the Sky available, those Red cavalry are so much pincushions. But generally, they are very good harassment units while you get your heavier infantry into place.

Direct fire is well represented here, in that the firing unit is honestly trying to kill something in the unit. To me, indirect fire is very inaccurate harassing fire, meant more to deny the enemy the ground then any serious intent to inflict damage. In order words, indirect fire is more to deny ground than to kill; anything that gets killed is strictly bonus.

So, if you want indirect fire from archers, I would propose that it become a special ability. The special ability would do no damage, but it can be one of following possibilities:
  • prevent all units, friendly or enemy, from entering the hex for one turn/ round (no books at my workplace)
  • prevent one targetted enemy unit from moving (pinned) for the next turn/ round, or
  • treat the unit's attack against a targetted enemy unit as having rolled.. err, one flag? only (no other damage), hence forcing a retreat if the unit is not Bold.
      
    
Vorheriges Thema:Gaining Ground - Creatures (EE)
Nächstes Thema:newbie question on ordered units
Gehen Sie zum Forum: