January 2018 Rules Update

Discuss anything about Washington Grand Company Products (TRIUMPH!, MESHWESH, TERRAIN CARDS, ETC.)
El' Jocko
Grand Master WGC
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 4:38 pm

January 2018 Rules Update

Postby El' Jocko » Tue Jan 16, 2018 5:30 pm

The January 2018 update of the Triumph Early Access Edition is now available on Wargame Vault. This is a free download for everyone who purchased the earlier version.

We had hoped to be releasing the final version PDF of Triumph at this point. However, we decided to release this January update because of a significant change that we made and we'd like to get feedback on it before we wrap things up.

During playtesting, we found that we were not entirely happy with the way that shooting worked, especially in games that involved large numbers of Archers on each side. In particular, we felt that the rules for combining the shooting of multiple stands were awkward and unintuitive when multiple stands from one side were shooting at multiple stands from the other side. In addition, we found that the rules had accumulated a significant number of special cases and exceptions that were stuffed in the Tactical Factors for Distant Shooting.

We addressed these problems by rethinking the way that shooting works. Here's the quick summary:
  • All distant shooting is now by individual stand (no combined shooting).
  • Shooting is in a single direction; the target stand does not shoot back as part of the combat. Two stands of Archers exchanging shots with one another will be resolved as two separate combats, one in each direction.
  • Combat factors for distant shooting are separate from combat factors for close combat.

More about the changes to distant shooting on this thread:

http://forum.wgcwar.com/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=319

In addition to the changes to distant shooting, the January 2018 update includes the following changes to the Triumph Rules document:

MINOR CHANGES AND CLEAN-UP
  • Clarified command point cost for forming column in difficult terrain
  • Small change in how to measure distance during distant shooting
  • Modified the supplemental diagrams for ZOC to better illustrate how ZOC is blocked or not blocked in various situations

FORMATTING AND DESIGN
  • Table of Contents has been simplified--only shows top level headers
  • Added index

michaelguth
Levy
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Dec 24, 2016 12:14 am

Re: January 2018 Rules Update

Postby michaelguth » Thu Jan 18, 2018 6:20 pm

Shooting rules were one of the worst aspects of DBA, producing unrealistic maneuvering to get the corners of two or 3 shooters in range of an enemy target even when other targets were partly in the way or closer to the shooters. DBA rules never even clearly answered the basic question of what happens when 3 bows fire on 2 bows. Is it a 1 versus zero, or a 2 versus 2 and a and 2 versus one?

The alternate bowfire in one turn is used in ADLG (the French Disease). There it does add to game length, because even skirmsihers have to shoot in that game. Should be much less of a problem in Triumph.

The efficacy of ancient bow fire is also a subject of interest and debate. In the book, 'From Sumer to Rome, Military capabilities of Ancient Armies' the argument was made that ancient archery had limited effect against infantry with shields. The pikes of deep phalanxes also can be shown mathematically to provide significant cover from plunging fire.

Longbow fire was clearly more effective against unarmored infantry like Scots, or other bowmen. But what was the efficacy of longbow fire against armored plate knights either in the WOTR or at Potiers? In an archaeological study of crossbow fire at a Swedish battlefield many wounds could be demonstrated through rudimentary 10th century type helmets. Did this change in later periods or differ from crossbows?

Odds of getting kills are slightly different with this interpretation. The odds of any one versus one attack against heavier types of infantry is less than when 3 shooters could gang up on one target. But, there is a possibility of a catastrophic massacre of 3 heavy foot by 3 bows in one turn. So, there is some balancing out.

I do wonder whether Pavisiers are considered to be primarily archers using a shield/spear wall for increased protection from HTH combat, or are using the shields primarily for protection from bowfire? As the factors stand now the Pavise protects in HTH combat against infantry, but not against mounted HTH or long range bowfire. They have the same combat factor against bow shooting as ordinary bows. Might bear some discussion from the authors.

User avatar
David Kuijt
Grand Master WGC
Posts: 603
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 4:44 pm
Location: MD suburbs of Washington DC

Re: January 2018 Rules Update

Postby David Kuijt » Thu Jan 18, 2018 9:12 pm

michaelguth wrote:I do wonder whether Pavisiers are considered to be primarily archers using a shield/spear wall for increased protection from HTH combat, or are using the shields primarily for protection from bowfire? As the factors stand now the Pavise protects in HTH combat against infantry, but not against mounted HTH or long range bowfire. They have the same combat factor against bow shooting as ordinary bows. Might bear some discussion from the authors.


Shooting at more than close-combat-range is arcing fire into a mass of men. A line of shieldmen in the front line is largely irrelevant protection to arcing fire.

A Pavise unit is nothing like the sort of protection you see in sieges, where there is a single crossbowman taking cover while reloading against a large pavise. A pavisier unit has a crunchy external front shell of spearmen (with, usually, pavises) and is 90% bowmen otherwise, in multiple ranks behind. Almost none of them get any cover advantage versus arcing fire.
DK


Return to “Product Discussion - Ask questions and talk about WGC Products”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest