Pikemen in Combat?

[76mm]

I've played a few dozen games now, generally either as, or against, the various Hellenistic states with pikemen, and have an observation and a question:

OBSERVATION: In general, it seems like in impact combat, pikemen don't have any particular advantage over some other types of troops, particularly legionaries and spearmen. That is, while the pikemen often deliver a nice hit (12-15%) to such troops on impact, they almost as often suffer a 12%-15% hit instead. All of this is with steady troops in open terrain. Same seems more or less true in melee...

QUESTION:

What benefits do pikemen receive in impact and melee combat? I looked at the pdf manual, but found it rather unclear. For instance, there is some kind of +1 bonus for spearmen/pikemen, and then another +1 bonus for pikemen. So is that +2 for pikemen? Also, in the description of pikemen, it says that their advantages are lost if they are unsteady, although this fact is not mentioned in the table which supposedly quantifies the combat factors.

I really wish that the manual would be improved...

[CharlesRobinson]

Yeah, I am not sure how they are doing it for pikemen neither - on the Table top version you get a bonuse for depth which was one of the strengths fo the phalanx. Cannot really do that with the PC version because of the way the game is designed but they are at 50% of the size at what is represented on the table top game (4 units on the table top = 2 units in the PC version).

[IainMcNeil]

Pikes are costed at more than their TT version because they are assumed to always be fighting in depth. I'm having some odd factors from Pikes in the latest version so checking it out.

[batesmotel]

Yeah, I am not sure how they are doing it for pikemen neither - on the Table top version you get a bonuse for depth which was one of the strengths fo the phalanx. Cannot really do that with the PC version because of the way the game is designed but they are at 50% of the size at what is represented on the table top game (4 units on the table top = 2 units in the PC version).

As I read the help file and understanding the TT rules:

Pikes get +1 POA for having pike in both impact and melee (unless charging shock mounted, i.e. lancers or HCh)
Pikes get a second +1 POA for having a fourth rank on the TT and for being above 75% strength in the PC version. So pikes with a skull never get the second POA.

Overall it make sense for pikes to cost more than they do in the TT rules but they should not cost double since they die at effectively twice the rate they do on the TT, e.g. losing 25% in a PC BG would be the equivalent of losing 2 stands out of an 8 strong BG on the TT. Most BGs int he PC game are the equivalent of 4 stand BGs in the TT game so a 25% loss there would only be one stand. Probably a factor of about 1.5 from the TT should be about right.

Chris

[IainMcNeil]

They're already costed at 50% higher than normal units

[76mm]

Thanks everyone for the replies, but I guess the answer is that no one knows what is going on with pikemen?

It looks like there are significant differences from the TT version, and I don't play the TT version anyway, so it would sure be nice if all of this was clearly laid out in the manual...

[jamespcrowley]

I do hope that RoR will update the help files/manual to include a great deal more information than is currently available. It is all well and good to have the mechanics of the game neatly tucked away for the pc version but it would be good to know just how things work in detail. One issue in particular being how the damage percentages more often than not vary hugely from the given expected maximums.

[IainMcNeil]

There are no differences to the TT, other than as there are for all units - but possible there is a bug which we are looking in to

Look at the help files on melee and impact and it details all the + factors.

[batesmotel]

There are no differences to the TT, other than as there are for all units - but possible there is a bug which we are looking in to

Look at the help files on melee and impact and it details all the + factors.

The one difference, at least in wording, from the TT for pike POAs is that there is no concept of 3 ranks of pike for the initial POA and for a 4th rank of pike for the second POA. The latter is represented in the PC version by losing the 4th rank POA when the BG is at or below 75% strength. I do not think there is any specific mapping for the 3 ranks of pike for the first POA in the PC game so that a pike BG below 50% strength still gets one POA. (Of course it suffers the other effects of being at or below half strength so this still seems to give the right effect in the game. ) I know it took me a while to understand that a pike BG loses the second POA when at 75% or below. It does help explain why pike BGs seemed to collapse faster than I expected in the PC version after suffering some loses. With the constant percentage loss rules as well, BG strength does seem to drop faster than it does in the TT rules.

One thing that definitely needs a better explanation in the help is the possible ranges of losses in combat along with a possible check to see if these are actually being calculated correctly in the PC game. A number of posts in the forum have noted that the actual losses being seen in games seem to run higher than those that appears to be expected according to the help.

As a final question on losses, does a non-loser in melee or impact have their expected range of percentage losses reduced? This is reflected in the TT rules by getting a +2 on the death roll. There should be something similar in the PC game but I do not see anything about this in the on line help.

Chris

[batesmotel]

In the TT game, the death roll for losses from shooting is also modified with a plus 2 (which reduces the chance of losing a stand) in the same way that the non-loser in combat's deathroll is. This should be reflected in the PC game percentage loss ranges as well and this does not appear to be the case according to the on line help. It may explain why the PC game casualties seem so much more bloody than the TT rules.

Chris

[76mm]

Look at the help files on melee and impact and it details all the + factors.

With all due respect, I don't think that it does "detail" all of the + factors, or if it does, it does not do so very clearly--please see my original post.

[deeter]

I feel you rpain 76mm. Having the TT rules is a big help. In a nutshell, pike and spears get a + at impact and melee and pike get another + if in good going. You can't do better than ++ or worse that --. Each advantage gives the enemy a disadvantage. If you are ++ (after all considerations) your foe is --.

Roman HF is ++ at impact, compared to pikes at ++ so its a push. Against spears, they would have a + net. In melee, they would get a + for swords only if pikes/spears are not STEADY. These troops can be not steady due to bad ground or being disrupted by combat. If armored, they get a + for better armor, so against steady pikes would fight at a - for no swords but better armor. If the pikes are not steady, they lose a + versus the Roman ++ for swords and better armor. So the Romans fight at a +. Of course things get worse if anyone is fraged or severly dispordered. Throw in lost dice for bad cohesion, re-rolls for quality or leaders and it gets even dicier.

In the help files is info on how to enable more verbose feedback on POA calcualtions and a running readout of dice throws, etc. These are most helpful but can zip by too fast the study sometimes.

Hope that helps,

Deeter

[IainMcNeil]

I'm sure its all there - it just takes a bit of practice to understand it fully. It sinks in better when you are playing the TT game as you have to do the calculations manually so have to really work it out. Look at the info on screen and refer to the factors and try and make it match up and you'll find it all in there. There are some fairly complex interactions that are not initially obvious. If you find something that is not accoutned for then let us know as it is a bug!

[jamespcrowley]

In the help files is info on how to enable more verbose feedback on POA calcualtions and a running readout of dice throws, etc. These are most helpful but can zip by too fast the study sometimes.

The console certainly shows a lot of information and you can scroll through it on your turn , which is useful. But not during your opponents, which is less so.

However, for me, the biggest problem is the disconnect between the terminology used in the console and that in the help files. The latter is all about percentages whereas the console is centred around dice throws. Getting a better understanding of those mechanics may help to manage expectations with combat results. I entirely agree with 76mm with regards to pikes losing as often as not, as winning.

Having been presented with a display showing something like an 80% chance to win a combat, over a 5% chance to loose, and then take losses of 15% or more is very discouraging. If this was an occaisional event it would not present a problem, as you need to have some outlier results but it does seem to be almost a case of win one, loose one. Perhaps there is too much randomness in the system?

[IainMcNeil]

I think we should probably remove the % in the help files and refer to dice. They are intended to simplify things and are referring to the die rolls but it seems to be confusing people.

E.g. a 16% chance is your chance of hitting if you need a 6.
33% is if you need a 5 to hit.
50% if you ened a 4 etc.

[batesmotel]

I'm sure its all there - it just takes a bit of practice to understand it fully. It sinks in better when you are playing the TT game as you have to do the calculations manually so have to really work it out. Look at the info on screen and refer to the factors and try and make it match up and you'll find it all in there. There are some fairly complex interactions that are not initially obvious. If you find something that is not accounted for then let us know as it is a bug!

At least in the on line help, I'm not sure all the details are included that are in the TT POAs. Looking at the PDF version of POAs for melee, only one POA appears for pikes in melee when there are two that apply in the TT version. It looks like it combines the POA for Spears in two ranks/Pikes in 3 ranks plus the 4th rank of pikes which is a second POA on the TT. I'm not sure that the game is calculating it wrong but it is listed wrong in the on line help (at least in the PDF version from 16/01/2010, presumably 1.03, that I just downloaded from the Slitherine site). In general, the TT formatting of the POA tables seems more complete and understandable than the on line help ones for FoG PC.

Overall, pikes h ave struck me as less effective in the PC version than in the TT version, so it could be that the calculations are being done wrong in melee.

Chris

[batesmotel]

Never mind, I think the 2nd Pike POA is there after all. I missed it past a page break in the PDF. On the other hand, the fact that the short name for it is listed as pike/spear but it apparently only applies for pikes is a bit misleading. After the page break is one listed as pike+ but this one does apply to spears and pikes (if >50%). Seems like the short name labels have been switched at a minimum.

Chris

I'm sure its all there - it just takes a bit of practice to understand it fully. It sinks in better when you are playing the TT game as you have to do the calculations manually so have to really work it out. Look at the info on screen and refer to the factors and try and make it match up and you'll find it all in there. There are some fairly complex interactions that are not initially obvious. If you find something that is not accounted for then let us know as it is a bug!

At least in the on line help, I'm not sure all the details are included that are in the TT POAs. Looking at the PDF version of POAs for melee, only one POA appears for pikes in melee when there are two that apply in the TT version. It looks like it combines the POA for Spears in two ranks/Pikes in 3 ranks plus the 4th rank of pikes which is a second POA on the TT. I'm not sure that the game is calculating it wrong but it is listed wrong in the on line help (at least in the PDF version from 16/01/2010, presumably 1.03, that I just downloaded from the Slitherine site). In general, the TT formatting of the POA tables seems more complete and understandable than the on line help ones for FoG PC.

Overall, pikes h ave struck me as less effective in the PC version than in the TT version, so it could be that the calculations are being done wrong in melee.

Chris

[hidde]

Having been presented with a display showing something like an 80% chance to win a combat, over a 5% chance to loose, and then take losses of 15% or more is very discouraging.

I don't know much of the calculations and inner workings of dice and percentages but I have to agree with the above. I don't have a problem with not having the success that 80% applies but taking heavy losses after an attack with such numbers are as stated above discouraging

[76mm]

Thanks to everyone for your responses, Deeter, your response was particularly helpful!

[deeter]

Please don't use it against me.

Deeter