Archery ineffective?

KingRat
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2020 9:30 am

Archery ineffective?

Postby KingRat » Mon Feb 10, 2020 10:03 am

Am I missing something obvious?
Units shoot at the nearest enemy so it is difficult to get more than one unit to shoot at the same target.
My Persian immortals shoot at some Greeks at close range. They get 6 dice, plus 2 for superior shooters less 1 for shooting at phalanx. They are a bit lucky and get 4 hits but the Greeks probably save 2 with their armour and shields anyway. So 2 hits and no effect. My ordinary Persian infantry have even less chance and the levies need 3 hits out of 3 and all the Greek saves to fail which by my maths is about 64:1 against.
My English longbows shoot at some French knights. They are at close range so they get 8 dice, probably 4 hits. But the knights defence is 2 so I would be lucky to get even 1 hit. Again, no effect.
Even if I get 3 hits and discourage someone the marker comes off automatically at the start of the next turn anyway, so unless I am in a position to charge them in the same turn i shot them there is no point bothering at all.

MartinG
Posts: 687
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 8:48 am

Re: Archery ineffective?

Postby MartinG » Mon Feb 10, 2020 10:27 am

Archery is expected to be harassment rather than destruction of the enemy, and is most effective against poorly protected targets or where multiple shooting units can target the same unit, which is easiest to achieve on the flanks, or where terrain allows the stacking of units, such as bow units on a hill behind other shooters. Normally you would be aiming to either clear skirmishers or cause discouragement in the turn in which a combat will occur. Is is indeed quite difficult to achieve this against outliers like D2 units or D4 or better in phalanx or shieldwall. A more typical D5 or D6 target is a different proposition. Overall, it is difficult to win with a force totally reliant on archery unless the enemy obligingly remains static.
"No one ever achieved anything without making a few mistakes along the way"

equites64
Posts: 12
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2020 2:45 pm

Re: Archery ineffective?

Postby equites64 » Mon Mar 02, 2020 2:42 pm

Hi Kingrat,
you could try the following house rules (for friendly games) :
INITIAL PHASE
4. Remove Discouraged markers from units NOT in combat or fleeing or within enemy shooting range
SHOOTING PHASE
Shooting results :
3 kills on already discouraged unit ---> Cohesion Test

In this way Archery can be more effective.

KingRat
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Feb 10, 2020 9:30 am

Re: Archery ineffective?

Postby KingRat » Wed Apr 15, 2020 9:54 am

Thanks for that suggestion, it helps a bit. The rules seem to work ok for armies with minimal firepower against each other like Romans v gauls or Greeks v Macedonians but 3 of my armies, persians, turks and 100 yrs war English just don't work. Did Henry V really take 5000 archers to agincourt just in case the French brought along some militia or crossbowmen they could hit? Were the 5000 or so French knights killed all killed by 1000 English men at arms? why did most of the French dismount to fight if the archers couldn't hit them anyway on their horses. Sadly, I think the rules just don't work historically so I won't use them.

Gary51971
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri May 01, 2020 2:15 pm

Re: Archery ineffective?

Postby Gary51971 » Fri May 15, 2020 11:14 pm

I think it models very early missile troops but I suggest the following amendment when bow technology advances to laminated/composite stages and a generation of poundage bows.
I suggest that easiest way to model such things would rather than change the rules is to create modifiers in terms of a penalty to defence rolls of 1 for bow long bow and cross bow to demonstrate this increasr in pematrative force.
This would mean that the armoured knighta in the previous example wouls have a 50/50 chance of taking a hit

Ponatowski
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2020 3:53 pm

Re: Archery ineffective?

Postby Ponatowski » Thu Jul 30, 2020 4:54 pm

I am just kicking the tires on Milites Mundi and seeing this, I do agree that some missile fire should be more effective than others. I have no problem house ruling things if needed. The proposals here would seem to work for infantry heavy forces with longbows/crossbows. What about cavalry heavy armies with lots of horse archers (Mongols, etc.)? Is it less of an issue due to lesser armor of their opponents, or ? Thank you.


Return to “Milites Mundi”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests