2 quick questions about the War

[Morg]

Questions of my own:

On page 62, under the descriptive of infantry, it states that these units are
ineffective against mounted troops in the open field. This implies that foot
troops cannot expect to stand against cavalry... period.

On page 69, it states that mounted units are forced to engage only if a mounted
enemy unit enters their area. If foot soldiers attack the mounted units, then
the cavalry can choose whether to engage or fall back.
This implies that the game effect of the cavalry's advantage is a simple choice
to engage or fall back... period.

So, my question is:
Can infantry successfully attack mounted units in the open field?

IMO, a unit of infantry will be mowed down by a cavalry charge in open field
combat. If however, the cavalry is engaged by foot soldiers *AFTER* they (the
cavalry) have finished their charge, then I can understand how the cavalry
might be slowly cut down from their mounts (though the mounted units would
still hold the advantage).

How does everyone handle this? What sort of modifiers (if any) do you apply to
such circumstances? And what if the battle is in forest terrain? Is the above
situation then reversed, so that the cavalry is ineffective in a similar
manner?

BTW, (and completely off topic) my PC has been down for several weeks, so my
email has been trashed by the server.

Later!

Morg
To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com
with the line

[Robert Trifts]

> IMO, a unit of infantry will be mowed down by a cavalry charge in open
>field combat. If however, the cavalry is engaged by foot soldiers *AFTER*
>they (the cavalry) have finished their charge, then I can understand how
the >cavalry might be slowly cut down from their mounts (though the mounted
>units would still hold the advantage).

You want "the Birthright answer" or the "real answer"?

I'll give you the real answer - and leave the Birthright answer for someone
else.

The answer is - it depends:

If your infantry are armed with knives, swords, short spears, and makeshift
weapons - basic mediaeval infantry - they are going to get routed in an open
field battle unless they are VERY disciplined (a la 1st/2nd Order Roman
Centurions) Classical Roman foot soldiers still reigned more or less supreme
over cav for six centuries, and mostly every military historian agrees that
Alexander could have stood up to Napoleon but for grapeshot.

If your infantry are armed with polearms, and reasonably well disciplined,
the cavalry retreats until missile fire can be brought to bear on the
infantry unit. (Phillip/Alexandrian tactics). Cav cannot stand up to
properly armed & disciplined infantry - no matter what you may have read to
the contrary. Well armed and disciplined infantry rules the historical
battlefield until arty enters the picture. The problem was keeping them fed
long enough to get them to *be* well armed and well-disciplined. The
Imperial Romans and Alexander did not have that problem - the Carolingian
and Merovingian Franks did.

See the film Braveheart for the multimedia proof of same in the mediaeval
era.

If your infantry is extremely well armed with polearms and has good missile
weapons mixed in to the unit in support (crossbowmen) your cavalry is going
to withdraw after taking heavy losses and after inflicting precious little
in return. The Spaniards, Swiss and Florentian/Venetian armies used Pikes
and crossbows to reduce Cav to simply a junior element in a combined arms
force throughout the Rennaissance period.

While it may be inappropriate to compare Rennaissance armies with mediaeval
forces, the drawing line is NOT gunpowder (until grape shot/field arty
enters the fray - which is early industrial era tech). On the tech side, it
is well forged steel and the technological innovations in mechanition/pull
strength permitted by good trigger mechanisms in an army's crossbows which
is important - a historical dividing line which AD&D has never appreciated
nor modelled correctly. Gygax was poorly read; heavy crossbows are a
rennaissance - *NOT* a mediaeval weapon.

(Good triggers also leads you *directly* to Swiss clocks which leads
*directly* to the cam shaft thence to the scientific & industrial
revolutions, respectively, but I digress).

While gunpowder co-existed with heavy crossbows for 200 years until musketry
prevailed, it was the crossbows trigger mechanisms which reduced Cav's
pre-eminence in European continental warfare. Both Crossbows and Muskets are
easy to train any rabble in. At point blank range - a levelled barrage of
either bolt or bullet is going to hit the attacker *hard*.

Final result: Heavy Crossbows + pikes and enough food to keep your unit
together to train - your heavy cav in Chain or even Plate Armour and barding
is just expensively armed and slow moving "reckie".

So *that's* why "it depends".

(Can you tell I run Birthright under Rolemaster? :-) )

To bring us out of history and back into Birthright...

Add a mage with a fireball into the fray - the Cav is useful again. The
infantry can't maintain cohesion under what is equivalent to a very
frightening field arty grapeshot attack. This brings you to
Frederick/Napoleon era cavalry tactics - when the battle centres upon your
arty (mages). Whoever loses the mostest mages the firstest loses the battle
for all of the above reasons as the Cav is unleashed upon the shattered
infantry to rout it.

See the film Waterloo for a reasonable multimedia simulation of the
devastation after such a battle when the arty *was not* routed sufficiently
before Ney released the Cav. Substitute muskets for crossbows and you get
the field tactics in such a battle well depicted, albeit with more smoke.

Answer your question? Nope. Didn't think so.. :-)

Regards,

.Robert
To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com
with the line

[Craig Greeson]

Hello Morg and Fellow BR'ers,
Hmm, fine questions are raised by Morg. My group always liked to give
cavalry the edge over infantry (not pikemen, just std. infantry) in the
open field, so we always ruled that infantry could only engage cavalry if
the horsemen chose to be engaged. I suppose I would agree with Morg's
assertion that infantry could successfully engage cavalry once their charge
attack had ended.

I've always had "elfnocentric" campaigns, so my feeling on handling cavalry
in the forest is potentially different than everyone elses. We always
ruled that Sidhelien cavalry performed as per their given stats in any
terrain but high mountains, while human cavalry was much less effective in
the forest. I've never been a big fan of the War Card system, but if I
used it I would not allow human cavalry to charge in forested provinces,
and I'd probably reduce their attack # by 1 and reduce their movement to
that of standard infantry.

Regards (and glad to be back on the list)
Craig Greeson

Morg wrote:
>
> Questions of my own:
>
> On page 62, under the descriptive of infantry, it states that these units are
> ineffective against mounted troops in the open field. This implies that foot
> troops cannot expect to stand against cavalry... period.
>
> On page 69, it states that mounted units are forced to engage only if a mounted
> enemy unit enters their area. If foot soldiers attack the mounted units, then
> the cavalry can choose whether to engage or fall back.
> This implies that the game effect of the cavalry's advantage is a simple choice
> to engage or fall back... period.
>
> So, my question is:
> Can infantry successfully attack mounted units in the open field?
>
> IMO, a unit of infantry will be mowed down by a cavalry charge in open field
> combat. If however, the cavalry is engaged by foot soldiers *AFTER* they (the
> cavalry) have finished their charge, then I can understand how the cavalry
> might be slowly cut down from their mounts (though the mounted units would
> still hold the advantage).
>
> How does everyone handle this? What sort of modifiers (if any) do you apply to
> such circumstances? And what if the battle is in forest terrain? Is the above
> situation then reversed, so that the cavalry is ineffective in a similar
> manner?To unsubscribe from this list send mail to majordomo@lists.imagiconline.com
with the line