Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wedge formation

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Sith_Happens View Post
    Or, you know, you could make it so the battle group is the one that does the Push Through gambit.
    Battlegroups can't gain Initiative or make Decisive attacks (they can use the Engage gambit).

    I wouldn't have a problem with battlegroups using a custom gambit to move through an enemy battlegroup, but with static Initative it's going to be hard to pull off.


    Hi, I'm JohnDoe244. My posts represent my opinions, not facts.

    Comment


    • #17
      And keep in mind, especially with sizes, you are surrounding your battle group with enemy battlegroups. Putting you in the middle.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by JohnDoe244 View Post
        Battlegroups can't gain Initiative or make Decisive attacks (they can use the Engage gambit).

        I wouldn't have a problem with battlegroups using a custom gambit to move through an enemy battlegroup, but with static Initative it's going to be hard to pull off.
        I think the custom gambit performed by the battlegroup is the way to go, personally. I'd argue that there should be ways for a commander to adjust their battlegroups' initiative as well, whether that means transferring some from themselves, boosting it temporarily, or simply paying the cost of battlegroup gambits out of their own initiative. Also, I think there should be mechanics (possibly via charms, or maybe some base options) for a commander to gain initiative by commanding troops.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by JohnDoe244 View Post
          Additionally, most great generals still have some kind of champion or field commander on the front line. Piccard/Professor X/Agamemnon commands from the behind the lines but his trusted Ryker/Cyclops/Achilles is on the front. There's no reason the person performing the Gambit needs to be the mastermind in ultimate authority.

          I can write you a Stratagem for a brainy commander, but my homebrew isn't any more valid than anyone else's homebrew.
          All this falls entirely in the design perspective, ultimately. I'd prefer to keep BG tools within the hands of those who do the commanding, which would favor something dependent of a commanded BG rather than a gambit.

          I'm not sure stratagems are a good place for it either, as those are almost exclusively done before the battle - demanding such stratagems to be in the exclusive field of supernatural commanders capable of deploying stratagems mid-battle. Something like "you get a pass to break through during the next battle" like you proposed feels out of place, as such maneuvers are relevant impromptu just as much as planned.


          So this is the first question to be answered: Can a mortal commander pull this off at all?
          If the answer is yes, then it can't quite be a stratagem.
          If the answer is no, then a stratagem is fine.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Synapse View Post
            So this is the first question to be answered: Can a mortal commander pull this off at all?
            If the answer is yes, then it can't quite be a stratagem.
            If the answer is no, then a stratagem is fine.
            The short answer is "no".

            If you have broken the enemy's lines then you have broken the enemy.

            I'm only an amature historian but I'm an expert LARPer. If the enemy gets through your front line you are dead: time to roll up a new character. Rules As Written a battlegroup cannot move through another battlegroup. Period. If you've smashed an enemy battlegroup so thoroughly that you can walk your own army through it then you've routed them.

            In a desperate battle situation where everything is going your way, like a group of heavily armored mounted knights sallying forth from a castle to break seige lines, then you might be able to pull this off with forethought and planning. If you have meticulously drilled your soliders with horn and drum to fight in wedges instead of flat battlelines (a sure death sentence for whomever is on the thin edge of the wedge) and the battle comes together based on your plans (not the enemy's) then you might be able to pull this off. Or if you're a supernatural god of war who can either plow directly through the enemy without pause or you are a master commander who can pull off impossible strategies at the drop of a hat then you might be able to pull this off.

            You cannot simply walk your 500 armed men through an enemy group of 500 armed men. It isn't possible. That's why we have armies: if you're trying to defend something you put armed men in to guard it because people can't just ignore them and walk through anyway.

            In the Battle of Thermopylae, the Persians didn't just make a wedge and walk through the Spartans.

            In the Dynasty Warriors games you play an epic unstoppable hero who takes on armies single handedly. It's a great visual representation of the utter devestation a combat focused Exalt can inflict on battlegroups. I think it's completely thematically appropriate for Exalted to carve up enemy battle lines, blowing massive breach holes that they can flood troops through (like the latest depiction of The Bull butchering the Tepet Legions). Hence my original Gambit. Should backline generals of similiar supranatural ability be able to pull off similar effects? Sure!

            Should mortals be able to do it?

            Maybe. With great difficulty. If you're risking static Initative you're never going to get back. If you're appropriately heroic and have a convincing advantage. If you've prepared thoroughly. Maybe.

            Nameless NPC extras seeking to break the enemy lines impromptu without some great champion leading them? Not unless it's really important to the drama.

            I've got no problem with battlegroups attempting a custom gambit themselves. But a brilliant planning general is using Stratagems to reflect their brilliant planning. A brilliant warrior is spending the Initiative they're accumulating on Gambits to reflect their turning the battle with their great skill.

            And this is not something that should be done casually.

            But that's just my opinion. I'm not a writer or a dev.

            If you want to do this as an Order or what-have-you then I'm eager to see your idea. I don't have a balanced, fun way of modelling that, but that doesn't mean such a way doesn't exist. How would you like to see this modelled?
            Last edited by JohnDoe244; 08-04-2019, 05:43 AM.


            Hi, I'm JohnDoe244. My posts represent my opinions, not facts.

            Comment


            • #21
              It all depends on what is going up against what there.

              If it's mortal infantry getting charged by heavy cavalry, unless they form a square, they will be busted up in no time.

              Infantry would need a lawnmower type character to be able to break through a formation in that way or they will go the way of the Romans back at Cannae.

              "Monstrous" cavalry like elephants and similar... Are you going to tell a livid elephant bull where he can or can't go? And considering this is Exalted we can end up with even more terrifying mounts.

              Cavalry will in general need to be routed unless they are formed as a single thin line in which case I want to have a word with their commander as that is pretty darn silly.

              Archers will in general just break before a breakthrough, with the exception being if the group trying to break through is so small that it leaves just a small gap in their line.

              Monstrous infantry (things like blood ape style demons, necromantic constructs, Elementals and construct soldiers) is more likely to just break the enemy before they break through.

              A lead from the back character would most likely be able to perform such a move if they have the appropriate soldiers to do so with.
              Same thing with mortals, a formation of heavy armored knights will break through most infantry lines with or without exalted support (big exception is if they happen to be halberds as those will pretty much beat everything in close combat).

              Gambit is more than likely the thing that will perform best for this kind of thing, possibly having an extra cost of magnitude health equal to the difference in size, might and drill compared to the enemy group with a minimum of 1.
              To clarify, you attempt to break through a size 5, drill 3, might 2 legion of silence battle group with a size 3, drill 1, might 0 mob of peasants, they have a combined value of 10, you have a combined value of 4, you will suffer 6 magnitude damage regardless of the result of the gambit by attempting this breakthrough.
              Meanwhile, light cavalry and monstrous infantry get +1 to their score, heavy cavalry +2 and monstrous cavalry +3.

              Speaking of Gambits and battle groups initiative cost, the biggest reason for that I would guess is to prevent someone with a size 3 battle group from just demolishing every solo character around with "engage" orders.

              Anyway that was just me throwing some thoughts out there, hopefully I made a bit of sense.


              I'm making the Tales of Exalts webcomic
              http://xanroth.deviantart.com/galler...ales-of-exalts
              alchemical report http://xanroth.deviantart.com/galler...hemical-Report
              the fall http://xanroth.deviantart.com/gallery/55265686/the-fall

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by JohnDoe244 View Post
                The short answer is "no".

                If you have broken the enemy's lines then you have broken the enemy.

                I'm only an amature historian but I'm an expert LARPer. If the enemy gets through your front line you are dead: time to roll up a new character. Rules As Written a battlegroup cannot move through another battlegroup. Period. If you've smashed an enemy battlegroup so thoroughly that you can walk your own army through it then you've routed them.
                This is a fine simplification. With this a stratagem should work well.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by JohnDoe244 View Post
                  Battlegroups can't gain Initiative or make Decisive attacks (they can use the Engage gambit).
                  They can use gambits in general.

                  I wouldn't have a problem with battlegroups using a custom gambit to move through an enemy battlegroup, but with static Initative it's going to be hard to pull off.
                  Which, as you subsequently explained, it should be.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Sith_Happens View Post

                    They can use gambits in general.
                    Do you have a citation for that? I'm not saying they can't (as they can clearly use the Engage Gambit) but the Gambit section begins by explaining that Gambits are a type of Decisive attack.

                    Which, as you subsequently explained, it should be.
                    Which is why I said I don't have a problem with it. It'd be hard and I think it should be hard. The reason I mention it is if someone thinks it's a routine strategy that they'd like to pull off consistently you're going to need to use some of Kelly Pedersen's ideas or come up with an idea to do this as an Order.


                    Hi, I'm JohnDoe244. My posts represent my opinions, not facts.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X