Riding combat

[Rolando]

One way of simplifying it is by allowing a rider and mount to have a second movement phase after the combat phase.

So a rider moves near a target, the combat is resolved then riders get a second movement phase where they can move past the target.

Then add that the second movement must be at least one hex in the current facing and maybe a minimum turning radius (1 hex turn each X hexes in a straight line).

I find multiple attack in a ride-by unrealistic, the saber example may be due to the fact that at the time soldiers had little armor and the cutting effect of the saber was dangerous enough to be a valid technique, long and cuts like that are terribly inconvenient, even is somewhat shallow.

[Shostak]

Originally Posted by Rolando

One way of simplifying it is by allowing a rider and mount to have a second movement phase after the combat phase.

So a rider moves near a target, the combat is resolved then riders get a second movement phase where they can move past the target.

Then add that the second movement must be at least one hex in the current facing and maybe a minimum turning radius (1 hex turn each X hexes in a straight line).

I find multiple attack in a ride-by unrealistic, the saber example may be due to the fact that at the time soldiers had little armor and the cutting effect of the saber was dangerous enough to be a valid technique, long and cuts like that are terribly inconvenient, even is somewhat shallow.

Who else gets second movement? Anything with MA over 10?

[JohnPaulB]

My original idea was the charging horse & rider (8 hexes at least) to be able to ride by a lone figure, that there be a possibility of either or both attacking, and then horseman continue a bit past during the same turn so you get the concept that cavalry is not stopped by this as an engagement (well, unless he or the horse is killed). I think most of you seem to agree with the ride-by.

The visual aid I was looking to help in this was some type of token placed a few hexes beyond the combat hexes to emphasize the continuation and as a reminder to place the cavalry at that mark at the end of the turn.

I was picturing that if there was a second ride-by by this horse, that combat location would be the end of turn and be the first combat taken up next turn. The riding marker would be placed at least 8 hexes further down if the player wanted his horseman to continue charging. If the horseman’s player didn’t want him to go to the marker after the combat resolution, that was up to him. If the player wanted his horseman to go further than 8 hexes after that, he may certainly do so.

If the turn starts with a ride-by combat and then the horseman continues his rush into a second ride-by, the cycle starts again next turn with a ride-by combat.

If the rider keeps doing multiple consecutive ride-bys, he is eventually not going to be charging and normal horse combat will take over.

I like the turning restriction idea and I think that a one-time shift of 60-degrees (each turn) would be enough.

I agree with all the comments about the groundsman’s final facing determines his ability to attack.

I think Pole Weapons (either the groundtroopers or the horseman’s Knight’s lance or cavalry lance) should go first. I haven’t researched what happens to the rider’s lance if he impales a groundsman. I would assume that it is stuck in the body and he has to release it and perhaps pull out a different weapon.

As far has who goes first on those characters who can do a second action before handing the turn over, I would guess that the cavalryman goes first and any high dex person shoots where he ends the turn.

I envision Lord of the Rings battle of Pelonnor Fields when the Rohan cavalry breaks the Orc line. Though this would not be possible even with the rules suggested here, it moves it more in that direction.

[timm meyers]

Originally Posted by Rolando

One way of simplifying it is by allowing a rider and mount to have a second movement phase after the combat phase.

So a rider moves near a target, the combat is resolved then riders get a second movement phase where they can move past the target.

Then add that the second movement must be at least one hex in the current facing and maybe a minimum turning radius (1 hex turn each X hexes in a straight line).

I find multiple attack in a ride-by unrealistic, the saber example may be due to the fact that at the time soldiers had little armor and the cutting effect of the saber was dangerous enough to be a valid technique, long and cuts like that are terribly inconvenient, even is somewhat shallow.

A second movement phase in essence is the same as a single strike ride by but now we must contend with the effect of doubling the mounts MA because they get to move twice each turn. I think that change would make horses lighting fast unless we halved their current MA (which might work well?).

Adding the mounted rule exception to attack "during" movement seems pretty innocuous to me. The number of these attacks allowed is unimportant and obviously very subjective, but the ability emulates the use and mobility of cavalry very well.

Doesn't OGRE have similar rules for the G.E.V.?

[timm meyers]

Originally Posted by JohnPaulB

My original idea was the charging horse & rider (8 hexes at least) to be able to ride by a lone figure, that there be a possibility of either or both attacking, and then horseman continue a bit past during the same turn so you get the concept that cavalry is not stopped by this as an engagement (well, unless he or the horse is killed). I think most of you seem to agree with the ride-by.
Cut-snip-snip-cut
I envision Lord of the Rings battle of Pelonnor Fields when the Rohan cavalry breaks the Orc line. Though this would not be possible even with the rules suggested here, it moves it more in that direction.

Cavalry smashed infantry regularly throughout history, especially post stirrup.
Using the current rules and your Pelonnor Fields scenario combined with a move attack exception we are referring to as "ride-by" I will try to explain how it could work.

3 deep line of orcs (30) vs. single line of cavalry (10), at 10 hexes apart.

1st horseman moves to contact. Cav is allowed to strike during movement so immediately gets to roll (remember they count as pole armed for strike order so unless the orcs have spears they usually roll 1st).
Cav hits for 2d+2 (using spear or sword see p.131) does 9 hits and knocks the ugly down.
The horseman is no longer engaged as he is now in only 1 orcs front hex so he can choose to continue movement. "Yes! for Rohan! for Theoden!" he slides forward another hex (trampling the ugly orc on the ground of course) allowing a second strike.
He is now in a shallow pocket and may choose to strike at either front rank orcs or the two second rank orcs. No chance of becoming unengaged he chooses the front rank orc on his right (the side the next horseman will come from) rolls and hits for a pitiful 7. The orc strikes back (at -2 vs mounted and -2 for hits taken = total -4DX) and of course misses.
End of cav #1 move.
Horseman 2 now begins movement, travels 10 hexes forward, rolls during movement to attack the front rank orc left next to horseman #1. Since this orc has hits from the first rider only a small amount of damage is needed to clear him. Lets say he does so. Again he is now only engaged by 1 orc so may move 1 hex forward and strike a second time. He decides to make this attack against a 2nd rank orc and manages to put it down but now his movement is stopped because there are 2 enemies engaging him.
On to horseman #3....
On average after all 10 Roharim have moved there is probably a ragged line of horsemen with some having taken a few hits mixed into a ragged line of orcs missing 7 or more of their original compliment with another half dozen or more knocked down or wounded.

Time for the combat round. DX order, most orcs strike second because of the -2 modifier vs. cavalry (p.132). So 10 cavalry strikes, vs roughly 15 infantry strike. A few of the cav are probably gonna go down but the horsemen will certainly perform better due to striking 1st and having carry over wounds on the orcs from the movement strikes. I would guesstimate 8 rohan vs 12 orcs now.

Turn 2- roll for initiative. Even if Rohan wins there is not much to be done as most if not all will be engaged by 2 enemies so little to no move attacks are possible. And due to maneuver rules even the one or two riders that can ride clear of enemies could only hope to cantor out in a shallow turn to reorient for a second charge.
So a tense round of normal turn order shifting followed by another round of combat. The orc numbers are still giving them an edge to off set some of the -2 DX with some flank and rear attacks. Not a sure thing for either side.

Now run the same scenario but put the orcs in a single line of 30. The Cav slice through them easily with most continuing well past the line in a single move, turn around and repeat.

Both I think are realistic outcomes based on historical accounts.

I am glad you started this thread, obviously I have been enjoying it.

[Shostak]

Originally Posted by timm meyers

A second movement phase in essence is the same as a single strike ride by but now we must contend with the effect of doubling the mounts MA because they get to move twice each turn. I think that change would make horses lighting fast unless we halved their current MA (which might work well?).

Adding the mounted rule exception to attack "during" movement seems pretty innocuous to me. The number of these attacks allowed is unimportant and obviously very subjective, but the ability emulates the use and mobility of cavalry very well.

I had understood that the MA would be divided between the two movement phases, so the maximum number of the sum of the hexes moved in the two phases can’t exceed one’s MA.

[madhopper50]

I've always wanted mounted combat rules for melee, but shouldn't this thread be in "House Rules" Seems to me all the discussion is on attacking, none on defense, terrain effects on movement or pike defense like in "Braveheart". More importantly is this all feasible on a 28' x 56' (7 hex x 14 hex) Melee map?

[Shostak]

Originally Posted by madhopper50

I've always wanted mounted combat rules for melee, but shouldn't this thread be in "House Rules" Seems to me all the discussion is on attacking, none on defense, terrain effects on movement or pike defense like in "Braveheart". More importantly is this all feasible on a 28' x 56' Melee map?

I’d reckon that a 28’ x 56’ map with 1.5” hexes ought to suffice. You might have to set up the table outside, though. ;-)

[Rolando]

A single Move rating, divided between 2 movement segments.

As for who can take a second movement segment, I believe anyone riding another entity, as it is not just a factor of speed but also of divindng your attention.

People riding beasts or riding in a car that someone else is driving for example.

If the horse want to kick it must stop and attack as normal, no second movement segment there.

The ride by attack and immediate target reaction attack is good to me, as long as it doesn't turn into a multiple attack situation, that seems as a stretch to me.

[Axly Suregrip]

This discussion should be moved to House Rules section.