Minor Adjustment

[-Stormrage-]

The removed-Storm-Fin axis demand an adjustment to Paragraph A line II of the EBO constitution which states:



No run-throughs or charge-throughs with either infantry or cavalry. The only exception is when withdrawing cavalry through enemy units. You may not withdraw your cavalry through your own units unless those units are in loose formation.

The Axis powers demand the united council of elders adjust said commandment to


when a Cavalry unit is surrounded it may not pullback it must fight to the death, unless a window of escape arrises in which case it lives to fight another day

We rest our case, and wait for the councils reply.

[Arjos]

Since in the engine there isn't any animation for "cutting your way out", imo is fine as it is...
War horses were trained to be weapons, they could kick etc...

Unlike infantry, who literally had to fight his way, cavalry had the possibility to just open a gap wide enough for the horse to run into it, not to mention it could trample on the enemy infantry; what enemy infantry could do to oppose that was to assume a very defensive position (like holding under the shield, even kneeling down), I don't see how this would make the cavalrymen "stuck", the only threat would be a spear and already as it is, those kill fast...

I could agree, that surrounded by spearmen, makes it pretty hard to get out, that would require distinctions in the rule between types of infantry...
Basically that "window of escape" can't be actively made by the cavalry, due to no animation (something which happened in real life), in my view we just have to live with it as it is...

[-Stormrage-]

by window of escape i mean maybe another inf unit comes over to push the enemy back (which would encourage inf to support cav advances hence more strategy) or if the cav was stuck with freindly and enemy troops on each side you would move your inf to the side to make room for cav to retreat through etc.

I see where your coming from but its currently very frustrating when you finally get your spears to catch those darn catas then they slip away through your own spears and charge your rear.


I'm up for having distinction in rules for types of infantry. How about we giving Medium to heavy spear units Wall of Stone attribute, which means no cav may charge through said unit.

[Kival]

I cannot agree for all infantry but for spears we may make such a rule.

[The Celtic Viking]

I should point out that Stormrage has taken his own liberties with my opinion. What I said to him is that rule #1 has been changed where before it only allowed cavalry to run through enemy infantry if it was surrounded first. It used to be that you couldn't run through enemy infantry otherwise, whereas now you only need to engage/be engaged with the infantry first.

I'd happily take it with the spear distinction though.

[-Stormrage-]

I should point out that Stormrage has taken his own liberties with my opinion. What I said to him is that rule #1 has been changed where before it only allowed cavalry to run through enemy infantry if it was surrounded first. It used to be that you couldn't run through enemy infantry otherwise, whereas now you only need to engage/be engaged with the infantry first.

I'd happily take it with the spear distinction though.

Yah, sorry about that...

So thats 3 votes for making spearmen Cavalry proof

[The Celtic Viking]

No problem. I can see how you made the mistake so it's fine, I was just clearing things up.

[Kival]

I should point out that Stormrage has taken his own liberties with my opinion. What I said to him is that rule #1 has been changed where before it only allowed cavalry to run through enemy infantry if it was surrounded first. It used to be that you couldn't run through enemy infantry otherwise, whereas now you only need to engage/be engaged with the infantry first.

Oh, i complelty agree here! Did not even realized that has been changed.

[vartan]

Oh, i complelty agree here! Did not even realized that has been changed.

http://ebportal.tk/wp/2012/06/03/fair-play-rule-2-re-wording/

We aim to keep you posted!

[-Stormrage-]

http://ebportal.tk/wp/2012/06/03/fair-play-rule-2-re-wording/

We aim to keep you posted!

Has nothing to do with what were discussing :p

That is about charging through own men etc. we are talking about Cav running through spearmen as if its nothing.

[Velho]

Yay Hoplites are more usefull

[The Celtic Viking]

Has nothing to do with what were discussing :p

That is about charging through own men etc. we are talking about Cav running through spearmen as if its nothing.

Yeah, it's about rule #1, not #2. I was as surprised as Kival to notice it had changed because I had seen no announcement or even heard of a discussion to do so.

[antisocialmunky]

Stack cav, profit still?

[vartan]

Yeah, it's about rule #1, not #2. I was as surprised as Kival to notice it had changed because I had seen no announcement or even heard of a discussion to do so.

The issue came up very quickly, early last month. We rephrase to add specificity. The gist remained the same.

[-Stormrage-]

That isnt what were talking about Vartan, this is a different issue.

Your talking about Fairplay rule number 1, were discussing rule number 2.

[The Celtic Viking]

The issue came up very quickly, early last month. We rephrase to add specificity. The gist remained the same.

Storm means we're talking about Rule #1, not #2. I feel like you're still talking about #2 though as I do remember that being discussed earlier, but that's wholly irrelevant to this discussion. I will quote it for ease:


1. No run-throughs or charge-throughs with either infantry or cavalry. The only exception is when withdrawing cavalry through enemy units. You may not withdraw your cavalry through your own units unless those units are in loose formation.

It used to say that the only exception was when the cavalry unit was surrounded, and then it had to take the route through enemy unit/s. This seems to be more than a rephrasing as (the way I interpret it, at least) you can now charge an enemy infantry unit and then run through it whereas you couldn't do that before.

[gamegeek2]

I hope we do not turn further away from a low-rules environment. We've eliminated many of the onerous composition rules of the past and replaced them with simple ones that do not mandate arbitrary classifications. We have only made minor changes to existing fair-play rules. Look at the results - compare the length of the Rules page when you load the Legacy Rules (http://ebportal.tk/wp/legacy-rules-pre-3-0/) as opposed to when you display the modern ones (http://ebportal.tk/wp/rules/). Now we are coming up with rules like "withdrawing when you are surrounded is OK, except through spear units." Huh?

Why are we even considering this? Spears are currently the most lethal melee weapon besides two handed weapons, at least on paper. They do much more damage to cavalry than swords do. Yet for some reason cavalry should not be allowed to withdraw from the unit type that is most effective against them?

There are obvious practical problems with this, too. Do Arjos count as spearmen, for example? Or do we only apply the rule if the unit has been ordered to use its spears? Will it now be advantageous for a player to switch from swords to spears so that the enemy cannot escape all of a sudden? Yet more annoying micro tips for new players to learn?

Besides, what real-life basis is there for such a distinction? Surely well-armed Roman legionaries post much more of a challenge for cavalry to escape from than Pantodapoi or Lugoae.

[Arjos]

Besides, what real-life basis is there for such a distinction? Surely well-armed Roman legionaries post much more of a challenge for cavalry to escape from than Pantodapoi or Lugoae.

Ah yes, the most famous legionary formation, so thight there was space for a man between each XD
And also the famed gladius, so long it pierced the rider's eyes and no kontos, no spatha, no machaira from horseback could outreach it...

Surely an incredible formation, everything stopped in front of it...

BTW if you read my post, I said this rule is too much trouble to apply it...

[Lazy O]

Firmly against .

[The Celtic Viking]

GG2, it's not about withdrawing from a unit but withdrawing through it that's the problem. Me and Kival spoke to Vartan about this a couple of nights ago and he said that the change that brought on this thread was an unintended cause of rephrasing the rule, and he was thinking of a way to rephrase it again so that this change is removed. In other words you still cannot run through close formation infantry unless surrounded, so if your cavalry is engaged you have to leave it in melee or withdraw into open space. You can't just run through the engaging unit. If no opening exist, then and only then may you run through enemy infantry. You can only run through your own if they are in loose formation.

So forget all about that "only spears" thing and just don't run cavalry through close order units unless your cav is surrounded, which is as it's always been.

[Arjos]

So now you guys are arguing for the inability to run through infantry, unless the cavalry is surrounded? XD

[The Celtic Viking]

So now you guys are arguing for the inability to run through infantry, unless the cavalry is surrounded? XD

No, it's the way it is and has been for years. That's exactly what my point was in my last post: the change that Stormrage complained about in the OP was an unintended one that came with a rephrasing, a mistake that Vartan is going to fix, and so the actual rule is the same as before. This means you may not run through already.

[-Stormrage-]

Excellent, all done here.

[Arjos]

So what's the deal with being surrounded now?

[The Celtic Viking]

If the cavalry is surrounded then you may run through, that's the exception. If not then you must take the open lane though.

[Arjos]

I'll be honest, that's pretty gamey XD
But good thing you sort out that leisurely running through matter :)

[Kival]

I'll be honest, that's pretty gamey XD

We can of course just forbid to withdraw cavalry at all when surrounded. :cheesy:



EDIT: I heavily disagree that more or more complex rules are necessarily bad btw.

[gamegeek2]

Don't units already take massive damage when running through? If so then why have a rule against it?

Or is the problem people running through infantry only to charge at the rear?

[The Celtic Viking]

Don't units already take massive damage when running through? If so then why have a rule against it?

They don't, not by my experience. They get out far too quickly to suffer any real damage (exception might be very lightly armoured cavalry, but even then I doubt you could call it "massive"); regardless of that though


Or is the problem people running through infantry only to charge at the rear?

this is indeed the reason why the rule was set in place, as I understand it. (This rule precedes my entrance into the MP community, after all.)

[Lazy O]

If the cavalry is surrounded then you may run through, that's the exception. If not then you must take the open lane though.

I thought this was always the rule ????

[The Celtic Viking]

I thought this was always the rule ????

Yes, that's correct. As I'm now saying for the third time, the "change" that caused this thread to exist was just an unintended consequence from a rephrasing of the rule. The actual meaning of the rule never changed, so you should still oblige by the rule as it was. I was just clarifying that since Arjos asked about it.

[vartan]

GG2, it's not about withdrawing from a unit but withdrawing through it that's the problem. Me and Kival spoke to Vartan about this a couple of nights ago and he said that the change that brought on this thread was an unintended cause of rephrasing the rule, and he was thinking of a way to rephrase it again so that this change is removed. In other words you still cannot run through close formation infantry unless surrounded, so if your cavalry is engaged you have to leave it in melee or withdraw into open space. You can't just run through the engaging unit. If no opening exist, then and only then may you run through enemy infantry. You can only run through your own if they are in loose formation.

So forget all about that "only spears" thing and just don't run cavalry through close order units unless your cav is surrounded, which is as it's always been.

Thanks TCV. Sorry everyone for responding more than a couple of days late. I normally like to respond sooner. I've been preoccupied lately. Some time in the past week I talked to TCV and Kival about this and they helped clarify for me what the issue is. There was never intended to be a drastic change in the first rule, regarding cavalry withdrawals. The core of the rule was always the same, just as TCV describes it. I came to the conclusion that I need to rewrite it to make it more faithful to the original idea behind the rule. I'll be doing that hopefully later today when I can sit down and put my thinking cap on.

For those thinking what's with all the talk about minimizing the number of rules or the size of the rules page and so on and so forth, that's a long story. I subscribe to a philosophy of minimalism both in academia and in life (as humanly possible; I'm not an ascetic). gamegeek2 also had his fair share of ideas in discussing rules with me. Combined with talks with the community, our post-3.0 ruleset has become reflective of this minimalism, and I'm fairly delighted with it so far.