Two Handed Weapons, "Lance", Mounted Combat and basic physics

[Joerg]

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

So how much of a bonus do you think that's worth? Break even, slight damage bonus? I could see a range bonus due to height. Is a charging horse as good as, say an alt-alt ? That would be a an easy solution.

Break even, or (though not a common solution used for damage dice in RQ) up the number of sides on the damage die by two (turn D4 into D6, or D6 into D8).

I had the chance to play around with an atl-atl, and for me it is a projectile weapon rather than a technique to toss a normal javelin further or for more damage. The projectile is more like an oversized arrow, with fletching to keep it aligned along the throw, and even as a bloody beginner I felt able to hit a bale of hay at medium bow distance. The extra length of the arrow requires some quite tough shafts, but still way thinner than your usual hand-thrown javelin. I would use a normal javelin for parrying, but I wouldn't bother with an atl-atl missile.

Atl-atl penetration is from higher speed and narrow points, javelin penetration is from missile mass and probably wider shaft and point.

[Atgxtg]

1 hour ago, Joerg said:

Break even, or (though not a common solution used for damage dice in RQ) up the number of sides on the damage die by two (turn D4 into D6, or D6 into D8).

Yeah, I've been seriously considering reworking the weapon damage and/or damage bonuse along those lines. d2/d4/d6/d8/d10. Maybe a shift for every 4 points of STR+SIZ. Then everything else could be handled with die shifts. 

1 hour ago, Joerg said:

I had the chance to play around with an atl-atl, and for me it is a projectile weapon rather than a technique to toss a normal javelin further or for more damage.

Sorry, my bad, I didn't explain what I was thinking. I meant that is the bonus for a mounted javelin throw as good, in game terms as the alt-alt  was in RQ3, where it gave +10m to range, +20m to max range, and +1D6 damage. Again sorry, I should have clarified that. 

[Julian Lord]

1 hour ago, Atgxtg said:

Lol! Don't forget poleing rafts and gondolas.

That's the Long Staff -- different weapon entirely ... 😋

[M Helsdon]

17 hours ago, Furry Fella said:

There have been quite a few experiments looking at the issue of mount velocity to missile fire. The debate and experiments usually have major flaws from poor simulation of the mass techniques needed for engagement. Almost all close range mounted fire is delivered with a passing motion so simple mechanical variants that simulate  head to head are very questionable.

Mounted skirmisher fire was almost always at close range to compensate for crossing speed, and the variable and erratic geometry of motion from being mounted.

I recommend reading Ann Hyland's Training the Roman Cavalry: From Arrian's Ars Tactica. Whilst it relates to Roman javelin cavalry, like much of the Roman military machine, the tactics were lifted from others. The best mounted javelin skirmishers were expected to be able to throw one on the straight, a second as they passed the target, and often a third as they veered away. The most skilled could apparently throw a fourth back over their shoulder. The best ergonomic technique made use of a quiver carrying three or more javelins, with the quiver mounted on the rear right of the saddle with the shafts pointing forward, heads down, so that the rider could smoothly and rapidly draw, raise, and throw.

So most would be thrown on the approach, turning away and then receding. Riding along the front of a hostile formation is not conducive to survival, either mounted, or in a chariot...

Edited July 18, 2018 by M Helsdon

[Pentallion]

On 7/18/2018 at 11:59 AM, M Helsdon said:

I recommend reading Ann Hyland's Training the Roman Cavalry: From Arrian's Ars Tactica. Whilst it relates to Roman javelin cavalry, like much of the Roman military machine, the tactics were lifted from others. The best mounted javelin skirmishers were expected to be able to throw one on the straight, a second as they passed the target, and often a third as they veered away. The most skilled could apparently throw a fourth back over their shoulder. The best ergonomic technique made use of a quiver carrying three or more javelins, with the quiver mounted on the rear right of the saddle with the shafts pointing forward, heads down, so that the rider could smoothly and rapidly draw, raise, and throw.

So most would be thrown on the approach, turning away and then receding. Riding along the front of a hostile formation is not conducive to survival, either mounted, or in a chariot...

The circle.  If you've ever played Rome Total War you've probably seen the light cavalry form a rotating circle formation that allows for a constant stream of javelins to rain down on a formation, forcing them to hunker down.

[M Helsdon]

10 minutes ago, Pentallion said:

The circle.  If you've ever played Rome Total War you've probably seen the light cavalry form a rotating circle formation that allows for a constant stream of javelins to rain down on a formation, forcing them to hunker down.

That's the form used in displays. The reality was probably more complex, especially as there wouldn't be that many javelins in a rider's quiver, so there was a need to ride to the supply wagons and 'reload'.

[Pentallion]

Off topic but Id pay for a PC game Glorantha: Total War.

[boztakang]

2 hours ago, Pentallion said:

Off topic but Id pay for a PC game Glorantha: Total War.

+1000

I've been playing the hell out of TW:Warhammer2, and thinking you could ALMOST do a decent glorantha version via mod.

On the other hand, the warhammer property is only currently planned through tw:wh3, so there could be a window to a make a Glorantha version happen. I think it might be a bit of a hard sell, given the relative "niche-ness" of glorantha and the expense of that kind of AAA title, but one can dream 🙂