From: "Sean Jackson" Subject: Medieval: After Action Report (Long) Downloaded demo last night and hafta say I'm pretty impressed. Here's the lowdown so far: Demo is a speculative Robin Hood scenario, and while downloading, had my doubts -- until I saw the set-up. Within a century of Hastings, a Norman army of 870+ seeks battle w/ rebellious Saxons led by Hood, who leads a gaggle of @575. Key to Norman victory is to destroy Hood's army or capture the sacred Saxon Stone Circle located on a low lying hill in a clearing of Sherwood forest. Playing as Normans first I was able to win by utilizing my horse (which the Saxons don't have) to penetrate his flanks, then isolate and destroy the powerful longbow leader units of Hood and Will Scarlet. The battle was pitched, w/ my Normans suffering heavy losses to the longbows until the flanks were turned. After that, the Saxons army crumbled and I achieved victory by turn 9 (of an 18 turn scenario). The real fun came when I played as the Saxons. Here I got to utilize the full flavor of the simulation. I actually moved my covering line of Pikemen one hex forward, spread them every other hex, and formed them into defensive square. I then alternated, one hex back, my shortbowmen ready to take the Normans in range as soon as they closed. To supplement this line, I fed in reserves of Men-at-Arms, equipped w/ battle-axes and shields and able to form "line of shields". Both square and line of shields are defensive formations, that while they preclude you from attacking or moving well, add defensive melee benefits. The two longbowmen units then formed behind this line to take advantage of their six hex range. Bowman, both long and short are the key to victory for the Saxons, as both seem to dominate their Norman bow brethren, and can keep the rest of the Normans at "arms length" for much of the battle. Targeting priority was as follows: Longbowmen had as a priority the Norman horse, which is his main advantage. Secondary to this is "counter-battery" to the Norman bows, as they outrange them. Shortbowman primarily focus on counter-battery of Norman bows when they get into range since they seem to be able to "outduel" them in a same-range fight. Their secondary target is the Norman infantry who can often be stopped in their tracks, once they get within two hexes, by a shower of arrows. With this plan in place, the battle began. A constant stream of arrows broke, disrupted or routed Norman units, w/ the longbows successfully halting the horse. The mobs of Norman infantry reached the battleline, but found rough going on the Saxon pike squares and rows of shields. This cycle continued until about halfway through the battle, when the weary Saxons began to run out of arrows. As those Norman units that haven't fled the battle rally and surge forward, the contest becomes a nail-biter, w/ Saxons grudgingly giving ground and falling back up the hill. By about turn 15, the Normans successfully infiltrate horse units behind the hill and make a bid for the Stone Circle. Luckily, Friar Tuck's elite unit of swordsmen fight them back down the hill. When the battle ends on turn 18, I still control the Circle and achieve victory. The bloody contest costs the Normans nearly 700 men (including deserters), and the "Outlaws", nearly 260. I think Medieval could be the "sleeper" hit of the summer, as there seems to be a thorough tactical engine under the hood. Various weapons, w/ their strengths and weakness, types of body armour, and even class of soldiers (i.e. "noble", "knight") appear to be modeled. The AI, set on a medium setting seemed above average. With an editor included, so you can recreate virtually any clash of the middle ages, it adds value heretofore unseen in an ISI product. Now if only my software retailer can locate a copy for me! From: "Sean Jackson" Subject: Re: Medieval: After Action Report (Long) James Cobb wrote in message <3597768E.7A9D@inxpress.net>... >Doesn't the lack of reaction fire bother you? Also, the mechanics of >moving and melee one unit at a time? > >Jim Cobb Good points Jim, thanks for bringing them to light. Yes lack of reaction fire would be one of my biggest criticisims of the game. Interestingly, units will "reaction-melee" (counter charge officially) sometimes as a result of adjacent enemy movement. Most archer units have two fire opportunities per turn, so it seems this could be easily patched to allow one of those, optionally, to be saved for reaction fire. As to moving and melee one unit at a time, I have mixed emotions. While it would be convienent to be able to group or formation move units, the ability to carfully cooridinate "group" melees against one target hex would be pretty ahistorical from what I understand of the period, as melee combat usually degenerated into a free-for-all. Since each melee tends to effect the defender by loss of men, loss of morale, and/or disruption, consecutive melees into the same hex by different attackers usually forces the same result.