Archery in DOK

Handling missile units in late medieval games is precarious. If archery is too destructive, it can ruin historical replays where, despite significant numbers of archers, battles were decided by desperate hand to hand fighting. If missiles are too ineffective, then of course the equally unsatisfying opposite occurs. I had many early disappointing DOK games where slightly hot rolling would see one side gut the other before contact was made. This was particularly a problem for Wars of the Roses contests, where both sides would field an appropriately high percentage of Longbow units. What to do? Given the robust Chipco mechanisms, for me the answer is always house rules.

First, let’s review the most important one. The John Hills rule. This oldie but goody suggested that longbows and crossbows performed as “bows” (on the 1 instead of the 2 column and short range only) whenever demoralized. Full disclosure, I loved this rule. I’ve always felt that robust archery capability tended to cancel out when both sides possessed it. We see evidence of it in the Wars of the Roses and at Shrewsbury. I like to believe it could have been possible at Crecy if the Genoese were properly prepared.

This rule wasn’t present in DOK1, and DOK2 only allows a similar effect when double demoralized. An improvement, but simply not enough in my opinion. Obviously an unopposed missile contingent can do far more damage.

Two more significant advances came via Age of Hannibal. These rules alter the 1 Table to make a roll of 8 a hit. They also never allow skirmishers to combine fire with any other units. These two changes seem to generate the right feel, although that’s admittedly subjective. With freedom of movement, a handful of  these guys can be anything from mildly irritating to dangerous. Can be.

With that all being said, what are my latest house rule? Skirmishers are handled. They never combine and hit on 8+. As I’m using a grid, measuring in squares should be easy. Let’s review all the other missile troop options with regard to their capability in the shooting phase.

Longbows use the 2 column out to 4 squares, and the 1 column from 5-7 squares. I make them shoot at anything directly ahead or up to one base width to the left or right if a target is available, and they must target any unit in their ZOC. If no targets are within these parameters, they may then select any target within range and within a 45 degree angle, but it will only be on the 1 column even if within 4 squares. Demoralized or doubly demoralized units may only fire out to 4 spaces on the 1 column. Longbows may combine their shooting at will.

Crossbows work exactly the same, except that they may never combine shooting at long range of 5-7 squares. Experienced players will note that they now have a similar range to longbows, which I feel is warranted. They may not move if they shoot, as is traditional.

Light Artillery. Oh, the models. Love them. If you feel it’s warranted that they be different than crossbows, then here’s my current house rule. They fire out to 10 squares on the 1 table. They cause a panic check on units Subject to Panic. They are demoralized after firing, and may not fire again until they rally off demoralizations they received for any reason.

CF 0, Move 2/0, Rally 6+, Cause Panic, Subject to Panic

Boy, these need testing. And probably only inclusion in scenarios designed to accommodate them.

Finally, what have I done to the Bowfire table? Not much. As discussed, allowing rolls of 8 to hit is a major improvement from Age of Hannibal. The second house rule used is that the first K result in each row is changed to a double demoralization or DD. I just like reducing the “bang, yer dead” feeling. I also think that singling out units in the enemy line for saturation is a powerful gaming tool that shouldn’t be overly rewarded.