Matrix Games Forums

a) result of a missile attack vs chariot. the chariot have moving but the missile attack receive a -1 for defending.

[:-][:-][:-][:-]

I have the screenshoot

one more

slinger with +1 for firing on highter ground. in the rule only the archer receive a bonus

all missile weapons receive the height bonus. Slingers/Bow etc...

please report things you think are bugs to the proper forum for reporting such things or support@matrixgames.com

As far as the rules, we will make sure that they are clarified so that the generic archer term is replaced with a generic missile term.

ORIGINAL: 2gaulle
a) result of a missile attack vs chariot. the chariot have moving but the missile attack receive a -1 for defending.

2gaulle,

It is possible that a "moving" unit can receive a defensive bonus. Remember, the turn is broken into 3 sub-phases. If a unit moves forward 1 space, they will have a move order in the first phase and a defend order in the reaction and reserve phase. If they move diagonally, they will have a facing order in the command phase, a move order in the reaction phase and a defend order in the reserve phase.

Did what you see fit any of these scenarios?

Deride

Did what you see fit any of these scenarios?

look like it's.

unfortunatly that doesn't make sense to have a defence bonus vs missile for chariot and cavalry. In fact for melee I don't see more reason.

have you ever play the old WRG rules?

ORIGINAL: 2gaulle
unfortunatly that doesn't make sense to have a defence bonus vs missile for chariot and cavalry. In fact for melee I don't see more reason.

2gaulle,

Really, that was a design decision to have defensive bonuses against missile units. Given the time period, armies did not rely heavily on missile units, and we needed to balance them to make sure they weren't too strong. Without the defensive bonus, units would have to run around to avoid too much missile damage -- something that wouldn't make sense for the period either.

Deride

Really, that was a design decision to have defensive bonuses against missile units. Given the time period, armies did not rely heavily on missile units, and we needed to balance them to make sure they weren't too strong. Without the defensive bonus, units would have to run around to avoid too much missile damage -- something that wouldn't make sense for the period either.

I could agree on the fact that missille are able to do too mutch damage, specialy again light troop. but the logical solution would have been to decrease the missille effect, not to give a malus for defence. by the way they were a great difference between indian bow and other nation, unfortunatly not in Tin.


an other point not logical.

an unit attack in the rear have the benefit of charge ?!?! I could understand a reduce of casualty because they run but certainly not an increase in damage done.

there are plenty of little think like that in Tin. as for reaction after a victory.
2 units fight again one, one of the 2 cause a retreat, but only one is able to react?! no sense. the first have a better reaction and so be logicaly able to more react than the 2nd.
on the other side if the first win, the 2nd must be able to do something.

too simple realy too simple