Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

about the destruction of a siege engine

Expand Messages
  • kosoris
    So I have been interested in siege engines and am currently working on making my own ballista. I was reading up on the rules in the siege handbook and I
    Message 1 of 4 , Jan 6, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      So I have been interested in siege engines and am currently working on making my own ballista. I was reading up on the rules in the siege handbook and I noticed that if there is fighting around a siege engine then it is declared destroyed.

      I was thinking that it was common practice for captured enemy engines to be used against them when they were taken with minimum damage.

      So I would like to throw an idea out there and let me know if A) it has already been thought of and dismissed or B) whatever...

      Perhaps you place a flag or something near the engine and have like a piece of paper hanging off it, if the enemy is able to take the paper flag intact then the enemy must sacrifice a number of fighters equal to the crew of the engine and the fighters get to tel the crew where to fire.(for safety reasons the crew are the only ones trained to fire the engine)

      if the crew is able to tear the paper flag or really any tearing of the flag would signify sufficient damage for the weapon to be unusable and thus out of the battle.

      I am just thinking this off the top of my head, so if this is the dumbest idea you have ever heard please, no need to be too harsh I am still learning, otherwise I would encourage discussion.
    • Sean Powell
      It has been discussed before. Feel free to use it as a scenario rule as an exception but don t expect it to change the game to a significant degree. In
      Message 2 of 4 , Jan 7, 2012
      • 0 Attachment
        It has been discussed before. Feel free to use it as a scenario rule as
        an exception but don't expect it to change the game to a significant degree.

        In general, SCA siege engines are positioned in the backfield and
        frequently for resurrection battles. The closer you get to the engine
        the faster the enemy recovers and they are very difficult to capture or
        kill. In the event that you do capture or kill one you now need a siege
        qualified crew. If you have a siege crew with you then they have an
        unfamiliar engine that they haven't been checked out on. Finally if you
        capture an engine have a crew and are comfortable using the engine, the
        majority of the enemy is probably too close to legally use the engine
        against. If you capture an engine, with a crew, that can use it and all
        of the enemy is far enough away to shoot at... hold your breath, the
        cannon is about to announce everything is over. (or the engine was
        abandoned for a lack of ammo)

        Then, at least for cannons, there is the very period solution of driving
        a nail through the touch-hole so that a captured engine can't be used.
        For most SCA era siege engines a knife to the bowstring would be as
        effective.

        I really like the movie scene where the Luke kills the gunner, points
        the cannon at the deck of Jabbas barge and starts blasting away (ya know
        WWI invented a system to keep pilots from shooting off their own props
        and wings. You think they'd learn in a galaxy far far away.) but in most
        SCA combat people are packed way to close for those sorts of actions.

        Sean


        On 1/7/2012 12:21 AM, kosoris wrote:
        > So I have been interested in siege engines and am currently working on making my own ballista. I was reading up on the rules in the siege handbook and I noticed that if there is fighting around a siege engine then it is declared destroyed.
        >
        > I was thinking that it was common practice for captured enemy engines to be used against them when they were taken with minimum damage.
        >
        > So I would like to throw an idea out there and let me know if A) it has already been thought of and dismissed or B) whatever...
        >
        > Perhaps you place a flag or something near the engine and have like a piece of paper hanging off it, if the enemy is able to take the paper flag intact then the enemy must sacrifice a number of fighters equal to the crew of the engine and the fighters get to tel the crew where to fire.(for safety reasons the crew are the only ones trained to fire the engine)
        >
        > if the crew is able to tear the paper flag or really any tearing of the flag would signify sufficient damage for the weapon to be unusable and thus out of the battle.
        >
        > I am just thinking this off the top of my head, so if this is the dumbest idea you have ever heard please, no need to be too harsh I am still learning, otherwise I would encourage discussion.
        >
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        >
      • brian kosoris
        Thank you for that explanation but I was suggesting that the actual original crew of the weapon continue to man the weapon, there just needs to be an
        Message 3 of 4 , Jan 7, 2012
        • 0 Attachment
          Thank you for that explanation but I was suggesting that the actual
          original crew of the weapon continue to man the weapon, there just needs to
          be an equivalent number of enemy fighters there to "crew" it for the other
          side and basically tell the Actual crew where to fire bolts. When the
          engine is captured the original crew is "dead" so they would just act as
          weapon operators, nothing more.

          Also it shouldn't be easy to capture the weapon. the flag idea is that it
          is made out of paper and easy to destroy. Destroy flag=destroy weapon,
          capture flag intact= capture weapon.

          I do see your point about being near the rez points making it quite
          crowded. I personally think that the 5 ft rule is needed but not for
          protecting the fighters. In this rant I an speaking only about ballistas.
          If the prod of a ballista were to contact a fighter it would likely not
          hit him harder than most armor could take to prevent injury, and if he were
          unlucky enough to get hit in an unarmored bit then it would give him a
          nice welt or maybe a cut in the case of catching the end of a steel prod.
          But the possible damage to the ballista can take it out of the fight
          possibly for the rest of the war. So in my mind this rule isn't to keep the
          fighters safe, its to keep the brutes from ruining a finely running weapon.
          I am not an authorized siege engineer but I have seen them
          operate extensively so maybe I will see things different when I start
          test firing mine.

          BTW, I hope to be on the field @ gulf wars with a shiny new ballista, will
          there be people there to authorize a crew?

          On Sat, Jan 7, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Sean Powell <powell.sean@...> wrote:

          > **
          >
          >
          > It has been discussed before. Feel free to use it as a scenario rule as
          > an exception but don't expect it to change the game to a significant
          > degree.
          >
          > In general, SCA siege engines are positioned in the backfield and
          > frequently for resurrection battles. The closer you get to the engine
          > the faster the enemy recovers and they are very difficult to capture or
          > kill. In the event that you do capture or kill one you now need a siege
          > qualified crew. If you have a siege crew with you then they have an
          > unfamiliar engine that they haven't been checked out on. Finally if you
          > capture an engine have a crew and are comfortable using the engine, the
          > majority of the enemy is probably too close to legally use the engine
          > against. If you capture an engine, with a crew, that can use it and all
          > of the enemy is far enough away to shoot at... hold your breath, the
          > cannon is about to announce everything is over. (or the engine was
          > abandoned for a lack of ammo)
          >
          > Then, at least for cannons, there is the very period solution of driving
          > a nail through the touch-hole so that a captured engine can't be used.
          > For most SCA era siege engines a knife to the bowstring would be as
          > effective.
          >
          > I really like the movie scene where the Luke kills the gunner, points
          > the cannon at the deck of Jabbas barge and starts blasting away (ya know
          > WWI invented a system to keep pilots from shooting off their own props
          > and wings. You think they'd learn in a galaxy far far away.) but in most
          > SCA combat people are packed way to close for those sorts of actions.
          >
          > Sean
          >
          >
          > On 1/7/2012 12:21 AM, kosoris wrote:
          > > So I have been interested in siege engines and am currently working on
          > making my own ballista. I was reading up on the rules in the siege handbook
          > and I noticed that if there is fighting around a siege engine then it is
          > declared destroyed.
          > >
          > > I was thinking that it was common practice for captured enemy engines to
          > be used against them when they were taken with minimum damage.
          > >
          > > So I would like to throw an idea out there and let me know if A) it has
          > already been thought of and dismissed or B) whatever...
          > >
          > > Perhaps you place a flag or something near the engine and have like a
          > piece of paper hanging off it, if the enemy is able to take the paper flag
          > intact then the enemy must sacrifice a number of fighters equal to the crew
          > of the engine and the fighters get to tel the crew where to fire.(for
          > safety reasons the crew are the only ones trained to fire the engine)
          > >
          > > if the crew is able to tear the paper flag or really any tearing of the
          > flag would signify sufficient damage for the weapon to be unusable and thus
          > out of the battle.
          > >
          > > I am just thinking this off the top of my head, so if this is the
          > dumbest idea you have ever heard please, no need to be too harsh I am still
          > learning, otherwise I would encourage discussion.
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > ------------------------------------
          > >
          > >
          >
          >
          >


          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • Patrick Connors
          I could see this in certain scenarios - I m thinking resurrection battles - with the following changes. Let s use Red vs Blue, and Red captures one of Blue s
          Message 4 of 4 , Jan 7, 2012
          • 0 Attachment
            I could see this in certain scenarios - I'm thinking resurrection battles - with the following changes. Let's use Red vs Blue, and Red captures one of Blue's ballistas (by capturing a flag nearby)
            1. Don't worry about Red sacrificing fighters to make the sides equal. Impractical and not fun. Besides who gets to decide and how?
            2. Blue needs to have a way to capture the flag back.
            3. After a certain number of exchanges, the siege weapon is declared "destroyed". Keep track of these by attaching tokens to the flag. Remove a token at each turnover.

            As a practical matter, though, siege weapons are generally emplaced in such a way that if the siege weapon is taken, it would be difficult or impractical to turn them onto the other side.
            In period, I'm thinking of siege weapons either attacking or defending a castle.
            In SCA terms, a specific example is Estrella War, where the size of the fighting field the last few years has restricted siege lines of fire. We're getting a bigger field this year, but it looks like there will still be some restrictions.

            On Jan 6, 2012, at 10:21 PM, kosoris wrote:

            > So I have been interested in siege engines and am currently working on making my own ballista. I was reading up on the rules in the siege handbook and I noticed that if there is fighting around a siege engine then it is declared destroyed.
            >
            > I was thinking that it was common practice for captured enemy engines to be used against them when they were taken with minimum damage.
            >
            > So I would like to throw an idea out there and let me know if A) it has already been thought of and dismissed or B) whatever...
            >
            > Perhaps you place a flag or something near the engine and have like a piece of paper hanging off it, if the enemy is able to take the paper flag intact then the enemy must sacrifice a number of fighters equal to the crew of the engine and the fighters get to tel the crew where to fire.(for safety reasons the crew are the only ones trained to fire the engine)
            >
            > if the crew is able to tear the paper flag or really any tearing of the flag would signify sufficient damage for the weapon to be unusable and thus out of the battle.
            >
            > I am just thinking this off the top of my head, so if this is the dumbest idea you have ever heard please, no need to be too harsh I am still learning, otherwise I would encourage discussion.
            >
            >



            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.