Points frustration

General discussion forum for anything related to Field of Glory Ancients & Medieval.

Moderators: hammy, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design, Field of Glory Moderators

Fluffy
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz  251/1
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 11:52 pm
Location: South Africa

Re: Points frustration

Post by Fluffy » Wed Dec 26, 2012 9:22 am

What annoys me is taking 3 TC's, they are the only thing that uses an uneven number of points. So if you take 3 or 1 you will not be able to spend the extra point and will have a max total of 799.
I sould say though, it's always just a peeve and not an acctual problem.

grahambriggs
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Posts: 2989
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am

Re: Points frustration

Post by grahambriggs » Thu Dec 27, 2012 9:43 am

Fluffy wrote:What annoys me is taking 3 TC's, they are the only thing that uses an uneven number of points. So if you take 3 or 1 you will not be able to spend the extra point and will have a max total of 799.
I sould say though, it's always just a peeve and not an acctual problem.
But they'll have an advantage in a 799 point competition!

ShrubMiK
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 824
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 8:37 am

Re: Points frustration

Post by ShrubMiK » Thu Dec 27, 2012 10:49 am

>they are the only thing that uses an uneven number of points

Ah - now that's where 1/3 supporting LF can come in handy!

NickW
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 75
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:27 am

Re: Points frustration

Post by NickW » Thu Jan 10, 2013 11:41 pm

I have an example - putting together a medieval army where the cheapest troop type is 6AP - potential to waste up to 11AP. Or even worse - you have selected all of your BGs with maximum allowable size and have, say, 14AP left over. What can you do with that? Seems a little unfair and artificial to require you to reconfigure your army to use all the AP, otherwise be at a disadvantage relative to armies with more flexible troop options.

philqw78
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Posts: 8696
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Manchester

Re: Points frustration

Post by philqw78 » Fri Jan 11, 2013 5:55 am

I use Sassanids. Is it fair then that I can overspend by 75 points as the cheapest BG in my army is 76.

That appears to be your logic
phil
putting the arg into argumentative

grahambriggs
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Posts: 2989
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am

Re: Points frustration

Post by grahambriggs » Fri Jan 11, 2013 9:42 am

NickW wrote:I have an example - putting together a medieval army where the cheapest troop type is 6AP - potential to waste up to 11AP. Or even worse - you have selected all of your BGs with maximum allowable size and have, say, 14AP left over. What can you do with that? Seems a little unfair and artificial to require you to reconfigure your army to use all the AP, otherwise be at a disadvantage relative to armies with more flexible troop options.
I appreciate you find this frustrating but being unable to spend that 14 AP is unlikely to make much difference in reality. And in the great majority of armies it's possible to get very close to the points limit.

Even if everyone agreed it was a glaring fault, which it isn't, nithing will be done about it for ages as we just have a new version of the rules.

philqw78
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Posts: 8696
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Manchester

Re: Points frustration

Post by philqw78 » Fri Jan 11, 2013 10:20 am

grahambriggs wrote:Even if everyone agreed it was a glaring fault, which it isn't, nithing will be done about it for ages as we just have a new version of the rules.
What could be done?
And points limits aren't really part of the rules, they are set by those organising the game.
phil
putting the arg into argumentative

kevinj
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2379
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 11:21 am
Location: Derbyshire, UK

Re: Points frustration

Post by kevinj » Fri Jan 11, 2013 10:31 am

I really think this is a non-issue. I checked the armies for 2 tournaments I umpired last year. Out of 40 lists:

19 were exactly 800 points.
17 were between 796-799.
4 were between 792-795.

So only 10% of players "lost" more than 5 points, and the greatest was 8.

ShrubMiK
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 824
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 8:37 am

Re: Points frustration

Post by ShrubMiK » Fri Jan 11, 2013 9:00 pm

I totally agree with Phil, allow people to overspend a little to avoid the "frustration" of not being able to spend all of the nominal limit, and all you achieve is people then getting frustrated because they spent exactly the nominal limit and therefore wasted the extra points they could have overspent by.

I have wondered though if the rules should perhaps allow odd numbers of bases in BGs (aside from the 9 base 2/3 1/3 thing). Seems theoretically perfectly justifiable to me. You have an 8 bases phalanx and can lose a base in combat in the battle today. Alternatively maybe that base was lost in a small skirmish yesterday and today as you deploy on table you start with an already depleted BG.

How the rules should work in such cases is presumably why the authors avoided this - do you count hits per base vs. 7 bases, or 8 bases on the theory that that's the units proper strength and the casualties lost before this battle should decrease their morale slightly? If the former, does the player game the system by choosing BG sizes that don't divide easily by 2 or 3. If the latter, why does the player pay normal cost that actually makes its BG quicker to get to -1 on CTs (lose one base from a 6 base BG and you haven't lost 25%; lost one from a 7 base BG that is considered to be 8 bases for morale purposes, and you have lost 25%).

hazelbark
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4957
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Capital of the World !!

Re: Points frustration

Post by hazelbark » Sun Jan 13, 2013 8:30 pm

ShrubMiK wrote:I have wondered though if the rules should perhaps allow odd numbers of bases in BGs (aside from the 9 base 2/3 1/3 thing). Seems theoretically perfectly justifiable to me. You have an 8 bases phalanx and can lose a base in combat in the battle today. Alternatively maybe that base was lost in a small skirmish yesterday and today as you deploy on table you start with an already depleted BG.
True but...

People would FREQUENTLY buy the odd base because it would give you so many advantages. For HPB in melee and shooting, the 25% penalty to autobreak level.

Now you consider giving a free extra base to every average, protected/un protected, defensive/offensive spear unit on the ground why not they need all the help they can get and make the minorly more sturdy. Still not enough to make them worth much.

ShrubMiK
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 824
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 8:37 am

Re: Points frustration

Post by ShrubMiK » Mon Jan 14, 2013 3:54 pm

Agreed. Which is why either making sure the benefits and downsides are reasonably balanced would be important, or perhaps just limit it to one BG with an "extra" base, purely for the purposes of using up some points, thereby limiting the possible gains that could be made from it.

Which also makes me think, why not consider allowing one BG of smaller than normal size? One 4 base auxilia BG in a Dominate Roman army, for example, presumably doesn't instantly turn it into a swarm, but does allow another mechanism for increased flexibility in spending points.

But of course this is just idle musing...I'm not particularly bothered by the rules as they stand, and seldom find myself wasting more than a 5 points.

lawrenceg
Colonel - Ju 88A
Colonel - Ju 88A
Posts: 1536
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 6:24 pm
Location: Former British Empire

Re: Points frustration

Post by lawrenceg » Tue Jan 15, 2013 3:39 pm

I think the solution is to restrict armies to 795 points, but allow you to go over the limit by up to 5 points.
Lawrence Greaves

philqw78
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Posts: 8696
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Manchester

Re: Points frustration

Post by philqw78 » Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:29 pm

lawrenceg wrote:I think the solution is to restrict armies to 795 points, but allow you to go over the limit by up to 5 points.
:)
phil
putting the arg into argumentative

ShrubMiK
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 824
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 8:37 am

Re: Points frustration

Post by ShrubMiK » Tue Jan 15, 2013 9:11 pm

I see your :) and raise you :lol:

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 22732
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Points frustration

Post by rbodleyscott » Thu Jan 17, 2013 11:59 am

lawrenceg wrote:I think the solution is to restrict armies to 795 points, but allow you to go over the limit by up to 5 points.
:wink:

NickW
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 75
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:27 am

Re: Points frustration

Post by NickW » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:13 am

grahambriggs wrote:
NickW wrote:I have an example - putting together a medieval army where the cheapest troop type is 6AP - potential to waste up to 11AP. Or even worse - you have selected all of your BGs with maximum allowable size and have, say, 14AP left over. What can you do with that? Seems a little unfair and artificial to require you to reconfigure your army to use all the AP, otherwise be at a disadvantage relative to armies with more flexible troop options.
I appreciate you find this frustrating but being unable to spend that 14 AP is unlikely to make much difference in reality. And in the great majority of armies it's possible to get very close to the points limit.

Even if everyone agreed it was a glaring fault, which it isn't, nithing will be done about it for ages as we just have a new version of the rules.
It's not a fault nor a major problem, just a frustration (that is probably unnecessary). :)

NickW
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 75
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:27 am

Re: Points frustration

Post by NickW » Tue Jan 29, 2013 1:13 am

lawrenceg wrote:I think the solution is to restrict armies to 795 points, but allow you to go over the limit by up to 5 points.
Brilliant! :D

tamerlane
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 105
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 3:27 am

Re: Points frustration

Post by tamerlane » Tue Jan 29, 2013 3:10 am

I played 7th and Warrior for years and you could exceed the notional total by the value of the cheapest element in your army.

I never understood there to be any basis in principle for that approach.

It lead to lots of discussion.

I prefer the hard limits.

I am also in favour of having tournaments at varying points sizes to prevent people obsessing about their one perfect list that they use all the time.

Adrian

IanB3406
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 340
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2007 6:06 am

Re: Points frustration

Post by IanB3406 » Tue Jan 29, 2013 4:25 am

I recently saw a fow tournament posted at 1760 points. Speculation was that someone had found a perfect list at 1760 so made the tournament at this level.

Ian

ShrubMiK
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 824
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 8:37 am

Re: Points frustration

Post by ShrubMiK » Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:09 pm

lol

sounds like an entirely reasonable speculation!

I could relate to a FoW points limit of something like 1939 though.

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory : Ancient & Medieval Era 3000 BC-1500 AD : General Discussion”