OTHER

Moderators: Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design

terrys
Panzer Corps Team
Panzer Corps Team
Posts: 4181
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 11:53 am

Re: OTHER

Post by terrys » Sun Sep 11, 2016 3:21 pm

Why should they be hit at all? In games I've played in and watched LH seem to be used quite historically (wearing away the enemy with repeated and rapid missile attacks, then quick withdrawals).
You've obviously never played Hungarians with 5 BGs of battled troops and 7 BGs of LH. The army can't be broken without killing at least on the the LH BGs, meaning tht the battle troops can be committed without the risk of losing the game.
There's nothing more frustrating than playing the last half of a game with absolutely no chance of catching the additional BG of LH needed to break your opponents army.

There's nothing in these proposals that stop you using you LH historically.

ChrisTofalos
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 212
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2014 5:18 pm

Re: OTHER

Post by ChrisTofalos » Tue Sep 13, 2016 10:51 am

Why should they be hit at all?
I think I owe everyone an apology here. At a V3 test game at MAWS last night one of the players pointed out that it isn't actually going to make much of a difference to LH at all.

Oops! :oops:

Chris

This post appeared after I'd written the above:
You've obviously never played Hungarians with 5 BGs of battled troops and 7 BGs of LH.
Very true, Terry! Unfortunately, my experience playing FOG is about a third the length of time of most others.

Still blushing of Bolton! :roll:

Caliph
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2009 7:30 am
Location: Oldham

Re: OTHER

Post by Caliph » Sat Mar 04, 2017 2:18 pm

I've read the comments with interest, even discussed a few at the club. I thought I'd add my opinions, or changes I would like to happen, for what thy are worth.

Skirmishers/evaders - no matter what troop type, if caught evading by chargers should drop a cohesion level and lose a base. If caught by heavier troops, they should again have to evade, the chargers having an option to continue the pursuit. If evaders are caught again, same applies. If caught by chargers of same type (LF by LF, Cv by Cv etc) the evaders can have the option to turn and fight.

I like the idea of moving heavier troops into contact with skirmishers forcing the skirmishers to evade. As if a full fat legion would be bothered about a few boys wearing a smile and carrying a sharp stick. Put it in the rules.

HF movement. Moving further would be nicer for HF, but unless MF get additional movement, it's a bit unfair. Perhaps changing the second move distance restrictions instead could be considered. What if a second move by heavy troops, if it contacts the light troops thereby forcing them to evade, was permitted? Makes things more difficult for skirmishers but means the heavy troops have to have a general committed to them and will effectively be moving faster?

Second move restriction caused by non-light troops - drop it down to 3MU. If you do this and the previous suggestion, there would be no need to give HF a longer move.

Make Light Chariots better. A great idea. They are utterly useless at the moment. (This has nothing to do with my under construction Gallic army of course.)

Bw* getting second rank shooting at impact. Great idea. Get it in the rules. (Nothing to do with my Highlanders or Japanese - which are rubbish anyway.) At the moment all Bw* does is cost me a Japanese battlegroup.

MF - need to be better. Currently when MF are in the open they are useless. No matter what the MF are armed with, HF and mounted will make mincemeat of them.

Heavy weapon - all this does is direct your opponent to charge them with mounted.

And finally a whinge about one of my pet armies. Scots Isles & Highlands. Effectively a Viking Successor - but no veteran or superior troops, no armour, very little chance of winning. Galloglaich can be superior but only when they are not at home.

terrys
Panzer Corps Team
Panzer Corps Team
Posts: 4181
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 11:53 am

Re: OTHER

Post by terrys » Fri Mar 24, 2017 3:02 pm

LF could also be "fixed" simply by putting an arbitrary limit of, say, 3 units max in any army list.

A lot of the FoG lists (arguably) allow overly-gamey compositions because of an apparent desire on the part of the writers to include all historic options for all force sizes - perhaps a more pragmatic "what can you do to build a 800-point-sensible-list" approach to maxima and minima could be easier to implement than twiddling with some of the rules.
We will be reducing the number of skirmishers permitted to a lot of armies. You certainly won't be able to field lots of them as cheap filler.
We are changing the max/min for core troops in most armies. This should remove a lot of 'gamey' compositions where a player can cherry pick all the best units while leaving out most of the more (historically) common troops types

Skirmishers in general seem to be used more historically under V3 proposals than under V2.
There's generally less of them - So that you'll not likely end up facing those armies that are more than half skirmisher and therefore impossible to catch.
The reduced numbers of them are used more selectively
We've also found that combat between lines of LF (and sometimes LH) happens more often now - because the effect of losing them isn't so great.

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory 3.0 Beta”