Any new updates?

[Bar853]

I was just wondering if there will be any further updates or revision to the rules and army list. There was some discussion about this a couple of months ago, but has since gone very quiet. Is Terry still active and part of the process or has he moved on to other things?
I am still having loads of fun with this rule set. I think that all those involved with the creation of this system have done a fantastic job. Thank you for your hard work.

Merry Christmas

[MDH]

Terry and I agreed the latest set last week so watch this space as they say- ball was/is in his court. Thanks for your kind words.

Mike Horah

[Bar853]

Thanks Mike! That is great news. You and Terry have just made my Christmas Again I would like to thank you for all your hard work and effort and have a merry Christmas and happy new year.

[nikgaukroger]

As Terry seems to have forgotten

Have a look here - http://www.fieldofglory.com/fog_nap

[MDH]

Thanks Nik - that's the one and a Merry Xmas a Good New Year to all FoG(N) fans.

Mike Horah

[Blathergut]

Would Terry not at least mention here that those have been put up?

[Philip]

Thanks Nik - that's the one and a Merry Xmas a Good New Year to all FoG(N) fans.

Mike Horah

Pelisse Navidad!

[terrys]

Sorry guys - I intended to - Christmas visits/shopping got in the way.

Of particular interest are the changes to the 1815 French and British lists.
The French now get a cavalry division, while the British list has been changed to allow them to field the Dutch-Belgium division(s) which was previously impossible because of the minimum requirement of British troops.

[KeefM]

Uh-oh.

The new rule amendment about a unit not finishing its move partially in a river means that it will now be impossible to cross rivers covered by enemy. All you need to do to prevent a crossing is station a unit slightly back from the river edge but with its front edge within 60mm (15mm figure base depth) of the river. A unit cannot assault into contact cos that would leave it finishing its assault move still in the river (always assuming it passes any shooting tests) which is now not allowed. Nor could a unit cross the river not in the assault phase cos there is no way for it to physically do so and not remain in the river. Thus, the amendment makes rivers impossible to cross in the face of any enemy even when they don't defend the river bank - was that the intention ?

Unless that was what was intended, can the the new amendment be either dropped entirely or changed to apply only to assault moves ?

[pugsville]

I thin you can when assaulting sort of .you dont actually move into the river but fight across, with the defender being back (1mu or something counts as defending) so units are in combat but not actually touching (I'd more at least one base over to symbolize contact)

[KeefM]

Exactly my point. The new amendment means that if you sit back from the rivers edge then your opponent can't cross. Not in an assault move nor in a normal move. Indeed, with a 4MU-wide river, by sitting >2MU but less than two base depths away from the edge no opposing unit can cross or even assault nor shoot at medium range !

[pugsville]

I would say that if they are defending the river to assault it you only need to reach your side of the river, once in contact with that it qualifies for combat similar to assaulting an occupied village you don't actually move to the unit but to your side of the obstacle. So for assaulting the width of the river isn't important.

Though that is simply my opinion.

[terrys]

The new rule amendment about a unit not finishing its move partially in a river means that it will now be impossible to cross rivers covered by enemy. All you need to do to prevent a crossing is station a unit slightly back from the river edge but with its front edge within 60mm (15mm figure base depth) of the river. A unit cannot assault into contact cos that would leave it finishing its assault move still in the river (always assuming it passes any shooting tests) which is now not allowed. Nor could a unit cross the river not in the assault phase cos there is no way for it to physically do so and not remain in the river. Thus, the amendment makes rivers impossible to cross in the face of any enemy even when they don't defend the river bank - was that the intention ?

This update is a clarification not a rule change.
Rivers have always been obstacles and you are either across it or you aren't across it (and therefore can't stay 'in' it).

Attacking across a defended river is difficult or impossible without the right preparation - as it should be.
Only a unit 'defending' (i.e. touching) a river can be assaulted. A unit standing back from a river can't be.
Each has it's advantages:
A unit defending a river gains the 'defending an obstacle' advantage and don't retire unless broken- The attackers count as having cohesion losses if the river is waist or shoulder height.
A unit standing back from the river can still be shot at medium range, unless the river is more than 90mm wide. It will retire if taking an additional hit while wavering. It cannot be assaulted. (An amendment restricting a river to a maxim width of 90mm would be useful - or perhaps by player agreement for the moment)

To cross a river defended in this way, you have 3 options:
1) Cross in single rank
2) Use 2 units separated by 2 base widths and cross with the one not blocked
3) Assault in column across a bridge
I'm not saying that any of these are easy - but an opposed crossing shouldn't be.