FOGN 2nd Edition

General discussion forum for anything related to Field of Glory Napoleonics.

Moderators: hammy, terrys, Blathergut, Slitherine Core, hammy, Blathergut, terrys, Slitherine Core

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

FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by terrys » Wed Apr 29, 2015 3:00 pm

We're working on 2nd Edition of FOGN as of now!

Planned changes are as follows:
1) Add all updates
2) Reformat rules to make them easier to follow and understand.
3) Update the index and reference section to make it easier to find the information you're looking for.
4) Add new feature and updates to improve the game.
5) Replace the example lists with something else (Campaign rules perhaps?)

Item 4) will be of particular interest to existing players looking for a refresh to the rules.
We have a number of ideas already with areas for improvement such as:
>> More use of Command Points, and hence more value in selecting better quality commanders.
>> More varied setup options - where, for example, beating someones initiative by 9:8 gives different setup choices to a 5:4 win.
>> A review of army balance - Divisional structure, Attachments, and allied/attached division formats.
>> Other updates to rules and terrain options.
Additional suggestions would be welcome. Please post the here or send to me by message.

We will also be looking at the lists, although haven't decided on whether to reproduce them as yet. It depends upon how many changes, if any, the updates to the rules will require.
I know that Mike has identified some additional lists that he'd like to add (although they could go into the back of the rules).
Again - anyone with suggestions for additional lists can post here or send them to me.

> We'll be looking for BETA testers to try out new features before fully incorporating them. Anyone interested can let me know by message - we'll need names in groups of 2 or more, with full email addresses please.


Thanks for your support so far.

Terry

BrettPT
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1262
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by BrettPT » Thu Apr 30, 2015 12:15 am

Great news. I've flicked you a private message Terry putting my hand up to test v2.

Cheers
Brett

shadowdragon
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Brigadier-General - Elite Grenadier
Posts: 2043
Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2009 7:29 pm
Location: Manotick, Ontario, Canada

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by shadowdragon » Thu Apr 30, 2015 3:21 am

Unfortunately I'm only a group of one but would be keen to beta test.

Saxonian
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz  251/1
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2014 12:00 am

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by Saxonian » Thu Apr 30, 2015 11:38 am

This is great news.
The League of Ancients in Melbourne has a group of about 10-12 who play FOGN on a very regular basis, I'm sure I speak for them when I say we would love to help out with play-testing.

MDH
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Posts: 198
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:00 pm

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by MDH » Thu Apr 30, 2015 4:42 pm

Just to clarify re lists that might be put at the back of the 2nd ed of rules ( assuming we don't' review most of the lists)
a) an additional Grande Armee corps in each of 1809 and 1812 in response to those that folk have mentioned they were sorry not to see there :( Do remind me if you were one of those!) :shock:
b) the Rheinbund regiments of 1809 ( see separate thread I did some time ago)
c) a thorough review of 1814 in the light of George Nafziger's book just published ( obtained at SALUTE) and which has a great many new orders of battle) where for example there was a British Division of 6000-8000 men in the Netherlands cooperating with Russians and Prussians. Currently there are allied lists that are 1813-1814. I think this work makes a distinctive 1814 set of lists for the allies at least and maybe the French feasible . There has been so little published in English on this campaign.
d) I shall also go through them all to see f there are other supplementary add on Divs I can i/d eg maybe expand and develop the French allied list in 1805-07 a bit more. Any views on that?

Also I want to look again at the way we classify French Middle and Young Guard Chasseurs ,Voltigeurs et al as light infantry - We were not consistent - mainly a factor of the order in which they ere written and published.

Any other thoughts folks?

Mike Horah

Daemionhunter
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 70
Joined: Fri Jan 10, 2014 8:41 am

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by Daemionhunter » Fri May 01, 2015 8:39 am

Hi Brett. Count me in too if NSWC is involved.

marty
Sergeant Major - SdKfz 234/2 8Rad
Sergeant Major - SdKfz 234/2 8Rad
Posts: 635
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:26 am
Location: Sydney

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by marty » Sat May 02, 2015 9:18 am

Are you guys considering modifying the points at all? I understand it is a vexed question given they are published with the lists but I feel there are one or two tweaks that could help.

I play with 4 other guys in Sydney. We would love to be part of the playtest.

Martin

MDH
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Posts: 198
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:00 pm

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by MDH » Sat May 02, 2015 11:10 am

marty wrote:Are you guys considering modifying the points at all? I understand it is a vexed question given they are published with the lists but I feel there are one or two tweaks that could help.

I play with 4 other guys in Sydney. We would love to be part of the playtest.

Martin
We don't want a wholesale revision of the points set out in the tables at back of each book as that would not only require every list to be rewritten it would potentially unbalance the game and be unwelcome, I suspect , to many, current users.

What do you mean by "tweaks"? Examples?

We have discussed whether we could adjust the cost of British Line Infantry by one point ( down) to reflect the "move unreformed fire reformed" aspect . We have also wondered whether later Austrian Line Infantry should be classified as "move reformed and fire unreformed" with a one point adjustment upwards. They key to the latter is - from when?

My question to study is at what point has the Austrian army ceased to be comprised of the long serving regulars of the 1790s-1805 and become mainly, or much more, dependent on newly raised units and men who were not therefore so well trained in the old style of movement in line so could not conform to the old way of fighting.

We think the continued lack of really effective left flank companies by comparison with other armies is still a limitation . My present inclination , if we were to go down that route, would be to do so from 1813. The Austrian army was limited in the size of its army by enforced treaty terms by Napoleon but I want to look in more detail at the recruitment pattern for 1809 before being sure on that .

MDH
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Posts: 198
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:00 pm

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by MDH » Sat May 02, 2015 11:25 am

I realise in referring to the British in the Netherlands in 1814 that we already have that list ( page 120 of ToN) but I want to see if George's book , in orders of battle ( over 355 pages of them !) and narrative gives us new insight to improve it in a number of ways - eg optional Prussian units and optional mortars . Ditto the German Confederation lists on pages 117-119.George offers three versions of the 3rd German ( Saxon) Corps ( ToN on page 119-120).

That will also apply to the other 1814 lists especially the French where presently there are only two lists.

Are folk interested in a more expanded 1814 set for what was only 4 months at most of fighting?

What I don't want to do is offer new additional lists that are so nuanced as to be indistinguishable! Better to tweak existing ones if that can be justified.

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

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by terrys » Sat May 02, 2015 11:32 am

Are you guys considering modifying the points at all? I understand it is a vexed question given they are published with the lists but I feel there are one or two tweaks that could help.
We will try to avoid that if possible - mainly due to the effort involved in revising all the lists.
We would be interested in hearing about the 'tweaks' that you mention though.
I play with 4 other guys in Sydney. We would love to be part of the playtest.
Can you send me a message with the names and email addresses of 2 of your group that I can send info to?

Blathergut
Field Marshal - Elefant
Field Marshal - Elefant
Posts: 5660
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:44 am
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by Blathergut » Sat May 02, 2015 12:05 pm

Will there be a beta forum or will we just post ideas/comments here?

BrettPT
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1262
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by BrettPT » Sat May 02, 2015 12:34 pm

What do you mean by "tweaks"? Examples?

For me, the significant points issue is with Guard Cavalry. 8 points extra per base would seem more representative of effectiveness for Gd Cav - and hopefully reduce the amount of guard cav units turning up on table (in our neck of the woods, every 2nd cavalry unit seems to be guard, and some players are specifically choosing lists largely on the basis they they can field Gd Cav).
We have discussed whether we could adjust the cost of British Line Infantry by one point ( down)

I doubt if you'll get many arguing against this.
We have also wondered whether later Austrian Line Infantry should be classified as "move reformed and fire unreformed" with a one point adjustment upwards. They key to the latter is - from when?

Interesting idea. Although Austrians being slave to the drill book, might it be better to look at when regulations were reformed, rather than the mix of veterans/conscripts within a regiment? To my mind 1809 would seem a good start date based on Charles' reforms of 1807-9 where the 1769 regulations were replaced by the 1807 manual in which:

(a) The 'standard' infantry pace changed from 75 paces per minute (with a double of 120 paces), to a standard 90 paces per minute, with a manoeuvre speed of 105 paces and the double of 120;
(b) battalion columns became favoured for manoeuvre, deploying into line when close;
(c) the front rank kneeling to fire was abolished; and
(d) battalion guns were abolished.

BrettPT
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1262
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by BrettPT » Sat May 02, 2015 1:01 pm

More use of Command Points, and hence more value in selecting better quality commanders.
Couple of general ideas to kick around to get us started:

1. Expand the 2nd move concept to allow as many subsequent moves outside of 6MU as you like, needing to pass a CMT for each one. Would speed play, allow for more sweeping moves, and permit reserves to get into the game before it is too late.

2. Allow spare CPs to add to the dice when taking CMTs. Ie, it takes a CP (or attached commander) to attempt a CMT, but each extra CP you throw into the attempt adds an extra dice when making the CMT roll. This may speed the game, allowing things to happen that may not otherwise (ie double moves, charging home, getting artillery into effective range, charging with disordered troops) although would also may also make it easier CMT'ing vulnerable units backwards. It would be a bonus for conscript armies, who could to an extent compensate for bad troops by having good leaders.

3. More blue sky and controversial, in a concept borrowed from Blucher, have the non phasing player roll 2 dice in the movement phase, hiding these under a cup. The resulting number is how many units/brigade groups the phasing player can attempt to move. When the hidden number has been moved, the opponent says stop. From that point, any subsequent moves in that phase require a CP (or extra CP if complex).

This would also encourage prioritising in the movement phase (ie greater player decision making) and a player with few CPs could find themselves exposed in some turns, or less able to react dynamically. It may also encourage more skilled DCs so brigade groups of 3 can be formed.
Last edited by BrettPT on Sat May 02, 2015 1:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Blathergut
Field Marshal - Elefant
Field Marshal - Elefant
Posts: 5660
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:44 am
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by Blathergut » Sat May 02, 2015 1:11 pm

3. I found this idea to be completely silly when reading through those rules. Weird luck can ruin a game. I want to know I can move everything.

What is interesting in those rules is the campaign system. FoGN needs something to vary the game set up so it is not always 'I'm-on-a-central-hill-come-get-me.' Of course, one flank invariably ends up heavily weighted. Since we've been playing around with set up our games have been more interesting (but also much closer; more difficult to overwhelm one section).

2. We've used this at times. It's a good idea.

1. Is a good idea, but points sure would be scarce. Might make Skilled Divisional Commanders more useful for brigade moves.

Blathergut
Field Marshal - Elefant
Field Marshal - Elefant
Posts: 5660
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 1:44 am
Location: Southern Ontario, Canada

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by Blathergut » Sat May 02, 2015 1:19 pm

Game Set Up

-deploying commands/divisions in different sectors of the field is interesting; you need some ability to control this...just random doesn't work

-knowing you are temporarily outnumbered is interesting...but there has to be a chance for the reinforcements to arrive...possibly on an enemy sector/flank...makes skilled divisional commanders definitely more useful...plus, I will knowingly set up in a defensive position, hopefully hanging on long enough...but I also need to be able to control/choose my ground a bit more accurately than the current random terrain placement...give me one or two terrain features of my choice to place once I know I am outnumbered for a while

-should cavalry (LC only??) have some effect on initiative?...the more I have I gain a +???

BrettPT
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1262
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by BrettPT » Sat May 02, 2015 1:25 pm

Blathergut wrote:3. I found this idea to be completely silly when reading through those rules. Weird luck can ruin a game. I want to know I can move everything.
We tried a variation of this in one game (although without the CPs allowing you to move after your number is up). My opponent got a double 1 in a movement phase, which sure stuffed him, so point taken. I guess we, like a historical commander, would all like to move everything - however for historical commanders troops did not always move as/when desired...

BrettPT
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1262
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by BrettPT » Sat May 02, 2015 1:47 pm

Blathergut wrote:-should cavalry (LC only??) have some effect on initiative?...the more I have I gain a +???
I think so. Anyone remember the old WRG scouting points?

Another idea could be to look at some kind of points purchased set-up advantage, or base this on quality of CC.

ie, instead of the CC level adding to initiative value, it allows you to choose one strategic/setup skill/advantage for each level of your commander from some kind of set-up list, or alternatively you can pay points to be:

Strategist - may outflank (perhaps rolling from 1st turn)
Quickest with the Mostest - opponent must keep a division in off-table reserve
Good eye for terrain - gets +2 on terrain sliding rolls
Impetuous - will always be the attacker
Cautious - will always be the defender
Aggressive - may always move out of deployment zone in the first 2 turns even if defending
Deployment Tactician - opponent must deploy 5 units at a time rather than 3

or whatever

If both players choose the same skill it is cancelled

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

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by terrys » Sat May 02, 2015 2:39 pm

We tried a variation of this in one game (although without the CPs allowing you to move after your number is up). My opponent got a double 1 in a movement phase, which sure stuffed him, so point taken. I guess we, like a historical commander, would all like to move everything - however for historical commanders troops did not always move as/when desired...
I don't like the idea of not being able to make a simple move because someone rolled 1's on the dice.
We are certainly looking at making CPs more important in the game, and will probably allow a 3rd move for units as long as you have CPs to spare.
There could well be more or different things that require a CP - However, there will no longer be an option to spend CPs in your opponents phase (so that we can replenish CPs at the start of the same phase that they're allocated - one of the things that gets forgotten most often). It will not stop players being able to intercept charge.

We will be changing the entire deployment/setup procedures, with select-able options based upon:
a) Difference between attacker/defender values.
b) Overall value (based on defenders score.
The reasoning being that an the defender would have more options if he lost the initiative 8-12 than if he lost it 2-6
Commanders (even divisional) will have a proportionally larger impact on your overall score (so that more importance is placed on have good quality Leaders.
Some examples being considered:
> Compulsory reserves for both attackers and defenders
> Changes in deployment zones
> Additional choices of Bonus units for both attacker and defender
> Defenders restriction on moving could be 1, 2 or 3 moves
> Most defender options will change their attrition points (up or down)
i.e. choosing a 'bad' option will increase your attrition value, choosing a 'good' option will reduce it.

These changes will be in the first Beta information pack

MDH
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Posts: 198
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:00 pm

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by MDH » Sat May 02, 2015 4:04 pm

I am not sure I am taken with using the balance of cavalry for the initiative result. For me the initiative level has been more about the command and staff capacity and capability of the army as a whole in a given year or campaign ( not just a particular corps of that army ).I doubt it was lack of cavalry at Austerlitz that led the Allies into error- it was judgement and a chaotic staff system.

If it is to reflect the idea of swarms of cossacks ( 1813) and other light cavalry ( 1806) outscouting the other side - those cavalry are necessarily not on the battle field itself being busy elsewhere - some of it pursuing .A better thing might be a wider range say up to 5 reflecting an analysis of the overall relative light cavalry strengths of the opposing sides in a given campaign- where it was a significant factor in the historical narrative .

We need also to be clear what the range of things are that we beta test. Those that they may alter the overall balance and shape of the game unhelpfully or add up to more than the sum of the parts ( or even less!) unintentionally - and those which are just sensible " tweaks" - It may take forever otherwise.

MDH
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Posts: 198
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 7:00 pm

Re: FOGN 2nd Edition

Post by MDH » Sat May 02, 2015 4:48 pm

BrettPT wrote:
We have also wondered whether later Austrian Line Infantry should be classified as "move reformed and fire unreformed" with a one point adjustment upwards. They key to the latter is - from when?

Interesting idea. Although Austrians being slave to the drill book, might it be better to look at when regulations were reformed, rather than the mix of veterans/conscripts within a regiment? To my mind 1809 would seem a good start date based on Charles' reforms of 1807-9 where the 1769 regulations were replaced by the 1807 manual in which:

(a) The 'standard' infantry pace changed from 75 paces per minute (with a double of 120 paces), to a standard 90 paces per minute, with a manoeuvre speed of 105 paces and the double of 120;
(b) battalion columns became favoured for manoeuvre, deploying into line when close;
(c) the front rank kneeling to fire was abolished; and
(d) battalion guns were abolished.

Regulations help as does this but what was the time lag and had they been fully implemented by 1809? If the composition of the army was such that the actual capability of the army by then made these a necessity and recognition of a de facto situation , as well as desirable, then that helps too.

The Austrians had implemented the Corps system by 1809 but it broke down and they had a history of reforms that were never completed or reversed. Also conservative regimental officers can resist change. The key thing re extended line is do they and their Officers and NCOs still even know how to advance in extended line, in good order , even had they wanted to or been allowed to ? You may well be right - I am being cautious at this stage and would like Austrian players, who I am told rather like them :shock: to chip in :D


After all the French regs allowed for forming line but in 1813 hardly any of the new regiments had been trained to do anything but form column and square- well documented. Of course conscripts in extended line in open terrain are heavily penalised!

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory : Napoleonic Era 1792-1815 : General Discussion”