What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

General discussion forum for anything related to Field of Glory Renaissance Wars.

Moderators: hammy, Slitherine Core, FOGR Design

Post Reply
timmy1
Lieutenant-General - Nashorn
Lieutenant-General - Nashorn
Posts: 3436
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 8:39 pm
Location: Chelmsford, Essex, England

What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by timmy1 » Wed Nov 02, 2016 9:37 pm

FoG:R Comp numbers seem to have declined. I still play the occassional game but not as much as I would have done in the past. I notice that the UK competition circuit have put in place a number of rules to mitigate the impact of some parts of the rules that were leading to imbalance / less enjoyable games.

Not in any way suggesting wholesale revisions to FoG:R, more a V1.1 rather than V2. If it were to occur (and no one official has said it will) what things (maximum of TWO per person - Nigel you don't get two votes for each side of your personality...) have to be included to make you want to play FoGR more. Please state what you see as the problem that needs fixing. Obviously if you have ideas how to fix it, so much the better but it is not required. Remember though the more you change about the game the more playtesting would be required.

timmy1
Lieutenant-General - Nashorn
Lieutenant-General - Nashorn
Posts: 3436
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 8:39 pm
Location: Chelmsford, Essex, England

Re: What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by timmy1 » Wed Nov 02, 2016 9:41 pm

For me the two things are:

1, Determined Horse are too costly for the effect that they have upon the game. Polish Lancers need to be seen on the table more often. (I would either reduce the cost or increase the number of dice at impact.)

2, In going other than good, mounted seem to suffer the same way as heavy foot - mixed Pike and Shot formations seem to be no better off as a whole in the shrubbery which seems odd to me.

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10227
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Re: What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by nikgaukroger » Thu Nov 03, 2016 6:39 am

Only two? :wink:

1. Update the points along the lines of the discussion of a couple of years ago to (hopefully) address a few issues.

2. Change autobreak to all battle troop BGs break on greater than 50% loses (or when they reach 1 base) and all light troop BGs break on 50% loses.
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk

kevinj
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2378
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 11:21 am
Location: Derbyshire, UK

Re: What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by kevinj » Thu Nov 03, 2016 1:36 pm

If I'm only allowed 2, avoiding the points that have already been made here and in the V1.11 Errata thread, mine are:

1) Artillery. The whole capture/recapture thing is a mess. It's silly that uncrewed artillery is a more significant barrier than an undefended fortification. An option for removal on capture is clean, but I think a tidied up option for leaving/recapturing them would be beneficial for scenario games if not for tournament play.

2) Commanded Shot. These just aren't right. In their current form they drastiacally slow down mounted troops so they normally turn up supporting Dragoons (which I also think need some fixing but I'm only allowed 2 :D) or as sniper squads and very rarely in their historical role. My suggestion would be:

Commanded Shot are costed and represented as LF Av/Po with Musket. They become part of a Horse BG of the same grade. They may shoot or provide Protection from a second or third rank. The combined BG moves as the slowest of Horse or LF dependent on terrain. It is treated as a Mounted BG so may deploy in the outer 12 MU and may march up to 3 times. Commanded Shot are not allowed Regimental Guns. Remove the +1 point for Commanded Shot.
As the Foot are interspersed with the Horse, all shooting at the mixed BG counts as shooting at Horse.
Similarly, if one of the LF bases is contacted, the enemy fights as if it had contacted Horse. Turn a Horse base to face the enemy if possible. Any file which has bases fighting in more than one direction does not count the benefit of Protection.

This would also provide a cheaper mechanism to field 6 base BGs of Average/Poor Horse which might make them more viable.

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10227
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Re: What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by nikgaukroger » Thu Nov 03, 2016 4:19 pm

kevinj wrote: 2) Commanded Shot. These just aren't right.

These would be on my extended list :lol:

I'd just replace them with a marker similar to regimental guns rather than representing them with a BG or other bases. Then say how they affect movement. Not sure I'd bother with any shooting from them, but not bothered either way. Can be discarded to allow the mounted full movement (need to think if this is automatic if the mounted pursue) at which point they are lost for the rest of the game. Points cost would differ between Horse and DH/Cavaliers as the latter can function in shallower formations.
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk

timmy1
Lieutenant-General - Nashorn
Lieutenant-General - Nashorn
Posts: 3436
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 8:39 pm
Location: Chelmsford, Essex, England

Re: What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by timmy1 » Thu Nov 03, 2016 9:45 pm

Mr G. - you know why the limit of two is there - otherwise the discussion would take longer to complete than Brexit will to start...

Kevin / Nik

Rather like those ideas.

Anyone born South of Watford Gap got an opinion?

marshalney2000
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
Posts: 1170
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 10:14 am

Re: What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by marshalney2000 » Thu Nov 03, 2016 11:34 pm

I think we have gone a bit around the houses in that many of these changes have been discussed several times but with no result.
At Britcon this year, it seemed to me that most of the armies were looking to maximise shot and minimise mounted which led to an almighty shot fest which was a bit boring. I have won Britcon last two years but suspect I may jump ship in 2017.
John

IanP
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 40
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2008 8:27 am

Re: What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by IanP » Fri Nov 04, 2016 2:29 am

To me the effect of artillery for the period seems wrong.
I know what the intention of the designers was, but as it stands, grand batteries in the Napoleonic style have the potential to blow big holes in the enemy.
My suggestion, though admittedly it would seem a little clumsy until people got used to it, is that hits from artillery at other than short range do not count towards kills.
It would still affect cohesion loss as now, so could rout units through that manner. To me this is more in keeping with the intent, and feel of the period.

An alternative could be to only allow a certain number of guns, maybe per battery, to fire on each target. Maybe dependant on the target size?

Also some people hate the fact that artillery can shoot through their own skirmishers. I'm not so fussed on this, but perhaps a cohesion test or some such for the friends, if the artillery can only trace a line of sight through their own light troops?

In compensation, the cost of MA and HA would of course have to be reduced, but that is also a good thing, as most armies of the period had at least some guns, if available, even if not very effective.

donm2
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Posts: 168
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2013 6:24 pm

Re: What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by donm2 » Fri Nov 04, 2016 8:28 am

I think if this job is worth doing then you will need more than two, but here are my two

1. Look at points costs. Dragoons are way too cheap for all their abilities. How can superior, heavily armoured, pistol, pistol, horse be the same cost as superior, armoured, bow, sword, cavalry. The horse are up in every round of combat????

2. Look at maximum and minimums within the army lists to create more realistically balanced armies.

Don

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10227
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Re: What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by nikgaukroger » Fri Nov 04, 2016 9:23 am

marshalney2000 wrote:I think we have gone a bit around the houses in that many of these changes have been discussed several times but with no result.

OK then shall we do it "for real" this time?

Assuming I don't get vetoed by Slitherine & Richard I'll commit to doing an official update. Something covering the points and a few other important issues as a v1.1 sort of thing (no need for a full blown v2 IMO) and possibly include some list tweaks in this.

Would that help?
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk

kevinj
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2378
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 11:21 am
Location: Derbyshire, UK

Re: What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by kevinj » Fri Nov 04, 2016 10:01 am

OK then shall we do it "for real" this time?
Yes please. Assuming you can proceed, would it be possible to set up a section in the forum so that the discussions are easily visible and so that we can have separate threads for each subject?

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10227
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Re: What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by nikgaukroger » Fri Nov 04, 2016 10:13 am

kevinj wrote:
OK then shall we do it "for real" this time?
Yes please. Assuming you can proceed, would it be possible to set up a section in the forum so that the discussions are easily visible and so that we can have separate threads for each subject?

I wouldn't want to do it without haviing that - for my own (fragile) sanity if nothing else :lol:

I'll contact the powers that be and see what they say.
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk

madaxeman
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Posts: 2828
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 5:15 am
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by madaxeman » Fri Nov 04, 2016 12:21 pm

1. Changing something in the rules balance to make currently under-utilized armies and troop types a little more viable. I have Ottomans, Poles, some half-painted Russians and - I guess - the Swedes that don't quite seem to cut it right now, but all of which I'd like to get on table sometime

2. Allow mountd in 6's in (almost) all lists
http://www.madaxeman.com
Become a fan of Madaxeman on Facebook at Madaxeman.com's Facebook Page.

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10227
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Re: What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by nikgaukroger » Fri Nov 04, 2016 12:26 pm

madaxeman wrote:1. Changing something in the rules balance to make currently under-utilized armies and troop types a little more viable. I have Ottomans, Poles, some half-painted Russians and - I guess - the Swedes that don't quite seem to cut it right now, but all of which I'd like to get on table sometime
Any actual ideas though?
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk

madaxeman
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Posts: 2828
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 5:15 am
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by madaxeman » Fri Nov 04, 2016 12:39 pm

nikgaukroger wrote:
madaxeman wrote:1. Changing something in the rules balance to make currently under-utilized armies and troop types a little more viable. I have Ottomans, Poles, some half-painted Russians and - I guess - the Swedes that don't quite seem to cut it right now, but all of which I'd like to get on table sometime
Any actual ideas though?
no, sorry :( I leave that to smarter people than me....
http://www.madaxeman.com
Become a fan of Madaxeman on Facebook at Madaxeman.com's Facebook Page.

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10227
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Re: What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by nikgaukroger » Fri Nov 04, 2016 1:07 pm

madaxeman wrote:
nikgaukroger wrote:
madaxeman wrote:1. Changing something in the rules balance to make currently under-utilized armies and troop types a little more viable. I have Ottomans, Poles, some half-painted Russians and - I guess - the Swedes that don't quite seem to cut it right now, but all of which I'd like to get on table sometime
Any actual ideas though?
no, sorry :( I leave that to smarter people than me....

No worries - identifying issues is valuable (especially for me as I have been away from the game for a couple of years).
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10227
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Re: What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by nikgaukroger » Fri Nov 04, 2016 1:12 pm

nikgaukroger wrote:
kevinj wrote:
OK then shall we do it "for real" this time?
Yes please. Assuming you can proceed, would it be possible to set up a section in the forum so that the discussions are easily visible and so that we can have separate threads for each subject?

I wouldn't want to do it without haviing that - for my own (fragile) sanity if nothing else :lol:

I'll contact the powers that be and see what they say.

OK, initial soundings are positive. Will make sure and then set things up so we can get going 8)
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10227
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Re: What two things would a spruced up FoG:R have to have?

Post by nikgaukroger » Fri Nov 04, 2016 10:35 pm

Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory : Renaissance Wars : General Discussion”