FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

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

Moderators: hammy, Blathergut, terrys, Slitherine Core

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

Re: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by shadowdragon » Tue Jan 24, 2017 2:01 am

hazelbark wrote:I think to add to Brett's points. A 800 point game is also an influence on the v2. At 800 or even 900 points (which I play more of) you are really talking about a smaller Corps.

Particularly 00-07 the OB for a Corps is approximately 1 battery per division and the equivalent of 1-2 Corps level battery assets. So I think there is a strong case for these limitations in those constraints.

On my to do is a more methodical review of late period OBs. The 1813 armies obviously, 1812 Russians and parts of 09 are ones to evaluate. It is important to review those OBs in the context of 800-900 points as some of those Corps clearly wildly exceed that many points.

I usually took max artillery units in V1 so I am looking at this carefully.
I agree that the proposal's a reasonable limit for the typical 800-900 point game. I usually play much larger games - more like 1200-1500 points.

FYI - an 1806 Prussian division had 2 heavy batteries (one per infantry brigade), a horse artillery battery (heavy cavalry brigade) and 10 medium battalion guns which were sometimes grouped into brigade batteries of 5 guns each, but at 10,000 troops that division is more like a small corps - since it's about 700-750 pts. :-)

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

Re: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by hazelbark » Tue Jan 24, 2017 7:59 pm

shadowdragon wrote: I agree that the proposal's a reasonable limit for the typical 800-900 point game. I usually play much larger games - more like 1200-1500 points.

FYI - an 1806 Prussian division had 2 heavy batteries (one per infantry brigade), a horse artillery battery (heavy cavalry brigade) and 10 medium battalion guns which were sometimes grouped into brigade batteries of 5 guns each, but at 10,000 troops that division is more like a small corps - since it's about 700-750 pts. :-)
Well the word "division" and the game effect are different. The Russian 1807 "divisions" were huge by comparison. 4-6 line 1-2 light 0-1 grenadier each of 3 battalions then about 3-5 regiments of mounted. Plus a gaggle of artillery.

Back to 1806 Prussian
That is 34 guns. Assuming 8 gun batteries. Horse may have been 6.
Horse clearly attaches to mounted unit.
So its one foot unit and one attachment for infantry.
That fits the 800 parameter pretty easily.
If I recall 1806 one of the perceived problems of the Prussians is they did not mass their artillery. As opposed to the Russians who massed their artillery even when they tried to disperse it.

The Austrians in 1809 also have a lot of guns in a Corps. But again, didn't really mass them in the Bavaria phase. Wagram more so, but that may have also been a feature of having the entire Empire's army present. (figuratively speaking)

As you said this is a different feature than at 1200 points. It is unfortunate a "standard" size game isn't a large or multi-Corps force, but that is where we are in FOGN.

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

Re: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by shadowdragon » Tue Jan 24, 2017 8:49 pm

I've seen both 6 and 8 guns for the horse artillery in various orbats; so 32-34 guns in total.

Yes, totally fits the proposal of limiting 1 battery per 800 point corps with 2 attachments - one for the cavalry and one for an infantry division - presumably the one without the battery.

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

light infantry

Post by shadowdragon » Sun Feb 05, 2017 5:27 pm

Some good discussion of light infantry in Brissonet (Napoleons Apogee). I'll provide more detai when I'm back from a business trip but here's a discussion at the Napoleon series site on tirailleurs en grande bande vs tirailleurs de marche et de combat. Some nice tactical drawings in Brissonet.

http://www.napoleon-series.org/cgi-bin/ ... d;id=36485

martymagnificent
Lance Corporal - SdKfz 222
Lance Corporal - SdKfz 222
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2014 12:22 am

Re: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by martymagnificent » Sun Feb 12, 2017 2:24 am

Some possible issues with the restriction on all artillery units been in the same division are allied divisions and and horse artillery in cavalry divisions. Presumably an allied division should be allowed to field an artillery unit that can not be added to a division of another nationality? As for the cavalry division's horse artillery, unless we are going to change the lists to allow more horse artillery attachments in all cavalry divisions, there are a quite a few lists where these divisions need to be allowed a horse artillery unit.

I tend to agree with Shadowdragon that the net effect of these changes is probably negative for unreformed armies. Even leaving aside the list changes the reduced effect of mounted on skirmish fire is a bigger negative for them than the minor positives included. A minor (1 point?) across the board point reduction may be needed (arguably this was justified before and is probably more so now).

I tend to think it may be better/simpler to just give non-shock heavies the same move as lights and change nothing else about them.

Observed part of a test game today and liked the look of how the changes will speed things up, especially the CMT changes, the varied standard "scenarios" and the changes to artillery target priority. Planning to have my own test game on Friday. Looking forward to seeing the draft of the re-written rules!

Martin

richafricanus
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 335
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 6:38 am
Location: Melbourne

Re: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by richafricanus » Sun Feb 12, 2017 12:09 pm

Hi Marty,

My thinking at the moment is to restrict the artillery choice to be from the primary list (so allies only get attached artillery). Yes, we'll have to look at whether more cav divisions need artillery attachments.

We have decided to drop unreformed by 1 point.

Testing the changes to dragoons has shown them to be more effective and we're definitely seeing more of them. Making them the same as light cav risks taking away variety which is important to maintain in this period.

We plan to have a draft full set of the rules ready by end Feb for full play-testing and proof-reading.

martymagnificent
Lance Corporal - SdKfz 222
Lance Corporal - SdKfz 222
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2014 12:22 am

Re: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by martymagnificent » Sun Feb 12, 2017 8:35 pm

All sounding good Richard.

Some other possible "exceptions" to the artillery rules would be Ottoman armies (which need to have more than one unit for the immobile big guns) and guard divisions with their own artillery. For example the 1814 French where the Guard are not an ally, but are in their own division and can have a large artillery unit.

Martin

geoff
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 8:25 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by geoff » Mon Feb 13, 2017 4:14 am

Played my first game ( finally ) of V2 on the weekend. I have to say as someone who went into it with a slightly negative attitude, I came away very impressed.
Biggest difference was to the speed of getting things happening. Even though I was using 1805 Russians there were no problems getting stuck in.Of course once you are just outside 6mu unreformed still have the hassle of not being able to close to 2mu in a single move so the dynamic between reformed and unreformed is preserved nicely.
I spent the extra points and added heaps of arty attachments which I think is essential for unreformed. My opponent went for 1805 French with almost no attachments and ended up with more troops than me.
Light infantry felt about right. Pricey but the ability to put in 5 dice at medium range plus move better in rough terrain is worth the extra points. Not being able to skirmish helped us avoid the frustration of chasing lights futilely around the table which was also a plus.
It was a very close fight, the new Basic Game scenarios are excellent. We rolled 3 and I was the attacker. This still allows the defender to have a flank march which he did whilst I had a reserve. I took the gamble that I would smash his centre before the flank march got to my LOC so I went all out. The gamble didn't pay off :)

Only one thing we didn't like. The new 'Retire to 3MU' rule. It seems a bit gamy to be able to put units right up behind so that, even though you have copped 3 hits, you can still shoot back at close range. This happened by accident in our game and cost my opponent dearly at that point. We discussed it and agreed that the unit should be more concerned about 2 hits than 3 so if it cannot get back out of 2mu then it should be subject to a cohesion test. Anything even just outsdie of 2mu would be no issue.

Looking forward to some more practice games as well as the NZ and Melbourne comps!

bahdahbum
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:40 pm

Re: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by bahdahbum » Mon Feb 13, 2017 10:58 am

I'll have to read it all but first quickly :
Artillery represent the corps reserve and this reflects the Corps commander sending them to a critical point.
Will be fun with the russians, especially in 1813 :mrgreen:

Ok I'll leave

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

Re: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by Daemionhunter » Mon Feb 13, 2017 11:09 pm

I have played a lot of games with the proposed rule changes.

The games go a lot faster as armies are getting to "fighting" range a lot quicker. This is a result of the new ways in which to play, although I've mainly played the NZ version, and removing the requirement to dice for a second move outside of 6".

I like the changes to rules and points for Dragoons, Light Infantry and Guard. I am undecided on the lower points for Unreformed.

I managed to field 19 units in 4 divisions using a Russian Army in Balkans 1806-1808 with Unreformed a point less. I had one artillery and one cavalry attachment and a single unit of Heavy Artillery. There were 12 infantry units and 6 cavalry, although 2 were Cossacks. This is a large force that can swamp the board and is much more resilient than most reformed armies, especially now large units are only 2 ACV. However, while I could wrap around the flanks it took a bit longer to close.

I don't like Irregular Light infantry being able to retreat when the enemy gets within 2" with no penalty. Why do this rabble of Bashi-bazouks respond to a threat with more spine than Veteran British Line?

I am also still a bit uncomfortable with the proposed limitations on artillery. I haven't seen artillery dominate the table top and tournaments in New Zealand, although one compatriot would often field 4 batteries and 3 or more Light Infantry units. (That was perhaps too much for historical accuracy!) The game is a simulation and also a game. There needs to be a balance between historical accuracy and flavour. At the level of abstraction we're playing at there is a temptation to make everything either too bland or too complicated in the quest of accuracy. I like seeing a few batteries on the table, perhaps not four but two and maybe three isn't the end of the world.

Limiting batteries and increasing the number of attachments raises the risk that, even at more points per attachment, armies will bristle with units that no-one wants to charge. It's also making list building for playtesting a bit harder as some lists require a battery per division. Its also raises a question about how to field allied divisions including when a cheaper artillery unit can fill out a Guard division. Perhaps 2 infantry units should be allowed per division. Or alternatively allow divisions to be formed with a single artillery battery which is then placed under the command of another division for the battle, thus reflecting there nature as a corps asset? Where ever the rules eventually land in regards to artillery I'm sure the new lists will address this issue of course. In the meantime I'm happy to take some license or to follow guidance.

As an aside to Unreformed Russian list above their are some fun lists of nearly all Superior units possible now with the reduction in points for Superior infantry.

BrettPT
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1263
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by BrettPT » Tue Feb 14, 2017 11:00 pm

geoff wrote:Only one thing we didn't like. The new 'Retire to 3MU' rule. It seems a bit gamy to be able to put units right up behind so that, even though you have copped 3 hits, you can still shoot back at close range.
Hi Geoff. This rule is essentially the same rule as written as in v1. A 'retire to 3MU' in v1 isn't actually a 'Retirement', as it doesn't burst through friends behind. It doesn't cause a CT for the unit behind that is bumped into. The v1 rule was (badly) errata'd in 2015 (so that if you started off less than 45mm in front of the unit then you 'passed through' the unit behind - unclear whether this caused a CT). In practice at our club we've (well, I've) pretty much ignored the errata'd version as being even more unclear and fiddly than the original rule as written.

In v2, we've hopefully removed some confusion by changing the wording of 'retire to 3MU' to 'driven back to 3MU', so people don't get the 'back to 3MU' outcome confused with a Retirement (which is what happened in v1).

IMO this is a crucial rule for unreformed troops.
Unreformed want to try and move up to 2MU so they can yell bang. Problem is, in FoGN the static unit gets first shot and a reasonably common outcome is your brave unreformed chaps get driven back to 3MU, thereby not getting to return fire and having taken the hits for nothing. Placing a supporting unit hard to the rear means the unreformed will not be driven back unless they take 4 hits, and will have a better chance of staying at 2MU to return fire.

geoff
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun Feb 10, 2008 8:25 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by geoff » Wed Feb 15, 2017 12:23 am

Fair enough Brett, I hadn't really realised that. Probably hadn't come up before.
I know what you mean about the unreformed troops. However, not having to pull back out of 2mu means that getting hit for 3 is no more upsetting than getting hit for 2. At close range I would think this would be a real morale problem if you couldn't get out of close range.
Anyway, as I said I'm overall very pleased with the changes. Will keep playing them and see how they go. Especially looking forward to using them in Auckland and Melbourne.

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: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by marty » Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:11 am

We have decided to drop unreformed by 1 point.
Will hopefully be enough, although even my largest Austrian army would only gain 36 points. Still better than a poke in the eye with a burnt stick.

If this is the case the 1809+ Austrians (move as reformed fire as unreformed) should probably be the old unreformed cost. If you think about it a small regiment with skirmisher attachment would then be the same cost and performance as a small unreformed unit (although you have had to use one of your attachments to achieve it). If they cost more than the old reformed such a unit costs more for identical performance.

Martin

BrettPT
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1263
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by BrettPT » Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:59 am

In the latest v2 draft, 1809 Austrians are actually remaining as normal plodding unreformed. The date for zippy Austrians is 1813+.
And as you suggest, 1813+ Austrians are currently 8 points (Average Drilled). It's the slow 1809 chaps who have dropped to 7 (average drilled).

BrettPT
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1263
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 8:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by BrettPT » Thu Feb 16, 2017 4:04 am

geoff wrote: not having to pull back out of 2mu means that getting hit for 3 is no more upsetting than getting hit for 2. At close range I would think this would be a real morale problem if you couldn't get out of close range.
You're not wrong. However most would say that Unreformed could use a little help to be competitive. So we'll let them keep this one.

martymagnificent
Lance Corporal - SdKfz 222
Lance Corporal - SdKfz 222
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2014 12:22 am

Re: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by martymagnificent » Thu Feb 16, 2017 6:03 am

Am I right that all fire at chargers now hits on a 4, or am I reading it wrong?

If it is the case this would seem contrary to the goal of making stuff happen more quickly as it makes charges even harder.

Martin

bahdahbum
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:40 pm

Re: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by bahdahbum » Thu Feb 16, 2017 9:08 am

Hy I asked for a copy of V2 as we would like to test in Belgium and we are starting the second part oof our 1813 campaign ...no news

Do we have to stiuck to V1 :mrgreen:

richafricanus
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 335
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 6:38 am
Location: Melbourne

Re: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by richafricanus » Thu Feb 16, 2017 12:12 pm

Summary of changes now sent. We hope to get the full draft ready for proof reading in a couple of weeks.

Marty, yes all defensive fire hits on 4's for simplicity, but only the target gets it's full dice. All other units only provide support dice (i.e. 1 or 2 dice depending on whether you have/are artillery). The effect is that charges are more viable (especially if you use the now cheaper superior troops).

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: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by marty » Thu Feb 16, 2017 8:27 pm

Ahhh, I misunderstood.

That is, as you say, both simpler and makes charges more viable

Martin

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: FOG N 2nd Edition - it's back!

Post by marty » Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:13 am

just saw "all intercepts require a cmt"! That's a pretty big change that is going to create a lot of cmt use in opponents turn, something that is pretty rare at the moment. Not sure this is a great idea. Now cavalry not only don't reduce infantry fire by much but they often wont intervene to protect vulnerable friends. It was, for instance, one of the last hopes I could see for keeping irregular LI alive (ie stick em with some cavalry to shepherd them as they no longer evade and still cant fight worth a damn).

Martin

Post Reply

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