Broken Rules

[caliban66]

I´ve played in three tournaments with more less the same players, and also have looked a lot results of other tournaments, and I remember winners used:
-Ottomans, either with Serbian knights and without them)
- Dominate roman
- Seljuk Turks
- One medieval with tons of longbows
- Cartaghinian
- Dinastic Bedouin
...
If we take places 2nd and 3rd, the variaty grows exponientally (incluing S. Hall´s Christian Nubian, the list that I read and thought that I could not build an army with it. You amazed me, Simon).
I mean, many kinds different of army have won tournaments. Do you really need these fixes?

[robertthebruce]

splinter:Hello, at my club in Spain we have played FOG a lot, and we had some discussions about rule themes. I'm not sure if this is the right place to post it, but I wanted to contribute with some ideas for rules change:


- In the first melee, no BG can expand (feed bases). This will prevent BG to contract in column before impact for statistic reasons (LSp vs IF), as they would be probably overlaped in the melee. As every BG can expand even in the Restricted Area to prepare for impact, I think it matches.

- Every BG that evades has to take a Cohesion Test. The evade move is completed unless the BG becomes Broken, where it has to make an Initial Rout Move.

- Every BG must take a CMT test for intercept.


They are just ideas, and my english is too "poor" and "undrilled" to defend them, but I hope that you see the point.
(I'm Christian, the Arab Conquest player from the European Championship in Rome, so greetings for the all players I met )

I can see that you have only a view of a game, but not of an historical simulation.

1- I would be very fun to see a column charging and standing his formation after the first contact, but only fun.


2- Take 5 friends and go to meet 100 skin heads, insult them, and when they charge you, check if you need to past a test to evade.

3- Test to intercept, I don´t need to think if I will intercept by flank to a enemy, I just do it.



David

[spike]

Table sizes is one. If we played on 5 feet by 3 feet tables this might well be a non issue

I think this is an excellent point Graham - and one that could address some of the valid concerns raised by Tim. And requires no rules changes.

So which competition organiser is willing to give this a try?

They already exist Pete.

I find the 650 pts on 5x3, alot of fun, and you get 3 games in the day. I have just sent my entry off for both the Sat and Sun comps in Manchester next month.

Speak to Hammy

Spike

[david53]

the experience of attempting to play a LH-type army with a "normally constituted" primarily foot based army is so horrendous and demoralising (because there is no glimmer of a chance to win) that it has stopped people I know from entering competitions, or even playing the game entirely, and now has a overwhelming influence on (restricting) the army choices made by some others.

I think its a bit rich to say that if I take LH armies people are put of FOG, same can be said about swarms or longbows.

What about the swarm armies that I have faced what about the 100YW armies that I think are too powerful that I have faced with my LH army I shrug my shoulders and get on with the game.

I don't well if fact yes I do not enter a Storm of Arrows event because of them so I'm the same but I still play FOG.

What about the swarm armies i have faced with my LH army who had more BG's than me because I can't beat them what rule change can i do to stop them being so good.

Unless you stop LH armies playing HF can only ever push them off the table you can't beat them, now MF drilled armies can easily do them.

[jlopez]

While there are no doubt lots of rule changes that could be made to fix this issue let's be pragmatic here. It'll be a long time before the rule book it reprinted as it's high production quality will make it expensive to do so. So solutions that require rule changes will take a while.

Perhaps it would be quicker to fix this within the things that are easily controlled by competition organisers. Table sizes is one. If we played on 5 feet by 3 feet tables this might well be a non issue (there might be other issues of course). Or the rules of the competition could restrict skirmish battle groups, for example.

The other concern I would have is that in fixing the issue we don't overdo it. Otherwise in a year we'll all be bemoaning the fact that some other army type is too strong.

I like it. I'll see if I can convince the Barcelona organizers to go for it. We'd maintain the Blitz, red/yellow card systems but only to deal with the extreme cases.

Julian

[david53]

Table sizes is one. If we played on 5 feet by 3 feet tables this might well be a non issue

I think this is an excellent point Graham - and one that could address some of the valid concerns raised by Tim. And requires no rules changes.

So which competition organiser is willing to give this a try?

They already exist Pete.

I find the 650 pts on 5x3, alot of fun, and you get 3 games in the day. I have just sent my entry off for both the Sat and Sun comps in Manchester next month.

Speak to Hammy

Spike

Yes great you get rid of LH armies but on come the swarms ask spike you took dom roms.

[david53]

Possibly the sort of thing where it'd be better to sit down with a couple of beers and talk it through - alas I'm unlikely to be up in Mnachester soon. Perhaps Mr R can do it for me in his own unique style

I'll be at roll call I'll treat you to a beer if your around and then you explain things.

[david53]

While there are no doubt lots of rule changes that could be made to fix this issue let's be pragmatic here. It'll be a long time before the rule book it reprinted as it's high production quality will make it expensive to do so. So solutions that require rule changes will take a while.

Perhaps it would be quicker to fix this within the things that are easily controlled by competition organisers. Table sizes is one. If we played on 5 feet by 3 feet tables this might well be a non issue (there might be other issues of course). Or the rules of the competition could restrict skirmish battle groups, for example.

The other concern I would have is that in fixing the issue we don't overdo it. Otherwise in a year we'll all be bemoaning the fact that some other army type is too strong.

Agree with you rules will not be changing soon.

I would say if your going to recstrict BG make it all BG's not just skirmishers.

The table is difficult I have played two events both with 650 points. If you use 800 points on these table you would IMO find a lot of wall to wall armies showing up taking away the manouvre that i feel FOG has best.

[jdm]

We have no immediate plans to change or modify the rules but what I would like to do is open a new thread where we can track issues like this for future consideration.

Obviously the purpose being to eliminate problems. Clearly after the amount of games we have now played new issues will arise and we should be aware of these.

So please feel free to open a new thread entitled "Rules for review"

Regards
JDM

[spike]

I think this is an excellent point Graham - and one that could address some of the valid concerns raised by Tim. And requires no rules changes.

So which competition organiser is willing to give this a try?

They already exist Pete.

I find the 650 pts on 5x3, alot of fun, and you get 3 games in the day. I have just sent my entry off for both the Sat and Sun comps in Manchester next month.

Speak to Hammy

Spike

Yes great you get rid of LH armies but on come the swarms ask spike you took dom roms.

Dave

I have also Played Classical Greek (twice) and Sassanid Persian, in this format

Spike

[robertthebruce]

We have no immediate plans to change or modify the rules but what I would like to do is open a new thread where we can track issues like this for future consideration.

Obviously the purpose being to eliminate problems. Clearly after the amount of games we have now played new issues will arise and we should be aware of these.

So please feel free to open a new thread entitled "Rules for review"

Regards
JDM

I suspected that this was so, I agree, there isn´t necessary to change the rules now, maybe some clarifications for some issues.

New thread opened.


David

[jlopez]

While there are no doubt lots of rule changes that could be made to fix this issue let's be pragmatic here. It'll be a long time before the rule book it reprinted as it's high production quality will make it expensive to do so. So solutions that require rule changes will take a while.

Perhaps it would be quicker to fix this within the things that are easily controlled by competition organisers. Table sizes is one. If we played on 5 feet by 3 feet tables this might well be a non issue (there might be other issues of course). Or the rules of the competition could restrict skirmish battle groups, for example.

The other concern I would have is that in fixing the issue we don't overdo it. Otherwise in a year we'll all be bemoaning the fact that some other army type is too strong.

Agree with you rules will not be changing soon.

I would say if your going to recstrict BG make it all BG's not just skirmishers.

The table is difficult I have played two events both with 650 points. If you use 800 points on these table you would IMO find a lot of wall to wall armies showing up taking away the manouvre that i feel FOG has best.

I agree to a certain extent but it will bring, IMHO, a whole new dimension to the game. For example, I have never used or been the target of a flank march as there is no need when you have so much room on the table. With 5'x3' tables and 800 points I expect to see a lot more of them and I have a hunch 5'x3' tables could make things a lot more interesting all round.

Julian

[footslogger]

Wow! What a thread!

[david53]

While there are no doubt lots of rule changes that could be made to fix this issue let's be pragmatic here. It'll be a long time before the rule book it reprinted as it's high production quality will make it expensive to do so. So solutions that require rule changes will take a while.

Perhaps it would be quicker to fix this within the things that are easily controlled by competition organisers. Table sizes is one. If we played on 5 feet by 3 feet tables this might well be a non issue (there might be other issues of course). Or the rules of the competition could restrict skirmish battle groups, for example.

The other concern I would have is that in fixing the issue we don't overdo it. Otherwise in a year we'll all be bemoaning the fact that some other army type is too strong.

Agree with you rules will not be changing soon.

I would say if your going to recstrict BG make it all BG's not just skirmishers.

The table is difficult I have played two events both with 650 points. If you use 800 points on these table you would IMO find a lot of wall to wall armies showing up taking away the manouvre that i feel FOG has best.

I agree to a certain extent but it will bring, IMHO, a whole new dimension to the game. For example, I have never used or been the target of a flank march as there is no need when you have so much room on the table. With 5'x3' tables and 800 points I expect to see a lot more of them and I have a hunch 5'x3' tables could make things a lot more interesting all round.

Julian

Strange I think you'd see wall to wall HF armoured armies appearing and its then a dice fest not what I would want from a set of rules. If you want 5 foot tables why would you not want a drop in points unless all you wanted was to cover all your front with armoured troop types. BTW some armies become non viable with 650 points can't get many Knights for that.

[jlopez]

Agree with you rules will not be changing soon.

I would say if your going to recstrict BG make it all BG's not just skirmishers.

The table is difficult I have played two events both with 650 points. If you use 800 points on these table you would IMO find a lot of wall to wall armies showing up taking away the manouvre that i feel FOG has best.

I agree to a certain extent but it will bring, IMHO, a whole new dimension to the game. For example, I have never used or been the target of a flank march as there is no need when you have so much room on the table. With 5'x3' tables and 800 points I expect to see a lot more of them and I have a hunch 5'x3' tables could make things a lot more interesting all round.

Julian

Strange I think you'd see wall to wall HF armoured armies appearing and its then a dice fest not what I would want from a set of rules. If you want 5 foot tables why would you not want a drop in points unless all you wanted was to cover all your front with armoured troop types. BTW some armies become non viable with 650 points can't get many Knights for that.

Probably. Needs trying out though and as it will largely remove the need for Blitz I won't be needed as a second umpire. That leaves me free to try out a LH/shooty cav army to hoist myself on my own petard and suffer four humiliating defeats at the hands of those super armoured armies.

Julian

[OldenTired]

They already exist Pete.

I find the 650 pts on 5x3, alot of fun, and you get 3 games in the day. I have just sent my entry off for both the Sat and Sun comps in Manchester next month.

Speak to Hammy

Spike

we've played a couple of 5x3 650pt comps here, and they're simply more fun. same game play, same all-too-mobile troop-types (dancing drilled bows completely demolished my swedes), same tricksy little exploits.

but... more fun for some reason.

probably because you start so much closer - evaders are just that little bit less powerful, and hiders have no-where to run to.

[david53]

They already exist Pete.

I find the 650 pts on 5x3, alot of fun, and you get 3 games in the day. I have just sent my entry off for both the Sat and Sun comps in Manchester next month.

Speak to Hammy

Spike

we've played a couple of 5x3 650pt comps here, and they're simply more fun. same game play, same all-too-mobile troop-types (dancing drilled bows completely demolished my swedes), same tricksy little exploits.

but... more fun for some reason.

probably because you start so much closer - evaders are just that little bit less powerful, and hiders have no-where to run to.

I agree with you as a person who justs plays events without the thought to win many games. As I have said yes go with five foot tables by three foot but drop the points. If this happened in larger events (no disrespect Hammy) I feel you'd be able to here the screams for going back to six foot tables and 800 points after the first try.

[richnz]

yep, and 650 on a 5x3 is great game. However, you dont necessarily need to reduce the points, as the game changes through the 6" edge of the world becoming relatively larger, flank march threats and larger terrain pieces.

[david53]

yep, and 650 on a 5x3 is great game. However, you dont necessarily need to reduce the points, as the game changes through the 6" edge of the world becoming relatively larger, flank march threats and larger terrain pieces.

Sorry but I have to disagree with you, removing 12 inchs of the board without adjusting the points will swing the whole balance of the game especially if you keep the terrian as it stands as well.

It will allow a armoured MF force or HF force to go wall to wall this would kill any manourve and force the game to become a HF/MF bash in the middle.

I'll be at the event in Manchester doing the 5' table but with 650 points which works well.

[OldenTired]

yep, and 650 on a 5x3 is great game. However, you dont necessarily need to reduce the points, as the game changes through the 6" edge of the world becoming relatively larger, flank march threats and larger terrain pieces.

Sorry but I have to disagree with you, removing 12 inchs of the board without adjusting the points will swing the whole balance of the game especially if you keep the terrian as it stands as well.

It will allow a armoured MF force or HF force to go wall to wall this would kill any manourve and force the game to become a HF/MF bash in the middle.

I'll be at the event in Manchester doing the 5' table but with 650 points which works well.

dave the points are arbitrary anyhow. we just have a convention where we play 800.

why? because we used to play 400 under DBM.

having played lots of 650 (more a dozen games, won a tournament), i've yet to see wall to wall armour.