Search found 2114 matches

by kevinj
Wed Jan 25, 2017 11:30 am
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Commanded Shot - proposal
Replies: 97
Views: 12631

Re: Commanded Shot - proposal

One of the other things changing in this revision is the capture of artillery, in future the norm will be that captured artillery is removed in the JAP.
by kevinj
Mon Jan 23, 2017 1:29 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
Replies: 91
Views: 11814

Re: Better Armour - proposal (updated)

The Elites would get the advantage that they wouldn't need to commit their commander.
by kevinj
Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:46 am
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
Replies: 91
Views: 11814

Re: Better Armour - proposal (updated)

Whilst I can see that better armour reducing your opponents re-rolls rather than enhancing your own makes better thematic sense, what happens to Poor troops fighting better armoured opponents? Would they re-roll 5s and 6s?
by kevinj
Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:46 am
Forum: Tournaments
Topic: Potential Dates for 'Way of The Warriors' 2017
Replies: 70
Views: 13757

Re: Potential Dates for 'Way of The Warriors' 2017

It will be down to each organiser but a lesson learnt from the FoG AM V2 update (which admittedly was more substantial than ours) was that if you take too long people lose enthusiasm. In terms of timing, I'm pretty confident that the updates will not be ready in time for Roll Call in April, but I'd ...
by kevinj
Sat Jan 21, 2017 11:26 am
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Early TYW Swedish armies
Replies: 13
Views: 1748

Re: Early TYW Swedish armies

Having carried out this exercise, if the points change, the most important thing will be to produce a table to issue to everyone with the revised points costs for each troop type in each army list. Three is quite a bit of work in this, but if you want people to work out their own points for their f...
by kevinj
Thu Jan 19, 2017 11:20 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: BG Autobreak - proposal
Replies: 60
Views: 8176

Re: BG Autobreak - proposal

Tim is right. Lowering Superior break points was playrested for Fog AM v2 and was universally unpopular. Currently people only take Average mounted when compulsory or for rear support. Making them cheaper would not make them more attractive.
by kevinj
Wed Jan 18, 2017 6:17 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
Replies: 91
Views: 11814

Re: Better Armour - proposal (updated)

A reroll is the nearest we have to half a POA. Remember also the current proposal gives troops with better armour if they are otherwise at a negative POA.
by kevinj
Wed Jan 18, 2017 5:30 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
Replies: 91
Views: 11814

Re: Better Armour - proposal (updated)

Your understanding is correct.
by kevinj
Tue Jan 17, 2017 3:22 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Cavalry turning and moving backwards in one turn?
Replies: 16
Views: 1862

Re: Cavalry turning and moving backwards in one turn?

One of the bizarre changes that was made to FoG AM was that cavalry could turn 180 degrees twice in one turn and move, but couldn't turn 180 degrees once and move. This was originally considered as an option, but was found in playtesting to be too powerful, allowing the cavalry to shoot from maximum...
by kevinj
Mon Jan 16, 2017 10:34 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: BG Autobreak - proposal
Replies: 60
Views: 8176

Re: BG Autobreak - proposal

Our thought was to replace the percentages with the table so you don't have to work it out.
by kevinj
Mon Jan 16, 2017 6:29 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Bows
Replies: 109
Views: 15253

Re: Bows

A good analysis but there are other considerations, e.g. Arquebus and Musket are Shot and hence ignore armour in melee. They also give -1 in CTs to Cavalry and Light Horse.
by kevinj
Mon Jan 16, 2017 4:58 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
Replies: 91
Views: 11814

Re: Better Armour - proposal (updated)

Is there a specific Foot interaction that you think would be irreparably affected?
by kevinj
Mon Jan 16, 2017 10:10 am
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Points Values - the whole damn lot
Replies: 86
Views: 13013

Re: Points Values - the whole damn lot

Thank you for your thoughts David. In the original points system Cavalry were charged a 2 point premium for the ability to evade. This was especially poor value for those that can't. They already have the disadvantage of being less resilient to firearm shooting. The Tatars are competitive against th...
by kevinj
Sun Jan 15, 2017 10:15 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Dragoons - proposal
Replies: 53
Views: 7530

Re: Dragoons - proposal

It sounds like maybe the people at your club use them more historically. Unfortunately, it's also possible to use them as a kind of Light Horse with Musket, as Keith describes above. The purpose of the proposal is to prevent that and force more historical usage.
by kevinj
Sun Jan 15, 2017 9:12 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
Replies: 91
Views: 11814

Re: Better Armour - proposal (updated)

Thank you for spotting that. I've fixed it now.
by kevinj
Sun Jan 15, 2017 6:39 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Dragoons - proposal
Replies: 53
Views: 7530

Re: Dragoons - proposal

It's a valid point and something I did consider when thinking about Dragoons but I think it is an added complication that we don't need. in most games it won't arise and It would require a number of additional rules such as what happens if enemy contact the marker.
by kevinj
Sun Jan 15, 2017 3:09 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
Replies: 91
Views: 11814

Re: Better Armour - proposal (updated)

As requested, here are a few examples showing how the latest suggestion compares to the existing position. Example 1 A - Louis XIV (Unarmoured, Superior) v B - L of A (Armoured Average). Both DH with Pistol/Pistol. Currently: B has + POA for better armour. A will reroll 1s Proposed: Neither have POA...
by kevinj
Fri Jan 13, 2017 4:59 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
Replies: 91
Views: 11814

Re: Better Armour - proposal (updated)

I think some of the examples have shown that the reroll option won't do the job on its own, so we've had another think. This one is somewhat inelegant but we think it may provide the fix we're looking for without breaking anything else. So, the next suggestion is (and if people like it I know we'll ...
by kevinj
Wed Jan 11, 2017 10:28 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: BG Autobreak - proposal
Replies: 60
Views: 8176

Re: BG Autobreak - proposal

quackstheking wrote: I wonder whether therefore we should change the Cohesion Test wording for %age losses to:-

"For each 25% of original base losses"
This was introduced into Fog AM in V2. The last I heard they were proposing to revert to the original in V3. It would be worth checking with Terry why that is.
by kevinj
Tue Jan 10, 2017 11:25 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Other Artillery stuff - proposal
Replies: 15
Views: 2791

Re: Other Artillery stuff - proposal

1 or 3 - not both.
Since these address different issues why do you regard them as an either/or option?

Go to advanced search