Search found 1966 matches

by ravenflight
Fri Jan 13, 2017 11:58 am
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Determined Horse at Impact
Replies: 23
Views: 2733

Re: Determined Horse at Impact

The Maison du Roi led by the Grenadiers a cheval de la Garde with the latter taking 5 colours - sort of boils down to the garde BG breaking a couple of enemy mounted BGs and assuming the nutters got to the colours first. That's the one I was thinking about, thank you. Sorry, I was tired and typing ...
by ravenflight
Fri Jan 13, 2017 11:51 am
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Duty and Glory - proposal
Replies: 13
Views: 3155

Re: Duty and Glory - proposal

(*) Actually, I'm not sure how much of this to blame on the list design, and how much to blame on the system that made the horse such a bad buy. From my perspective, a great deal on the latter. Most of my resistance to the change is a strong desire to not alienate players. I have a 1 BG of Horse Da...
by ravenflight
Fri Jan 13, 2017 11:42 am
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Dragoons - proposal
Replies: 53
Views: 8132

Re: Dragoons - proposal

I note the routed Dragoons but - surely in pursuit (admittedly not that frequent) they'd also be back on their horses ? So might suggest [if routing or pursuing]. In the line above? Pursuing with Dragoons probably won't happen too often. I thought routing made sense to get the full move, but maybe ...
by ravenflight
Fri Jan 13, 2017 5:12 am
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Sundry List Changes - proposal
Replies: 32
Views: 6132

Re: Sundry List Changes - proposal

2 army break points of foot battle troops for every army break point of artillery. This would mean in your 3 BGs of Terciis you could have 3 BGs of guns. 3 BGs of Tercios (6 army break points) give 1.5 BGs of guns (3 army break points) by your formula :?: Huh? Have I worded it bad?? 1 BG of artille...
by ravenflight
Thu Jan 12, 2017 10:17 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Determined Horse at Impact
Replies: 23
Views: 2733

Re: Determined Horse at Impact

I don't have rules on hand, and TBH it's been so long I don't remember the rule, but it has always struck me as odd that it's practically impossible to recreate the Late Louis XIV 'capture of X standards in one charge' thing. Perhaps you would get a more likely result if opponents to 2 dice mounted ...
by ravenflight
Thu Jan 12, 2017 9:59 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Sundry List Changes - proposal
Replies: 32
Views: 6132

Re: Sundry List Changes - proposal

timmy1 wrote:No. If you had three Early Tercios you could only take one BG of artillery.
Good point, how about something along the lines of 2 army break points of foot battle troops for every army break point of artillery. This would mean in your 3 BGs of Terciis you could have 3 BGs of guns.
by ravenflight
Thu Jan 12, 2017 6:15 am
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Sundry List Changes - proposal
Replies: 32
Views: 6132

Re: Sundry List Changes - proposal

Sorry, I'm posting this on holiday so I don't have my lists with me (!) to do the math, but I'm thinking of Ottomans and Mughals who do sort of want 6 guns - maybe in 2 unwieldy batteries. Your ottoman artillery park plus supports looks like, erm, 330-odd points (?), plus Generals to me, leaving on...
by ravenflight
Thu Jan 12, 2017 6:10 am
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Duty and Glory - proposal
Replies: 13
Views: 3155

Re: Duty and Glory - proposal

because, as I understand it, these armies were low in numbers of mounted compared to other armies. And the armies still running 2 stands of pike in that period have enough problems... So, worry less about history and worry more about making armies more playable? Buccaneers with Superior Heavily Arm...
by ravenflight
Tue Jan 10, 2017 8:43 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Duty and Glory - proposal
Replies: 13
Views: 3155

Re: Duty and Glory - proposal

I still think you're at risk of alienating people who already have an army and don't want to buy more figures. I also don't really understand why. I mean the list writers would have done their research in the first place, right? so the numbers wouldn't have changed, and no new research has come to l...
by ravenflight
Tue Jan 10, 2017 9:59 am
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Other Artillery stuff - proposal
Replies: 15
Views: 3063

Re: Other Artillery stuff - proposal

I would amend this to:

3. Artillery can no longer shoot through friendly LF

Other than that, I don't mine this as it still means that artillery can start pointing into the flank sectors, but mounted can avoid that if they choose.
by ravenflight
Mon Jan 09, 2017 8:26 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Better Armour - proposal
Replies: 16
Views: 1967

Re: Better Armour - proposal

If a stand is in combat with steady enemy that has a lower armour rating and that is not Shot, Heavy Weapons, Elephants, War Wagons, Protected Horse, Protected Determined Horse or Protected Cavaliers, the Melee close combat “to hit” dice (but not any other dice rolls) of that stand are one re-roll l...
by ravenflight
Mon Jan 09, 2017 7:02 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Bows
Replies: 109
Views: 16453

Re: Bows

Yay, a longbow debate! The weapon that would have conquered the world had not the army leaders of Europe decided to switch to firearms. Which they did (because it was better). And, pretty much, conquered the world anyway despite the superiority of the bow. How lucky for the conquistadors and other ...
by ravenflight
Mon Jan 09, 2017 7:12 am
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Bows
Replies: 109
Views: 16453

Re: Bows

The main reason the Japanese went to the arquebus was due to ease of training. I disagree. Sorry, but I never fully bought the "ease of training" explanation for either the crossbow or the gun. My own impression is that the Japanese adopted the arquebus because is -was- a devastatingly effective we...
by ravenflight
Sat Jan 07, 2017 10:57 am
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Elephants
Replies: 39
Views: 2551

Re: Elephants

Playing Devil's advocate, could I understand the rationale for not allowing Elephants, Divisional moves with cavalry, with the assumption being that such moves would be limited to 2 and that movement would be at the elephant rate of 4" - thus giving a max Divisional move of 8"? As I understand it, ...
by ravenflight
Fri Jan 06, 2017 10:44 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Elephants
Replies: 39
Views: 2551

Re: Elephants

I would go with 20 points each, deployment as cavalry and hopefully the supporting cavalry will get cheaper / better if their cost is reduced. Don Divisional moves? Otherwise they go out with the cavalry and then get left behind! :roll: Don The division CAN slow down. They don't HAVE to be left beh...
by ravenflight
Fri Jan 06, 2017 10:38 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Other Points Changes
Replies: 46
Views: 5152

Re: Other Points Changes

Vespasian28 wrote:LT though is a better artillery target. Swedish brigade and Colunela both have a single file three deep but only the latter is more vulnerable to artillery.
Is that right? I thought ANYTHING 3 deep EXCEPT Swedish Brigade got the target put on them?
by ravenflight
Thu Jan 05, 2017 9:58 am
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Bows
Replies: 109
Views: 16453

Re: Bows

It also feels more important to keep 4" for the in-book/in-theme interactions, rather than applying a 3" short range as a "fix" for the out of theme musket/bow interaction I'd say the arquebus/bow interaction is more relevant to historical matchups, though. I think in this sense the rules have it r...
by ravenflight
Wed Jan 04, 2017 8:37 am
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Updates - where we are at
Replies: 69
Views: 11230

Re: Updates - where we are at

Go on, lock the topics that are not proceeding - what's the point of having the power if you are not going to abuse it now and then...? Thanks for the update - good to know. Tend to agree. I would be one who would bang on about my pet opinion in the vain hope it gets changed. Enforced 'drop it, we'...
by ravenflight
Sun Jan 01, 2017 12:36 am
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Musket*
Replies: 15
Views: 1066

Re: Musket*

And remember we are dealing with a set of rules for a game covering about two hundred years of history over five continents. Not every interaction is going to be perfect and we may end up creating one not completely perfect interaction whilst attempting to solve another. In FOGAM I pay twice as man...
by ravenflight
Fri Dec 30, 2016 10:07 pm
Forum: FOGR Update
Topic: Musket*
Replies: 15
Views: 1066

Re: Musket*

I agree that the highlander long range shooting is anomaly that I don't care for when combined in 8s. I think the idea that Warrior musket* have a negative effect at long range has an appeal. It could be a POA. Which would be simpler to incorporate. Agree do not mess with standard musket* types. Ca...

Go to advanced search