Enjoyable II

General discussion forum for anything related to Field of Glory Ancients & Medieval.

Moderators: hammy, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Moderators, Field of Glory Design, hammy, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Moderators, Field of Glory Design

madaxeman
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Posts: 2970
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 5:15 am
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Post by madaxeman » Fri Jan 13, 2012 6:37 pm

philqw78 wrote:But they could bring a lot of this to bear, though not this time around. Just make all move the same distance when outside 6MU.
Its inside of this 'tactical' range when the differences need to be shown anyway.
Along the same lines,give mounted troops the option of taking a CMT every turn. Pass it by 1 they can move 1" further, pass by 2 or more and they can move 2" further. Fail it and bad things happen. Do it twice in a row and you cant initiate a charge in your next turn.

Woudl make turning and marching away from mounted a bit more risky
http://www.madaxeman.com
Become a fan of Madaxeman on Facebook at Madaxeman.com's Facebook Page.

pezhetairoi
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 305
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2008 5:31 am
Location: Smiths Falls, Ontario, Canada

Post by pezhetairoi » Fri Jan 13, 2012 7:53 pm

ravenflight wrote:Quite simply - (and I'm not trying to re-write the rules here - just observing) I would double the VMD and keep the distance they can charge. Other than that, everyone in the same formation moves the same. Close formation troops 2, loose 3, and light 4.
This is just an exercise in fun, I'm not advocating any changes because they would never come about anyway.
Details aside, I think I'm realizing now we are saying pretty much the same thing but emphasizing opposite elements.
I'm saying "cavalry mostly moves at a walking pace -- but sometimes can really push-it"
And I think your saying "cavalry has its moments of speed, but most of the time they walk"
:D

Anyway, I like your idea on this matter.
I've had similar thoughts about identical tactical move rates for most unit types -- with the added potential to "exert" your troops for some additional unit-specific abilities (mounted go faster, inf push harder). The double move seems to take this in a little, but it's a bit bland to me. I think it would need a drawback or a limit to be realistic. Unfortunately to record fatigue levels would require paperwork or something similar.
I have no real answers.
:(
My Architectural Model Making Business
http://www.monolitham.com/

ravenflight
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Posts: 1966
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:52 am

Post by ravenflight » Fri Jan 13, 2012 9:10 pm

pezhetairoi wrote:Unfortunately to record fatigue levels would require paperwork or something similar.
I have no real answers.
:(
I don't think you have to record fatigue levels.

As you said earlier, the unit commander is going to limit the amount you 'push' the mounted. There have been instances where mounted were pushed for a long time prior to engaging in combat and then charged on top of that. The attack on Beersheba in WWI springs to mind, but there have been equally impressive 'forced marches' by foot. Davout's III Corps pretty much any time springs to mind.

Thing is that these extra-ordinary feats are then used to justify people doing it the entire game with their entire army. I mean, how many times do you see mounted not move there whole move?

One interesting thought I had was to give all troops the option of 'forced marching' and so they all get VMD's every turn. You don't HAVE to take a VMD you just have the option at any time of taking a VMD. This has two advantages. Firstly, you risk going short as much as you risk going long. Secondly, if you try doing it with the entire army there is no way you're going to stay together as a unit and therefore WILL get stragglers.

ravenflight
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Posts: 1966
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:52 am

Post by ravenflight » Fri Jan 13, 2012 9:12 pm

madaxeman wrote:
philqw78 wrote:But they could bring a lot of this to bear, though not this time around. Just make all move the same distance when outside 6MU.
Its inside of this 'tactical' range when the differences need to be shown anyway.
Along the same lines,give mounted troops the option of taking a CMT every turn. Pass it by 1 they can move 1" further, pass by 2 or more and they can move 2" further. Fail it and bad things happen. Do it twice in a row and you cant initiate a charge in your next turn.

Woudl make turning and marching away from mounted a bit more risky
Bit of record keeping with the twice in a row bit.

Strategos69
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Posts: 1375
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 10:53 pm
Location: Alcalá de Henares, Spain

Post by Strategos69 » Sat Jan 14, 2012 11:41 am

I have enjoyed your conversation on cavalry. Usually I think that in wargames there is too much inheritance of previous rulesets, creating a sort of "wargame wisdom" that you can't find in the sources. For example, in Ancient Western warfare, elephants working closely with HF are rather the exception than the norm, but they are usually allowed to form combined forces, battle lines, etc.
ravenflight wrote: One interesting thought I had was to give all troops the option of 'forced marching' and so they all get VMD's every turn. You don't HAVE to take a VMD you just have the option at any time of taking a VMD. This has two advantages. Firstly, you risk going short as much as you risk going long. Secondly, if you try doing it with the entire army there is no way you're going to stay together as a unit and therefore WILL get stragglers.
I would say that there is not much incentive in using a forced march when the most likely outcomes are not moving more and having your line disrupted. But I like the idea. I would prefer to have a fixed amount of movement for all troops when away from the enemy more than XMU and let the option of the forced march. That would be a double move and after completing it troops would check for morale (a CT) representing the loss of cohesion when performing such a move. Troops in column would not be forced to do that check as the column formation is THE way to march. Whether one way or the other, it is an interesting concept to the initiative roll every turn to try different ways of playing the same ruleset.

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

Post by hazelbark » Mon Jan 16, 2012 5:04 pm

Strategos69 wrote: If you want to represent an overall battle, I think that watching how the HF or Cv move to chase LF or LH is way too detailed for the scale of representation. Indded, that game provided a better look as a battle and that is done with 100 stands per side. In my opinion that is interesting because 100 stands are somethig feasible in larger and more appealing scales.
In otherwords a FOG game with say 1000 or 1200 points on a 4x6 would be more historical looking. I agree.

philqw78
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Posts: 8721
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Manchester

Post by philqw78 » Mon Jan 16, 2012 5:28 pm

Or 800pts on 150x100 (cm)
phil
putting the arg into argumentative

ravenflight
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Posts: 1966
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:52 am

Post by ravenflight » Mon Jan 16, 2012 9:34 pm

Strategos69 wrote:I would say that there is not much incentive in using a forced march when the most likely outcomes are not moving more and having your line disrupted. But I like the idea. I would prefer to have a fixed amount of movement for all troops when away from the enemy more than XMU and let the option of the forced march. That would be a double move and after completing it troops would check for morale (a CT) representing the loss of cohesion when performing such a move. Troops in column would not be forced to do that check as the column formation is THE way to march. Whether one way or the other, it is an interesting concept to the initiative roll every turn to try different ways of playing the same ruleset.
Yes, yours is much better. It means that veterans (superior and Elite) with a inspirational general are able to do it lots, and poor aren't... Which I can see as reasonable. I think you would have to assume that the elite with inpired general will forced march every turn, which is perhaps unrealistic (elite Mamalukes going into ballte with blown horses that are magically not blown coz they rolled good dice) but that is an overall minor loss of realism for an overall increase in realism in broader areas. I'd keep the 6" rule tho. No forced marches within 6" of enemy. Maybe double the VMD for a +ve result for cavalry. Starting to get too tricky tho.

Strategos69
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Posts: 1375
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 10:53 pm
Location: Alcalá de Henares, Spain

Post by Strategos69 » Tue Jan 17, 2012 8:57 am

ravenflight wrote: I'd keep the 6" rule tho. No forced marches within 6" of enemy. Maybe double the VMD for a +ve result for cavalry. Starting to get too tricky tho.
I agree that marching should not be allowed within 6 MU of the enemy. I thought for example that there is a problem with the VMD after reading pezhetairoi's post on cavalry in the beta and how they can perform sprints that outrun any man. I have to agree that making the same likeliness for both foot and cavalry is not realistic. That makes that psiloi can get away from their historical enemies (cavalry) quite quickly and easily. I thought about a VMD with two dice and some modifiers that account for terrain, being on a horse and armor to account for those factors. Or maybe the VMD should be a roll of 1d6 plus-minus modifiers and you move what you get on the die.

ravenflight
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Posts: 1966
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 6:52 am

Post by ravenflight » Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:18 am

Strategos69 wrote:
ravenflight wrote: I'd keep the 6" rule tho. No forced marches within 6" of enemy. Maybe double the VMD for a +ve result for cavalry. Starting to get too tricky tho.
I agree that marching should not be allowed within 6 MU of the enemy. I thought for example that there is a problem with the VMD after reading pezhetairoi's post on cavalry in the beta and how they can perform sprints that outrun any man. I have to agree that making the same likeliness for both foot and cavalry is not realistic. That makes that psiloi can get away from their historical enemies (cavalry) quite quickly and easily. I thought about a VMD with two dice and some modifiers that account for terrain, being on a horse and armor to account for those factors. Or maybe the VMD should be a roll of 1d6 plus-minus modifiers and you move what you get on the die.
Just shooting from the hip here... "If Light Chariot, Cav or Lighthorse (note, not HC, Elephants, Knights or Cataphracts) vs any foot troops roll 2 dice for VMD taking the highest dice".

This means that it can be both positive and negative. You may not WANT to catch the infantry. You may not WANT to evade off table - etc. It DOES keep the infantry skirmishers honest though. If you wanna not get caught by the cavalry, stay back.

Other things that aren't being considered here is that things like shooting ranges etc I'm sure have been influenced/influence how far troops can move. I don't think it's an accident that Bow shoot 4" and Knights charge that far.

Strategos69
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Posts: 1375
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 10:53 pm
Location: Alcalá de Henares, Spain

Post by Strategos69 » Tue Jan 17, 2012 9:29 pm

Interesting mechanism and far easier to implement.

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory : Ancient & Medieval Era 3000 BC-1500 AD : General Discussion”