Some new questions

This forum is for any questions about the rules. Post here is you need feedback from the design team.

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

Post Reply
vincent
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 7:27 pm
Location: Paris, France

Some new questions

Post by vincent » Sat Jan 27, 2007 1:33 am

Olivier and I played a game on Thursday
The late republican Romans completely crushed the Early Germans (lost 2 out of 11 to 14 out of 14).
MF warbands were routed in a single bound in each case. Pursuit and charges often reduced moves for the germans, leading to delays in the attacks.
The fact that there are 3 melees between each move by a single player proved a big problem for the german. They were unable to use their superior numbers and their units were killed in detail one after the other.
On frontal contact, the Romans, whether superior or elite, proved completely invulnerable.

Several questions occured during the game:
  • 1) A LF, already engaged in melee against another LF, was charged by a Roman legion. Surprisingly, it did not suffered from any malus on the cohesion test (while MF do) after losing the impact phase. In the movement phase, the roman LF wished to contract their engaged front (keeping the same number of base in combat since they were filling up rear ranks previously lost) to be replaced by the expanding legions. Is such a move legal?

    2) An elite legion BG (4 bases) in column was hit by a warband BG (8 bases, 2 ranks). The contact occured on the extreme right of the warband group. After initial impact, how are expansion/lining uo done? Can the legion expand on the overlap side of the warband? Which unit does expand first? (if the roman expand on the warband front first, the warband can then slide to get all 8 elements in melee, if the warband slide first, then the roman can expand on the small side and fight only 6 enemy element).
    IMO, if a unit wishes to expand/slides, it should be compulsory to do it in such a way as to maximise the number of enemy bases in contact.

    3) a BL of 3 cavalry BGs side by side was charged on the middle and left BG. The right BG counted as an overlap. Is it considered as engaged in melee? In particular, in the next bound, can it separate from the combat to charge another enemy unit or is it stuck until the melee is solved?
    Similarly, after the enemy BG routed its direct opponent, can it pursue or is it still engaged by the overlapping BG?
Best regards


Vincent

vincent
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 7:27 pm
Location: Paris, France

Post by vincent » Thu Feb 01, 2007 11:59 pm

Another game happened tonight, Olivier's Tatars won against Vincent's Later Hungarians.

A few question occurred during the game:
  • 1) a unit of armoured cavalry in a single line is shot at by bows from its flank. If the shooters had long bows, would the + POA apply ?

    2) a cavalry BG was charged in the flank by a foot BG while already engaged to its front. After the melee phase, they were not routed, hence they elected to break-off since they were fighting steady foot. Nothing in the rules prevented the break-off move, but allowing it while the BG was flanked seemed very strange.

    3) On one occasion, a charge was prevented by friendly troops being in the way. The fact that normal movement are made after charges was the direct cause. The more I play, the more I feel uncomfortable with the sequential procedure for movements and the simultaneous melee and shooting phase (which means that a lot can happen between 2 consecutive move phases by the same player).

    4) A KN BG was charged in flank, rear and front by 3 LH BG. The impact phase was 2 dices for the KN to 1 dice for the LH. Despite the ++, 1 LH lost the impact. In the melee phase, the KN were on equal or advantageous number of dices and had no net PoA either way (the better armour compensated for the fighting in 2 directions). They therefore started to slowly grind away the opposition which could not attempt break off. Both Olivier and I felt that this invulnerability of KN to LH even when surrounded is wrong. It also means that KN can completely disregard LH.

    5) A LH group found itself with HF to its front and, at a shorter distance, a KN BG to its back. Can he choose to shoot to its back (at - ) rather than straight ahead?
Best regards


Vincent

Post Reply

Return to “Rules Questions”