Quick Questions Thread on Rules

grahamed
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 261
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by grahamed »

rbodleyscott wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 5:39 am
grahamed wrote: Fri Sep 03, 2021 9:27 pm Ok thanks.

For clarity my question was intended to be does a unit which passes the autobreak threshold ( below half strength for an average unit) have no more “value” or usefulness than a dispersed unit, other than as a mobile obstacle . Compared to say a broken unit which does at least have a chance to rally?
It has no more “value” than a dispersed unit. It is only not taken off immediately because the enemy may pursue.
Understood, thanks
Badger73
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 337
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2018 11:08 pm
Location: Wisconsin, USA

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by Badger73 »

When attacking an enemy unit currently in melee with another of your units from a previous turn (in effect now attacking two against one), which close combat table does the defending unit use against that second attacker's initial combat round; Impact POA or Melee POA?
SnuggleBunnies
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Posts: 2789
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2015 2:09 am

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by SnuggleBunnies »

Badger73 wrote: Tue Sep 07, 2021 7:27 pm When attacking an enemy unit currently in melee with another of your units from a previous turn (in effect now attacking two against one), which close combat table does the defending unit use against that second attacker's initial combat round; Impact POA or Melee POA?
Impact
SnuggleBunny's Field of Glory II / Medieval / Pike and Shot / Sengoku Jidai MP Channel:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjUQy6dEqR53NwoGgjxixLg
grahamed
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 261
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by grahamed »

Generals allocation on deployment

I thought that an infantry sub general with wider influence was allocated to a mostly drilled foot (eg byzantine) army on deployment if their were a cav reserve. But i just deployed in a game and the cinc got allocated to the foot , a sub gen to the cav reserve and 2 are left for me to deploy.

Can someone explain what the full criteria are? After all the better general is quite an advantage and it seems strange that allocation is a bit murky?

Thanks
rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 28007
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by rbodleyscott »

grahamed wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 11:43 am Generals allocation on deployment

I thought that an infantry sub general with wider influence was allocated to a mostly drilled foot (eg byzantine) army on deployment if their were a cav reserve. But i just deployed in a game and the cinc got allocated to the foot , a sub gen to the cav reserve and 2 are left for me to deploy.

Can someone explain what the full criteria are? After all the better general is quite an advantage and it seems strange that allocation is a bit murky?

Thanks
Strictly speaking the C-in-C gets assigned to Team 4, if it exists, rather than to "the cavalry reserve".

Team 4 is any cavalry units within 2 squares of the infantry centre line in an non-mostly-cavalry army, within 4 squares in a cavalry army.

So if your "cavalry reserve" was deployed more than 2 squares from the centre line of the infantry, they would instead be assigned either to team 2 or team 3 (the cavalry wings), and get a sub-general.

Also, if the C-in-C is in Team 4, team 1 (the infantry) will be assigned a wider influence SG regardless of whether the army is drilled or not.
Richard Bodley Scott

Image
grahamed
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 261
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by grahamed »

rbodleyscott wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 12:43 pm
grahamed wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 11:43 am Generals allocation on deployment

I thought that an infantry sub general with wider influence was allocated to a mostly drilled foot (eg byzantine) army on deployment if their were a cav reserve. But i just deployed in a game and the cinc got allocated to the foot , a sub gen to the cav reserve and 2 are left for me to deploy.

Can someone explain what the full criteria are? After all the better general is quite an advantage and it seems strange that allocation is a bit murky?

Thanks
Strictly speaking the C-in-C gets assigned to Team 4, if it exists, rather than to "the cavalry reserve".

Team 4 is any cavalry units within 2 squares of the infantry centre line in an non-mostly-cavalry army, within 4 squares in a cavalry army.

So if your "cavalry reserve" was deployed more than 2 squares from the centre line of the infantry, they would instead be assigned either to team 2 or team 3 (the cavalry wings), and get a sub-general.

Also, if the C-in-C is in Team 4, team 1 (the infantry) will be assigned a wider influence SG regardless of whether the army is drilled or not.
Richard thanks for that, it seems clear. Does it matter how far forward or back the cavalry who the player wants to be assigned to team 4 are ( eg if they are directly behind an infantry line it will work but will it still work if the cavalry are dead centre but in front of the infantry?

Also if there is only one cavalry unit in the army, if it is dead centre will the cinc be assigned to it and will it count as “team 4” so that the team 1 inf sub gen gets a wider influence commander? Or do you need a cav unit on each wing to make up the 4 teams?
rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 28007
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by rbodleyscott »

grahamed wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 1:26 pm
rbodleyscott wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 12:43 pm
grahamed wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 11:43 am Generals allocation on deployment

I thought that an infantry sub general with wider influence was allocated to a mostly drilled foot (eg byzantine) army on deployment if their were a cav reserve. But i just deployed in a game and the cinc got allocated to the foot , a sub gen to the cav reserve and 2 are left for me to deploy.

Can someone explain what the full criteria are? After all the better general is quite an advantage and it seems strange that allocation is a bit murky?

Thanks
Strictly speaking the C-in-C gets assigned to Team 4, if it exists, rather than to "the cavalry reserve".

Team 4 is any cavalry units within 2 squares of the infantry centre line in an non-mostly-cavalry army, within 4 squares in a cavalry army.

So if your "cavalry reserve" was deployed more than 2 squares from the centre line of the infantry, they would instead be assigned either to team 2 or team 3 (the cavalry wings), and get a sub-general.

Also, if the C-in-C is in Team 4, team 1 (the infantry) will be assigned a wider influence SG regardless of whether the army is drilled or not.
Richard thanks for that, it seems clear. Does it matter how far forward or back the cavalry who the player wants to be assigned to team 4 are ( eg if they are directly behind an infantry line it will work but will it still work if the cavalry are dead centre but in front of the infantry?
I think so. Try it and see!
Also if there is only one cavalry unit in the army, if it is dead centre will the cinc be assigned to it and will it count as “team 4” so that the team 1 inf sub gen gets a wider influence commander?

Yes
Or do you need a cav unit on each wing to make up the 4 teams?
No
Richard Bodley Scott

Image
kraff
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 240
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 1:10 am

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by kraff »

Are there any plans of removing double drops of cohesion from the game?
rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 28007
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by rbodleyscott »

kraff wrote: Fri Nov 26, 2021 11:08 pm Are there any plans of removing double drops of cohesion from the game?
No
Richard Bodley Scott

Image
kronenblatt
General - Elite King Tiger
General - Elite King Tiger
Posts: 4321
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2019 4:17 pm
Location: Stockholm, SWEDEN

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by kronenblatt »

rbodleyscott wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 8:09 am
kraff wrote: Fri Nov 26, 2021 11:08 pm Are there any plans of removing double drops of cohesion from the game?
No
Good! I like that there is this type of stochasticity in-game. Frustrating while suffering from it, of course, but adds a nerve and unexpected twists that are fun.
kronenblatt's campaign and tournament thread hub:

https://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=108643
markleslie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 321
Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2020 6:55 am

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by markleslie »

Yes, very cathartic.

A dose every now and then is good for ones health.
Flockaveli
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 58
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2021 3:20 am

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by Flockaveli »

Are there any limits on extra pursuit APs? Or theoretically, could a cavalry unit cross the entire map in one turn, if there were enough enemy units that could be charged, evade, and lead the charger to another such unit?
deeter
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Posts: 1953
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 8:52 pm

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by deeter »

I've seen units pursue for many squares, so no limit apparently.

Deeter
kraff
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 240
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2017 1:10 am

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by kraff »

rbodleyscott wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 8:09 am
kraff wrote: Fri Nov 26, 2021 11:08 pm Are there any plans of removing double drops of cohesion from the game?
No
Are there any plans to revise any unit stats? Or maybe de-buff some army lists, like the Muslim from the time of conquest (overpowered, I think)? Or to give extra love to certain army lists? E.g. the Sassanid, which is grossly underdeveloped, in my honest opinion, especially in comparison to Roman/Byzantine roster.
kronenblatt wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 9:13 am Good! I like that there is this type of stochasticity in-game. Frustrating while suffering from it, of course, but adds a nerve and unexpected twists that are fun.
It's the opposite of fun for me, actually, and it doesn't really matter who suffers from randomness, me or my opponent, it equally destroys enjoyment. Randomness produces unrealistic results most of the time, and that forces me to suspend my disbelief way too often for a game that is supposed to be realistic simulation of ancient and medieval warfare.
rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 28007
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by rbodleyscott »

kraff wrote: Sun Dec 05, 2021 7:19 pm
rbodleyscott wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 8:09 am
kraff wrote: Fri Nov 26, 2021 11:08 pm Are there any plans of removing double drops of cohesion from the game?
No
Are there any plans to revise any unit stats? Or maybe de-buff some army lists, like the Muslim from the time of conquest (overpowered, I think)? Or to give extra love to certain army lists? E.g. the Sassanid, which is grossly underdeveloped, in my honest opinion, especially in comparison to Roman/Byzantine roster.
Maybe one day, when we have completed all of the DLCs for Medieval and Ancients.
kronenblatt wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 9:13 am Good! I like that there is this type of stochasticity in-game. Frustrating while suffering from it, of course, but adds a nerve and unexpected twists that are fun.
It's the opposite of fun for me, actually, and it doesn't really matter who suffers from randomness, me or my opponent, it equally destroys enjoyment. Randomness produces unrealistic results most of the time, and that forces me to suspend my disbelief way too often for a game that is supposed to be realistic simulation of ancient and medieval warfare.
I will leave someone else to reply to this, except to say that unexpected is not the same as unrealistic. How else could the game represent things going unexpectedly wrong, in particular sudden troop panics? These often happened historically.

We will never get a consensus on how much randomness there should be in the game - people have different preferences.
Richard Bodley Scott

Image
kronenblatt
General - Elite King Tiger
General - Elite King Tiger
Posts: 4321
Joined: Mon Jun 03, 2019 4:17 pm
Location: Stockholm, SWEDEN

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by kronenblatt »

rbodleyscott wrote: Mon Dec 06, 2021 7:35 am
kraff wrote: Sun Dec 05, 2021 7:19 pm
rbodleyscott wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 8:09 am No
Are there any plans to revise any unit stats? Or maybe de-buff some army lists, like the Muslim from the time of conquest (overpowered, I think)? Or to give extra love to certain army lists? E.g. the Sassanid, which is grossly underdeveloped, in my honest opinion, especially in comparison to Roman/Byzantine roster.
Maybe one day, when we have completed all of the DLCs for Medieval and Ancients.
kronenblatt wrote: Sat Nov 27, 2021 9:13 am Good! I like that there is this type of stochasticity in-game. Frustrating while suffering from it, of course, but adds a nerve and unexpected twists that are fun.
It's the opposite of fun for me, actually, and it doesn't really matter who suffers from randomness, me or my opponent, it equally destroys enjoyment. Randomness produces unrealistic results most of the time, and that forces me to suspend my disbelief way too often for a game that is supposed to be realistic simulation of ancient and medieval warfare.
I will leave someone else to reply to this, except to say that unexpected is not the same as unrealistic. How else could the game represent things going unexpectedly wrong, in particular sudden troop panics. These often happened historically.

We will never get a consensus on how much randomness there should be in the game - people have different preferences.
True. Good that the game at least can then be modded to suit one's own preferences. Because both these considerations (revised unit stats and reducing randomness) are moddable to some extent, right?
kronenblatt's campaign and tournament thread hub:

https://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=108643
rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 28007
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by rbodleyscott »

kronenblatt wrote: Mon Dec 06, 2021 11:23 am
rbodleyscott wrote: Mon Dec 06, 2021 7:35 am
kraff wrote: Sun Dec 05, 2021 7:19 pm

Are there any plans to revise any unit stats? Or maybe de-buff some army lists, like the Muslim from the time of conquest (overpowered, I think)? Or to give extra love to certain army lists? E.g. the Sassanid, which is grossly underdeveloped, in my honest opinion, especially in comparison to Roman/Byzantine roster.
Maybe one day, when we have completed all of the DLCs for Medieval and Ancients.

It's the opposite of fun for me, actually, and it doesn't really matter who suffers from randomness, me or my opponent, it equally destroys enjoyment. Randomness produces unrealistic results most of the time, and that forces me to suspend my disbelief way too often for a game that is supposed to be realistic simulation of ancient and medieval warfare.
I will leave someone else to reply to this, except to say that unexpected is not the same as unrealistic. How else could the game represent things going unexpectedly wrong, in particular sudden troop panics. These often happened historically.

We will never get a consensus on how much randomness there should be in the game - people have different preferences.
True. Good that the game at least can then be modded to suit one's own preferences. Because both these considerations (revised unit stats and reducing randomness) are moddable to some extent, right?
Of course.
Richard Bodley Scott

Image
vakarr
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 840
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2006 6:57 am
Contact:

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by vakarr »

I'm not understanding the change to the ZOC rules. I thought I had some units pinned in my last game but they weren't. Can somebody please enlighten me how it's changed e.g. before you could pin a unit this way, now you can't?

Also, in one game I had an undamaged elephant charge the flank of another undamaged elephant. Result: my elephant was Fragmented. In another game, I charged an undamaged average thureophoroi straight into an undamaged raw thureophoroi. Result: my unit became Fragmented. What is the odds on either of these events happening?
grahamed
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 261
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 6:08 pm

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by grahamed »

vakarr wrote: Fri Mar 04, 2022 2:18 am I'm not understanding the change to the ZOC rules. I thought I had some units pinned in my last game but they weren't. Can somebody please enlighten me how it's changed e.g. before you could pin a unit this way, now you can't?

Also, in one game I had an undamaged elephant charge the flank of another undamaged elephant. Result: my elephant was Fragmented. In another game, I charged an undamaged average thureophoroi straight into an undamaged raw thureophoroi. Result: my unit became Fragmented. What is the odds on either of these events happening?
I empathise with your obvious frustration over the elephant charge, i have seen similar surprises myself, i think that as long as such things are not too common it is fair enough, as Richard said above:-

“I will leave someone else to reply to this, except to say that unexpected is not the same as unrealistic. How else could the game represent things going unexpectedly wrong, in particular sudden troop panics? These often happened historically.”

The only bit of Richards point that I am not convinced about is “often” i suspect for the more extreme anomolies “sometimes” is more sccurate?

Perhaps in one of the manual updates a few examples of some surprising outcomes and their probabilities might help people understand. For me, as a longtime tabletop player, not being able to see the dice rolls made it very frustrating at first, i still find it a little difficult that its quite hard to assess the risk you are taking on a charge in the same way you could if you could “run the numbers” in your head before charging. Admittedly you can get some idea from the reletive poa, but playing lots of games ( training, AI or mp) seems to me the only way of getting a good feel for the chance of less likely combat outcomes, especially when you factor in CT test impacts. Unless i am missing something?

Stil, if it was entirely predictable, it would be lime re-reading the same book over and over again, would it not?
tyronec
Colonel - Ju 88A
Colonel - Ju 88A
Posts: 1523
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2014 11:09 am

Re: Quick Questions Thread on Rules

Post by tyronec »

This is a question about infantry units turning around in combat.

There are two Irr foot facing away in a wood.
On my turn I charge them both with light infantry, which stick in combat.

During the enemy turn one of the Irr foot turns around and the combat continues.
The second Irr foot stays facing away while the combat continues, allowing me to rear charge it with a unit of MI.

What are the criteria which determine if the unit will about face or not. Is it random or is there some other factor in play, like for example winning the combat or a perceived charge threat ?
Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory II: Frequently Asked Questions”