Suggested amendments

General discussion forum for anything related to Field of Glory Renaissance Wars.

Moderators: hammy, Slitherine Core, FOGR Design

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 22066
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by rbodleyscott » Mon Jan 28, 2013 11:52 am

kevinj wrote:Not requiring a charge would eliminate the anomaly that Dave pointed out (i.e. as uncontrolled artillery are not classed as an enemy BG you can't charge them). Unforthunately, it doesn't prevent artillery tag where the guns change hands every turn, or the fact that uncontrolled artillery is more of an impediment to moving than an undefended field fortification.
Artillery tag should not occur, as a BG cannot capture artillery without moving into contact with it. Being already in contact with it does not suffice.

bahdahbum
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:40 pm

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by bahdahbum » Mon Jan 28, 2013 7:15 pm

Sorry if Early Swedish players feel hard done by, but this change has been made after long consideration. The change allows Early Swedish armies to shoot at long range at equal effect to equivalent non-Swedish troops, and they remain a terror in close combat. It by no means renders the Early Swedes ineffective, as the popularity of Later Swedish armies testifies.
Yes I feel it bad and disagree . Now Why should I disagree
1) you PAY 7 bases, so the advantage of the swedish formation is to be paid for . A jannisary unit of 8 bases has the same advantage ( in numbers ).

2) for the rest of the advantages you have TO PAY for the special swedish formation

So I would suggest : make Keils pay, they have advantages , no flank and do not have to pay for it . Make Tercios ( latter or early ) a to be paid formation and then I will agree . Tercios have no flanks, and early tercios no rear as well and it all comes free .

So antother change might be : drop the 4 points you pay for the swedish formation . it would be fair ..or make all other special formation mor costly :twisted:

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 22066
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by rbodleyscott » Tue Jan 29, 2013 9:00 am

bahdahbum wrote:So another change might be : drop the 4 points you pay for the swedish formation . it would be fair ..or make all other special formation mor costly :twisted:
We are not at liberty to change points values at present. If at some time in the future, we are able to do so, then we can revisit this question.

In the meantime, the change needed to be made (in our considered view, after taking into account the various views that have already been expressed on the matter). We take the view that this outweighs the potential "unfairness" of possible VERY slight over-costing.

grahambriggs
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Posts: 2978
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by grahambriggs » Tue Jan 29, 2013 5:50 pm

bahdahbum wrote:
They were not meant to be able to survive on their own or fight on their own and we don't read of them roaming the battlefield in their own right.
If you let them alone they will die quickly ! even in the game do not worry .

But why is everyone so obsessed with those units . there are usually no more than 2 or 3 units . They are costly and their role is to support cavalry . if someone uses them as muketeers ..a musketeer unit is cheaper and does the same work . If they all have attached guns they are even more costly . Are hey the superman units of the game . I do not think so .
I take it you haven't faced the Swedish with superior salvo foot commanded shot with regimental guns. The ones I've faced have been mixed in with the Swedish foot as strongpoints.

bahdahbum
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:40 pm

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by bahdahbum » Tue Jan 29, 2013 6:05 pm

I take it you haven't faced the Swedish with superior salvo foot commanded shot with regimental guns. The ones I've faced have been mixed in with the Swedish foot as strongpoints.
No I use them but not superior, average .
Superior or average die as quickly ...

But I am very disapointed : some people fear an army that can be beaten easely , that does not regularly wins a tournament and now they managed to make it a very easely to beat army . The swedish will perhaps rarely be seen in the future . All the fun and specificity of the army has been taken away .

And , excuse me, but an answer like " now we are not able to change the points " ...is not very positive.

What's funy nobody says something about keils or tercios...

But OK nobody said the world is a fair but I will always wonder : how many times did an early 30 years war swedish army win a tournament or did they have so many outright victories as to make them the supper army some people would like you to believe !

grahambriggs
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Posts: 2978
Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by grahambriggs » Tue Jan 29, 2013 6:41 pm

bahdahbum wrote:
I take it you haven't faced the Swedish with superior salvo foot commanded shot with regimental guns. The ones I've faced have been mixed in with the Swedish foot as strongpoints.
What's funy nobody says something about keils or tercios...
[/b]
There are suggested changes to Keils. But not to change the points. Perhaps because 192 points for a unit is high already, and the errata already limits how they can form up.

It does seem harsh that you pay an extra 4 points for Swedish brigade for little benefit now.

bahdahbum
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:40 pm

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by bahdahbum » Tue Jan 29, 2013 6:57 pm

for little benefit now.
There is simply no benefit now . You might argue that a swedish formation enables you to have a 7th base but you have to pay for that base ...so a 8 base unit ( ottomans, warriors ..) is perhaps better than a 7th base swedish castrated formation .

As you have to pay, I usually ended up with 4 or 5 infantry + 3 cavalry units ( horses in fact ) average ....vs 10 infantry units and 3-5 horses ...

The advantage of swedish formation was a small bonus and it helped to attack in one place and try to catch the ennemy before he could react . Now with that slight bonus taken away it will be more difficult , even near impossible to attack with 5 infantry units vs 10 ...

The commanded shots are also not so good;..so all is taken away . detached shots I am willing to do without , but as the infantry will remais as costly as before for nothing ...the cavalry is not the strenght of the army ...ok , put it back on the shelves and cry or go gallantly 1 vs 2 and win the battles

quackstheking
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 844
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:41 pm
Location: Hertfordshire, England

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by quackstheking » Tue Jan 29, 2013 7:06 pm

how many times did an early 30 years war swedish army win a tournament or did they have so many outright victories as to make them the super army some people would like you to believe !
But the issue wasn't just about winning tournaments - it was also that the way the list was constructed, no-one was using Swedes historically. The Swedish Brigades used to stand off and shoot (rather than getting stuck in) and the commanded shot supported the foot and acted as mobile gun platforms (rather than defensively supporting cavalry). These amendments address these issues.

As for the points - well in an 800 pt army it's only an extra 20 points assuming 5BG's - if the Swedish Brigade value was considered only 2pts then we are worrying over only 10pts in an 800pt list - not worth getting worked up about!

Lots of armies don't win competitions but people still use them - I like my Henrician's and Louis XIVth French, but I will never win a competition with them because they are just not optimal Tournament armies. :(

Don

bahdahbum
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Brigadier-General - 15 cm Nblwf 41
Posts: 1950
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 7:40 pm

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by bahdahbum » Tue Jan 29, 2013 8:22 pm

Ok but the army was one of the armies that had a spirit , that you had to play historically in order to win . Now the spirit is broken .

A marvelous achievement from few players who complained .

Next i'll complain about tercios and ask they have flanks and rears

I just bought a new FOGR army and decided I will not play FOGR with the new amendments . if I organise a tournament it will be the older version because I find the way some armies a being treated now is simply outrageous .

Because perhaps a very few players do not use their army historically , an army is castrated . Ok I want the Ottomans to play historically, all infantry behind fortifications and all the cavalry rushing forward in order to have the ennemy pursuing them coming to the infantry ...The infantry does not move and wait .

The imperial cuirassier should charge the infantry , despite it being formed and solid ( that's what they basically did )

I want the swedish artillery supérior and with more dice because they had invented modern artillery 100 years before the others ( no civilians to drag the guns, cannister cases, and prepared amunitions ...a novelty ) ...and I want it because it is historical .

I know no one will listen ...so we stop saying " because it is not historical" ...you might be very surprised by what is historical and what is not .

Let us stop that useless discussion .

Three
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 216
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 7:30 pm

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by Three » Wed Jan 30, 2013 12:09 pm

quackstheking wrote:

But the issue wasn't just about winning tournaments - it was also that the way the list was constructed, no-one was using Swedes historically. The Swedish Brigades used to stand off and shoot (rather than getting stuck in) and the commanded shot supported the foot and acted as mobile gun platforms (rather than defensively supporting cavalry). These amendments address these issues.

As for the points - well in an 800 pt army it's only an extra 20 points assuming 5BG's - if the Swedish Brigade value was considered only 2pts then we are worrying over only 10pts in an 800pt list - not worth getting worked up about!


Don
I think it's a bit strong to say that no-one was using Swedes historically, that may be accurate of some tournament players but certainly isn't true of the Swedish players I've come across locally. Perhaps the Tourney enviroment and mind-set is given too much weight in these discussions? Hard cases make bad law.

As for the amendments, I'm not sure how well it will stop CS with RG supporting foot as mobile gun platforms, the amendment only says it cannot charge or intercept, nothing there to prevent it supporting foot.

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 22066
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by rbodleyscott » Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:11 pm

Three wrote:As for the amendments, I'm not sure how well it will stop CS with RG supporting foot as mobile gun platforms, the amendment only says it cannot charge or intercept, nothing there to prevent it supporting foot.
They will be able to shoot, but at the cost of leaving a hole in the battle line when the Swedish brigades charge. Moreover, they won't be able to charge with the CS in on their next impact phase for a second bite at the salvo impact effect.

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

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by hazelbark » Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:59 pm

rbodleyscott wrote:3) Swedish brigades lose 2 pike bases before losing any shot bases, thus maintaining their firepower longer than other BGs.
Why is this the case?

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

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by hazelbark » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:03 pm

rbodleyscott wrote:Note that the erratum preventing Commanded shot from charging prevents them from capturing guns if we maintain the ruling that capturing guns requires a charge.

However, it might be reasonable for them to capture and man guns - changing the wording to clarify that a charge is not required would allow them to do so.

Probably not a big deal either way, but which would people prefer?
I would not prohibit commanded shot from capturing guns. First I believe they could historically. Second it is an incredibly agile unit that does so in game terms.

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 22066
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by rbodleyscott » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:17 pm

hazelbark wrote:
rbodleyscott wrote:3) Swedish brigades lose 2 pike bases before losing any shot bases, thus maintaining their firepower longer than other BGs.
Why is this the case?
Because the formation led with the pikes, the shot sleeves being set back somewhat. The same logic was the reason for them counting as armoured to frontal shooting, but that turned out to be over-effective in practice. (Dissenters notwithstanding).

kevinj
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2379
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 11:21 am
Location: Derbyshire, UK

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by kevinj » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:20 pm

hazelbark wrote:
rbodleyscott wrote:3) Swedish brigades lose 2 pike bases before losing any shot bases, thus maintaining their firepower longer than other BGs.
Why is this the case?
It's an exception to the normal rules on base loss, see P151, the bullet headed "Other Shooting"

kevinj
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2379
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 11:21 am
Location: Derbyshire, UK

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by kevinj » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:22 pm

I would not prohibit commanded shot from capturing guns
I may have missed it but Errata V1.0.9 doesn't seem to include any changes to capturing guns. Is this under consideration for the next errata?

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10265
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by nikgaukroger » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:24 pm

hazelbark wrote:
rbodleyscott wrote:3) Swedish brigades lose 2 pike bases before losing any shot bases, thus maintaining their firepower longer than other BGs.
Why is this the case?

Er, because that's what the rules on base removal say - they lose the "point" pike base first and the go by the proportional rule (where any sensible player will remove a pike base first).

Caveat - IIRC there are circumstances where this may not occur, but it is the most likely scenario.
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10265
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by nikgaukroger » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:26 pm

Three wrote:Perhaps the Tourney enviroment and mind-set is given too much weight in these discussions?

Rest assured that non-competition views hold their own in our consideration :)
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk

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

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by hazelbark » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:38 pm

nikgaukroger wrote: Er, because that's what the rules on base removal say - they lose the "point" pike base first and the go by the proportional rule (where any sensible player will remove a pike base first).

Caveat - IIRC there are circumstances where this may not occur, but it is the most likely scenario.
Been playing it wrong awhile. :oops:

timmy1
Lieutenant-General - Nashorn
Lieutenant-General - Nashorn
Posts: 3436
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 8:39 pm
Location: Chelmsford, Essex, England

Re: Suggested amendments

Post by timmy1 » Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:23 pm

Dan

That is the BIG benefit of the Sewdish Brigades - certainly when you lose bases as frequently as I do...

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory : Renaissance Wars : General Discussion”