Points question and discussion

msuspartan · Post by **msuspartan** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:15 pm

I have played a variety of games to include DBx, 40k, Fantasy and FoW (and fairly new to FoG) and most of the games having an opponent over by a point or two is not a big deal. How is it with FoG? Especially in tournements. I do not care if my opponent is over 1-3 points as he/she may finish out an even BG. Since playing FoW the points usually even out on the total but in FoG it limits evening out a unit (4 vs 6) Also if I get beat by 2 or 3 points then either my dice failed (most of the time) or by poor Generalship on my side.

Rebuttels, discussions, ideas, opinions......beer.......

Thanks for your replies.

Cheers, Don

dave_r · Post by **dave_r** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 6:45 pm

In the privacy of your own home or club I would have thought that was fine.

However, in a competition game you cannot go over 800 points. This is very strictly enforced.

david53 · Post by **david53** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 7:29 pm

dave_r wrote:In the privacy of your own home or club I would have thought that was fine.

However, in a competition game you cannot go over 800 points. This is very strictly enforced.

To be honest 800 is the limit and as Dave says a list would'nt get past the checker if it was one point over.

mbsparta · Post by **mbsparta** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:06 pm

If you don't have enough points left to build another BG, then you don't get that BG. 800 points means 800 or less points.

Mike B

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 8:30 pm

dave_r wrote:In the privacy of your own home or club I would have thought that was fine.

However, in a competition game you cannot go over 800 points. This is very strictly enforced.

I love the way Dave assumes all comps are 800 points

However, he is correct - unless stated otherwise a competition points limit will be the absolute limit.

paulburton · Post by **paulburton** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 9:53 pm

Competitions vary in their use of point limits. Many 7th competitions allowed you to go over by less than the cost of the cheapest element. Points limits got strict with DBM.

Some armies are harder to balance than others, though I haven't found an army that got stuck more than 5 points on the maximum. If you were allowed to go over by the cost of your cheapest element it is possible for some armies to really max out and introduce another element of gamesmanship.

Best stick to the absolute limit, though that 'Limit +1' point army is always a real pain.

DavidT · Post by **DavidT** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 10:32 pm

It is also very annoying that TCs are 35 points. With the majority of BGs being fielded with even numbers of elements, this invariably means that, if using 1 or 3 TCs in a list, you end up with points under or over (and its back to the drawing board to see where you can shave off that last point).

Polkovnik · Post by **Polkovnik** » Wed Sep 16, 2009 10:38 pm

I think even in casual games you shouldn't go over the agreed limit. After all, a points limit is just that, a limit. We play 700 points and if my army comes to 697 and my opponent has gone over to say 701, then for that extra 4 points I could have upgraded a BG of 4 cavalry to drilled, or taken two more poor LF, etc.

philqw78 · Post by **philqw78** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 6:10 am

DavidT wrote:It is also very annoying that TCs are 35 points. With the majority of BGs being fielded with even numbers of elements, this invariably means that, if using 1 or 3 TCs in a list, you end up with points under or over (and its back to the drawing board to see where you can shave off that last point).

This is not a problem anymore. Some BG in the new book cost 35 points.

Polkovnik · Post by **Polkovnik** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 8:26 am

DavidT wrote:It is also very annoying that TCs are 35 points. With the majority of BGs being fielded with even numbers of elements, this invariably means that, if using 1 or 3 TCs in a list, you end up with points under or over (and its back to the drawing board to see where you can shave off that last point).

What's the point of going "back to the drawing board" ? If you have one or three TCs you know you won't be able to get to 800 points exactly so you're wasting time in trying. 799 would be the best you could get.

msuspartan · Post by **msuspartan** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 10:54 am

Are you able to have an odd number BG? I have gathered that you are not able to. Just want to play correctly not offend the rule masters

. Since I also play FoW, I know the rules are pretty strict. I would rather , even in a club setting, have the correct points vs. going over a point. I think having the choice of a fortified camp or not should be given unless having a Principate army (it is what I had when in DBA, and they are actually lead not white metal!!) is that powerful. Just some views of my own. (Not a destructive view of FoG in anyway) Just like to have choices. AND do not want to paint a LM army, like Brits!!!

Also in Commanders, what are most people running? Since Principate armies are a bit expensive having an IC seems over the top. Is having three Commanders really important? Even if they are TC's? Does that help/hurt in the view of most Principate armies are HF superior classed? I have much to unlearn from DBx so bear with me. Having played FoW for awhile, I see this very much like FoG in set up and deployment and mechanics and playing in the Comp. circuit for FoW, I enjoy the competition and people I play against. Most cool!!

Polkovnik · Post by **Polkovnik** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 10:59 am

Romans have (as you suggest) less use of generals than many other armies. They are drilled (so don't need them for manoeuvre) and armoured(so don't need them so much for shooting CTs). At a lower points level you could probably get away with two TCs, but it's more normal to take 3 or even 4.

grahambriggs · Post by **grahambriggs** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:25 pm

Don,

It's true that a few point here and there don't make much difference with FOG. However, the way competitions work a strict upper limit is set. If that were (and often is) 800 points many people will turn up with armies a few points under. It's more important to get an army with the right mix of forces than to skew this by trying to squeeze out every single point.

paulburton · Post by **paulburton** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:03 pm

Where the number of commanders becomes important is when you get to bolstering battle groups as the commander has to be there. I always try to run 4 commanders at 800 points and I do use an IC with my Principate Romans (Tiberius). This makes units very stubborn and is very important when trying to rally routers as the extra +1 at the end of the 2d6 distribution represents a sizeable increase in probability.

I also use generals in the proper Roman fashion - just behind the battle line (with but not fighting). This makes your front line supported battle groups hang in there for a very long time as +3 on the cohesion test is very effective for superior troops.

DavidT · Post by **DavidT** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:27 pm

Polkovnik wrote:What's the point of going "back to the drawing board" ? If you have one or three TCs you know you won't be able to get to 800 points exactly so you're wasting time in trying. 799 would be the best you could get.

Because if your army comes in at 801 points, you have to get rid of soemthing to make it legal. So it's back to the drawing board (or the excel spreadsheet in this case).

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 8:27 am

msuspartan wrote:Are you able to have an odd number BG? I have gathered that you are not able to. Just want to play correctly not offend the rule masters .

There are some armies that allow BGs of 9 bases where 2/3 are one type and 1/3 are another type.

The points limit is just that a limit so for an 800 point game you cannot use more than 800 points.

Most of my armies end up between 797 and 799 with only a small proportion getting to exactly 800. That last point is normally not that important.

msuspartan · Post by **msuspartan** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 12:13 pm

Ok, question for looking at the way FoG is played (sorry, old DBx player coming to the Light side) here is what I have for my list. I do not know how commanders are used in this AND their effectiveness in the game. (honestly have not played but need to paint up me army first)

FC CnC (cav)
Tc (Cav)
Tc (INF)

2x6base HF Legionaires armoured, superior, drilled, Imp./skilled sw.
1x6base HF Leg. arm., average, dr, IMP/s.s.
3x6base MF Auxilia, armoured, average, drilled, Lt. spear/sword
2x6base LF Aux, protected, average, drilled, bow
2x6base Cav Armoured, average, drilled, lt.spear/sword
1x4base LH unprot., average, drilled(do not have the list so cannot remember if drilled or undrilled) Bow
Fort. camp

All told 800points exact....surprise!!! (per excel sheet, nice work to Dader!!)

I tried to keep units at 6 base for survivability and use the LH for harrasment, camp capture or for stop gap.

Since the game mechanics are unfamiliar I tried to go with a combined arms approach since in FoW that is what wins most games.
Thanks for all of your input. It is most valuable and appreciated. Any critiques are welcome.

rogerg · Post by **rogerg** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 12:25 pm

Four commanders at 800 points is almost universal in our games. Even with an 8 BG army, I still took four.

carlos · Post by **carlos** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 12:35 pm

msuspartan wrote:I have played a variety of games to include DBx, 40k, Fantasy and FoW (and fairly new to FoG) and most of the games having an opponent over by a point or two is not a big deal.

No? Can you got a 40k or Fantasy tournament over a point or two? I don't think you can, neither in European GTs or American GTs. Same applies to DBM for any competition I ever heard about. I'm sure your buddies at your local club agree to this, but I've never seen any kind of looseness in tournaments and competitions. Why would it be different for FoG?

Polkovnik · Post by **Polkovnik** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:19 pm

List looks OK but you might want the cavalry in 4s so they can expand to one deep in order to be able to evade from stronger opponents, eg cataphracts, lancer cav, etc. Also gives more tactical possibilities having 3 BGs of 4 rather than two of 6.
And you might want more legionaries and less other stuff. Legionaries are the game winners, the other are for support and flank protection.

Points question and discussion

Points question and discussion

Re: Points question and discussion