Command Chain
Moderators: philqw78, terrys, hammy, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design, Field of Glory Moderators
-
- Captain - Bf 110D
- Posts: 870
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 4:11 pm
- Location: San Lazzaro (BO) Italy
Command Chain
FOG lacks totally an effective command chain. Troops should be assigned to generals before deploy.
Mario Vitale
Not the original. but the lack of a command structure is odd. It will be interestin to see how H&M fog works, as this was definitely part of the process then. Arguably the medieval period is also valid, would Percy's troops have really responded to Neville as an SG?
Interesting that in the old Lance rules IIRC all medieval troops had to stay in Command radius of their liege.
Interesting that in the old Lance rules IIRC all medieval troops had to stay in Command radius of their liege.
-
- Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
- Posts: 8812
- Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
- Location: Manchester
In the old rules you had to write orders for all of your troops as well. And there was only one army list for China, 3000BC to 1000AD. Things may have moved onazrael86 wrote:Interesting that in the old Lance rules IIRC all medieval troops had to stay in Command radius of their liege.
Evidence and reason is a better call than an old set of rules.
phil
putting the arg into argumentative, except for the lists I check where there is no argument!
putting the arg into argumentative, except for the lists I check where there is no argument!
-
- Captain - Bf 110D
- Posts: 870
- Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 4:11 pm
- Location: San Lazzaro (BO) Italy
Certainly a rule by which "command chain doesn't exist at all" is not the answer. Troops assigned to a general respond to that general (or the C-in-c unless they are allied troops and so they consider their commander as C-in-c) not to whatever general passes near them. Anyway, stop the nonsense rule which permits to have 2 generals with the same unit so you can use a general in melee and another for CT.olivier wrote:What's is the common denominator between the mongol chain of command and the roman ones or celt ?
Mario Vitale
-
- Lieutenant Colonel - Fw 190A
- Posts: 1126
- Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 5:49 pm
- Location: Paris, France
I you consider each BG as a modern division and each general as a part of a modern "Etat major", the line of command is coherent and comphrensive about lone BG wandering on far flank.
If you think for a game where you simulate a division general, the line of command is a bit permissive...
Hey, I rather like to play Alexander than Philotas
If you think for a game where you simulate a division general, the line of command is a bit permissive...
Hey, I rather like to play Alexander than Philotas
-
- General - Carrier
- Posts: 4957
- Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
- Location: Capital of the World !!
I think the way generals work now there are three interactions: manuver, morale and combat. How would these be effected by a CoC.
Manuver.
OK it would curb some of the turn and move. The double move probably wouldn't have too much effect,
The byproduct would be people would prefer LH (and maybe CV) more as the odds of exploiting manuverabilty remain with the faster troops with more simple move choices.
Personally the curb on driled foot isn't all bad, but withou a great curb we make moutend more powerful.
overall impact probably low order of magnitude.
Morale.
harder to bolster. Harder to pass CT. Result more negative impact from shooting. Bias increases in favor of shooty cav armies.
IC as CiC still can effect a lot. More ICs possible result
Combat.
Harder to have generals in right place to commit to combat.
Result players who want combat edge re-rolls buy more superior troops.
Armies with average troops that can be compensated by buying 4 TCs become lesser options.
Upsides:
Possible a greater incentive to take allies. As currently the ally command restrictions are all downside for the 10 point savings.
Manuver.
OK it would curb some of the turn and move. The double move probably wouldn't have too much effect,
The byproduct would be people would prefer LH (and maybe CV) more as the odds of exploiting manuverabilty remain with the faster troops with more simple move choices.
Personally the curb on driled foot isn't all bad, but withou a great curb we make moutend more powerful.
overall impact probably low order of magnitude.
Morale.
harder to bolster. Harder to pass CT. Result more negative impact from shooting. Bias increases in favor of shooty cav armies.
IC as CiC still can effect a lot. More ICs possible result
Combat.
Harder to have generals in right place to commit to combat.
Result players who want combat edge re-rolls buy more superior troops.
Armies with average troops that can be compensated by buying 4 TCs become lesser options.
Upsides:
Possible a greater incentive to take allies. As currently the ally command restrictions are all downside for the 10 point savings.