FoG:R Errata v1.10

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

Moderators: hammy, Slitherine Core, FOGR Design

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by nikgaukroger » Thu Dec 05, 2013 8:46 pm

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

vexillia

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by vexillia » Thu Dec 05, 2013 10:15 pm

Nice to see:
P.67. INTERPENETRATIONS. Add additional bullet after the 4th:
“Any troops can pass through uncontrolled artillery perpendicularly from back to front or
front to back only"
Of course this still leaves the somewhat glaring inconsistency that artillery "vanishes" if shot at but if fought over it remains in place and can captured and re-captured as a result. ;-)

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

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by kevinj » Thu Dec 05, 2013 10:58 pm

It also does not resolve the issue of how uncontrolled guns can be recaptured as they are not an enemy BG.

donm2
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 224
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2013 6:24 pm

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by donm2 » Thu Dec 05, 2013 11:07 pm

That certainly fixes the Later German list.

Don

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by nikgaukroger » Fri Dec 06, 2013 9:58 am

donm2 wrote:That certainly fixes the Later German list.

Don
Well, it makes it a bit different to what it was for the post 1634 period - no change from Lutzen to Nordlingen :)
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

donm2
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 224
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2013 6:24 pm

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by donm2 » Fri Dec 06, 2013 5:41 pm

kevinj wrote:It also does not resolve the issue of how uncontrolled guns can be recaptured as they are not an enemy BG.
There are certainly not your guns anymore and they count to your loses. So surely they must be an enemy BG.

Don

daveallen
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 542
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 9:21 am

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by daveallen » Sat Dec 07, 2013 10:15 pm

donm2 wrote:
kevinj wrote:It also does not resolve the issue of how uncontrolled guns can be recaptured as they are not an enemy BG.
There are certainly not your guns anymore and they count to your loses. So surely they must be an enemy BG.

Don
The clue's in the name :shock: and in the rules.

Since
Uncontrolled artillery does not count as enemy to either side."

Page 127, penultimate paragraph, final sentence
and
To be allowed to declare a charge, there must be a visible enemy base that can be "legally" contacted..."

Page 72, DECLARATION OF CHARGES, first paragraph
Hence you can't recapture uncontrolled artillery under the rules as written.

Get out of that one! :twisted:

Dave

donm2
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 224
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2013 6:24 pm

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by donm2 » Sun Dec 08, 2013 9:09 am

Dave,

Not sure why you think I need to charge them when on page 127 second para, second bullet,

Under the heading 'Once captured, artillery cannot be recaptured until either:'

* A battle group belonging to the previous owner MOVES into contact (in a way that would normally result in close combat) with an artillery baser that does not have rear support from the current owner's troops.
Get out of that one! :twisted:
To you :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Don

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

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by kevinj » Sun Dec 08, 2013 9:29 am

a way that would normally result in close combat
How can you do that other than charging?

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by nikgaukroger » Sun Dec 08, 2013 9:48 am

kevinj wrote:
a way that would normally result in close combat
How can you do that other than charging?
By reading the sentence as a whole and applying a modicum of common sense as to what it says?
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

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

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by timmy1 » Sun Dec 08, 2013 9:49 am

Nik

Wargamers... common sense...

(one has to limit one's expectations...)

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by nikgaukroger » Sun Dec 08, 2013 9:51 am

timmy1 wrote:Nik

Wargamers... common sense...

(one has to limit one's expectations...)

Fair point.

FWIW my reading of the bullet point is that the bit in brackets is clarifying that the contact has to be a "legal charge contact" as that is the contact that would result in a close combat normally. The move itself cannot be a charge as you only charge enemy BGs and an uncontrolled BG isn't an enemy one.
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

donm2
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 224
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2013 6:24 pm

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by donm2 » Sun Dec 08, 2013 12:18 pm

nikgaukroger wrote:
kevinj wrote:
a way that would normally result in close combat
How can you do that other than charging?
By reading the sentence as a whole and applying a modicum of common sense as to what it says?
The word 'move', is highlighted in my post and in the rules, so I kind of thought that was a hint :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Don

madaxeman
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Major-General - Jagdtiger
Posts: 2956
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 5:15 am
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by madaxeman » Sun Dec 08, 2013 5:51 pm

donm2 wrote:Dave,

Not sure why you think I need to charge them when on page 127 second para, second bullet,

Under the heading 'Once captured, artillery cannot be recaptured until either:'

* A battle group belonging to the previous owner MOVES into contact (in a way that would normally result in close combat) with an artillery baser that does not have rear support from the current owner's troops.
Get out of that one! :twisted:
To you :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Don
But what if you start the turn in contact.... Do you have to mve away and then in again?
http://www.madaxeman.com
Become a fan of Madaxeman on Facebook at Madaxeman.com's Facebook Page.

daveallen
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 542
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 9:21 am

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by daveallen » Sun Dec 08, 2013 6:54 pm

donm2 wrote:Dave,

Not sure why you think I need to charge them when on page 127 second para, second bullet,

Under the heading 'Once captured, artillery cannot be recaptured until either:'

* A battle group belonging to the previous owner MOVES into contact (in a way that would normally result in close combat) with an artillery baser that does not have rear support from the current owner's troops.
Fair point Don.

Aside from charging, stepping forward and pursuing the only other MOVES into contact (in a way that would normally result in close combat) are to:
  • feed more bases into an existing combat P96,
    move into an overlap position P102,
    or use the strange rules on P101 to "engage in melee."
All of which situations would be extremely difficult to engineer.

Life would be so much easier if the words in italics weren't there, then all you'd have to do is walk up and touch them...

Also, I'd like to see recaptured artillery only counting as regained APs when it is controlled. In game terms the bits of wood and metal aren't worth anything until they are crewed, so why should they count towards morale if not crewed?

Dave

Sarmaticus
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 275
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 4:31 pm

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by Sarmaticus » Sun Dec 08, 2013 7:58 pm

Loss of guns was a blow to prestige, to the purse and to future prospects of knocking down high medieval walls around prosperous towns.

donm2
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 224
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2013 6:24 pm

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by donm2 » Sun Dec 08, 2013 8:25 pm

daveallen wrote:
donm2 wrote:Dave,

Not sure why you think I need to charge them when on page 127 second para, second bullet,

Under the heading 'Once captured, artillery cannot be recaptured until either:'

* A battle group belonging to the previous owner MOVES into contact (in a way that would normally result in close combat) with an artillery baser that does not have rear support from the current owner's troops.
Fair point Don.

Aside from charging, stepping forward and pursuing the only other MOVES into contact (in a way that would normally result in close combat) are to:
  • feed more bases into an existing combat P96,
    move into an overlap position P102,
    or use the strange rules on P101 to "engage in melee."
All of which situations would be extremely difficult to engineer.

Life would be so much easier if the words in italics weren't there, then all you'd have to do is walk up and touch them...

Also, I'd like to see recaptured artillery only counting as regained APs when it is controlled. In game terms the bits of wood and metal aren't worth anything until they are crewed, so why should they count towards morale if not crewed?

Dave
I would like to see the artillery removed when it is first lost. Would make the situation so much easier.

Don

daveallen
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 542
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 9:21 am

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by daveallen » Sun Dec 08, 2013 8:40 pm

Sarmaticus wrote:Loss of guns was a blow to prestige, to the purse and to future prospects of knocking down high medieval walls around prosperous towns.
Very important, strategically. And if you win the battle you'll own all the guns left on the field.

But in terms of the battle itself those guns are no use unless you can kill stuff with them. Once their crews are dead (or running away) you've lost that facility. Having some posh boy on a horse wave his sword over them shouldn't have the same effect on morale.
donm2 wrote:I would like to see the artillery removed when it is first lost. Would make the situation so much easier.
True, but then we wouldn't be able to recreate that handful of battles where (re)captured guns were used to good effect...

Re another thread - perhaps we should have a theme where captured guns are removed from the table...

Dave

nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by nikgaukroger » Sun Dec 08, 2013 9:53 pm

daveallen wrote:
donm2 wrote:I would like to see the artillery removed when it is first lost. Would make the situation so much easier.
True, but then we wouldn't be able to recreate that handful of battles where (re)captured guns were used to good effect...
Richard and I did discuss the immediate removal option but decided against it. We are unlikely to revisit this.

Re another thread - perhaps we should have a theme where captured guns are removed from the table...

That always remains an option :D
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

vexillia

Re: FoG:R Errata v1.10

Post by vexillia » Sun Dec 08, 2013 10:12 pm

nikgaukroger wrote:Richard and I did discuss the immediate removal option but decided against it. We are unlikely to revisit this.
Ahem! Except you also decided for immediate removal when artillery are shot at.

Post Reply

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