Rule Tweaks for 2020

[nikgaukroger]

Whilst 2019 has, for various reasons, turned out to be a non-event for me in respect of FoG:R I have not forgotten it

I am aware that at a number of comps this year an unofficial rule amendment regarding Cavalry falling back has been tried out and found, I believe, to have worked well. Therefore, if the community so desires I am happy to give it a review and make this amendment official. If I could have a "show of hands" as to whether my belief if correct please and any comments for or against.

It has also been mentioned to me that perhaps Dragoons could do with a re-visit. If people could post their thoughts on that I am happy to discuss. This could be looking again at the mechanisms or at points costs if it is a case of not being value for money.

[benjones1211]

I am an aye on the rules for Cavalry, it seems to work OK.

Other things we have tried
Dragoons after 1670 (or a date around this) , can make a full move even within 6" of the enemy if they pass a CMT. By this time Dragoons were almost becoming cavalry that dismounted, and usually kept their horses close. Went down well.

Also has been suggested but not used yet.
Dragoons may use Bayonet if the infantry in their army can.

One of the other rules used a lot is the first BGs down must be Heavy followed by Medium artillery. As at this time they took a long time to deploy and were not very manoeuvrable.

If you read accounts of the Relief of Vienna, the artillery were sent in during the previous night, guarded by Dragoons, to set up ready for the attack in the morning.

Just some suggested tweaks.

Ben

[dene]

Hi Gents,

The cavalry drop-back rule has worked well.
The heavy and medium artillery deploying first also works well.
Dragoons did have bayonets towards the end of our period.
Ben- does the CMT for dragoons to "make a full move" represent them remaining mounted? If so would they be allowed to shot? As you say around 1700AD they became more like 2nd rate cavalry but did still dismount when necessary.
The change I would most like to see is, all Swedish foot units reduced from 7 to 6 bases. Unless anyone can offer evidence that Swedish units were significantly bigger than their contemporaries. As the rules stand, the 7 base Swedish unit can engage in a long range firefight against a 6 base opponent knowing that they are virtually immune from cohesion tests as their opponent has to score 3 hits to force a cohesion test. The Swedish 7 base unit only has to score 2 hits to force their opponent to take a cohesion test.
Any thoughts?

regards Dene

[dene]

Another thought, to prove I'm not anti Swedish. Are the 2 compulsory commanded shot on the Early TYW Swedish list necessary/historical? Did their armies always contain commanded shot? It seems unlikely once they change from horse to determined horse. It doesn't seem to fit with the aggressive behaviour of the Swedish and Finnish horse.

just a thought, regards Dene

[nikgaukroger]

Dragoons did have bayonets towards the end of our period.

Having a weapon does not mean a capability will follow. I don't believe Dragoons deserve the capability even if they had bayonets.

Ben- does the CMT for dragoons to "make a full move" represent them remaining mounted? If so would they be allowed to shot? As you say around 1700AD they became more like 2nd rate cavalry but did still dismount when necessary.

I think this later date is a better one for when Dragoons have become primarily mounted troops and so I am not really minded to make a movement change. If such a change were made I would not allow them to shoot if they made the longer move.

The change I would most like to see is, all Swedish foot units reduced from 7 to 6 bases. Unless anyone can offer evidence that Swedish units were significantly bigger than their contemporaries. As the rules stand, the 7 base Swedish unit can engage in a long range firefight against a 6 base opponent knowing that they are virtually immune from cohesion tests as their opponent has to score 3 hits to force a cohesion test. The Swedish 7 base unit only has to score 2 hits to force their opponent to take a cohesion test.
Any thoughts?

The size of the brigades recorded does show them to be larger than, say, the contemporary Imperial battalions - the Osprey Lutzen book has some useful numbers IIRC.

[nikgaukroger]

Another thought, to prove I'm not anti Swedish. Are the 2 compulsory commanded shot on the Early TYW Swedish list necessary/historical? Did their armies always contain commanded shot? It seems unlikely once they change from horse to determined horse. It doesn't seem to fit with the aggressive behaviour of the Swedish and Finnish horse.

just a thought, regards Dene

IMO yes as they continued to use the commanded shot asa standard tactic even after the cavalry formations were reduced in ranks. I did consider this when the rules amendments were done.

[donm2]

A couple of people have commented about commanded shot and how they effect two enemies that start on the same factor, In that they give a + advantage.
I had always understood that commanded shot was a leveller, not an advantage.

Other than this, I think they work so much better in the rules now.

Don

[nikgaukroger]

A couple of people have commented about commanded shot and how they effect two enemies that start on the same factor, In that they give a + advantage.
I had always understood that commanded shot was a leveller, not an advantage.

Dredging my memory I think that went in because the player base felt there should be some advantage in such cases - could be wrong though. It is effectively a 0.5 PoA advantage. However, basically I agree with your view that they were a leveller. It could easily come out.

Other than this, I think they work so much better in the rules now.

Good to know

[nikgaukroger]

My current view is to make the following official.

1 rank deep Cavalry if they pass a CMT, can either move 2MU and turn 180, or turn 180 and move 2MU, as well as turn 180, move 2MU and turn 180.

Dragoons can make a full move, including evades, even starting or ending within 6" of the enemy if they pass a CMT, however, if they make such a move they cannot shoot.

Any unlimbered heavy or medium artillery must be in the first group BG's to be deployed.

[Vespasian28]

At the Wessex we adopted most of the dragoons rules changes but we always gave them a full evade move even if charged within 6". Seemed daft if you had a nag you wouldn't use it to get the hell out of Dodge if needed.

[donm2]

Was a decision arrived at for the command shot?

Don

[DavidT]

Since the rule changes we have allowed cavalry to turn and move without having to turn back again when they make a successful complex move test. It seemed reasonable and prevented a bad evade roll stopping them from shooting for the rest of the game. Si I agree that this should be a formal change.

With regards to commanded shot, having played against my friend Tom with his Swedes quite a lot recently (up until lockdown) I believe that they work fine as they are. I am sure that when Gustavus Adolphus attached shot to his horse he wasn't thinking about something to stop his horse loosing but was looking at a way to help his horse win. Removing the quality increase when things are even means that average pistol/pistol horse will invariably lose to their superior equivalents. At 10 points for an average commanded shot they would be much too expensive if their effectiveness was reduced. As a matter of interest, when commanded shot are optional, how many players use them?

I don't see any need for medium of heavy artillery to deploy first. This makes it too easy to negate by avoiding it (and historically armies didn't deploy to avoid enemy artillery as we are able to do with our god-like view). Now that it's effectiveness has been reduced against mounted, it works fine in any games I have played no matter when it is deployed. At Lutzen, the Swedish big guns were the last elements of the Swedish army to deploy as they had to detour via a bridge to get to the battle.

Dragoons do seem a bit hard done by at the moment, particularly against infantry as they are effectively pinned when infantry reaches them and unable to get away, so they are stuck in a firefight they usually lose. I don't like the idea of allowing them to evade 5MUs as this means that they don't have to occupy terrain - they can happily go and skirmish in the open against horse as they can move up to 3MUs and shoot effectively with little chance of being caught when charged. Just as they could before the rule changes and which was one of the things we were trying to do away with. However, a simple change would be to allow them to move as Light Foot when within 6MUs of the enemy. This means they are still vulnerable to horse in the open (just not quite as vulnerable) so will still try to stick to terrain, but with a 1 MU longer move they can disengage from infantry.