And what about those of us who have registered for beta testing but are still waiting for:
a) acknowlegement
b) the rules

My plan was to get the lancers around my force blocking the elephants into the fake legionaries - it partly worked. With hindsight I should have added the Bastarnae to the jumbo-hunters. What Neil neglected to mention was that he lost 14APs out of 16 to my 13 out of 13 - a bloodbath that Pyrrus woul...

Richard - so will Godendag be themed next year?

Marks were in use here in King John's time and in Germany

It struck me that there were more Medieval armies amongst the winners at the Ascot BHGS Challenge. Coincidence? Good players like Dave Handley, Simon Hall or Bruce Brown just happened to have Medieval armies? Looking at the results, there were 44 games where medievals played ancients. Medievals won ...

Hammy
So how does FoG classify war rhinos?

This true, but the fact remains that the deeper spear formation is fighting at no POA in both the impact & melee phases - not great odds. When he assembled his 50 rank-deep formation at Leuctra, Epaminondas did so as a tactic that he knew would win the battle - suggesting that 3 ranks of spear s...

In phalanx fighting there are two key mechanisms: 1. length of spear 2. depth of formation FOG simulates the second for pikes with a POA advantage for 4 ranks vs spear in two ranks. BUT spear in deeper formations also ought to beat spear in swallower ranks (Leuctra). Length of spear is an advantage ...

4 ranks of pikes are 1 POA better than 2 ranks of spears - hardly significantly better. 12 pikes vs 12 spear will result in at least one overlap in melee therefore pikes get 6 dice while the spear get 8 or 10.

I read the Sassanid preference for rough terrain in the Strategicon with interest also - my conclusion was that Persian heavy cav were more reliant on bows than their Byzantine counterparts.

What is the rationale behind 3 ranks of pikes = 2 ranks of spears (eg hoplites)? Surely the former have a longer sharp pointed stick that ought to give them a combat advantage? If spears were better, why then were they superceded historically by less effective pike tactics?

Don't be so circumspect Nik - say what you mean!

A splendid weekend's wargaming - won two, lost two, so my usual standard. I played Early Armenian twice against Romans and in both games found it pretty easy for cataphracts to exterminate legionnaries - perhaps too easy (even POAs in impact, cataphracts +POA in melee - all three 6 strong cat units ...

Where on the BHGS site?

And there was me thinking to see how my Vikings would perform under FoG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I know the debate is about shooting being too effective! My point is that I did not get any unexpected shooting results from my shooty army and that it performed its pinning role as planned while the punch troops did their job. Therefore in my experience, shooting is effective but not too effective.

Simon Your results aren't complete - the three games my Ghaznavids played gave me, I think 55 points (2 wins 1 loss). Despite being a horse shooty army, my game plan was to win with the elephants (2)/Dailami (superior armoured impact foot)/Ghazi (superior protected impact foot) combo in broken terra...

If the feeling is that light shooting is too effective, a possible solution is to allow a shooting cohesion test to be carried out if the general is in command range (leaving him to join BGs to bolster combat cohesion drops only)

As at 14th June post, there is no mention of a FoG competition on the WAR website

Neil Hammond & I played Richard & Thomas Bodley Scott as a 1,000 point doubles early Friday pm at Britcon. The game flowed well (we each handled 6-7 BGs) and a result was reached in @2.5 hours (we won!). This reinforces my view that doubles competitions should be higher pointed With a max of...