Search found 28 matches
- Sat Aug 15, 2015 7:55 am
- Forum: Field of Glory : Ancient & Medieval Era 3000 BC-1500 AD : General Discussion
- Topic: good book on Crusades
- Replies: 4
- Views: 2850
Re: good book on Crusades
Hi I have a BBC book called Crusades by Terry Jones (of Monty Python fame) and Alan Ereira that accumpanied a TV series years ago. I found it very readable and quite a good overview though I haven' read it for a good few years so it may be the mists of time making me say that. Unfortunately the TV s...
- Fri Feb 06, 2015 9:34 am
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Conforming...
- Replies: 35
- Views: 8370
Re: Conforming...
http://www.ctp-photo.co.uk/images/Conform-01.jpg I would say neither. In your diagram you say it's 2 BG vs 2 BG and that it is 2 bases vs 2 bases at impact. So unless I'm completely on the wrong track I think it would become: :mrgreen: :D :D :) :) :mrgreen: :D :D :) :) :oops: :oops: :twisted: :twis...
- Fri Apr 25, 2014 8:31 am
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Flank marches and dismounting
- Replies: 22
- Views: 5839
Re: Flank marches and dismounting
For the Alexandrian Macedonian list there is a specific rule to allow this, 5th bullet point: “Foot companions and hypaspists listed in a player’s army list as heavy foot pikemen can instead be deployed at the start of the battle as medium foot with javelins – as in the army list below. This is only...
- Wed Apr 03, 2013 8:00 am
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Conformation Problem
- Replies: 23
- Views: 3795
Re: Conformation Problem
I don’t have my book with me but I thought that if he could not conform to you at the start of his movement phase, you would conform to him, if possible, at the start of your next movement phase. So your lighter based unit would not be in that location to receive the charge. This is how I’ve been do...
- Wed Jul 18, 2012 8:28 am
- Forum: Field of Glory : Ancient & Medieval Era 3000 BC-1500 AD : General Discussion
- Topic: The Future is coming!!! FOG v2
- Replies: 36
- Views: 8410
Re: The Future is coming!!! FOG v2
I had intended buying the V2 rules when they came out but not in this limited electronic format. Having used the same set of rules , “Shock of Impact”, for 25 years until the switch to FoG in 2009, completely skipping DBA,DBM etc. I have no problem sticking with the V1 FoG rules for the next 20 year...
- Thu May 31, 2012 8:07 am
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: battle lines
- Replies: 21
- Views: 3091
Re: battle lines
In a recent battle my opponent had a normal battle line: AAAABBBBCCCC AAAABBBBCCCC and after the double move it ended up like: AAAA AAAABBBB _____BBBBCCCC _________CCCC He claimed this was legal as the BG’s stayed in contact for the entire move. To me it just felt wrong but I could not find anything...
- Wed Aug 03, 2011 7:59 am
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Melee dice allocation
- Replies: 1
- Views: 494
- Tue Apr 26, 2011 8:29 am
- Forum: Field of Glory : Ancient & Medieval Era 3000 BC-1500 AD : General Discussion
- Topic: (NOT) Turning towards enemy
- Replies: 47
- Views: 6214
In my opinion, if CMT were CT things would be easier. This way if your order your troops to turn, they will, but if they fail the CMT they would be disrupted after that. Right now trying is free and with no cost, so you just try it as if you fail you can always try a simple move. That feels odd. I ...
- Sun Apr 10, 2011 11:03 am
- Forum: Field of Glory : Ancient & Medieval Era 3000 BC-1500 AD : General Discussion
- Topic: Type of FoG players
- Replies: 17
- Views: 3011
- Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:34 am
- Forum: Field of Glory : Ancient & Medieval Era 3000 BC-1500 AD : General Discussion
- Topic: Half Strength but Happy
- Replies: 85
- Views: 9256
Thanks. However, these are currently removed when they get to one base anyway so what difference, other than they actually break and rout before removal, would this rule change make? Is it a bad thing that they would make a rout move? A unit that autobreaks is only removed at the end of the JAP isn...
- Tue Jul 20, 2010 8:56 am
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Charging and Defending the Camp
- Replies: 34
- Views: 4926
2. BUT - what if they pass? The rules say they can move normally in their next turn, but what about in the enemy turn? I think they should be able to evade in the enemy's turn but can see where the rule could be read to dis allow this. I haven’t got my rule book with me but if I recall correctly yo...
- Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:17 pm
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: supporting Light Foot
- Replies: 19
- Views: 3473
- Thu Apr 22, 2010 2:59 pm
- Forum: Army Design
- Topic: Later Horse Nomad (Mongol After 1266)
- Replies: 44
- Views: 8017
- Mon Apr 12, 2010 6:00 pm
- Forum: Army Design
- Topic: Teutonic Knights
- Replies: 2
- Views: 1366
Re: Teutonic Knights
Yes you can have none at all or a minimum of 4 spearmen and 6 crossbowmen.stenic wrote: Does this mean that if you have any Serving Xbow you must have Serving spear? And vice versa
- Sun Mar 28, 2010 10:32 am
- Forum: Field of Glory : Ancient & Medieval Era 3000 BC-1500 AD : General Discussion
- Topic: Damn Light Horse again
- Replies: 322
- Views: 38431
I am curious to know what system all these players are going to that are leaving FoG? Surely they cannot be throwing their figures away? As a player who loves the ancient period above all others I’ll use the set of rules that give the best feel for the period and in my opinion that is FoG at the mom...
- Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:07 pm
- Forum: Army Design
- Topic: Okay, Here is my final 650 point Samurai
- Replies: 14
- Views: 2899
- Sat Feb 27, 2010 6:58 pm
- Forum: Army Design
- Topic: Okay, Here is my final 650 point Samurai
- Replies: 14
- Views: 2899
- Mon Feb 22, 2010 9:52 am
- Forum: Rules Questions
- Topic: Charging problem
- Replies: 26
- Views: 3733
- Wed Feb 17, 2010 11:55 am
- Forum: Field of Glory : Ancient & Medieval Era 3000 BC-1500 AD : General Discussion
- Topic: Scoring System - Please vote if you ever play in tournaments
- Replies: 101
- Views: 14776
But not if you lost your camp as the 2AP for the camp is not included in the starting value :!: Its not supposed to be included in the starting AP. It is not included in the starting value of AP ever. It is only included when lost and only as lost AP. The rules are clear about this. I see, I think....
- Wed Feb 17, 2010 11:07 am
- Forum: Field of Glory : Ancient & Medieval Era 3000 BC-1500 AD : General Discussion
- Topic: Scoring System - Please vote if you ever play in tournaments
- Replies: 101
- Views: 14776
:? What I show is the current system. Which I don't think you understand What I was trying to point out was that: ((Own Starting AP - Own AP lost) / Own Starting AP) is not the same as (Own Remaining AP / Own Starting AP) Oooh. Sorry. But if you take what you have lost from what you start with you ...