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 ...

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 ...

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 ...

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 ...

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 ...

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 ...

I think you where right but for the wrong reason

You have 4 dice disrupted, so lose 1 per 3 to give 3 dice

You have 2 dice severely disordered, so lose 1 per 2 to give 1 dice

There is no “choose to loose 1 of the 2 also”

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 voted 1 though I don't think that gives the correct answer.

I play informal mini tournaments with 3-4 friends or at other times we play mainly historical re-fights, so an option 1.5 would be more accurate

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 ...

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 ...

You were correct but not because of the rounding up.

You get 1 dice per base for support shooting and then you lose 1 dice per 2 if LF.

phlewis wrote: 3 TC
4x4 Best Equiped Cavalry Armoured Sup Drilled Bow Swordsman
8x4 Light Horse Unprotected Sup Drilled Bow Swordsman
12 BGs

I would use this option as I think an IC is a waste when every BG is Superior.

Definitely keep the LH superior, it's more fun that way

stenic wrote: Does this mean that if you have any Serving Xbow you must have Serving spear? And vice versa

Yes you can have none at all or a minimum of 4 spearmen and 6 crossbowmen.

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 ...

In the starter army there are 2 BGs of Detached bushi and 2 BGs of Detached yari-armed followers, they are still Detached followers, they have just been upgraded.

Unfortunately neither list is legal. If you take a BG of Detached bushi (samurai cavalry) then you must have a BG of Detached followers, 1 BG per BG of detached bushi.

If you use option 2 and swap a TC for a 6 base BG of Detached followers the list is then legal.

In the original post he said the LF are friendly, so I would assume that he could charge the LH and after they evade will stop charging when the HF reach the back of the friendly LF.

I don't have my book with me so I might be wrong, it wouldn't be the first time

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 ...

:? 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 ...