Shooting loss
Moderators: hammy, philqw78, terrys, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design, Field of Glory Moderators
Shooting loss
Hello, I have just a question: what is the purpose to add a +2 when doing a death roll?
I mean, i don't understand the reason because shooting hits should be so less damaging than close combat hits.
I wish somebody could provide me a satisfying explanation of such a choice by the authors of the game.
Good bye.
I mean, i don't understand the reason because shooting hits should be so less damaging than close combat hits.
I wish somebody could provide me a satisfying explanation of such a choice by the authors of the game.
Good bye.
-
- Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
- Posts: 437
- Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2007 12:42 pm
- Location: Scotland
-
- Field of Glory Moderator
- Posts: 1506
- Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 11:51 am
Re: Shooting loss
The primary objective of shooting is to force cohesion tests, not cause base losses.Hermano wrote: I wish somebody could provide me a satisfying explanation of such a choice by the authors of the game.
The rules (shooting POA, cohesion test modifiers, BG size, etc) are balanced with this objective in mind. Try to imagine the effect of not having the +2 in the rules as they are now. For example, nobody would use BGs of 2 bases as they would vaporise from any shooting. LH bow armies would be virtually unbeatable.
Re: Shooting loss
Now theres a thought......peterrjohnston wrote: LH bow armies would be virtually unbeatable.
-
- Field of Glory Moderator
- Posts: 1506
- Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 11:51 am
kevinj wrote:In FOG R there is no +2, it will be interesting to see how this changes the game balance.
As far as I know its still in place for Bows but not firearms, since there are fewer firarms or fewer BG's of eight bases around compared to Bow armed troops it might not make that much difference.
-
- Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
- Posts: 3002
- Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 5:15 am
- Location: London, UK
- Contact:
There's actually quite a few firearm-armed BGs in FoG:R, but not that many 8-strong or larger BG's. Given almost everyone can shoot, it changes the game balance quite significantly - especially for 4-strong BG's of skirmishers who now face a real risk of losing a base every time they approach most units of foot.david53 wrote:kevinj wrote:In FOG R there is no +2, it will be interesting to see how this changes the game balance.
As far as I know its still in place for Bows but not firearms, since there are fewer firarms or fewer BG's of eight bases around compared to Bow armed troops it might not make that much difference.
Oddly enough, once they do lose a base, they tend to bug out so as to avoid their owner losing a whole BG at 50% autobreak. This seems somehow to limit the ability of skirmishers to hang around much beyond the early phases of the game, or to be a substitute for proper units of "line of battle" shooters.
Neither of which is a bad thing IMO

tim
(advocate of a +1 on death tests for skirmishers shot at by non skirmishers in FoG:AM)
http://www.madaxeman.com
Holiday in Devon? Try https://www.thecaptainscottagebrixham.com
Holiday in Devon? Try https://www.thecaptainscottagebrixham.com
-
- Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
- Posts: 3002
- Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 5:15 am
- Location: London, UK
- Contact:
Changing the weather may be easier than changing FoG ....david53 wrote:madaxeman wrote: tim
(advocate of a +1 on death tests for skirmishers shot at by non skirmishers in FoG:AM)
Good one but its still too hot......
http://www.madaxeman.com
Holiday in Devon? Try https://www.thecaptainscottagebrixham.com
Holiday in Devon? Try https://www.thecaptainscottagebrixham.com
Maybe your right but look on the bright side neither will the limit on BGs change,madaxeman wrote:Changing the weather may be easier than changing FoG ....david53 wrote:madaxeman wrote: tim
(advocate of a +1 on death tests for skirmishers shot at by non skirmishers in FoG:AM)
Good one but its still too hot......
and the weather up here makes me feel all Southern.
