Half POAs

[Rekila]

I have been following the debate about the new version with great interest. First to say is that a thing the game is great as it is so the few the changes the better. Having say that, I’m going to propose the use of more “half” POAs. POAs, like the one of mounted light spears, that gives advantage to one side when there is no initial advantage. I should propose two: Undrilled Impact foot against Drilled impact foot a + POA at impact (just to help the barbarians a little). Deeper formation, same capacity, like Offensive spear against Offensive spear, a +POA in melee. In any case, no points change.

[hazelbark]

While I like the game idea, i don't think the authors believe the barbarian foot was base for base better than Romans even at impact. (Authors please enter your actual views, rather than my made up ones)

The answer does seem to be in decreasing the costs of barbarian armies.

Perhaps jsut creating a list of armies that get a free TC for 0 points. Functionally gives the barbarians 35 points, but not sure that is actually enough. 50-75 seems more the consensus.

[rogerg]

I am not convinced by arguments for decreasing points. If the troops cannot fight, having more of them to lose isn't a big advantage.
Having a free TC is a bit like making troops a grade better in contact.

[waldo]

I am not convinced by arguments for decreasing points. If the troops cannot fight, having more of them to lose isn't a big advantage.
Having a free TC is a bit like making troops a grade better in contact.

I'm not sure I agree with this - if average undrilled protected impact HF cost 1 point I think people would use them.

If they are going to appear (and from what I read a fair few LH using players aren't concerned by this) then they either have to be made better or be cheaper. If they are improved in combat then what happens when they start to beat up legions in a fight with more regularity? I imagine a few complaints. Another alternative is for them to manoeuvre better - or make others worse at it.

A quick look at some of the recent 'themed' tournaments in the UK shows where FoG is headed (or should I say arrived): Warfare 2010 Classical 15mm - very few undrilled foot armies (and this from a choice of 3 books); World Team Challenge Derby 2010 Pool 2 Wolves from the Sea - very few undrilled foot armies.


Walter

[david53]

I'm not sure I agree with this - if average undrilled protected impact HF cost 1 point I think people would use them.

Sorry as Roger said making them cheaper will not make them fight better in FOG, and to change them would require a new re-write of the rules, not just an amendment.

[grahambriggs]

I'm not sure I agree with this - if average undrilled protected impact HF cost 1 point I think people would use them.

Sorry as Roger said making them cheaper will not make them fight better in FOG, and to change them would require a new re-write of the rules, not just an amendment.

Not entirely correct IMHO. Making a bad troop type cheaper without doing anything about their POAs will do something positive:

- you can have more BGs, so the army is tougher and doesn't care as much about losses.
- you can put BGs in three ranks, and/or give them rear support. They will last longer while you work the flanks.

So cheaper would give some benefit. However, the issue seems to be that they do not perform as well as history suggests - particularly that they should give Romans a long hard fight and then lose. At the moment it's a short, soft fight and then lose.

And we are talking about a rewrite of the rules, not just an amendment. The problem with points changes is that this also involves the army lists.

[nikgaukroger]

However, the issue seems to be that they do not perform as well as history suggests - particularly that they should give Romans a long hard fight and then lose. At the moment it's a short, soft fight and then lose.

Indeed - and if this is sorted it should naturally lead to more use of such troops IMO.

And we are talking about a rewrite of the rules, not just an amendment. The problem with points changes is that this also involves the army lists.

However, it has been stated on more than one occasion that points will be changed where necessary - so hopefully no tail wagging the dog in a DBx stylee.

[Strategos69]

I agree that the half PoA is a good solution, especially for the case of the Barbarians. I have already argued that they should be given that advantage at impact. Someone described that "half PoA" as "fierce charge", and that would be for Gauls, Germans and Samnites. The problem is that, if you still pretend to make a general statement, you will end up getting troops in those categories that we don't want to. For example, Spanish are now undrilled impact foot but they were not known for fighting as the Gauls did. I would create a new capability for making clear the difference between what historically was different: Roman and Spanish style of fight throwing javelins before the clash and those troops (Gauls, Samnites) relying more on the power of the charge. I think we want to deal with some specific problems and those are the ones to be dealt with. In fact what we want here is another special rule for a reduced number of armies.

Therefore, some troops should see maybe reduced the cost in points (Spanish impact MF) and others (Gauls, Germans, Samnites) should remain the same but be added this new capability resolving ties with other impact foot. That would be a short change without a major change in the game mechanics.

By the way, I find very interesting the ideas about the extra PoA resolving the other ties, like spears against spears, etc.

[Rekila]

Well the Spanish army also needs some help even if I agree that Medium foot should not be advantaged in Impact. It falls perhaps in the category of defensive/terrain armies debated on another threat. In any case it seems to be a consensus that some armies and types of troops were in danger of extinction! The solution is not a change of points, making them cheaper only means to have more figures to paint for a losing army. In FoGR heavy lances and light lances cost the same points but when fighting between them, heavy lances got the POA. The same principle IMO must be used to sharp the edge of some troop types that by now were performing less well that their historic counterparts.

[Strategos69]

Well the Spanish army also needs some help even if I agree that Medium foot should not be advantaged in Impact. It falls perhaps in the category of defensive/terrain armies debated on another thread.

I also think that the Spanish army is not a good list (and just reducing the points cost is not a suitable fix), but I think the main problem is that it has not been developed enough and needs some push based on the sources. For example, the Ancient Spanish list could be given a unit linked to the leader by the devotio hispana and be similar to the Gallic soldurii foot, some superior troops representing the warrior aristocracy and an upgrade for a few units as drilled (and even some superior caetrati) for Viriatus and Numantia special campaigns. Besides that, the reduction in points can help to have more units for ambushing, which did happen in some battles against the Romans.

Anyway, getting back to the topic, I don't see all Spanish foot benefitting from a rule that describes more the Gauls or Germans than the Spanish style of fight (very similar to the Roman, by the way).

[nikgaukroger]

I also think that the Spanish army is not a good list (and just reducing the points cost is not a suitable fix), but I think the main problem is that it has not been developed enough and needs some push based on the sources.

Why not put some ideas, with the evidence, in the Player Designed Lists forum?

[Strategos69]

I also think that the Spanish army is not a good list (and just reducing the points cost is not a suitable fix), but I think the main problem is that it has not been developed enough and needs some push based on the sources.

Why not put some ideas, with the evidence, in the Player Designed Lists forum?

ok, I haven't thought about that. Thanks!

[expendablecinc]

I agree that the half PoA is a good solution, especially for the case of the Barbarians. I have already argued that they should be given that advantage at impact. Someone described that "half PoA" as "fierce charge", and that would be for Gauls, Germans and Samnites. The problem is that, if you still pretend to make a general statement, you will end up getting troops in those categories that we don't want to. For example, Spanish are now undrilled impact foot but they were not known for fighting as the Gauls did. I would create a new capability for making clear the difference between what historically was different: Roman and Spanish style of fight throwing javelins before the clash and those troops (Gauls, Samnites) relying more on the power of the charge. I think we want to deal with some specific problems and those are the ones to be dealt with. In fact what we want here is another special rule for a reduced number of armies....

I like the approach to create a rules distinction based on battlefield behaviour. Perhaps the spanish/romans spearchuckers should nto get impact foot at all, but instead get javelins like the atl-atl wielders in the americas book.

This way the romans have a chance to disrupt the germans on the way in and are still very resiliant at impact (through at a disadvantage compared to the "true" impact foot). If they weather the initial clash its a steady slog to mop up the barbarians who have exhausted their one trick.

The question is whether this woudl give the legion too much side effect benefits. like being able to sit back and respond to enemy missile units.

[eldiablito]

Even another way to slightly alter this poor re-enactment is to create a new category of impact foot; perhaps a step up from light spear and not quite as good as impact foot. That new category could represent the Romans and similar troop types. Make it something like ++ against all foot except true "Impact Foot" (at which point they are only +). Then the barbarian hordes could be Impact foot and have a net PoA of + against Romans.

The Romans, in a straight up fight will still hit on 5s with re-rolls of 1, 2 (most often a 3 as well). So 4 Roman dice would theoretically earn 1.78 to 2.5 hits. The barbarians (with re-rolls of 1 and possibly 2 as well) would earn 2.17 to 2.33 hits. So, the end result would be Superior barbarians against Elite Romans is barely winning during impact. However, if the same Elite Romans have a general along with them, then they will win (but just barely). Effectively, if the barbarians can disrupt the Romans on impact, they have a good chance (but the odds are only slightly in their favor) at winning in melee. However, if the Romans do not disrupt, then it will go very poorly for the barbarians.

I do admit that this is just a quick analysis with decimals and we all know that there is rarely a chance to roll a 2.33 (unless the corners are rounded, you have a thick carpet for a game board and the die lands directly in some crease).

Just more food for thought...

[Polkovnik]

Effectively, if the barbarians can disrupt the Romans on impact, they have a good chance (but the odds are only slightly in their favor) at winning in melee.

Not if the Romans are Skilled Swordsmen. Even when disrupted the odds are in their favour.

[Polkovnik]

The Romans, in a straight up fight will still hit on 5s with re-rolls of 1, 2 (most often a 3 as well). So 4 Roman dice would theoretically earn 1.78 to 2.5 hits. ..

You maths is bit off I'm afraid. Even Elite with a general (which would be unusual - Superior Romans would be much more normal) will only expect to get 2 hits from 4 dice on a -POA, not 2.5.

[peteratjet]

I'm afraid adding new attributes with associated POAs gives me the heeby-jeebies. You need a damn good reason to add complexity, and I don't think that handicapping the Roman legionaries is reason enough. There are two simple things that can be done just by fettling the army lists.

Radically reduce the availabilty of superior/skilled swordsmen legionaries. Maybe have a maximum of 4 bases. The rest would be armoured, drilled swordsmen, still pretty effective in melee.

As others have suggested, make legionaries Light Spear rather than Impact Foot.

The match-up of hairy barbarian impact foot vs vanilla legionaries starts to look more even, and a pike phalanx starts to feel positively smug at impact.