At Leeds all four games of my games went to a finish. In all of them, at least eight of my ten units fought in melee. This may have been down to inexperience and a desire to fight and find out. AoW does makes combat more inviting than in some game systems. Troops who are at a disadvantage in the impact phase can be at an advantage in melee. This gives both sides a reason to commit. Whatever the reason, there was plenty of action. I look forward to playing more games.
There doesn't seem to be much wrong with rules.
LEEDS FEEDBACK
Moderators: hammy, philqw78, terrys, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design, Field of Glory Moderators
-
richardcollins70
- Lance Corporal - Panzer IA
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 4:00 pm
I took along Spartans for a couple of reasons:
1. they are deathly dull in dbm so the figures had been mouldering in a box for several years
2. i reckoned in an unfamiliar ruleset having an army that fundamentally shoved a whacking great wodge of spear at the enemy would simplify things
Game 1 vs Sassanids
Despite favourable terrain, the spartans were shredded by the Sassanid cavalry, struggling to defend there flanks and being vulnerable in straight up fights. They did however slaughter elephants in short order - it does seem that armies are very hard to kill if they keep there ancillary troops out of trouble - by the end of the game I had 7 hoplite phalanxes broken, but we were still hanging on in the game
Game 2 vs Spear heavy Carthaginians
A school boy error cost me my LH and thus my baggage and so put me in deep shtuck. However we evened things up by butchering the Cartho elephants in short order and the game petered out into a draw
Game 3 vs Hundred Yrs War English
The English initially deployed very historically(!) in a very secure position buttressed by terrain. However a couple of BGs were isolated and because of scoring system we both realised that by killing those i would win 28-4 so the english were forced to take the fight to me. We won in short order as 4 man men-at-arm BGs proved no match for larger spartiate BGs
Game 4 vs Palmyran
Our main phalanx crashed into a mixed Palmyran battle line of cataphracts and impact foot. Maybe it was a sunday afternoon thing but i found the combat results extremely difficult to work out in such a big clash especially as our BLs were overlapping each other, so each BG was splitting its dice making the combats quite tricky to resolve. Eventually tho the good guys won! Interesitly me and my opponent took radically different uses for generals me putting them in the front line to add impact while my opponent used them to stubbornly rally fleeing BGs
Overall, I found using the Spartans a far more enjoyable experience than I ever managed in dbm. I thought the terrain and deployment worked really well and I was pleasantly suprised at how historical the rules seemed - but maybe thats just because I and my opponents didn't know what they were doing! I think in an ideal world the CMT test should be removed - it seems a bit of an oddity in that virtually all of the movement rules involve no dice throws or at the very least if you fail a CMT you cannot then make a simple move with the BG
Richard
1. they are deathly dull in dbm so the figures had been mouldering in a box for several years
2. i reckoned in an unfamiliar ruleset having an army that fundamentally shoved a whacking great wodge of spear at the enemy would simplify things
Game 1 vs Sassanids
Despite favourable terrain, the spartans were shredded by the Sassanid cavalry, struggling to defend there flanks and being vulnerable in straight up fights. They did however slaughter elephants in short order - it does seem that armies are very hard to kill if they keep there ancillary troops out of trouble - by the end of the game I had 7 hoplite phalanxes broken, but we were still hanging on in the game
Game 2 vs Spear heavy Carthaginians
A school boy error cost me my LH and thus my baggage and so put me in deep shtuck. However we evened things up by butchering the Cartho elephants in short order and the game petered out into a draw
Game 3 vs Hundred Yrs War English
The English initially deployed very historically(!) in a very secure position buttressed by terrain. However a couple of BGs were isolated and because of scoring system we both realised that by killing those i would win 28-4 so the english were forced to take the fight to me. We won in short order as 4 man men-at-arm BGs proved no match for larger spartiate BGs
Game 4 vs Palmyran
Our main phalanx crashed into a mixed Palmyran battle line of cataphracts and impact foot. Maybe it was a sunday afternoon thing but i found the combat results extremely difficult to work out in such a big clash especially as our BLs were overlapping each other, so each BG was splitting its dice making the combats quite tricky to resolve. Eventually tho the good guys won! Interesitly me and my opponent took radically different uses for generals me putting them in the front line to add impact while my opponent used them to stubbornly rally fleeing BGs
Overall, I found using the Spartans a far more enjoyable experience than I ever managed in dbm. I thought the terrain and deployment worked really well and I was pleasantly suprised at how historical the rules seemed - but maybe thats just because I and my opponents didn't know what they were doing! I think in an ideal world the CMT test should be removed - it seems a bit of an oddity in that virtually all of the movement rules involve no dice throws or at the very least if you fail a CMT you cannot then make a simple move with the BG
Richard
-
rbodleyscott
- Field of Glory 2
- Posts: 28321
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm
I think the idea is to post a compilation. JD is in USA till the 10th, so it probably won't get posted till after that.plewis66 wrote:IS there some restriction against posting on the open forum regarding Leeds? After Usk there was a lot of activity there about reports etc, but there doesn't seem to be any this time. I left quite early on Sunday, so maybe I missed some announcement?
I don't think there is any problem with people putting individual reports in the public forum. I would have done one but have been a touch distracted and also I am struggling to find the right way to word it. Essentially I found my games frustrating but I don't think they were ahistorically frustrating and I am trying to work out a way to put this without sounding too negative.rbodleyscott wrote:I think the idea is to post a compilation. JD is in USA till the 10th, so it probably won't get posted till after that.plewis66 wrote:IS there some restriction against posting on the open forum regarding Leeds? After Usk there was a lot of activity there about reports etc, but there doesn't seem to be any this time. I left quite early on Sunday, so maybe I missed some announcement?
-
plewis66
- Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
- Posts: 202
- Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2006 9:56 pm
- Location: Manchester, UK
Funny, that's almost exactly my position, though I expect the frustration comes from entirely different causes. My problem is frustration with my own skills! The one game that I won was where my opponent was as eager to get the main line into combat as I was, upon which, the Legionaries did their job. In the other three games, my opponents main battle line - quite sensibly - held back as long as possible, and relied on it taking me until the last 45 minutes or so of the game to get my legionaries across the table. In all three cases, this allowed them to largely focus on wiping out my skirmishers, which then gave them 10AP straight off the bat. Like I say, this is not a complaint, and I'm certain there is no fault in the rules...the fault lies with me trying to figure out how to use the army.hammy wrote:I don't think there is any problem with people putting individual reports in the public forum. I would have done one but have been a touch distracted and also I am struggling to find the right way to word it. Essentially I found my games frustrating but I don't think they were ahistorically frustrating and I am trying to work out a way to put this without sounding too negative.rbodleyscott wrote:I think the idea is to post a compilation. JD is in USA till the 10th, so it probably won't get posted till after that.plewis66 wrote:IS there some restriction against posting on the open forum regarding Leeds? After Usk there was a lot of activity there about reports etc, but there doesn't seem to be any this time. I left quite early on Sunday, so maybe I missed some announcement?
I am still trying to work that out. I am pretty sure it was not that rookie opponents were playing slowly (especially when two of my opponents were Bruce and Simon) so I suspect it boils down to army choice (which will bring cries of joy from all).garyb wrote:Do you think the games were frustrating because rookie opponents were struggling to get up to speed with the game? Or was it a factor of army choice?
Essentially I don't think that Swiss works in an open comptition. They work very much like I would expect a renaissance army to work but against very mobile opponents they are too narrow and I have not yet worked out how to bring enough of the enemy into combat to win against mounted shooty armies.
Please feel free to post your comments on the open forum. We will post an official one at some point but no need to hold back. The only reason for the request for people to post here was to give us some materials to build on - and thanks to those who have so far.
Just be careful to post issues to here so we can deal with them and keep the open forum to thngs people will be able to follow given tey have never played or read the rules.
Cheers and thanks to all
Si
PS Phil, once you get up to speed you will have 90 minutes and not 45 minutes for the legionaries to get stuck in I suspect....
PPS James...I think you can sleep safely at night in the knowledge that commanding the Swiss in real life wasn't that exciting! There is only so much one can do....I thought yuou gave them a good run out but with such an army you tend to be givng the initiative away. A spartan by contrast is wide enough to seize this and apply more pressure. However if anyone gets hit by the Pikes full on - as 1 BG of bowmen discoverd - it gets ugly pretty fast!
Just be careful to post issues to here so we can deal with them and keep the open forum to thngs people will be able to follow given tey have never played or read the rules.
Cheers and thanks to all
Si
PS Phil, once you get up to speed you will have 90 minutes and not 45 minutes for the legionaries to get stuck in I suspect....
PPS James...I think you can sleep safely at night in the knowledge that commanding the Swiss in real life wasn't that exciting! There is only so much one can do....I thought yuou gave them a good run out but with such an army you tend to be givng the initiative away. A spartan by contrast is wide enough to seize this and apply more pressure. However if anyone gets hit by the Pikes full on - as 1 BG of bowmen discoverd - it gets ugly pretty fast!
-
neilhammond
- Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
- Posts: 465
- Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2007 7:51 pm
- Location: Peterborough, UK
-
spike
- Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
- Posts: 554
- Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 4:12 pm
- Location: Category 2
I was not available Sat, but I turned up on the Sunday, much as a day out rathat than in expectation of a game. However prior planning etc I brought my Principate Romans so that if the comp. was 1 short that I could step in.
As this occured I ended up with 2 games on the Sunday, which were my 2nd and 3rd games using these rules.
One was vs "New Kingdom Egyptian" and the other against "100 Years War English"
Needless to say both battles had decisive events....
Against the Egyptians there were 2 decisive events...
1. The Auillia on the left managed to break through the major proportion of the enemy infantry who were hiding in the terrain where they thought they were safe from the Legionaries! This then forced him to turn, some of the infantry to stop the baggage from being looted, rather than pushing forward and out flanking the roman left.
2. The roman cavalry managed to break the chariot BG on the right of his centre, which allowed them to turn the flank of the centre of their army- I would suggest that the Egyptians were a little unlucky at this point to lose this so easily.
I have a more comprehensive report of this battle on this board.
Against the 100YWE...
The Roman Leginaries stuggled against the longbow BG's as I kept failing death roll after death roll, however the turning point happened much earlier with the loss of a general who was leading a Mixed cavalry/ Light horse force of 2 BG's against a single force of LH but with a group of BG LI bowmwen and another BG of Longbowmen rushing to the aid of the LH. Whilst the LH won the combat causing the loss of 1 enemy LH from his BG, the general was lost, and the supporting cavalry also filed to break the LH when they attacked, these were then butchered by the combination of the 3 units. If thy had managed to break past the LH these 2 units would have been in the rear of the bowmen in the centre.
Also the Auxillia proved to be a liability against the enemy knights and Billmen, when they were covering the flank of the legionaries. Also the bow armed light horse while they were able to sack the baggage , were still there 3 turns later and were not providing the centre with any support, But by this time the the battle was already lost as the casulties from the longbows forced BG after BG of legionaries to flee.
It was enjoyable to have game against people other than those from MAWS, and to have some assistance from the rules writers on various points. So whils I was not able to have a look round the museum I hid have an enjoyable time.
As this occured I ended up with 2 games on the Sunday, which were my 2nd and 3rd games using these rules.
One was vs "New Kingdom Egyptian" and the other against "100 Years War English"
Needless to say both battles had decisive events....
Against the Egyptians there were 2 decisive events...
1. The Auillia on the left managed to break through the major proportion of the enemy infantry who were hiding in the terrain where they thought they were safe from the Legionaries! This then forced him to turn, some of the infantry to stop the baggage from being looted, rather than pushing forward and out flanking the roman left.
2. The roman cavalry managed to break the chariot BG on the right of his centre, which allowed them to turn the flank of the centre of their army- I would suggest that the Egyptians were a little unlucky at this point to lose this so easily.
I have a more comprehensive report of this battle on this board.
Against the 100YWE...
The Roman Leginaries stuggled against the longbow BG's as I kept failing death roll after death roll, however the turning point happened much earlier with the loss of a general who was leading a Mixed cavalry/ Light horse force of 2 BG's against a single force of LH but with a group of BG LI bowmwen and another BG of Longbowmen rushing to the aid of the LH. Whilst the LH won the combat causing the loss of 1 enemy LH from his BG, the general was lost, and the supporting cavalry also filed to break the LH when they attacked, these were then butchered by the combination of the 3 units. If thy had managed to break past the LH these 2 units would have been in the rear of the bowmen in the centre.
Also the Auxillia proved to be a liability against the enemy knights and Billmen, when they were covering the flank of the legionaries. Also the bow armed light horse while they were able to sack the baggage , were still there 3 turns later and were not providing the centre with any support, But by this time the the battle was already lost as the casulties from the longbows forced BG after BG of legionaries to flee.
It was enjoyable to have game against people other than those from MAWS, and to have some assistance from the rules writers on various points. So whils I was not able to have a look round the museum I hid have an enjoyable time.