Poll- Fortified Camps

General discussion forum for anything related to Field of Glory Ancients & Medieval.

Moderators: philqw78, terrys, hammy, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Moderators, Field of Glory Design

Have you ever spent the 24 points on a fortified camp in a list where it was optional (not the Romans)?

Yes
7
11%
No
27
44%
No, but I might if they were cheaper
27
44%
 
Total votes: 61

Jhykronos
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 250
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 10:52 pm

Poll- Fortified Camps

Post by Jhykronos »

Just out of curiosity, does anyone ever take these when they are optional? Just thought I'd throw this up here while the new edition is in beta.
Jhykronos
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 250
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 10:52 pm

Post by Jhykronos »

The reason I ask, is I've never seen anybody do so.
philqw78
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Posts: 8842
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Manchester

Post by philqw78 »

2009 Britcon. I won.
phil
putting the arg into argumentative, except for the lists I check where there is no argument!
hazelbark
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4957
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Capital of the World !!

Post by hazelbark »

philqw78 wrote:2009 Britcon. I won.
Didn't that involve a bet? That you also won?
philqw78
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Posts: 8842
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Manchester

Post by philqw78 »

hazelbark wrote:
philqw78 wrote:2009 Britcon. I won.
Didn't that involve a bet? That you also won?
OK, so my reaosns may not have been completely logical.
phil
putting the arg into argumentative, except for the lists I check where there is no argument!
nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Post by nikgaukroger »

philqw78 wrote:
hazelbark wrote:
philqw78 wrote:2009 Britcon. I won.
Didn't that involve a bet? That you also won?
OK, so my reaosns may not have been completely logical.
And that differs from the rest of your life how?
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
ShrubMiK
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 824
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 8:37 am

Post by ShrubMiK »

I might take them if I could garrison them. Or the loss of the camp was more of a blow to my army. As it is, I don't think they give me value for the points expended.
Mehrunes
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 12:21 pm

Post by Mehrunes »

In most of my games with Romans, the enemy didn't make it to my camp OR sacked it so early I couldn't save it.
So wasted points for me.
jonphilp
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Posts: 154
Joined: Sat Sep 19, 2009 5:01 pm

Post by jonphilp »

From the Roman point of view the points are wasted. For the cost involved I do feel that the Roman camp should have a shooting element to portray the light artillery ( or legionaries/Auxiliary troops armed with slings etc). which was integral to the legions but tend not to appear on the table due to the light artillery rules.
Last edited by jonphilp on Tue Mar 15, 2011 10:11 am, edited 2 times in total.
expendablecinc
2nd Lieutenant - Elite Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Elite Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 705
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:55 pm

Post by expendablecinc »

ShrubMiK wrote:I might take them if I could garrison them. Or the loss of the camp was more of a blow to my army. As it is, I don't think they give me value for the points expended.
Great Idea being able to garrison the camp.

Possible implementation:
- attackign camp treated as attacking FF (ie cant overlap, treated as not open ground etc...)
- can be garrissoned by a single BG that is fought instead of the normal rules

outcome;
- gives a bit more depth to the camp play
- gives a logical place for the rubbish unit (most likely MF levies of some type)
- more cost effective and a handy piece of 'terrain' for those foot armies fighting on the steppe
- Gives me a Fog use for seven pieces of Baueda fortifications with space to visually portray the defenders manning the walls.

anthony
Anthony
NeoAssyrian, Spartan, Scythian, Later Seleucid, Parthian, Thematic Byzantine, Latin Greek, Later Hungarian
Jilu
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 560
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 12:14 pm

Post by Jilu »

expendablecinc wrote:
ShrubMiK wrote:I might take them if I could garrison them. Or the loss of the camp was more of a blow to my army. As it is, I don't think they give me value for the points expended.
Great Idea being able to garrison the camp.

Possible implementation:
- attackign camp treated as attacking FF (ie cant overlap, treated as not open ground etc...)
- can be garrissoned by a single BG that is fought instead of the normal rules

outcome;
- gives a bit more depth to the camp play
- gives a logical place for the rubbish unit (most likely MF levies of some type)
- more cost effective and a handy piece of 'terrain' for those foot armies fighting on the steppe
- Gives me a Fog use for seven pieces of Baueda fortifications with space to visually portray the defenders manning the walls.

anthony
i had already proposed that but no reaction from designers
rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 28411
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Post by rbodleyscott »

We wanted to keep the camp rules as simple as possible - it was a design decision - so as not to distract from the main action.

However, we over-costed fortified camps and they will probably go down a lot in points cost when we get around the revising the points system. Personally I think 12 points would be about right.
petedalby
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3118
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:23 pm
Location: Fareham, UK

Post by petedalby »

However, we over-costed fortified camps and they will probably go down a lot in points cost when we get around the revising the points system. Personally I think 12 points would be about right.
A definite improvement Richard. I know historical colour is important but any chance of them making them optional for all armies - including the Romans please?
Pete
rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 28411
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Post by rbodleyscott »

petedalby wrote:
However, we over-costed fortified camps and they will probably go down a lot in points cost when we get around the revising the points system. Personally I think 12 points would be about right.
A definite improvement Richard. I know historical colour is important but any chance of them making them optional for all armies - including the Romans please?
You would have to lobby Nik on that.
nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Post by nikgaukroger »

rbodleyscott wrote:
petedalby wrote:
However, we over-costed fortified camps and they will probably go down a lot in points cost when we get around the revising the points system. Personally I think 12 points would be about right.
A definite improvement Richard. I know historical colour is important but any chance of them making them optional for all armies - including the Romans please?
You would have to lobby Nik on that.

If they are cheaper I'd actually be more inclined to make them compulsory for more armies ...
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
petedalby
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3118
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:23 pm
Location: Fareham, UK

Post by petedalby »

If they are cheaper I'd actually be more inclined to make them compulsory for more armies ...
Not quite the response I was hoping for.... :(

Wasn't a Roman army destroyed by slaves because they didn't fortify their camp?
Pete
nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Post by nikgaukroger »

petedalby wrote: Not quite the response I was hoping for.... :(
Be careful what you ask for ...


Wasn't a Roman army destroyed by slaves because they didn't fortify their camp?

Possibly. However, the FoG lists do not set out to cover every single historical possibility, but to be broadly typical in order to avoid (hopefully) the wet Wednesday afternoon in 3AD option that somehow exploits a rule nerf.
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Post by nikgaukroger »

That said optional for all will be considered as it is also a rational approach :D
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
petedalby
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3118
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:23 pm
Location: Fareham, UK

Post by petedalby »

That said optional for all will be considered as it is also a rational approach
Huzzah! :D
Pete
nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Post by nikgaukroger »

Of course I was in no way influenced by the supply of Testudo figures ... :P :lol:
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory : Ancient & Medieval Era 3000 BC-1500 AD : General Discussion”