Britcon table size - time for something new?

[rich]

Yeah maybe Dave, the smaller table may work, but if v2 was the answer I’m not sure people would be trying to change the table size. I will go with the flow anyway as I enjoy the weekends. My view tends to be fixing the balance of the troop types, but I can see the option of reducing the playing area or filling the space with more toys may work. I haven’t deserted FOGAM yet.

--

FOGR seems to work because it has a good balance for the light/heavy troops, giving the heavy troops a good standing as the muskets would just shoot the skirmishers away.

My view on FOGAM would be set skirmishers at -1 on bow fire and set LH to 6MU. That way you get a chance to kill them or catch them and more people would play heavy armies. I understand FOGAM bow fire is base on inflicting cohesion trouble but wouldn’t heavy bow fire have a higher kill rate.

But I hope v2 and any table size change in AM has the desire effect on the skirmish dominance and I will give it a try.

Rich

[zoltan]

We changed our Australian championship format this year, from the previously accepted 800 pts on 6x4 to 650pts on 5x3. The NZ National comp in April is also going to this format.

There was extensive discussion and angst before the comp about the change, and the numbers attending were quite heavily reduced (not necessarily by the change - some played FoGR, some couldn't get holidays, some played FoW etc).

The comp itself was very enjoyable, and everyone played in good spirit and liked the changed format. It did encourage foot based armies, and I don't think anyone was ever going to beat the Swiss, even when not played by Shaun. So ost armies were either pike or spear based, or Roman. However, that also encouraged good movement and positioning, and there were lots of army breaks.

I would encourage people not to get too caught up in the name of the event, as stated before, most people want to go to play a range of people they haven't played much before, not to be crowned world champion. I think the variety in games offered allows a greater variety of armies, and for people to then enjoy thinking about the particular one they believe might triumph.

muz

I endorse what Murray has said. The key to differentiating an annual wargames comp from a 'world championship' (be it Britcon, Cancon or whatever) is maximising the diversity of countries represented. If changing table size, points etc facilitates more countries being represented then great.

[Albion1]

I quite like the idea postulated earlier in this thread that perhaps table size can vary.
If both players want 6x4 then 6x4 it is. Same with 5x4.
But if one wants 6x4 and the other 5x4, then it gets diced for.
A small move in the direction of supporting armies not based on large amounts of skirmishers.

[dave_r]

Had a practice game last night on the 5x4 table.

Bosporan v 100 YWE. Was a different game, but not broken or anything.

Am going to try next week with spearmen.

Seemed good to me.

[ericdoman1]

I am still a relevant newcomer to the FOG game but do have quite a few years of wargaming experience. Even so there is a chance that some of my suggestions below have been discussed

Have now used a reasonable mixed bag of armies. Santa H, Avar, Late Dyn Egypt, Anglo IRish, Fan Berbers and ThirdRate Romans.

I do enjoy the game and if both players teams, plays relatively quickly , you can get to grips with the enemy.

There are also those rare ocassions where lf can be caught by slower moving troops BUT skirmishing armies are nigh impossible to beat with an army that has limited skirmishers and or missile fire.

At the moment though if a player doesn't really wish to fight an opponent they can do so, just by marching away.

Reducing table sizes I think is a good idea if both players agree bu wouldn't you have to reduce terrain sizes? A smaller table less of a chance of fitting in terrain pieces. what about 6 x 3. You still have the width but not the depth and a better chance of chasing skirmishing troops off table.

A -1 for all troops when it comes to testing if they are 6 or maybe more inches from their rear edge?

Possibly for a unit to test you would need to inflict 1 casualty/hit per 2 bases, this is for shooting and for impact/combat?

Of course you could always increase the points sizes of armies. 900pts for singles, 1000pts for doubles

Again getting the balance right is what is very important. Too small a table, prob no cav bow skirmishing armies. As it is there are probably too many.

Speeding up the game so you can have more turns? This is where my limited knowledge of the game doesn't help and as I am still green with reference to the rules I am still quite slow.

Not sure at the mo but I reckon there are 9 turns per player. If that is the case HF will be able to move a minimum of 27". It still leaves them 9" away from the enemy's base edge.

[hazelbark]

Of course you could always increase the points sizes of armies. 900pts for singles, 1000pts for doubles

This is something that is really needed. I think many more armies become interesting at 900 as they tend to have more to cope with LH for example.
In the US our doubles is now 4x8 which is actually spacious and 2 allied or same 650 point armies.

More is better and not longer as there is less benny hill.

similarly smaller table size and fewer points is a winner.

[mbsparta]

Of course you could always increase the points sizes of armies. 900pts for singles, 1000pts for doubles

This is something that is really needed. I think many more armies become interesting at 900 as they tend to have more to cope with LH for example.
In the US our doubles is now 4x8 which is actually spacious and 2 allied or same 650 point armies.

More is better and not longer as there is less benny hill.

similarly smaller table size and fewer points is a winner.

...... 900 point single armies are too big. They slow the game down, make it difficult to reach a game-conclusion and make it difficult for new players to get into the hobby and tournaments. Of course I play in 28mm so I imagine the above suggestion is for 15mm, We play 650 point games (for single play) and this has allowed some new players to buy and paint their own armies. While an army may be more interesting at 900 points, is it become less historic? Does the focus of a Caesarian Roman army become its auxiliaries or does it remain the legions?

Mike B

[ericdoman1]

Yep it's 15mm and yes I think you are right about slowing the game down. But 25 or 28 mm bases are 60mm wide, In 15mm they are 40mm wide. Now I know that in 15mm a 6 Feet table is approx 45 bases wide. So in 25/28mm it would be 30 bases.

I am looking at the rules now but can not find anything about movement for 25mm armies. Is it 3 mus for HFetc and a mu = 1 inch or is it more?

[petedalby]

I am looking at the rules now but can not find anything about movement for 25mm armies. Is it 3 mus for HFetc and a mu = 1 inch or is it more

It is the same Eric. It makes for a different but still enjoyable game.

25mm at 650 points on a 6 x 4 table is a fun game which makes HF viable. More points at 25mm would need a bigger table.

Personally I'd like to see more variety from competition organisers in 15mm. Let's have 900 or 1000 AP on a 6 x 4 table. Or 800AP on a smaller table. I've not tried it but I understand that 650AP works well in 15mm when you reduce the table size.

[davesaunders23]

we've played a competition at Central London of 650pts on 4'x3' it's fine for a quick game (2 hours) and to introduce players to the rules but completely wrecks light horse and even cavalry in total and is highly pro-heavy metal armies, legionaries and more legionaries. this competition was 2 dom roms in the final and not for no reason.

you need to keep the width to some degree - so drop the table width by all means 6'x3' or 5'x3' but no less.

but my preference is 900pts on 6x4.

please can we keep the number of toys on the table. be careful not to lose the rest of the players to FOGR...in terms of history i prefer the time period to R and would hate to lose my hobby.

[kevinj]

I've played 650 points on 5x3 quite a lot. It does change the balance, HF has more chance, without making mounted troops useless. One of the main benefits is that you can fit 3 games on a normal day.

[philqw78]

I've played 650 points on 5x3 quite a lot. It does change the balance, HF has more chance, without making mounted troops useless. One of the main benefits is that you can fit 3 games on a normal day.

So that would be 5 games on Staurday at Britcon then

[ericdoman1]

I was trying to work out the ratio of pts per army, be it 25mm and what size tabe etc

At the mo 25mm 650pts is played on a 6 x 4 feet table

As I have mentioned in 25mm that means the width of the table is 30 bases, in 15mm 45 bases.

That is a 50% differene

So now this is where I need help and woud that mean a 650 pts game at 15 mm would be played on 4 x 8/3 (2.6666) foot table based on scale.

As you can see that is a big difference and hence the reason why not many cav armies are used in 25mm ( from what I have seen in comps)

So absed on this what size table should a 800, 900 pts 15mm game be played on. Is it something like 4 x 1.2 and 2.666 x 1.2

The 1.2 signifies the increase from 650 pts to 800 pts which is apporx a 4.8 foot table by a 3.2 foot table (pretty close to 5 x 3)

Does this make sense and if so discuss? LOL

[kevinj]

So that would be 5 games on Staurday at Britcon then

No, more time for beer

[babyshark]

...... 900 point single armies are too big. They slow the game down, make it difficult to reach a game-conclusion and make it difficult for new players to get into the hobby and tournaments.
Mike B

To address this point: my experience running 15mm tournaments at 900 points on a standard 6x4 table is that the games are not slowed down. Or, to put it a different way, there are no fewer completed games at 900 points than at 800.

Some games will not result in an army break, regardless of the point level (and almost without regard to the time limit, too). That has more to do with the players than the army size.

Marc

[SDnz]

Any news on this yet ? I need to decide if I am booking a flight and leave.

[dave_r]

Any news on this yet ? I need to decide if I am booking a flight and leave.

Still in discussion I believe. What particular bit do you want an answer to? Table size, points, periods?

[olivier]

What particular bit do you want an answer to? Table size, points, periods?

Table size and points are required for me before I'll take a reservation, period is optional

[SDnz]

Table size and points. I can decide period or open later. With flying for two days and playing then flying straight back I am keen to book soon so I get a cheap fare.

Hopefully you won't run away to the biblical period Dave!

[ericdoman1]

Yep table size and points are important. I will make an effort to turn up as well.

If there is a predominantly foot based period (haven't looked), what about 5 x 3 and a cav based period would be 6 x 4. I think 800 points is a good number?