Criticisms of rules / Rules Book

[miffedofreading]

OK, it's been long awaited, and overall is a good set of rules and I think will be a big success, I hope it is. I would like to discuss a few areas where simplification may help.

Good bits.
I very much like the idea of impact and melee phases being separate, allows flexability of how you handle impetuous chargers like gauls etc so much better than traditional approaches.

shooting and hand to hand combat mechanisms - quite different, interested to see how well these work.

The Rules book is well on the way to being 200 pages!! That is a lot for a newby to read.

The POA etc tables all seem quite long, I think this may appear off putting at first, though most of them are going to become second nature...

So what is the bit that concerns / confuses / scares me the most?
Anything to do with movement. I have not added up the total number of pages committed to rules and examples that relate in some way to movement, but I don't think I am exaggerratting by much to claim 50 pages (it felt like that much)

I am pleased to see that the authors are trying to avoid the ludicrous situations that were so common in DBx but to try and ensure the rules stop all of these cheesy moves it seems to have become a huge section of the book.

Could someone give me a small paragraph of the classic basic movements along the lines of

You can move forward and wheel
If you want to do something fancier pass a test
skirmishers and cavalry one rank deep can evade
etc

Not covering every weird example, but covering the basics??

OK I just wrote this and I realise I am not explaining myself very well. I don't know yet, but I suspect the movement rules MAY be quite simple and common sense?? but they don't at first appearances LOOK that way.

I would be interested in hearing of other areas where the rules are perhaps difficult to understand if you have never played before.

It is very difficult for authors and experienced players to spot things that are difficult, because like so many things it is easy when you know how. However at the moment we are going to be having a LARGE number of people playing these rules for the very first time, with a bunch of other people who have never played them. A recipe for chaos if ever there was one. Some people with short attention spans (I can be guilty of this) will play once, get confused and give up.

We need some kind of simple 10 page pull out with the rules that gives you "basic rules, use these for first couple of games" you could probably lose half the POA's etc if they don't come up very often like chariots, elephants etc. You could deffinitely lose 48 of the 50 pages of movement rules.

In 6 months time a newby would be able to get a vet to show them the ropes, today though we have thousands of newbys and no vets......

Only my humble opinion, feel free to disagree. I really would be interested in a simple para from the authors or a vet as to what (in english not rules speak) was intended by the movement rules. If I understand what the author is trying to allow or not allow then I have a context to put all the detailed rules within??

Andy

[miffedofreading]

Sorry about the double posting, No one got a view on what the author intended on movement??

[neilhammond]

The table you have to get to grips with is the Simple & Complex Moves table, on p42. It does take a few games before you start to get used to it.

Most moves are forward, optionally with a wheel.

Generally light troops (LH, LF) are fairly flexible and can move and do ONE of the following at the same time (expand / contract / double wheel / partial move).

Drilled troops and undrilled cavalry can also do most of the above.

Undrilled troops are pretty restricted. In additionl when undrilled troops are close to the enemy (<6"), it becomes difficult to do anything other than advance straight ahead a full move.

I'd take it from there. And just read a section at a time. Ideally, get someone to walk you through a game.

[miffedofreading]

Thanks Neil. I have now read the whole book cover to cover, there's a lot in there, but I really get the impression 90% of it would not get used in 90% of battles. Just looking for that 10%

[carlos]

80/20 principle as usual. 80% of what you will use is covered in 20% of the rules.

[rogerg]

It is just over a year since I printed off my copy as a beta tester along with another club member. We had only the test version 5, no digrams or pictures to work from. It did look daunting, however, when you line some figures up and give it a go, it is very easy.

Four types of move cover most of the game play. There are forward moves, sometimes with a wheel or occasionally two. There are 90 and 180 degree turns, expansion moves and contraction moves. Different troop types affect how these are done.

We played FoG at the Burton competition this weekend. The games were so much less stressful than DBM. The movement options are so straightforward once you pick up the game. Once again, get some figures out and follow it through. These are the easiest movement rules I can ever remember from thirty years of ancients wargaming.

The size of the book is an interesting issue. There was a lot of discussion about this. People wanted diagrams, pictures and explanations. They have got them. This of course greatly increases the amount of text. It was probably those same people who complained that DBM was too short with complex sentences and too few explanations.

[malekithau]

I'm not anywhere near as experienced as some of the playtesters but you shouldn't assume they were all experienced. If we saw something that was difficult to understand we pointed it out and it was worked on. The rule book is much easier to read and understand then the beta rules. In complexity I'd rate it less it then warrior/7th/6th possibly more then DBx but when you throw in the poor writing of DBx definitley easier to understand. And its more fun.

[miffedofreading]

The rules look good, but I was quite daunted by the size of them.

I approve of examples and diagrams, any pages spent on these are well worth while. I would vote for more not less.

I have read the entire book now cover to cover, and am going to start again.

I think with some referencing to the rules I can probably manage basic impact, melee and shooting.

I have to carefully re read the movement rules, and more on cohesion tests.


Neil - You still in Maidenhead? Maybe I should get you to show me the rules in person To the best of my knowledge there is not a single person at the Reading WAR club who has the beta rules or has actually played a game yet.......

Andy

[neilhammond]

Neil - You still in Maidenhead? Maybe I should get you to show me the rules in person To the best of my knowledge there is not a single person at the Reading WAR club who has the beta rules or has actually played a game yet.......

Andy

'fraid not. I'm near Peterborough.

I got the impression that everyone at Reading was MM'ing, so not surprised that there aren't any gamers there.

Can you get to a comp for a day and just sit and watch a couple of games?

[paulcummins]

Bruce and co are running a regular session on Tuesdays in High Wycombe - get in touch with them to get some games in.

[acl]

I had my first try at Fog without having read (or indeed owning) the rules. Admitedly it was a doubles game, so I had three people to help me through it, but I found it remarkably easy to pick-up.

I do urge anyone put-off by the length of the rules to give them a go. Chances are you'll be pleasantly surprised.

We naturally judge rules by their length. But long does not nes mean complex. Often it just means that the authors have made an effort to explain things and also to cover as many contingencies as they can. Apparently shorter sets can often leave you puzzled and so end-up making things more complicated.

Alan

[hazelbark]

Actually I had seen and played the beta rules. Then I heard everyone talkign about the length of these rules and today got my copy of the rules and find them not large at all. In fact I WANT A BIGGER BOOK.

Seriously, they are a host of things that you don't need to read every turn. In fact one of the assets of the book will be you don't need to keep refering to it for case law.

The only things i would like is a giant 1 meter square board that we can hang on the wall and see the CMT and POAs from about 5 yeards away. that would help us optically challenged types.

[Scrumpy]

Is your memory so bad you can't remember them too Dan ?

[Scruff]

Re rulebook size,they haven't arrived yet, but the popular Flames of War rule book has 256 pages in it, size sure hasn't put anyone off that one that I have seen.

cheers

[shall]

The only things i would like is a giant 1 meter square board that we can hang on the wall and see the CMT and POAs from about 5 yeards away. that would help us optically challenged types.

So presumbaly all these 15mm figures are just a blur to you - explains a lot. Yu'll be going 28mm for extra visibility I presume

[davidandlynda]

Andy,you may like to see if you can get to Abingdon on 2nd March,the local club are holding their annual Overlord show(see their website for details) and we are putting on a 25mm FOG demo.
Also Oxford wargames society have an all day Sunday meeting once a month,I think the next is 16th
David

[hazelbark]

The only things i would like is a giant 1 meter square board that we can hang on the wall and see the CMT and POAs from about 5 yeards away. that would help us optically challenged types.

So presumbaly all these 15mm figures are just a blur to you - explains a lot. Yu'll be going 28mm for extra visibility I presume

Already there mate. Its why all these people that talk 10mm and 6mm are playing with prickly counters to me.

I have found that 15mm are easier on the eyes with lightly coated bases as opposed to the dark green flocking of my youth.