New Fog? by R. Bodley-Scot! When?

[NikiforosFokas]

I was reading this article on wargamer http://www.wargamer.com/news/wargaming- ... wargaming/ . Richard Bodley-Scott. And he said that: "The way the units are going to be designed in the Field of Glory 2 game (ED: Oh yeah, he's working on Field of Glory 2, by the way) is that there aren't going to be any gaps between the units. So when you have a battleline of troops, it looks like a solid line – it's made up of individual units of course that can all move, but it looks like a huge solid line of men so it looks very call.". When? Those are some good news

[ianiow]

And also this....

Question: So no 'Field of Glory 3.0' rule-set?
RBS: Terry's doing that. I wouldn't really want to, no. Terry probably will though. Simon's gone off an developed is own set of rules.

FOG3.0 forum discussion: http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtop ... 20&t=72417

At least with our new Unity engine FOG, any future rule adoption from RBS's fog2.0 or Terry's fog3.0 will be easier to add (if need be).

[TheGrayMouser]

Interesting read. My gut tells me any FOG revisit by RBS for the PC will be using the undisclosed successor to the "BA" engine ( the one that runs Pike & Shot)

Which means it will be a great addition to a genre short on (turnbased) games but, I doubt we'll ever see a game that uses hand painted miniatures again...

[NikiforosFokas]

Interesting read. My gut tells me any FOG revisit by RBS for the PC will be using the undisclosed successor to the "BA" engine ( the one that runs Pike & Shot)

Which means it will be a great addition to a genre short on (turnbased) games but, I doubt we'll ever see a game that uses hand painted miniatures again...

I am afraid you are right. But still i am excited with the news.

[Towerbooks3192]

I was just saying on the Steam forums of Sengoku Jidai that I wish they worked on the new FoG. I do agree with what he says in the interview. Tabletop is cool but it is so easy to whip out your iPad and play a skirmish of Pike and Shot against the AI or PBEM rather than gather around some friends and setup a tabletop session. As someone new to FoG, I don't really mind the tabletop nature because I know what I am getting in to but making something with a tabletop rule under the hood and presented as a game really helps with the immersion because despite calculating POA and other stuff in an attack, I don't see some beautifully painted mini figures but I see my men and I am hoping that they will not route or the other peasant rabble around them will route.

I do wish that the new FoG (the one where we players have tons of issue) will get fixed though so I can finally enjoy the game that I payed $180 AUD for because I want to try and make my own armies.

[76mm]

I have to say this is rather confusing--so we'll have "new FoG" and "FoG 2.0" as totally different games? Seems odd that whoever owns the trademark would allow that...

[fogman]

by the time they sort out all the problems with FoG Unity, the new FoG 2 (based on Pikes and Shot or some new similar engine) could be out. that would be something. i must say though i don't enjoy playing Pikes and Shot all that much.

[Alwaysdime]

I am always weary of stuff on their site considering the ownership issue.

[stockwellpete]

When you think about it there are quite a few elements that we do not have in FOG PC yet that would make the game more historically accurate . . .

Weather effects
Buildings
Command and control rules that grouped units into "battles" with their own leaders and morale levels (essential really for the medieval period)
To have rules where the death of the leader was sometimes catastrophic for "battles" or entire armies
The ability to deploy skirmishers and then recall them
Supply wagons/limited ammunition (arrows)

[IainMcNeil]

I have to say this is rather confusing--so we'll have "new FoG" and "FoG 2.0" as totally different games? Seems odd that whoever owns the trademark would allow that...

It can be a little confusing because of the Tabletop and Digital versions, plus the Newrosft Digital version. Here is a quick summary

Field of Glory Ancients & Medieval Wargaming Rules - this was the original tabletop game
Field of Glory Digital - this was the PC/Mac game based on the original rules. It is not a direct adaption and has diverged from the rules in numerous ways to suit the PC.
Field of Glory 2.0 Ancients & Medieval Wargaming Rules - this was an amended version of the Tabletop Rules with adjustments and new features
Field of Glory Unity - this is a reworking of Field of Glory Digital. It is almost a direct replica but with slightly different UI and features and in a code base that could be taken forwards. It uses all the art and data from the digital version.
Field of Glory 2 - this is the project Richard Bodley Scott is working on. It is still based on the tabletop system but has further diverged to make more use of the advantages of the PC. The full feature set is yet to be announced. It is all new in terms of UI & graphics and fully 3D. It is written in the Archon engine.

[stockwellpete]

Just came across this after reading the interview with Richard. This would be very interesting if something along these lines came into FOG 2 . . .

" . . . More importantly, command and control is finally introduced into the system. Every battle has Commander-in-Chief (CnC) generals, allied generals and sub-generals to command units. CnC general can command any unit in its command range, allied generals only command their own troops and sub-generals command non-allied troops. When a general is selected, his subordinates are highlighted in blue and his command range is shown with pink tiles. Units out of command range have limited facing movement. Units with generals receive a combat bonus but generals lose command when in melee. Units close to their non-engaged general receive a cohesion bump. General can be wounded or die in melee causing their units to check cohesion . . ."

http://www.wargamer.com/reviews/sengoku ... un-review/