BRITCON FEEDBACK - RULE SUGGESTIONS

[shall]

Jerome

See the changes - they just deal with 2 situations that seem illogical:

1) the ability to shift round enemy when they are charging is not allowed and tropops evaede away from 2 chargers now rather than electing to avoid one - we hada very odd evade situation where the evaders dodged 2 charges completely that didnt feel right.

2) pursuits where say Defensive spears lose effectively 2 POAs is harsh and we have diluted it by allowing a CMT to allow you to stop. Again what happened on a couple of tables ddin't feel quite right and opened us up to a bit of potentially chessy play with smal sacrificial units fo Mob.

Doubt it would have altered the ffectiveness of your scots much- but takes away two general oddballs that we came across at Britcon

Si

[Pikeaddict]

No problem with the points mentionned above.

I was just regretting with reason or not the following point :

4) P.24 Bursting Through. (To avoid most destruction of evading BGs due to partial burst throughs).

“A battle group burst through by friendly evaders or routers drops one cohesion level:
o Move the evading or routing battle group to the full extent of its move. If its move does not completely clear all friends, it is placed beyond any battle group(s) it is currently bursting through if there is room for it beyond, otherwise it is destroyed and removed from the table. No cohesion test is taken for friends seeing this.”

I'm not saying it was good or not, just that a player who didn't managed well his shooty army could loose some BGs with a good pursuer who coul arrange his advances and charges to regroup the skirmisher in smaller area of the table in order to make evasions difficult if not impossible.
Now it will be a bit more difficult than before...

Jerome

[madaxeman]

We have given some considerable thought to a beginners concept of FOG and involves some much bigger changes. Something we will return to once the main set is off to print. It is best to think of it afresh rather than a tweak of the main set we felt. So somthing clearly of the same family but with much simplificiation.

Si

Maybe this isnt a "beginners" set, but could it drop in as "optional rules"?

This has been done very well in the BKC ruleset

Then you could have an optional rule for "no-one gets broken from shooting, but its easier to charge fragged people with Skirmishers" and say "newbies might like this, its doen to your interpretation of history" as part of the commentary, but without explicityly creating newbie rules or breaking the competition ruleset philosophy either .

You could also then lob in a similar optional rules for "fixed command structure" with CinC and subs commanding set groups of BGs, which seems an obvious mod people will try anyway.

if they are in there, Both of these might deflect potential criticisms as well.

[shall]

Coing back to the difficult simple move thing...

Could you have a think about the following wording. Does this actually do it for us .. as I said bit snowblind now on it. Tim?

Insert in table
"Wheel/short move <6MU without a general attached"

Then use the section in rules to ay

Wheel/short move <6MU without a general attached - detailed explanation

a) any of the movement comes within 6MU of any enemy (including the enemy camp but not a commanders base) and
b) no a general attachde to the Battle group or battle line. He mus....

Views?

Si

[madaxeman]

Coing back to the difficult simple move thing...
Could you have a think about the following wording. Does this actually do it for us .. as I said bit snowblind now on it. Tim?
Insert in table
"Wheel/short move <6MU without a general attached"
Then use the section in rules to ay
Wheel/short move <6MU without a general attached - detailed explanation
a) any of the movement comes within 6MU of any enemy (including the enemy camp but not a commanders base) and
b) no a general attachde to the Battle group or battle line. He mus....
Views?
Si

Iv'e not got my rules here (in India) but I think its OK assuming that in the table this move would be green for everyone ?

tim

[rogerg]

"Wheel/short move <6MU" is open to misinterpretation. It might be a move less than 6 MU or any wheel.
Much as I dislike adding new terms, it might be best to have "combat manouvre without a commander". The table is only a reminder, it need not, and probably should not, be a precise definition. The phrase in the table has to prompt players to think of 'close to the eneny' (combat) and 'not a straight forward move' (manouvre). So long as it jogs the player's memory it might be possible to drop the 'combat'.

The main rules then can have: undrilled troops to wheel or move less than their full move straight ahead must pass a CMT unless at least one of the following applies:
a) a commander is with the BG or BL.
b) the entire move is outside 6MU of the enemy etc.

[babyshark]

The main rules then can have: undrilled troops to wheel or move less than their full move straight ahead must pass a CMT unless at least one of the following applies:
a) a commander is with the BG or BL.
b) the entire move is outside 6MU of the enemy etc.

I like this. A good, declarative statement. I think it will be clear to everyone what is meant.

Marc