Damn Light Horse again

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

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

benos
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Posts: 168
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 10:01 pm

light horse

Post by benos »

I'm fairly sure Alexander fought the skythians , I'll check my Arrian to see if i can figure out more info, but i seem to rememebr fighting them while crossing a river and using artillery to cover the crossing....of course i can't see us re-creating that encounter ;-)

I suggested macedonians for this reason, (along with persians as they also fought skythians, which Dave has suggested good ways to try and recreate, so i think a reasonable possibility there)

perhaps the issue is not the effectiveness of light horse but that they are the easiest troop to be effective with while the others require more work?
thus currently there is a glut of light horse armies punching above thier weight while the other set-ups are catching up ?


Ben
dave_r
General - King Tiger
General - King Tiger
Posts: 3858
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:58 pm

Post by dave_r »

I'm fairly sure Alexander fought the skythians , I'll check my Arrian to see if i can figure out more info, but i seem to rememebr fighting them while crossing a river and using artillery to cover the crossing....of course i can't see us re-creating that encounter
The Skythians did have a fight against the Macedonians at Jaxartes. However, none of the Royal Skythis appear to have been there and it was largely just a skirmish that the Skythians got suckered into by Alex sacrificing a unit. Superb manoever by Alex that completely stitched up the local Skythian commander as nobody really sacrificed units historically - just us wargames generals....
I suggested macedonians for this reason, (along with persians as they also fought skythians, which Dave has suggested good ways to try and recreate, so i think a reasonable possibility there)
I have had cracking games against both Persians and Makedonians with Skythians and Bosporans - it is an interesting fight.
perhaps the issue is not the effectiveness of light horse but that they are the easiest troop to be effective with while the others require more work?
thus currently there is a glut of light horse armies punching above thier weight while the other set-ups are catching up ?
Light Horse are difficult to win with, but easier to draw with. The same can be said for any manoeverable troops.
jlopez
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 589
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 6:57 pm
Location: Spain

Re: light horse

Post by jlopez »

benos wrote: however there does seem to be a lot of complaining and very little in the way of contructive options or ideas

Ben
I and some others in Spain have proposed a fair number of alternatives to the current competition format (without chanhing the rules) and have met with indifference if not downright hostility in some cases. Unfortunately, the less conservative players have virtually all defected to the FOW community which is interested in trying new things out.

Julian
jlopez
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 589
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 6:57 pm
Location: Spain

Post by jlopez »

hazelbark wrote:
jlopez wrote:
I think you misread my previous post: I didn't give up on FOG after one game, I gave up on FOG after my first FOW competition.
THen why are you here?
Because I have a lot of painted lead sitting at home gathering dust and I'd rather it wasn't. I also think FOG competitions could be made a whole lot more interesting in a number of ways, not all of which require changes to the rules.

Having said that, it's been while since I posted on this forum or even came in to have a quick look. Blame Madaxeman for the last week's posts, it's all his fault.

Julian
MatteoPasi
Colonel - Ju 88A
Colonel - Ju 88A
Posts: 1534
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 7:17 pm
Location: Faenza - Italia

Post by MatteoPasi »

Maybe playing theeme tournement can solve the problem.

If you play Oath of Fialty games players can have lots of LH but they are going to play against troops with proper units to fight them.

Its in open competions thats thinks goes worse

Matteo
hazelbark
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4957
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Capital of the World !!

Post by hazelbark »

jlopez wrote:
Because I have a lot of painted lead sitting at home gathering dust and I'd rather it wasn't. I also think FOG competitions could be made a whole lot more interesting in a number of ways, not all of which require changes to the rules.
Then jump in, there are lots of fun to be had.
Hepius
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 3:06 am

Post by Hepius »

I posted this suggestion on the North American FoG site. I am a huge fan of FoG, but do think there is an element of unfairness in terrain selection. As long as this element of unfairness exists there will continue to be a predominance of light horse and cavalry armies and a frustrating lack of close foot. I am not making this argument because my favorite foot army is gimped by the rules. I favor combined arms armies.

My repost:

I've always felt terrain selection was broken in one aspect... the determination
of which country's terrain would be selected for the battle. It has never been
explained to me (in any manner that made sense to me) why having more cavalry
and light horse in your army (or an inspired battlefield commander) should force
the enemy to have to fight in your country. Some people will object to the
phrase "in your country" as the FoG rules don't specifically state in which
country a battle is being fought. In reality, the winner of the initiative role
is determining both the strategic and tactical offensive.

The determination of the strategic offensive (which country's terrain selections
should used) was historically determined by political, social, and historical
reasons. All of these factors (unless you are playing in a campaign game) are
beyond the scope of FoG. The fact we are pitting wildly non-historic opponents
against one another (in an open tournament) only adds to the problem of
determining where a battle should be fought.

The fact that a Mongol army led by an inspired commander can (more often than
not) force a Swiss army to fight in the steppes is just plain wrong on so many
levels. Certainly the Mongols were great at forcing their enemies to fight at the time and place of the Mongols choosing. But this was usually in their enemy's country.

I propose a simple solution. A competitive (and un-modified) die roll at the
beginning of the game. The high roller is on the strategic offensive and terrain
selection must come from their opponent's list. A second die roll (modified by
CiC [IC or FC], cavalry, and light horse as usual] determines the tactical
offensive. The winner of this roll is the attacker and selects terrain from the
available choices from the list of the strategic defender.

This solution adds a single un-modified die roll to the game. It adds an element
of fairness that is currently lacking from the terrain selection rules.
marco
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 658
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:50 pm
Location: saint brieuc

Post by marco »

i agree with some post
i'm french and i saw some desaffection about fog
in my point of view it's a good rule
but too much troops (800p)


too much to paint
too much money to begin
game too long

but things don't change
la bretagne ça vous gagne...
...mais ça fait pas gagner !

soit on les brûle ,et on venge jeanne,
soit on les defonce à la mitraille et on venge la vielle garde.
christophe artus

http://marcofwar.unblog.fr/
http://marcofwar2.blogspot.fr/
Robert241167
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Posts: 1368
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 5:03 pm
Location: Leeds

Post by Robert241167 »

marco - many times on the forum it has been mentioned that there is a 650 point variant that Hammy has run in competitions succesfully and the games only last two and a half hours.

As an added incentive I believe 650 points reduces the effectiveness of light horse armies due to the reduced depth of the table.

Rob
marco
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 658
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:50 pm
Location: saint brieuc

Post by marco »

many times, yes i undersatnd english
but i'm french
and all tournament are 800 pts here
la bretagne ça vous gagne...
...mais ça fait pas gagner !

soit on les brûle ,et on venge jeanne,
soit on les defonce à la mitraille et on venge la vielle garde.
christophe artus

http://marcofwar.unblog.fr/
http://marcofwar2.blogspot.fr/
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 »

>too much to paint
>too much money to begin
>game too long

>all tournament are 800 pts here

Well yes...if all you want to do is play in tournaments.

If you just want a fun friendly game (which I would have thought would be the case for most newbies to FoG - at least for a few months!) you can agree whatever points total and table size you like with your opponents. We seem to mostly play 700 pts, for example.
azrael86
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 596
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 3:55 pm

Post by azrael86 »

marco wrote: but too much troops (800p)

too much to paint
too much money to begin
game too long
If those are your concerns, then optimise your army to address them.

have a very expensive army to minimise (real) costs
have an IC
you will probably have fewer bgs, so the game will play faster. I remember fighting a sassanid who had only 9 bgs at 900pts.

You could of course always find an unfashionable army that is for sale, which can avoid the painting.
marco
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 658
Joined: Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:50 pm
Location: saint brieuc

Post by marco »

all this kidding because we win the "six nations" ?
i'm living in bretagne were wargamers are a few (only one opponent in st brieuc)
tournament is my only way to play with other

i paint myself
if i follow you, playing an unplayable army is the key ?

strange
maybe my english is not so good....

my reflexion is made by a lot of gamers i meet and they leave fog
maybe i should give them your reflexion to help
la bretagne ça vous gagne...
...mais ça fait pas gagner !

soit on les brûle ,et on venge jeanne,
soit on les defonce à la mitraille et on venge la vielle garde.
christophe artus

http://marcofwar.unblog.fr/
http://marcofwar2.blogspot.fr/
azrael86
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 596
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 3:55 pm

Post by azrael86 »

marco wrote:all this kidding because we win the "six nations" ?

that's just men playing with an odd shaped ball
marco wrote: if i follow you, playing an unplayable army is the key ?

strange
maybe my english is not so good....
Not at all. If you think the armies are too big/too expensive, then pick one that is smaller, because it has expensive units. This doesn't make it uncompetitive.

If unpainted figs cost about 60p mounted and 30p for foot (or €1 or 0.50) then a BG of 8 pike costs 8x4x0.5 = €16 and is 48pts. However a BG of 4 Superior Drilled Knights costs 4x4x1=€16, but costs 104 pts...Less than half the price.

Plenty of armies work this way - as well as the obvious knight armies there are the likes of Mongols, Ottomans, even Early persian if you take lots of immortals and cavalry.
marioslaz
Captain - Bf 110D
Captain - Bf 110D
Posts: 870
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 4:11 pm
Location: San Lazzaro (BO) Italy

Post by marioslaz »

azrael86 wrote:
marco wrote:all this kidding because we win the "six nations" ?

that's just men playing with an odd shaped ball
Well, I never think about relation between sport outcome and treatment they deserve on the forum. I'm Italian and we won last World Championship... mmmmh... Perhaps it's the reason I'm not liked on this forum. Oooops... now I remember you are French. Please, consider my nasme is not Materazzi :lol:
azrael86 wrote:
marco wrote:
if i follow you, playing an unplayable army is the key ?

strange
maybe my english is not so good....
Not at all. If you think the armies are too big/too expensive, then pick one that is smaller, because it has expensive units. This doesn't make it uncompetitive.
What kind of suggestion is it? Should he buy an army he dislike to play? I admit there is not a solution to his problem, or anyway nothing I can imagine now, but I think people choose armies because they like them. We are not talking of a tennis racket...
Mario Vitale
hazelbark
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4957
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Capital of the World !!

Post by hazelbark »

marco wrote:many times, yes i undersatnd english
but i'm french
and all tournament are 800 pts here
That is unfortunate. People who insist on orthodox will have problems.

The irony is the army choice changes. Some armies don't get enough extra interesting troops to go up to 800. Some need more than 800.
azrael86
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 596
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 3:55 pm

Post by azrael86 »

marioslaz wrote:[

What kind of suggestion is it? Should he buy an army he dislike to play? I admit there is not a solution to his problem, or anyway nothing I can imagine now, but I think people choose armies because they like them. We are not talking of a tennis racket...
I didn't say that at all. The concerns raised were -
but too much troops (800p)

too much to paint
too much money to begin
game too long
Obviously using fewer points would also work, but not for tournaments, unless 25mm when the cost is then higher. The other points can all be addressed by picking a small army with expensive troop types - figures cost less, there are fewer to paint, and the game will be shorter because you have fewer units to move, etc. There are literally dozens of armies that fit this category(Burgundian, Catalan, Swiss, Med German, Byzantine, Timurid), with widely varying characteristics - pick one that he likes. But don't pick something at the other extreme, which has very low troop costs (e.g. Libyan, Nubian, Spartacus, Irish/Scots/Welsh armies).
marioslaz
Captain - Bf 110D
Captain - Bf 110D
Posts: 870
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2009 4:11 pm
Location: San Lazzaro (BO) Italy

Post by marioslaz »

azrael86 wrote:Obviously using fewer points would also work, but not for tournaments, unless 25mm when the cost is then higher. The other points can all be addressed by picking a small army with expensive troop types - figures cost less, there are fewer to paint, and the game will be shorter because you have fewer units to move, etc. There are literally dozens of armies that fit this category(Burgundian, Catalan, Swiss, Med German, Byzantine, Timurid), with widely varying characteristics - pick one that he likes. But don't pick something at the other extreme, which has very low troop costs (e.g. Libyan, Nubian, Spartacus, Irish/Scots/Welsh armies).
Sorry, I didn't want to start a flame! :roll: I thought with a such start of my post was clear I wanted to joke. I meant if you play tennis, you can do it with any racket, because they all hit a ball (of course more expensive rackets have greater performance, but you still them to hit a ball). In a wargame, army choice has a greater impact on your play, because different army = different game plan. Obvious, I know, but just to explain my thought.
Mario Vitale
hazelbark
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4957
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Capital of the World !!

Post by hazelbark »

marco wrote:
i paint myself
What armies do you have or are you working on?
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 »

That's very true. And I certainly wouldn't want anybody to be forced to play an army they didn't like in order to be able to play at all...there's not much point in doing something that is supposed to be a leisure activity if you don't enjoy it.

But I can imagine plenty of other solutions to Marco's problems, rather than sitting around complaining it is an impossible situation and apparently expecting others to sort everything out to his satisfaction ;)

If there are no other local players, try to get some friends interested.

If no French tournament organisers want to run low-point tournaments, organise one yourself. (Yeah, I know that's a lot of work! But it is a possibility.)

If you go to tournaments because it is the only way to get games, not because you absolutely want to play in official tournaments, find a few other players who want to play smaller games and organise an informal meetup over a weekend. For a small number of people this may not be much effort.

Do what many frustrated, isolated wargamers have done over the years...play solo. There are plenty of ways to make this an interesting exercise, and several books have been written discussing how to make it work.

If you don't like the rules, use a different set.

If money and time costs to build up armies are too much, draw stickmen on paper on cardboard cutout to base sizes. At least to start with. You may mock, but that is how I started out at school when there was absolutely no possibility of getting "proper" armies.
Post Reply

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