Breaking-off.

petergarnett · Post by **petergarnett** » Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:12 am

The only one of the issues listed so far which I strongly dislike in the PC version is the foot being able to turn & move. This should not be permitted for undrilled IMO at all.

deadtorius · Post by **deadtorius** » Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:37 am

well in the TT game undrilled foot can still wheel and move. If they try any fancy stuff like turns or double wheels that takes a complex move test to manage to pull off, so foot changing direction and moving off is fine in the PC game. Undrilled cav are penalized in the pc game by not being able to change facing after their move. In the TT game undrilled cav can do almost any moves/wheels the drilled boys can. It is the expanding and contracting bases that they have problems with. Personally I would like to see the undrilled cav get the free facing change the drilled cav get, but I suppose in game terms that is the advantage of being drilled.

petergarnett · Post by **petergarnett** » Wed Feb 17, 2010 1:55 am

Wheeling is different to turning - it's the latter I dislike.

Paisley · Post by **Paisley** » Wed Feb 17, 2010 5:54 am

Actually turning (change of facing) is miles easier in real life than wheeling, which requires drill of the highest order to do without becoming disordered. If you look at The Trooping of the Colour, you'll see the Brigade of Guards, as well drilled anbody as any in history, has to stop frequently to dress ranks when performing what we'd regard as fairly straightforward manoeuvres on a dead flat surface.

I think (bar the casualty rates, which tend to be too high, especially for the winners the result of the battles 'feels' about right. But the actual turn by turn play isn't very realistic. It's fun and flavoursome though, and that is miles better than spending hours poring over a 'realistic' game (which in fact probably wouldn't be much more realistic at all).

petergarnett · Post by **petergarnett** » Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:55 am

But this is ancient warfare. The undrilled in FoG is perhaps badly worded - difficult to control is a better description. Gauls, Britons, Moorish Javelinmen etc. didn't, IMO, have file leaders etc. to aid the command structure & get the body to halt it's forward momentum & completely turn around, then head off in the opposite direction.
Equally wheeling for undrilled is more leading from the front & heading forward but bearing left or right. So this I'm happy with but not the ability to turn around & move in the same turn.

Paisley · Post by **Paisley** » Wed Feb 17, 2010 4:57 pm

It takes them a full turn to change facing. They can't move as well, bar lights who are different anyway. Surely that's enough? Especially as drilled troops can manoeuvre with much greater ease. Relatively speaking the manoeuverability of drilled and undrilled seems about right to me.

Again, I'd say your looking at the game counter as representing one unit. Whereas in fact they almost always represent 3 or more.

petergarnett · Post by **petergarnett** » Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:07 pm

Sorry Paisley but if you click on an undrilled foot BG then the available hexes it can move to include hexes to it's rear. If, however, you click on it & reface it to the rear then it can't move. This is my issue - the former is wrong & not in line with a key part of the TT rules, nor I believe even the PC rules as intended.

Paisley · Post by **Paisley** » Fri Feb 19, 2010 4:52 am

Yes but drilled can do the same and more importantly can turn at the end of their move. In game terms it's consistent and changing it would mean drilled units would be far superior to undrilled. So game balance would mitigate against that unless drilled were impeded somehoe also.

As for realism, how realistic is it to charge a unit of light infantry, see them evade and then wheel through 90 degrees plus to attack a well formed unit of HI at no penalty? Totally unrealistic. There's loads of examples of things that are unrealistic taken on an individual basis. But tinkering with one will unbalance things.

If you allow drilled units one change of facing (by no more than one a hex corner, or a complete 180 degree about face) at the start of their move, and undrilled none, that would be more realistic, I'd say. But how much more tedious would the game be as a result? On a 'counter' level I think the game's all about relativism and little to do with realism. And in honesty, I think that's for the best.

lpgamble · Post by **lpgamble** » Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:53 pm

Had a break off last night. The unit was in contact with 1 steady foot, 1 mounted HC and 1 LH. The unit broke off. I engaged the LH hoping it would stop the break-off.

Just posting in case skirmishers are ignored for the break off pupose, so I can adjust tactics. Personally I like that the TT and computer game play a bit differently, I just need to get used to the differences.

batesmotel · Post by **batesmotel** » Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:44 pm

lpgamble wrote:Had a break off last night. The unit was in contact with 1 steady foot, 1 mounted HC and 1 LH. The unit broke off. I engaged the LH hoping it would stop the break-off.

Just posting in case skirmishers are ignored for the break off pupose, so I can adjust tactics. Personally I like that the TT and computer game play a bit differently, I just need to get used to the differences.

I believe the criteria is if half or more of it's foot opponents are steady, including LF. So breaking off is the expected behavior in your position.

Chris

lpgamble · Post by **lpgamble** » Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:56 pm

thats what I was thinking at the time. It looks like it is not half or more of your opponents are steady foot, just if half your foot opponents are steady