Slitherine

Richard

Please accept my apology if my post suggested 'Shrinking the table so that an Early 30YW Swedish army will cover it from side to side'. That was not my intent and I agree with you that it 'would be very silly indeed'.

Use of prevailing terrain becomes very difficult on Steppe. I know that I played much more cautiously on the billiard tables of Steppe against Poles and Ottomans than I did against Alisdair, Dave R and Mick on tables where I was at least partially able to anchor a flank. While I lost against the last 3, I did manage a losing draw against Poles and Ottomans on the Steppe. When there was terrain or a table edge rather than a hanging flank, I finished up with most of my army in my opponents half of the table and was prepared to give it a real go even though I lost every one. When not, I was not but usually managed a draw. I suspect that these games were significantly duller for my opponents.

Even for the armies I was facing, unless they deployed on only about 2/3rds of the table, a 15 to 18 BG army can struggle to have rear support all along the line.

My preference would be for 830 or 850 points a side (though this would have implications for people with 400-450 point DBR armies - which is probably your target audience) or for battles on slightly narrower tables say 5' 6" x 4' at 800 points.
Regards

TBH there is'nt a problum IMO, shrinking the table size is maybe a problum with FOG AM but not FOG R. I agree with Richard if you cut the table size your allowing one type who already came 1st and 2nd and 3rd in Britcon a better chance to win. In the battles I have researched the early 30TYW there was space for movement why change it now when there has'nt been any official events. Lets not rush into any changes before we can look at some games first.

timmy1 wrote:Even for the armies I was facing, unless they deployed on only about 2/3rds of the table, a 15 to 18 BG army can struggle to have rear support all along the line.

That is good, not bad.

How many armies were there historically that filled the world from edge to edge?

Table edges are a necessary evil in tabletop wargaming. It is more realistic for armies not to fill the table.

timmy1 wrote:
My preference would be for 830 or 850 points a side (though this would have implications for people with 400-450 point DBR armies - which is probably your target audience) or for battles on slightly narrower tables say 5' 6" x 4' at 800 points.
Regards

Interesting question. Richard, are you expecting most players to be ex DBR, or FOG/AM drifting into period? My impression has always been that there are a great many more A/M players than renaissance, but maybe that's just the impression from tournaments?

azrael86 wrote:

timmy1 wrote:
My preference would be for 830 or 850 points a side (though this would have implications for people with 400-450 point DBR armies - which is probably your target audience) or for battles on slightly narrower tables say 5' 6" x 4' at 800 points.
Regards

Interesting question. Richard, are you expecting most players to be ex DBR, or FOG/AM drifting into period?

Probably both. Many drifting back to FOGR from DBR via FOGAM, I suspect. Also hope to pick up some old George Gush or Tercio players who did not buy into the DBx paradigm.

That would be good.

rbodleyscott wrote:
Probably both. Many drifting back to FOGR from DBR via FOGAM, I suspect. Also hope to pick up some old George Gush or Tercio players who did not buy into the DBx paradigm.

Hmm. Ok, though how many people really went DBR? Lists that permit morphing would help, also why not instigate a loyalty scheme to make books cheaper? After all a full set of FOg books will be close to £300 by the end of FoGR (and presumably £400 for Fog:n, etc).

I hope that fog R encourages the exotics, rather than concentration on european armies. A feature of Fog/AM is that very few* non-european/middle eastern armies appear in tournaments like Britcon(where there is a choice).


* i.e. Graham and David

azrael86 wrote: I hope that fog R encourages the exotics, rather than concentration on european armies.

Well there are 2 list books of "exotics" out of the 6 so the choice is there, however, IMO the real interest is with the wars of Europe (east and west) and this is reflected in the list books release schedule. In the end, in general, people will play what they are interested in.

Hi

having played in both the 800 point and the 900 point, (both of which I enjoyed) I think the 800 point version gives a wider range of armies a good opportunity of success, if it was 900 point I think you would see more Swedes and Tercios and less variation in armies selected and therefore less interesting, and as has already mentioned both Jims and Micks armies were 18 battlegroups and that seemed plenty large enough to me, so i am happy with 800.

Cheers

Alasdair