Slitherine

ethan wrote:You could have a dynamic table size actually.

And who is going to re-mark all the table edges during a competition Ethan?

rpayne wrote:An army may forced march up to 3 battlegroups.

BGs that are Forced Marched are placed up to 20 MU's on the board at the same time as BGs in Ambush.

The remaining BGs are adjusted into quarters in the same way they were previously.

Forced Marched BGs take a cohesion test at the start of the game.

But this removes any possible advantage a HF army would gain by a forced march.

If I have an Anglo Danish army, tough but SLOW. I force march 3 Off Sp BG to 20MU. The enemy mounted see this deployment before they put anything on table an now neutralise the extra deployment depth with a BG of 4 LF. Their lancers now deploy as far away as possible. But if you wish for forced marchers to be handicapped for doing it, it would work.

Well, Kevin's original suggestion was for the deeper deployment to only be allowable if both armies were big foot armies.

I feel like there should be some disadvantage to such a thing, so HF armies aren't planning on doing it every single game.

I dunno. Still not sure if I like the idea altogether. Your suggestion is not bad though!

It is a pity more people have not posted suggestions on this topic.

A simple solution would be to allow armies to deploy closer together. This would get them into contact quicker. If playing on 4' deep tables, there is still plenty of room for those armies who want to use the space to sit back and try and manoeuvre. How about all troops can deploy 15MU in (or even 18MU in to allow Heavy artillery to fire at the start of the game if the enemy has also deployed as far forward as possible - this means that Heavy Artillery should at least get to shoot at some stage in the game - normally, once deployed, people just avoid it).

I suppose everybody having the opportunity to deploy further forward would allow HF to get to grips sooner. But it doesn't seem as much fun.

DavidT wrote:A simple solution would be to allow armies to deploy closer together. This would get them into contact quicker. If playing on 4' deep tables, there is still plenty of room for those armies who want to use the space to sit back and try and manoeuvre. How about all troops can deploy 15MU in (or even 18MU in to allow Heavy artillery to fire at the start of the game if the enemy has also deployed as far forward as possible - this means that Heavy Artillery should at least get to shoot at some stage in the game - normally, once deployed, people just avoid it).

I don't know about all troops, but cavalry, especially the one that can be used either as LH or Cav should also be included in those troops deploying uo to 15MU.

If this is all to do with a "problem" in tournaments, and tournaments alone, surely the solution should be included in the tournament house-rules and not the core game?

HannibalBarca wrote:If this is all to do with a "problem" in tournaments, and tournaments alone, surely the solution should be included in the tournament house-rules and not the core game?

Even were I not to play tournaments, I would play games in the evening at my local club/game store. I would like those games to be reasonably interesting and have a chance of finishing in the 3-3.5 hours I have to play them. I would also like to feel like I wasn't making myself or anyone else miserable by taking HF...

ethan wrote:

HannibalBarca wrote:If this is all to do with a "problem" in tournaments, and tournaments alone, surely the solution should be included in the tournament house-rules and not the core game?

Even were I not to play tournaments, I would play games in the evening at my local club/game store. I would like those games to be reasonably interesting and have a chance of finishing in the 3-3.5 hours I have to play them. I would also like to feel like I wasn't making myself or anyone else miserable by taking HF...

Ethan is correct. The current situation requires either an asterisk for tournament games (i.e., special competition rules) or an asterisk for HF armies (i.e., to make them not a chore for either side). Neither asterisk is a viable solution.

Another deployment option would be to allow all troops int he center to be deployed further in.

Not sure this works as all the mounted armies would swing for the flanks rapidly.

hazelbark wrote:Another deployment option would be to allow all troops int he center to be deployed further in.

Not sure this works as all the mounted armies would swing for the flanks rapidly.

This might be OK, since you would not have to deploy deeply. So HF v. HF get a leg up, combined arms can adjust with their own mounted on the wings. The only skewed interaction might be mounted HF, but those match ups have more problems than just deployment.

So non-skirmishers in center deploy up to 12MU? Or just infantry?

philqw78 wrote:

ethan wrote:You could have a dynamic table size actually.

And who is going to re-mark all the table edges during a competition Ethan?

This would be pretty easy actually. Basically players could bring strips of felt/string/whatever to mark out the usable part of hte table. You could even have each player bring a 4 foot length and a 6 foot length and have them alternately place them.

philqw78 wrote:

ethan wrote:You could have a dynamic table size actually.

And who is going to re-mark all the table edges during a competition Ethan?

I really don't think that is a big consideration actually. People will just bring a road or stream to mark the new edge. Perhaps its bothersome to the anal folks, but having helped lay downt he maskign tape at challenge I can assue you there was some alcohol induced variation on at least one occassion.