Heavy Artillery - pivoting

[Grandviceroy2018]

Thank you gentlemen, my point exactly.

In many popular and well-written rules (like Flames of War, my vote for best written rules set - 200 games and my club has found the answer to every question anyone asked while playing IN the rules) - pieces can be immobile and still pivot; i believe in the old WRG rules i played for many years (to which FoG owes a nod -- and upon which FoG has greatly improved) i believe artillery that could not move could still turn to face....

again, a simple question, frequently asked.....and if the answer is 'no' then i am perfectly fine with that (not trying to argue the merit of the rule)

so again, thank you gentlemen. For now, i will assume they can not pivot, but it will be nice to see it in an FAQ or 2nd edition or whatever.

[SirGarnet]

In FOW do the rules say you can pivot? Mention pivoting at all?

[rbodleyscott]

Thank you gentlemen, my point exactly.

In many popular and well-written rules (like Flames of War, my vote for best written rules set - 200 games and my club has found the answer to every question anyone asked while playing IN the rules) - pieces can be immobile and still pivot; i believe in the old WRG rules i played for many years (to which FoG owes a nod -- and upon which FoG has greatly improved) i believe artillery that could not move could still turn to face....

again, a simple question, frequently asked.....and if the answer is 'no' then i am perfectly fine with that (not trying to argue the merit of the rule)

so again, thank you gentlemen. For now, i will assume they can not pivot, but it will be nice to see it in an FAQ or 2nd edition or whatever.

They cannot pivot.

[Luddite]

like Flames of War, my vote for best written rules set - 200 games and my club has found the answer to every question anyone asked while playing IN the rules

FoW might be well-written and play ok as a game, but as a WWII ruleset they are without doubt the worst ever written.

We played a Meditterranean scenario (as part of a 'Leros' campaign).

Entrenched British positions at the summit of a steep rocky hill.
In two turns, without taking casualties, the Germans 'stormtroopered' up the slope and obliterated the complete British position in close combat.

At that point we abandoned the rules completely. Just utterly ridiculous. Warhammer 40K with Shermans.

Now then, so far FoG has had a few rules teething problems (visibility in woods, etc.) but it essentially hold together excellently and for me achieves the very difficult combination of competative play and historical representation very well.

I've found that in FoG, even in competitions, if you use historical tactics associated with your army you'll do well...(i spent years as an avid DBM fan, but it never achieved this).

I'll take FoG with its rules vagueries over the 'well written' but unplayable FoW nonsense anyday

As for moving heavy artillery, RBS has spoken! No pivot is fine. Given that move heavy artillery was used at siege, and constructed on site (the early cannons were actually partially buried to give stability if i recall), this makes perfect sense.

One question arises though, does anyone actually use Heavy Artillery in their armies?

[revmidni]

Actually begin a newbie to FOG, I added to Bombards to my English army. The idea was to fight the English defensively with longbow men on the flanks and the bombards in the center with unmounted men at arms. After reading through this post no so sure that is a good idea now. Since I have not found any in Indianapolis to play yet I will to play solo for a while.

[NicktheLemming]

This is a good example of a heavy bombard. As you can see, it would take a fair bit to pivot it.

http://bp1.blogger.com/_acFJVl7wNlQ/Rgi ... ombard.jpg

[Primarch]

Light Artillery cannot pivot and fire either....



Clay

[SirGarnet]

I'll take FoG with its rules vagueries over the 'well written' but unplayable FoW nonsense anyday.

To be fair, there are a few things which are not specifically addressed, and a number of things where more cross-references and redundancy would make it easier to find answers, but few actual instances of vagueness - the writing is as a rule well-structured and clear compared to typical game rules. As for artillery movement and pivoting, "Immovable" is specific with no vagueness, and backed up by what is and is not included in the other movement-related rules.

One question arises though, does anyone actually use Heavy Artillery in their armies?

At a convention demo game this past weekend which was based on Losecoat Field two Royal bombards behind works in the middle of the field did good service blasting two opposing BGs into rout and ecnouraging the rebels to take the battle to the flanks. The -1 to CT from being shot at by artillery is quite nice nice when you have enough shooters (such as Longbowmen) to get the 2 hits needed to force a test on any BG of 4 or more bases.

[nikgaukroger]

The -1 to CT from being shot at by artillery is quite nice nice when you have enough shooters (such as Longbowmen) to get the 2 hits needed to force a test on any BG of 4 or more bases.

2 hits is not enough on a BG counting as 8 bases or greater as you need to cause 1 per 3 to force a test.

[nikgaukroger]

The -1 to CT from being shot at by artillery is quite nice nice when you have enough shooters (such as Longbowmen) to get the 2 hits needed to force a test on any BG of 4 or more bases.

2 hits is not enough on a BG counting as 8 bases or greater as you need to cause 1 per 3 to force a test.

[Grandviceroy2018]

the question came up because the carthaginian player had purchased a pair of heavy bolt throwers. they proved quite effective against the small roman units, and one roman unit was decimated when it got hit by artillery, slingers and javelins in the same turn....


ps: as to FOW, although this is not an FOW forum, i have played in, taught or gm'd over 100 FOW games in the last two years in three clubs, and we have never had so much fun with a ww2 set of rules. and they are exceptionally well written -- never had to go on a forum to ask a question, as the answers are in the rules. as a game designer myself i appreciate (and wish i could emulate) that sort of clean rules writing.


FOG is a lot of fun. so far no complaints with how the game plays, other than a number of confusing rules sections that have led not so much to arguments but more of the what exactly does that mean kind of them. so far, my guys like it very much.

[philqw78]

This is a good example of a heavy bombard. As you can see, it would take a fair bit to pivot it.

http://bp1.blogger.com/_acFJVl7wNlQ/Rgi ... ombard.jpg

Maybe just push it with your little finger?

[NicktheLemming]

This is a good example of a heavy bombard. As you can see, it would take a fair bit to pivot it.

http://bp1.blogger.com/_acFJVl7wNlQ/Rgi ... ombard.jpg

Maybe just push it with your little finger?

Not if it's glued to the table. :p

[flameberge]

The -1 to CT from being shot at by artillery is quite nice nice when you have enough shooters (such as Longbowmen) to get the 2 hits needed to force a test on any BG of 4 or more bases.

2 hits is not enough on a BG counting as 8 bases or greater as you need to cause 1 per 3 to force a test.

Battle group size doesn't matter. You are required to make a cohesion test if you suffer 2 hits and are shot at by artillery (wether the artillery hit or not).

[nikgaukroger]

Are you?

Learn something every day

What was the relevance of the BG size then?

[Luddite]

The -1 to CT from being shot at by artillery is quite nice nice when you have enough shooters (such as Longbowmen) to get the 2 hits needed to force a test on any BG of 4 or more bases.

2 hits is not enough on a BG counting as 8 bases or greater as you need to cause 1 per 3 to force a test.

Battle group size doesn't matter. You are required to make a cohesion test if you suffer 2 hits and are shot at by artillery (wether the artillery hit or not).

Eh?

I thought it was >=1 hit per 2 bases from shooting, not a flat 2 from artillery!

Have i been doing it wrong?
Can i get a page ref for that rule Flameberge?

[Draka]

On page 112, under reasons for a cohesion test, it states:

"At least 2 shooting hits if shot at by artillery (whether or not the artillery scored the hits)."

Just 2 hits - the actual 2 hits could be from any shooting scored that phase.

[SirGarnet]

Sorry, I should have quoted the rules with my comment. The relevance of mentioning BG size is that you need 2 hits at most to benefit from the Arty, but only need 1 for BGs smaller than 4 bases (such as vs. other Arty, or Elephants).

[Dakadave]

I play FOW and now FOG and I have to say that Luddites comments are without much merit.To have what you say happened to the British troopers you would have had to have either some incredible dice luck or you were playing the rules wrong.You cant stormtrooper when you assault-were the Brits pinned?-did they even fire at the Germans?Too take that one isolated instance as proof of the worst WW2 game ever(I highly disagree-they arent the most detailed and have a high level of abstraction at times-but are very playable and fun with reasonably historical results)I suppose what happened to me in my first game of FOG is proof that these are the worst ancients rules ever.I had 3 battlegroups of average offensive spear with 2 generals attached completely routed and destroyed -without causing casualties or disorder- by 2 BGs of Knights.We all know that Spear was the defense against the knight so this just proves the game is fundamentally flawed...see my point.

[Luddite]

I play FOW and now FOG and I have to say that Luddites comments are without much merit.

Cheers

To have what you say happened to the British troopers you would have had to have either some incredible dice luck or you were playing the rules wrong.

The dice were average, the Germans made their 'armour saves'. We played the rules right.

You cant stormtrooper when you assault

No but you stormtrooper when you move, even up steep rocky Meditteranean hills. Stormtroopper moves? Space Marine jet packs more like...

-were the Brits pinned?-

No. the Gemrans barely fired a shot. they were too busy leaping up the mountain like supermen.

did they even fire at the Germans?

The Brits shot everything they had (1 rifle/MG platoon + 1 HMG section & 1 mortar section) at the advancing Nazi Ubermensch. It didn't even slow them down, and they had 36" of terrain to cross.

that one isolated instance as proof of the worst WW2 game ever

This wasn't 'one incident' is was the 'straw that broke the camel's back' for us, after a series of frankly daft rules dynamics that totally fail to represent the flow of WWII battles...

(I highly disagree-they arent the most detailed and have a high level of abstraction at times-but are very playable and fun with reasonably historical results)

Yes they are playable but they do not produce 'historical' results.

I suppose what happened to me in my first game of FOG is proof that these are the worst ancients rules ever.I had 3 battlegroups of average offensive spear with 2 generals attached completely routed and destroyed -without causing casualties or disorder- by 2 BGs of Knights.We all know that Spear was the defense against the knight so this just proves the game is fundamentally flawed...see my point.

No, not really. ANY game rules will produce random results occasionally. Historically, charging knights did smash spearlines, heck they could even ride down formed bowmen...there's no accounting for dice ( )

FoW however, consistently produced mad results for us. A German platoon attacking uphill into a defended British position should have taken significant casualties...instead they simply stormed up (over 4 turns of movement), frontally assaulted and swept the position aside without casualties. Ahistorical tosh.

In my opinion. (Ahh...the trumping caveat )

Now then, so far, FoG has produced nothing but expected historical results for us.

Every troop type works the way we expect them to (according to the historical sources), and using the historical tactics for each army seems to achieve successes attested to in the historical accounts (not barring the ultimate leveller...'i rolled HOW many '1's'?!?)

In FoG, French knights assaulting the front of English longbowmen behind stakes are pretty much guaranteed to by crying 'why! ALL our ranks are broke!...' barring a hideously improbably series of 6's and 1's...

Its a very good 'game' and seems to produce historical results too which is really jolly satisfying...