Slitherine

tyronec wrote: ↑Wed Aug 24, 2022 6:06 am Victory condition - the strength of one or more armies is below 1200 FP, with the kingdom winning whose lowest strength army being the highest among all the kingdoms.

Elimination of armies
If the strength of an army at the end of a round is below 1200 FP, it will be eliminated and irrevocably removed from the map and the campaign.

Seem to contradict each other. If an army were eliminated and the game ended it would be very possible that the faction that lost the army would be the winner.

True, good point. Since the campaign ends as soon as one army is below 1200 FP, it wouldn't need to be eliminated. (Of course, eliminated armies are included when determining the winner, so the faction with the eliminated army would never win anyway.) Since I'd like to keep that "Elimination of armies" language for future/generic use, I'll clarify the victory condition instead. Many thanks for input.

The campaign ends as soon as one of the following requirements is fulfilled upon the conclusion of a round:

• ...

• the strength of one or more armies is below 1200 FP, with the kingdom winning whose lowest strength army (including any eliminated armies) being the highest among all the kingdoms.

kronenblatt wrote: ↑Sun Mar 13, 2022 2:38 pm Overview

Two armies from different kingdoms that at the end of a round are located within each other's ZoC and/or have the same structure within their respective ZoCs will fight an "engagement" (another expression for and in the form of a Field of Glory II: Ancients game.

The engagement will in Field of Glory II: Ancients be set up as follows:

• Conquestu Britanniae II v1 module (downloaded in-game).

• Open Battle scenario.

• 24 turns turn limit.

• Wide (40 x 32) map size.

• Map type on the terrain as specified in Map terrain of engagements below.

• Each army's strength as force size, adjusted:
  • for any effects from the Tower or Signal Station, Fort, Fortress, Fort Ruins, and Town Ruins structures,
  • by -40 FP for the one of the two armies (if any) that has spent more MP than its opponent army that round, if at least one of the two armies in the engagement is located in a River hex (only if such hex has no structures), and
    • If both players have spent the same amount of MP, none of them will suffer the River penalty.
  • by -60 FP for each engagement that the army is fighting that round (for example, if fighting 1 engagement then -60 FP, if 2 engagements then -120 FP in each of the 2 engagements, if 3 engagements then -180 FP in each of the 3 engagements, etc.).

Just some clarification here, for that last line I have bolded, to me that reads that even one on one both armies receive a -60FP penalty whereas I think the intention is only to have a penalty when an army is fighting more than one opponent?

SpeedyCM wrote: ↑Thu Aug 25, 2022 4:49 am Just some clarification here, for that last line I have bolded, to me that reads that even one on one both armies receive a -60FP penalty whereas I think the intention is only to have a penalty when an army is fighting more than one opponent?

The way it's written is actually correct and intentional, in order to ensure that the final FP in a battle never exceeds 1600 FP for any army, despite positive modifiers from structures. (The game will automatically switch to 48x32 when going above 1600 FP, which I'd like to avoid.)

Even with the -60 FP penalty for all engagements a 1600 FP army in a fortress receiving a +80 FP bonus will still be 1620 FP.
It might be simpler to just mention in the Structure defensive bonus section that the bonuses are up to an army size maximum limit of 1600 FP.

SpeedyCM wrote: ↑Thu Aug 25, 2022 5:40 am Even with the -60 FP penalty for all engagements a 1600 FP army in a fortress receiving a +80 FP bonus will still be 1620 FP.
It might be simpler to just mention in the Structure defensive bonus section that the bonuses are up to an army size maximum limit of 1600 FP.

Good point: there should be an overall cap of 1600 FP, just in case. I’ll add that, thanks. The -60 FP adjustment per engagement is also deliberately linear to be easier to remember and derive; always multiply your number of engagements with -60 FP and apply to all your engagements.

Alternatively I think there is only one Fortress on the map we are playing, that being Navib in the north.
You could change that to a fort and simply remove the fortress section from the rules as unneeded.

SpeedyCM wrote: ↑Thu Aug 25, 2022 5:51 am Alternatively I think there is only one Fortress on the map we are playing, that being Navib in the north.
You could change that to a fort and simply remove the fortress section from the rules as unneeded.

That’ll involve work on the map and its file. (And I’ve already spent 1h yesterday evening changing the colour of one faction, from red to white, upon a player’s request, to make it more distinguishable between the factions).

So let’s just keep it at having that 1600 FP cap as change. Soon enough (with losses) that cap will lose relevance anyway.

For those who might be interested...

I've put together a Cyberboard module for this campaign which you might find helpful in tracking and planning moves.

The module can be downloaded from:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oaHsvI ... sp=sharing

The Cyberboard software can be found at:

https://cyberboard.brainiac.com/download.html

Karvon

I'm still missing Giacofa'93's PM. Has anyone in The West had any contact with him or submitted moves on his behalf?

kronenblatt wrote: ↑Sun Aug 28, 2022 5:10 am I'm still missing Giacofa'93's PM. Has anyone in The West had any contact with him or submitted moves on his behalf?

I included orders for his army with mine.

Karvon wrote: ↑Sun Aug 28, 2022 6:23 am

kronenblatt wrote: ↑Sun Aug 28, 2022 5:10 am I'm still missing Giacofa'93's PM. Has anyone in The West had any contact with him or submitted moves on his behalf?

I included orders for his army with mine.

Ah, great! Thanks for heads-up!

EDIT: Had moved army 2 one hex to much. Have now adjusted.
EDIT2: The provided instructions for army 26 were clearly not the intentional. So adhering to good faith, I've adjusted that accordingly, in the table above and the map below.

Engagement
1.1 Army 19 of The South (Aquae Sulis, RedPossum, 1540 FP) versus Army 25 of The West (Gobannium, Kashtronomical, 1500 FP). North European Agricultural. RedPossum sets up.

The engagement will in Field of Glory II: Ancients be set up as follows:

• Conquestu Britanniae II v1 module (downloaded in-game).

• Open Battle scenario.

• 24 turns turn limit.

• Wide (40 x 32) map size.

• Map type on the terrain as specified in Map terrain of engagements below.

• Each army's strength as force size, adjusted:
  • for any effects from the Tower or Signal Station, Fort, Fortress, Fort Ruins, and Town Ruins structures,
  • by -40 FP for the one of the two armies (if any) that has spent more MP than its opponent army that round, if at least one of the two armies in the engagement is located in a River hex (only if such hex has no structures), and
    • If both players have spent the same amount of MP, none of them will suffer the River penalty.
  • by -60 FP for each engagement that the army is fighting that round (for example, if fighting 1 engagement then -60 FP, if 2 engagements then -120 FP in each of the 2 engagements, if 3 engagements then -180 FP in each of the 3 engagements, etc.).
  • Force size is capped at 1600 FP.

• The player having spent the fewest MP that round normally sets up the engagement in-game.

• The engagement to be concluded within a four-week period, i.e., by September 25 at the latest.

• The winner, or the player having incurred the fewest casualties, reports the results in this thread.

Main armies

• The army of a fiefdom (i.e., controlled by a specific player, a “Knight") always uses its fiefdom's army list as its main army, independent of whether the Stronghold of such fiefdom is controlled by its kingdom or not.

Allies

• Armies within the same kingdom can all (if they want to) use each other's fiefdom army lists as allies, provided that the Stronghold of that fiefdom is controlled by the kingdom.
  • An army can not use the fiefdom army list from another kingdom as allies, even if controlling the Stronghold of that kingdom.

A question about ownership of roads.

Does the four kingdoms map show road ownership at the start of the game ?
Does road ownership change at all during the game, for example if you take a structure would your faction own the road from your kingdom up to it next turn ? Am thinking this could be too complicated to implement...

tyronec wrote: ↑Tue Aug 30, 2022 1:52 pm A question about ownership of roads.

Does the four kingdoms map show road ownership at the start of the game ?
Does road ownership change at all during the game, for example if you take a structure would your faction own the road from your kingdom up to it next turn ? Am thinking this could be too complicated to implement...

There's no road ownership or control per se.

But it the road runs between two structures that you control (or more correctly along your kingdom's lines of logistics), movement cost into that Road hex will be lower (1 MP). In all other cases, moving into a Road hex will cost 1.5 MP.

So control of structures as indicated on the map will imply current status of Road movement cost (which may or will change), but not visualise it explicitly.

Did this answer your question?

So if for example North took Virnconium, then the two roads in red would now cost West 1.5 MPs each instead of 1 MP ?

tyronec wrote: ↑Tue Aug 30, 2022 4:36 pm So if for example North took Virnconium, then the two roads in red would now cost West 1.5 MPs each instead of 1 MP ?

Yes. And furthermore, enemy armies' ZoCs can disrupt lines of logistics and make Roads cost 1.5 MP instead of 1 MP.

• Roads = 1 MP (along the kingdom's lines of logistics), 1.5 MP (otherwise)

• A kingdom's lines of logistics:
  • originate from its Court;
  • extend along Road hexes to other structures controlled by the kingdom for as long as no Road hex along the logistics line is "interrupted", i.e., within the ZoC of another kingdom's army or a non-controlled structure;
    • Fort Ruins and City Ruins do not count as non-controlled structures since they cannot be controlled and thus do not "interrupt" lines of logistics;
  • end at the controlled structures from where there are no further uninterrupted Road hexes to other controlled structures farther away.

OK, thanks. Understand now.

I just want to say in a non-spammy way that I enjoyed seeing the screenshots from Redpossum and would personally welcome seeing them from other players

Kashtronomical (Gobannium #25) defeats RedPossum (Aquae Sulis #19)
Score: 61-35

A battle that could have easily gone either way, but in the end Gobannium's small contingent of infantry held their ranks long enough for their horde of cavalry to turn the tide.

A screenshot of the battle just before it ended:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/ ... 2870683716

Given the likelihood of open terrain, I decided to invest heavily in cheap cavalry units. I also brought a few massed archers along with Gobannium's prized horse archers. My total cavalry count including light horse archers was around 20. I was a bit unpleasantly surprised to find a large forest to Aquae Sulis' right flank as well as a rough hill to their left. I chose to attack their left flank, taking a wide angle around the hill with hopes to surround and attack from behind. Aquae Sulis presented a long line of infantry, with numerous superior warbands, pictish spearman, and picked scots-irish. Their cavalry consisted of 2 cataphracts, 2 armoured light lance, and 4 javelin light cav.

The attack on the enemy left flank proved quite successful, as most of the enemy cavalry defending the hill found themselves stuck and quickly surrounded, and although my cavalry took archer fire from the hill, there were only about 4 light archers and I had plenty of reserve cavalry. However, Aquae Sulis' large contingent of infantry began to draw close to my small left flank which was finding themselves heavily outnumbered. Pressed for time, I decided to push harder with my cavalry, taking some risky dives into and around the hill. This was costly, but ultimately paid off, as my small left flank held steady just barely long enough against the waves of enemy infantry until my cavalry was able to penetrate the back lines. The defensive effort of my left flank was highlighted by the 1 cataphract unit from our Segontium allies that took the brunt of the assault and held out against 3 pictish spearman for several rounds until they auto-routed.

A great effort by Redpossum who consistently found ways to flank my units despite me thinking they were safe! I was quite nervous throughout the battle. Good game!