Slitherine

Navaronegun wrote:What scale are you utilizing for terrain and time?

Ground scale is based on 1 square = one quarter of maximum musket range.

Some scenarios are played to turn limits, some are not.

I think I was a bit unclear. Sorry, so a square is approximately 50m? And how many minutes per turn per side?

Navaronegun wrote:Sorry, so a square is approximately 50m?

Approximately, yes.

Navaronegun wrote:And how many minutes per turn per side?

The system is a top-down design, rather than a bottom-up design.

The default turn limit for the stand-alone games is 16 turns each, and most battles result in one side being defeated within that limit.

So each pair of turns effectively represents 1/16th of the duration of a battle.

Thank you very much for your detailed answer!

So terrain graphics for the various seasons are on my wishlist now. But great to hear that there will be different tiles for the various theatres of war.

Further thoughts or questions maybe later.

I wish the team the very best for this interesting project.

Schweinewitz wrote:So terrain graphics for the various seasons are on my wishlist now.

I should have mentioned that there are a lot of different crop tiles which cover the various seasons, but they don't have different terrain effects by default. However, you can apply an (invisible) dead ground overlay to designate crops tall enough to conceal infantry, like the corn that concealed the Swiss advance at Novara.

Ah, I see. I like the terrain graphics so far from what I can see in the screens, although I think that the units could need some more polishing. But that's just me.

More important is the gameplay, IMO. So: How are the victory conditions in the game? Must the fighting morale of the enemy be broken (when a larger part of his units are rooted) or victory hexes taken? (Or both?)

In the screens one can see that there are different levels of quality in the units, is there also unit morale or even an army morale?

quote"In the Thirty Years war campaign, factions include Bohemians, Holy Roman Empire/Catholic League, German Protestants, Danish, Swedish, Spanish, French.
The army lists for stand-alone games include one or more lists for each of these at different stages of the war.
Other peripheral factions may also be added, but I cannot confirm this at this stage."quote"

We need Bethlen Gabor's amy!!!

Schweinewitz wrote:More important is the gameplay, IMO. So: How are the victory conditions in the game? Must the fighting morale of the enemy be broken (when a larger part of his units are rooted) or victory hexes taken? (Or both?)

In most (but not all) scenarios the objective is to defeat the enemy army. In most scenarios an army will always break if it has lost (routed or destroyed) 60% of its initial strength, but can break at any point after losing 40% of its initial strength if the enemy has lost less than half as many %. For this calculation, larger units are worth more than small units.

In multiplayer games where one side is advantaged at the start, they need to defeat the enemy without suffering too many losses themselves.

In the screens one can see that there are different levels of quality in the units, is there also unit morale or even an army morale?

There are 2 aspects to morale:

1) A component of the troop quality of each unit is its Elan (the other being Experience). In some scenarios some units may start the scenario Disheartened or Demoralised, which will impact on their Quality for the battle. Sometimes (e.g. White Mountain, Lutter) the degree of demoralisation will depend on the difficulty level selected.

2) During the battle, morale is tracked by the unit's Cohesion level, which is either Steady, Disrupted, Fragmented or Broken (Routed). When bad things happen units must pass a test or drop one or more Cohesion levels.
Disrupted and Fragmented troops have a negative combat modifier - worse for Fragmented. In addition, Fragmented troops cannot charge and may break before contact if themselves charged.

Broken troops run away. Close combat opponents may pursue them, sometimes off the map. Troops that pursue off the map have a chance each turn of returning, and do not count as lost.

Providing they have not dropped cohesion in the previous turn, units have a small chance each turn of rallying and rising one cohesion level. Broken units that run off the map or fail to rally within a certain number of turns are dispersed beyond recall.

TheGrayMouser wrote:

In the Thirty Years war campaign, factions include Bohemians, Holy Roman Empire/Catholic League, German Protestants, Danish, Swedish, Spanish, French.
The army lists for stand-alone games include one or more lists for each of these at different stages of the war.
Other peripheral factions may also be added, but I cannot confirm this at this stage.

We need Bethlen Gabor's amy!!!

It is there among the as yet unlisted factions

It is quite hard to win with against an Imperial army though....

Thats ok , I like any army that keeps around heavily armoured gendarmes and horse achers at such a late date. (and with that being said I hope an Eastern expansion will some day be in the works , haha)
I have a little bit Don Quixote in me apparently.

rbodleyscott wrote:

Navaronegun wrote:Sorry, so a square is approximately 50m?

Approximately, yes.

Navaronegun wrote:And how many minutes per turn per side?

The system is a top-down design, rather than a bottom-up design.

The default turn limit for the stand-alone games is 16 turns each, and most battles result in one side being defeated within that limit.

So each pair of turns effectively represents 1/16th of the duration of a battle.

Gotcha, so bathtub-able. Excellent.

Nav

rbodleyscott wrote: ... However, you can apply an (invisible) dead ground overlay to designate crops tall enough to conceal infantry, like the corn that concealed the Swiss advance at Novara.

the last part caught my eye on several levels:
1. i fail to see how tall crops can hide a pike (18 foot long) formation's approach.
2. corn, being a new world crop, would be unlikely to have been introduced yet in 1513, not to mention that in italy, corn is harvested in early september, not early june.
3. i researched novara recently for a FOG scenario and don't recall that the swiss were able to sneak up on the french through tall crop concealment.

sorry for the pedantic part but i'm a details guy.

Is a unit's cohesion level impacted by events which occur to other units within the LOS of a unit?

Nav

fogman wrote: 2. corn, being a new world crop, would be unlikely to have been introduced yet in 1513, not to mention that in italy, corn is harvested in early september, not early june.

I think we don't speak of corn in the US-American sense of the word here but of European "corn": wheat, rye etc. The older types of grains could grow to a remarkable height, higher than our modern "standardised" stuff - during the 7YW battle of Kolin (June 1757) for example grain fields could very well be used to hide skirmishers and they provided excellent cover for whole larger units too. You might be right about the pikes though.

Hi,

will there be a demo or a video ?

Micha wrote:Hi,

will there be a demo or a video ?

In due course, yes.

Schweinewitz wrote:

fogman wrote: 2. corn, being a new world crop, would be unlikely to have been introduced yet in 1513, not to mention that in italy, corn is harvested in early september, not early june.

I think we don't speak of corn in the US-American sense of the word here but of European "corn": wheat, rye etc. The older types of grains could grow to a remarkable height, higher than our modern "standardised" stuff - during the 7YW battle of Kolin (June 1757) for example grain fields could very well be used to hide skirmishers and they provided excellent cover for whole larger units too. You might be right about the pikes though.

I had similar thoughts myself. However, dawn was only just breaking. Oman cites the detailed account of Giovio, book xi, p.223. Oman says "We are told that they marched by bypaths through fields of standing corn, which so hid them that when the enemy's artillery was hastily put into action, most of the balls went over their heads".

Of course perhaps Giovio was wrong, but I have given him the benefit of the doubt as he was a contemporary, being born in 1483, although he did not write till 30 years after the battle. Perhaps they trailed the pikes. The dust would not have been visible in the early dawn.

Anyway, for whatever reason, the French artillery had difficulty hitting them, which is the effect simulated.

Navaronegun wrote:Is a unit's cohesion level impacted by events which occur to other units within the LOS of a unit?

Not within LOS as that is a long way, but units must test if a unit breaks in an adjacent square.

A little question... is possible in game have an option to replace one the unit flag by a unit type icon??? all units have at least 2 flags... with one to know nation you can use 2nd to made easier know if is a cavalry unit or an infantry unit with no pikes... you know in flag you have the type icon (infantry, cavalry, arty)+special capabilities icons (shot, melee...) and even the unit quality using a colour in the flag, the idea is you dont need click over every unit to have the info... you only need see the battlefield to know what you face.

Terrain... well, i see more interesting if heavy units (like tercios unit type) are unable to enter in forest... for me these units are to fight in open and forest terrain and other rough terrain (village, orchad...) only avaliable for light infantry or med infantry, a way to protect them from cavalry charges.

rbodleyscott wrote:
I had similar thoughts myself. However, dawn was only just breaking. Oman cites the detailed account of Giovio, book xi, p.223. Oman says "We are told that they marched by bypaths through fields of standing corn, which so hid them that when the enemy's artillery was hastily put into action, most of the balls went over their heads".

Of course perhaps Giovio was wrong, but I have given him the benefit of the doubt as he was a contemporary, being born in 1483, although he did not write till 30 years after the battle. Perhaps they trailed the pikes. The dust would not have been visible in the early dawn.

Anyway, for whatever reason, the French artillery had difficulty hitting them, which is the effect simulated.

the most modern study, and only monograph on the subject, i know of is 'Novare: derniere victoire des fantassins suisses' by Olivier Bangerter (Economica 2011), a Swiss researcher who made extensive use of cantonal archives, including letters home from the combatants.