Slitherine

If counted right. The King has massed a sizeable army, 14/20

I don't seem to be able to find 4 bases of Scots cavalry. If any one has some spare in period bases can I borrow. Currently we have scots cavalry look rather like tarueg camels

I've put 'em in my box for you Nigel.

rayd wrote:I've put 'em in my box for you Nigel.

Thanks

A big, big "thank you" to Bob and the rest of the Oxford club for putting on an excellent day's gaming, and to my opponents, David B, Nigel, and Steve - well played, gentlemen. And on Patrick's behalf, to Jerry, Geoff, and David E (sorr, only just worked out who all of his opponents were).

In terms of the new rules, I think the armour POA will take some getting used to; the new >50% autobreak level for Average troops prolongs melees un-necessarily (and frustrates those of us who spent extra points on Superior troops); the new dragoon rules didn't come into play much (mainly because they were used historically, IMO); and the artillery rules also seemed to work (except the hitting mounted only on 5,6 bit, which is still too lethal when playing against Nigel "Whoops, another four 6s - what can I say?" Emsen).

I think the message from yesterday is that FoGR competition numbers may be declining, but it's far from dead yet.

RonanTheLibrarian wrote:A big, big "thank you" to Bob and the rest of the Oxford club for putting on an excellent day's gaming, and to my opponents, David B, Nigel, and Steve - well played, gentlemen.

In terms of the new rules, I think the armour POA will take some getting used to; the new >50% autobreak level for Average troops prolongs melees un-necessarily (and frustrates those of us who spent extra points on Superior troops); the new dragoon rules didn't come into play much (mainly because they were used historically, IMO); and the artillery rules also seemed to work (except the hitting mounted only on 5,6 bit, which is still too lethal when playing against Nigel "Whoops, another four 6s - what can I say?" Emsen).

I think the message from yesterday is that FoGR competition numbers may be declining, but it's far from dead yet.

Don't worry Brendan, my artillery was no near as jammy vs Tom. But, yes I will conceded, I was a bit jammy on some throws.

On averages breaking at sane point as superiors. I am in the school.of thought that all troops regardless of morale grade break at same point, just take longer (higher) or quicker (lower grade) to arrive at the point.

I think new system works with regards to superiors/elites.

The change in averages break points actually finally makes average armies viable.

Separately, thank you to Bob and Tom for an enjoyable day

I would like to thank all those FOG R players who were able to make it to our one day competition. Everyone was very friendly and seemed to enjoy the competition and playtesting the proposed rule changes. Ben will be reporting back on the views of the players.

The results are set out below: -
Oxford Round of The Southern League 2017
Place Player Number Player Name Army Opponent Score Total Score
Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 1 Round 2 Round 3
1 17 Geoff Punshon Later Royalist 14 16 9 13 25 18 56
2 9 Tim Porter Later Royalist 6 8 17 23 17 7 47
2 5 Ben Jones Scots Royalist 13 3 8 14 12 21 47
4 8 Keith Spedding Scots Covenanter 10 9 5 23 8 4 35
4 15 Nigel Emsen Scots Covenanter 7 4 3 10 13 12 35
5 10 Stephen Stead Later Royalist 8 6 18 2 19 13 34
5 7 Bruce Rollet Later Royalist 15 18 13 10 12 12 34
5 3 Tom Elsworth Parliament 11 5 15 18 8 8 34
9 13 Dene Green Later Royalist 5 11 7 6 16 8 30
10 4 Brendan Morrissey New Model Army 12 15 14 10 7 13 30
10 2 Jerry Bray Later Royalist 16 14 1 7 13 10 30
12 1 Paddy Bray Later Royalist 18 12 2 8 11 10 29
13 11 David Eggleston Early Royalist Cornish 3 13 16 7 4 16 27
13 12 David Burrows Parliament 4 1 6 10 9 8 27
15 18 Ray Boyles Scots Covenanter 1 7 10 12 8 7 27
16 14 Steve Holt Later Royalist 17 2 4 7 7 7 21
17 16 Patrick Morrissey Parliament 2 17 11 13 0 4 17
18 6 David Hewkin Later Royalist 9 10 12 2 1 12 15
195 190 190 575
Average score per round 21.67 21.11 21.11

The results above are based on the scores enter by the players. There was a problem with two players who did not check their scores. If that had occurred one of them would have been in 4th place.

Bob

nigelemsen wrote:Don't worry Brendan, my artillery was no near as jammy vs Tom. But, yes I will conceded, I was a bit jammy on some throws.

Not to mention that unit that magically went from column to line without disrupting, despite passing through a large body of highlanders!

RonanTheLibrarian wrote:

nigelemsen wrote:Don't worry Brendan, my artillery was no near as jammy vs Tom. But, yes I will conceded, I was a bit jammy on some throws.

Not to mention that unit that magically went from column to line without disrupting, despite passing through a large body of highlanders!

Expansion mechanics have always been the same. Magically? It had clear room to expand the elements from the front base... Fogx has no concept of troops flowing directly across to their final position. Which as you expect would have passed through the Highlander unit.

If I didn't think I was going to be able get my pike/shot in I wouldn't have pushed that Highlander unit out to tempt you in...

In the end you chose to charge your horse into my pike/shot instead of extracting

I have posted it elsewhere but would like to post it here as it bears repeating.

Huge thanks to the organisers and players for having this competition play test the proposals we have been working on - the feedback will be invaluable in helping us decide what the final content of the update will be.

Really appreciate it

3 battle reports now posted on my site - link in the "reports" section of this forum