Slitherine

Being a relatively recent convert from DBM, I notice that at 800 points FOG armies are quite a bit bigger than DBM 400 points. This means we all need to paint extra figures. Also we struggle to get through an 800 point game in 3 hours. However, at 600 points armies are more comparable to DBM 400 points and we are more likely to get results in 3 hours. What drove the decision to go for 800 points?

Richard

I rarely have games where either army fails to rout within 3 hours and a half. Usually, when it does happen it's because one or both players are dicking around (slowly) with skirmishers trying to gain a clear advantage before committing their strike force (if they have one) for the finishing blow. Other than making the table smaller, there is no solution for that particular problem irrespective of number of points or ruleset.

Julian

Hi Richard,

I suspect it was partly a case of the first comp was 800 and we are unimaginative dullards

That said, there are competitions at other points levels.

It is a bit of a shame that you do tend to need extra figures to make up 800 points from a 400 point DBM army. I've some armies that I painted up specifically to be 400 point DBM and end up adding in BGs in a different painting style to make up the numbers.

G

800 points is the usual 15mm singles point total, however there are tournaments run at different totals. For instance, on the Thursday at Historicon we will be running at 650 point event (600 for 25mm).

I have found that an 800 point FoG army is pretty similar in size to a 400 point DBM army. The difference comes from the fact that I have needed a few more of some bases and a few less of others. Particularly annoying for troop types that one might take only a couple bases of in a DBM army, but that require 6-8 bases for a FoG BG.

Marc

Just a thought, but in DBM a Reg Bd(O) costs 7 points. And is widely regarded as the bench mark for all other troop types to be considered against (i.e. a Roman Legionary)

In FoG an Armoured, Drilled, Heavy Foot, Impact Foot, Skilled Swordsmen costs 14 points (i.e. a Roman Legionary). Since DBM was normally played at 400 points then....

Personally, I quite like 800 points. I think it offers enough to skirmishers and also solid bodies of troops, encouraging a wide variery of armies. Others (including Tim Porter who is actually attempting to prove it) has put forward the belief that more points makes an army rout more likely to occur as there are more troops to "get at".

Looking at statistics from the Northern Doubles then we usually get about a 60% finish rate with doubles at 900 points. If done as singles this would undoubtedly increase (as the arguments would decrease) to possibly as much as 70%. Haven't done any detailed analysis on singles at 800 points, but it is difficult to compare like with like as people do play differently depending on the tournament and what round it is.

Last round at Britcon will produce more draws than the first round for example, despite having exactly the same players and exactly the same armies. Similarly, most people play "faster and looser" at club games than at tournaments and also more freely at smaller tournaments than the bigger more prestigious events.

Just my thoughts. Since I now pretty much have all my armies upto 800 points of FoG, with some toys being put out to pasture (i.e. Battle Wagons, Irr Bw(I) etc, etc) then I would be forced to murder somebody if they then made the games 900 points.

So how many turns should we expect to get through in a 3 hour game to get a result? I'm not sure if we are playing too slowly or "dicking around" (to quote previous author ).
RIchard

Trouble is though Dave in DBM it's a real luxury to deploy those Bd(O) two deep. In FOG it's pretty risky not to. So on a six by four table there's more room on the flanks. I don't mind that for, say, Rome vs Parthia there should be a fair chance of wide open spaces. But I've found the Persia vs Greece battles I've had have too much open space.

I think a lot of it was to do with taking all the armoured immortals and hoplites, making for a small army.

grahambriggs wrote:Trouble is though Dave in DBM it's a real luxury to deploy those Bd(O) two deep. In FOG it's pretty risky not to. So on a six by four table there's more room on the flanks. I don't mind that for, say, Rome vs Parthia there should be a fair chance of wide open spaces. But I've found the Persia vs Greece battles I've had have too much open space.

Conversely it's harder to take advantage of those open spaces - less extremes of movement and no single
element of LH causing havoc when they get behind the line.

900 points for singles (in 15mm anyway) is the discerning players choice

nikgaukroger wrote:900 points for singles (in 15mm anyway) is the discerning players choice

Have you asked one Nik?

I'm fairly discerning
900 points means more knights - luvvly jubbly!

richafricanus wrote:So how many turns should we expect to get through in a 3 hour game to get a result? I'm not sure if we are playing too slowly or "dicking around" (to quote previous author ).
RIchard

That'll be me!

You can play 20 turns and still not get a result if one or both parties don't want to take risks (happened to me playing Andalusians with my Free Company). It can be over in 6 turns if both are homicidal maniacs.

Most of my games are over in 8 turns or so but then again I use aggresive tactics and, increasingly, I am minimizing the number of skirmishers (and hence the "dicking around" phase) to the strict minimum necessary to deliver my shock troops to their targets.

If both players are reasonably familiar with the rules you should be able to get a turn done in 15 minutes. Another problem can be set-up where some players take for ever to choose terrain and place it.

Julian

jlopez wrote:

richafricanus wrote:So how many turns should we expect to get through in a 3 hour game to get a result? I'm not sure if we are playing too slowly or "dicking around" (to quote previous author ).
RIchard

That'll be me!

You can play 20 turns and still not get a result if one or both parties don't want to take risks (happened to me playing Andalusians with my Free Company). It can be over in 6 turns if both are homicidal maniacs.

Most of my games are over in 8 turns or so but then again I use aggresive tactics and, increasingly, I am minimizing the number of skirmishers (and hence the "dicking around" phase) to the strict minimum necessary to deliver my shock troops to their targets.

If both players are reasonably familiar with the rules you should be able to get a turn done in 15 minutes. Another problem can be set-up where some players take for ever to choose terrain and place it.

Julian

Out of curiosity, do you think it is 15 minutes per player turn or 15 minutes for both player turns combined? If it's the former, that's still only 7 turns in a 3 1/2 hour game. Also, are your games over in 8 turns with an army fully broken or is it just clear at that point which army is definitely losing? Are you including time for the necessity to hunt down a last bg to break that others have mentioned as being an issue?

Chris

batesmotel wrote:

jlopez wrote:

richafricanus wrote:So how many turns should we expect to get through in a 3 hour game to get a result? I'm not sure if we are playing too slowly or "dicking around" (to quote previous author ).
RIchard

That'll be me!

You can play 20 turns and still not get a result if one or both parties don't want to take risks (happened to me playing Andalusians with my Free Company). It can be over in 6 turns if both are homicidal maniacs.

Most of my games are over in 8 turns or so but then again I use aggresive tactics and, increasingly, I am minimizing the number of skirmishers (and hence the "dicking around" phase) to the strict minimum necessary to deliver my shock troops to their targets.

If both players are reasonably familiar with the rules you should be able to get a turn done in 15 minutes. Another problem can be set-up where some players take for ever to choose terrain and place it.

Julian

Out of curiosity, do you think it is 15 minutes per player turn or 15 minutes for both player turns combined? If it's the former, that's still only 7 turns in a 3 1/2 hour game. Also, are your games over in 8 turns with an army fully broken or is it just clear at that point which army is definitely losing? Are you including time for the necessity to hunt down a last bg to break that others have mentioned as being an issue?

Chris

15 minutes for both players. The games are definitely over and there's blood all over the carpet. Again, this assumes my opponent is playing to win and isn't playing not to lose. If the latter, a bit of experience and a good army design are sufficient to avoid an army rout and as you say you can end up fruitlessly chasing that last skirmish BG needed to clinch the game.

Julian