Slitherine

Hi all,

Currently working through the rulebook after DBM drove me from Ancients many years ago. My 15mm Punic Wars armies are slowly being added to again

Anyway, couple of questions and apologies if the answers are elsewhere in the forums:

1. It's not possible to break a unit with one charge? As cohesion can can only drop 2 levels I can't see how a unit could be swept away unless it's disrupted first.

2. How are things like skirmishers who work in close support of cavalry work under these rules? e.g. Spanish.

3. As I've got Mid-Republic Romans I'm still a little unsure on the representation of the 3 lines. I understand that the whole Hastati/Principes thing is factored in so effectively a BG covers them both, but the points system in he lists still seems to be set for separate BGs of Hastati and Principes? Just seems funny to me...

4. How do the rules represent a battleline gradually being pushed back?

Have enjoyed reading the rules and it is had rekindled my Ancient interest so really looking forward to a first game.

Cheers

Andy

[quote="1. It's not possible to break a unit with one charge? As cohesion can can only drop 2 levels I can't see how a unit could be swept away unless it's disrupted first.

2. How are things like skirmishers who work in close support of cavalry work under these rules? e.g. Spanish.

3. As I've got Mid-Republic Romans ... but the points system in he lists still seems to be set for separate BGs of Hastati and Principes? Just seems funny to me...4. How do the rules represent a battleline gradually being pushed back?

1. It is possible, but rare. If a BG was charged in flank or rear it drops one cohesion level. If it were then also hit frontally and dropped two levels it would break.
2. LF doesn't combine in BGs w LH, but we've found skirmishers to work very well in the game once you catch on to them...tho once they've done their 'cover the heavies' or 'tempt the enemy' or 'chuck at the enemy', they don't have a lot to do. They can hang up some enemy BG whilst LH tries to work flanks.
3. H & P form one BG: 1 BG of 2H + 2P, a second BG of 2H + 2P, and a BG of 2T plus some LF in a BG in front.
4. BLs don't move back...there is no recoil or such...BG can rout and bolster and reform further back, but no gradual push in the game.

CountBelisarius wrote: 1. It's not possible to break a unit with one charge? As cohesion can can only drop 2 levels I can't see how a unit could be swept away unless it's disrupted first.

A BG that is frontally hit whilst steady will never break at impact unless due to autobreak from base loss, but they can break in the melee phase of the same turn.

2. How are things like skirmishers who work in close support of cavalry work under these rules? e.g. Spanish.

There are no special rules for this, except, IIRC, LF may move as a battle line with mounted. Other foot cannot.

3. As I've got Mid-Republic Romans I'm still a little unsure on the representation of the 3 lines. I understand that the whole Hastati/Principes thing is factored in so effectively a BG covers them both, but the points system in he lists still seems to be set for separate BGs of Hastati and Principes? Just seems funny to me...

This is just to represent the ratio of troops in the legions. H to P to triarii to velites

4. How do the rules represent a battleline gradually being pushed back?

They do not. It simplifies things a lot. Also, allegedly, at the grounbd scale troops are on overdeep bases at this scale. This is ignored or used by the law makers deepending which way the wind is blowing.

Have enjoyed reading the rules and it is had rekindled my Ancient interest so really looking forward to a first game.

Cheers

Andy

Hope you enjoy it Andy. Where are you?

philqw78 wrote:

CountBelisarius wrote: 1. It's not possible to break a unit with one charge? As cohesion can can only drop 2 levels I can't see how a unit could be swept away unless it's disrupted first.

A BG that is frontally hit whilst steady will never break at impact unless due to autobreak from base loss, but they can break in the melee phase of the same turn.

I have had a steady BG of 12 pikemen break on impact - 2 cohesion drops from the combat, then another from seeing the general in the front rank killed.

You're just unlucky though Richard.

I suppose it would be possible as well from seeing others rout whilst disrupted during the impact phase

CountBelisarius wrote:2. How are things like skirmishers who work in close support of cavalry work under these rules? e.g. Spanish.

The main danger to LF skirmishers is Light Horse. If you have your LF in front of your cavalry, they can shoot enemy LH but if charged they will retreat through your cavalry. The enemy LH will stop 1 MU from your cavalry where they are then in danger of being caught when charged by the cavalry. Whilst the LF are in front of your cavalry they protect them from shooting.

So whilst there are no special rules, the combination of LF and cavalry can be an effective one.

As I have said many times skirmishers in fog are set up to do what skirmishers did, not to be some loin clothed super troop capable of killing generals and wrecking swiss pike blocks in the flank!

Romans set up to abstract above the detail and give the army benefit of solid rear support from trairii. Velites provide shield from missiles. Army feels right on table vs historical opponents - which is always our aim.

Hope you ejoy the game balance Andy.

Simon

CountBelisarius wrote:4. How do the rules represent a battleline gradually being pushed back?



Cheers

Andy

Hi Andy,

The rules do cover a bit of this. For example, you can drive back skirmishers by charging them. There's also a rule to make mounted break off from steady foot, so the foot sloggers can push them back in time. It is also possible to trurn troops around to retreat before close combat is joined.

However, there isn't a 'recoil' out of combat as such.

Regards

Graham

philqw78 wrote:

CountBelisarius wrote: 1. It's not possible to break a unit with one charge? As cohesion can can only drop 2 levels I can't see how a unit could be swept away unless it's disrupted first.

A BG that is frontally hit whilst steady will never break at impact unless due to autobreak from base loss, but they can break in the melee phase of the same turn.

2. How are things like skirmishers who work in close support of cavalry work under these rules? e.g. Spanish.

There are no special rules for this, except, IIRC, LF may move as a battle line with mounted. Other foot cannot.

3. As I've got Mid-Republic Romans I'm still a little unsure on the representation of the 3 lines. I understand that the whole Hastati/Principes thing is factored in so effectively a BG covers them both, but the points system in he lists still seems to be set for separate BGs of Hastati and Principes? Just seems funny to me...

This is just to represent the ratio of troops in the legions. H to P to triarii to velites

4. How do the rules represent a battleline gradually being pushed back?

They do not. It simplifies things a lot. Also, allegedly, at the grounbd scale troops are on overdeep bases at this scale. This is ignored or used by the law makers deepending which way the wind is blowing.

Have enjoyed reading the rules and it is had rekindled my Ancient interest so really looking forward to a first game.

Cheers

Andy

Hope you enjoy it Andy. Where are you?

Hi,

Thanks for the feedback. Makes a little more sense. Can see that it IS possible to break a unit in a turn. My comments re the Hastati/Principes is that the list gives options for armoured and protected. I see the latter being the Hastati and that therefore you would have two separate BGs? Or am I trying to be too literal in wanting the 3 line effect. If you had a BG of combined H and P front and back you would have two armour types? Not sure I'm making sense here, getting a bit tired

Maybe will reserve judgment until I've played.

I'm based in Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK by the way so not sure on the local support for the rules?

Cheers again

Andy

You will note that the HF impact foot, swordsman BGs are described as "Hastati and Principes" therefore contain both lines. The difference in protection ratings is to represent varying degrees of equipment in the army. Each BG must consist of troops uniformly equipped. You are not allowed to mix protected bases with armored bases in the same BG.

gozerius wrote:You will note that the HF impact foot, swordsman BGs are described as "Hastati and Principes" therefore contain both lines. The difference in protection ratings is to represent varying degrees of equipment in the army. Each BG must consist of troops uniformly equipped. You are not allowed to mix protected bases with armored bases in the same BG.

Essentially the hastati/principes BGs are graded for the overall effect of the 2 lines. You can choose whether you feel this is best represented by grading them all as Protected or all as Armoured.

Even the smalled permitted hastati/principes BG represents approximately 1000 men - i.e. 3 maniples of hastati and 3 maniples of principes. These are assumed to be in chequerboard within the BG but the scale of representation is such that visually representing them (or explicitly representing the maniples under the rules) is below the level of representation.

rbodleyscott wrote:

gozerius wrote:You will note that the HF impact foot, swordsman BGs are described as "Hastati and Principes" therefore contain both lines. The difference in protection ratings is to represent varying degrees of equipment in the army. Each BG must consist of troops uniformly equipped. You are not allowed to mix protected bases with armored bases in the same BG.

Essentially the hastati/principes BGs are graded for the overall effect of the 2 lines. You can choose whether you feel this is best represented by grading them all as Protected or all as Armoured.

Even the smalled permitted hastati/principes BG represents approximately 1000 men - i.e. 3 maniples of hastati and 3 maniples of principes. These are assumed to be in chequerboard within the BG but the scale of representation is such that visually representing them (or explicitly representing the maniples under the rules) is below the level of representation.

maybe I should just go the 6mm route with 28mm bases and have the visual representation as well!

but that way lies madness...

thanks

Andy

CountBelisarius wrote:

rbodleyscott wrote:

gozerius wrote:You will note that the HF impact foot, swordsman BGs are described as "Hastati and Principes" therefore contain both lines. The difference in protection ratings is to represent varying degrees of equipment in the army. Each BG must consist of troops uniformly equipped. You are not allowed to mix protected bases with armored bases in the same BG.

Essentially the hastati/principes BGs are graded for the overall effect of the 2 lines. You can choose whether you feel this is best represented by grading them all as Protected or all as Armoured.

Even the smalled permitted hastati/principes BG represents approximately 1000 men - i.e. 3 maniples of hastati and 3 maniples of principes. These are assumed to be in chequerboard within the BG but the scale of representation is such that visually representing them (or explicitly representing the maniples under the rules) is below the level of representation.

maybe I should just go the 6mm route with 28mm bases and have the visual representation as well!

but that way lies madness...

I think it's a great idea, but you may limit your number of potential opponents as not very many people have 6mm armies, especially not on 28mm bases.

Use 6mm figures and base them for 15mm, you have the advantage of a mass look on the 'accepted scale'.

Works for me anyway

maybe I should just go the 6mm route with 28mm bases and have the visual representation as well!

but that way lies madness...

thanks

Andy

Well my 6mm pikeman 16 ranks beep look the business ... go for it.

there are quite a few FOG players around Newcastle ...check out the Brigantes club in the area for starters (try www.bhgs.co.uk for contact point). Robbo and co, can't be too far from you, and they are great fun to game with.

Si

but better to drink with