Slitherine

I feel very strongly that the Initative Roll already confers a large advantage to the winning player but in a report from the team event in Lisbon I just found out that they calling time and then playing to the end on the Initiative Players turn (as appossed to finishing the phase you are in as we do here in the US).

I object to this method for the reason that you are now giving the Player winning iniative another substantial benefit. This player can now in his final turn move units into places for shooting, charging, and threatening flanks that he would not move them into in any other phase ignoring the fact that he is leaving himself open to flank charges or opening gaps in his line because he knows in advance that the opponent gets no chance to respond.

Here in the US (with the exception of the one attempt at the IWF) we have done away with this ridiculous stop mechanism. When time is called you simply finish the phase you are currently playing. So if you are in maneuver phase you can make these silly moves but you stop there so do not gain any benefits. You may know time is getting short but just cannot take the chance of leaving a flank exposed as your opponent may get to his impact phase before time is called.

Before anyone chides me about the fairness of an equal number of turns....I am unconvinced that this has any bearing in FOG if both players are playing at a resonable pace.....This is (IMHO) a hold over from DBx and need to die a quiet death.

I repeat that it is disturbing to have a mechanism in place that encourages a player to make a move in his final turn that he would never make in an earlier turn. Please reconsider this practice.

Gino
SMAC

I would agree with Kal.. Finish what phase you are in, and let that be the end of it. Cut the cheese!

This was a problem in DBM as once time was called, if the phasing player was still in the manouvre phase then they could throw in some silly moves to try and get the extra casualties. Once you get beyond a few moves of actual fighting then any advantage from an extra move disappears, especially with simultaneous shooting and fighting.

The other problem with 'play to the end of the turn/pair of turns' was the result that games could overrun by a significant amount of time (I saw games run on for nearly an hour as both players got to try and maximise results). This places a huge burden on competition organisation as the late games still affect the draw as a swiss chess system is used.

My own preferred method was 'finish now unless you have actually started fighting in which case resolve all fights before stopping'. If you only got through three bounds in a 3-3.5 hour game then any draw is your own fault. My view was that a three hour game lasts three hours, not nearly four.

I don't see a reason to continue the turn sequence at the end of the allotted time in FoG. I haven't played in any competitions yet, but will get round to it eventually (once the kids are older and I can get out more often).

I too agree that, in competition games, the game should finish at the end of the phase when time is called.

While happy to offer personal opinion .... that one is actually down to the comp organisers view. We only say a game ends when and army routs or when time runs out. I am happy to finish at the end of the phase personally as I am finding the equal number of goes is less important in FOG. I also prefer rendom finishes.

As for PB initiative .. I find its not a huge advantage either way in FOG. That is why we made sure he who deployed first moved first etc. It has cancelled out the huge effects that existed in DBM. I now find there is no one answer - it depends what army I am using.

Sometimes I prefer to lose initiative and move first - mu Spartans perfer this.
Other times I prefer to win it and go second - my Parthians prefer this.

Thus I quite like it now as it is all part of army design and having a masterplan. Gino perhaps you are using an army where it matters a lot - in which case go for an IC and lots of LH in order to win it. But I think its not a general pattern at all.

Si

shall wrote: Gino perhaps you are using an army where it matters a lot - in which case go for an IC and lots of LH in order to win it. But I think its not a general pattern at all.

Si

Si,
I too argree that there are ups and down sides to losing / winning PBI. When you get to pick the battle feild, eliminate most terrain choices, AND get a free move without consequences at the end of the game you are putting alot of weight to a single Die roll. My point is not against the RAW benefits to PBI winners but to pile on another (albeit by individual event organizers) is just critical mass. (IMHO).

I would like to see something along the lines of allowing the non PBI player more terrain choices (particularly where already limited as in the steppes) perhaps alternate choices, etc.

Gino
SMAC

shall wrote:While happy to offer personal opinion .... that one is actually down to the comp organisers view. We only say a game ends when and army routs or when time runs out. I am happy to finish at the end of the phase personally as I am finding the equal number of goes is less important in FOG. I also prefer rendom finishes.

As for PB initiative .. I find its not a huge advantage either way in FOG. That is why we made sure he who deployed first moved first etc. It has cancelled out the huge effects that existed in DBM. I now find there is no one answer - it depends what army I am using.

Sometimes I prefer to lose initiative and move first - mu Spartans perfer this.
Other times I prefer to win it and go second - my Parthians prefer this.

Thus I quite like it now as it is all part of army design and having a masterplan. Gino perhaps you are using an army where it matters a lot - in which case go for an IC and lots of LH in order to win it. But I think its not a general pattern at all.

Si

Just finished the Halifax bit of the Northern Doubles. When time was called that was it finished in movement phase, I'm afried for my opionon I like the system were we play equal moves just seems right to me. But to be honest it makes no real difference to the game.

As to PBI I would rarther have the terrian choice so I go with IC and 25 bases of LH, other people such as Dave R who use's Horse Archer armies also would rather move first its a personal thing.

[quote="david53"][quote="shall"] When time was called that was it finished in movement phase, I'm afried for my opionon I like the system were we play equal moves just seems right to me. But to be honest it makes no real difference to the game.[quote]

No Difference???? Have you had no one make a charge that you have been preventing them from doing beacuse they know you will flank them next turn...Or run up to shoot something that they normally would not do because it or another troop would run them down?

If you think it through....there are many examples of moves that you would not make all game that you can suddenly make because you know the opponent does not get a chance to respond.

Gino
SMAC

kal5056 wrote: I would like to see something along the lines of allowing the non PBI player more terrain choices (particularly where already limited as in the steppes) perhaps alternate choices, etc.

Gino
SMAC

Just wondered where this free move is.

By wining the terrian you go second, therefore when time in most events the player who went second moves last whats the problum with that seems fair to me.

You see I fear your arguement is not about any moves but about the terrian choice. You want more choice if your opponent picks Steppes is that it.

Weres your reasioning behind you wanting more terrian just cause you do would'nt that defeat the whole point of the player trying to get a battlefield he wants. A battlefield he wants by spending points when you don't spend any extra but get to chose more terrian seems a tad unfair to me.

kal5056 wrote:

david53 wrote:

shall wrote: When time was called that was it finished in movement phase, I'm afried for my opionon I like the system were we play equal moves just seems right to me. But to be honest it makes no real difference to the game.

It works both ways have'nt you had something you could do but could'nt cause was called and that was that.

Its an arugement that works for both ways and TBH I feel like mose of the large events here have picked the right way.

If it was as bad as you say why are all the big events run that way surely many people better than me have thought it through and come up with this system.

Game end rules are very much up to tournament organisers.

The Northern League end rule in DBM used to be 'whistle stop' but finish combat if you have started it. For FoG finish the current phase is about the same.

The main reason for this type of ending in the Northern Leagues has nothing to do with balance or fairness, it is to simplify the organisation of the event. If you allow a pair of turns to complete then you will potentially have games still running 20 or more minutes after last bound. That is not a good thing at a one day tournament, it means players drift off and makes clearing the venue more difficult.

As a FoG army can be beaten at the end of any phase there is not much in it really.

david53 wrote:

kal5056 wrote:

david53 wrote:

Most of the UK and Euro Events may be run that way but not on this side of the pond. Over here we only played one tourney (TMK) this way and it was roundly unpopular. We only have a couple of folks over here that think "If the Brits do it that way it muct be right." Most of us can think for ourselves.

You have confused 2 points on which I have opinions. I dislike the fact that terrain can de dictated to such an extent that any resonable general would have just choosen not to attach....ie a heavy foot army chasing a light horse army around the steppes.... I was then saying that this UK time stop method simply put more power to winning PBI.

Gino
SMAC

david53 wrote:

shall wrote: When time was called that was it finished in movement phase, I'm afried for my opionon I like the system were we play equal moves just seems right to me. But to be honest it makes no real difference to the game.

No Difference???? Have you had no one make a charge that you have been preventing them from doing beacuse they know you will flank them next turn...Or run up to shoot something that they normally would not do because it or another troop would run them down?

If you could flank them next turn it probably means he can't break the target in one turn (as otherwise he would probably pursue out of range anyway). Accordingly there is a pretty good chance that the charge will not have any (result changing) effect anyway. The shooting might be more problematic, but again unless the target is already in a bad shape (in which case I might be tempted to move and shoot at them anyway, even if that causes some danger to my BG) it's unlikely to have any effect that will influence the final result.

Ghaznavid wrote:

david53 wrote:

shall wrote: When time was called that was it finished in movement phase, I'm afried for my opionon I like the system were we play equal moves just seems right to me. But to be honest it makes no real difference to the game.

No Difference???? Have you had no one make a charge that you have been preventing them from doing beacuse they know you will flank them next turn...Or run up to shoot something that they normally would not do because it or another troop would run them down?

If you could flank them next turn it probably means he can't break the target in one turn (as otherwise he would probably pursue out of range anyway). Accordingly there is a pretty good chance that the charge will not have any (result changing) effect anyway. The shooting might be more problematic, but again unless the target is already in a bad shape (in which case I might be tempted to move and shoot at them anyway, even if that causes some danger to my BG) it's unlikely to have any effect that will influence the final result.

The point is that getting an even number of turns probably makes little difference to the 'fairness' of the game.

If just one more turn would have 'won' you the game then perhaps that could have been achieved simply by playing a little bit faster?
I am still finiding that players get into a DBM style mindset that as the game progresses it must slow down and as a result they end up sitting there doing nothing or almost nothing for significant amounts of time later in the game. Pointing out what is left to move and that there is nothing else they can do seems to get things moving. I have managed turns in the end game that take perhaps 3 minutse per side.

In DBM there was a significant advantage to being the phasing player. In DBMM there is a huge advantage to the phasing player. This is not IMO the case in FoG. Once your troops are in melee then most of the time it is just a case of which player's bound one BG will break in. I have played in comps where an even number of turns are played and it is often the case that the last players turn boils down to "well there is nothing significant I can do appart from getting this bow shot here and the we just roll the melee dice".

Gino wrote:Yo...... I dislike the fact that terrain can de dictated to such an extent that any resonable general would have just choosen not to attack....ie a heavy foot army chasing a light horse army around the steppes....

Or you could change it the other way and have too much terrain so that the mounted are disadvantaged.

Hi all,
As one of the three who organisers the Northern Doubles League (EX- Northern DBM League).
We but the whistle stop in to stop the “LAST BOUND SUICIDE ATTACKS” where you can safely commit elements (especially generals elements) and knowing that you did not have to roll a dice if your generals where killed to see if that command was broken.
Also it could be 10 to 20 minis after the last bound was called before you got the score sheets in to do the next round and it stops the SLOW PLAY to stop him stretch out the last few minutes to prevent the opponent getting in one more bound and this as worked very well for the last four or five year in the NDBML.

I must admit to being surprised playing the NDBML game this weekend when time stopped on the current combat I think.

I actually wanted my opponent to have his turn (as he won PBI) as I had a BG of his disrupted and fighting in 2 directions so I wanted the chance to fragment or break it.

It would be useful for an immediate stop when the breaks between games are short. I have struggled to complete a turn, pack my troops up, pop to the loo, and grab food in the time available.

I always thought that letting the person with PBI complete their last turn was for the sake of fairness but others have highlighted that they get their terrain and second placement of troops as it is.

Rob

The last turn charge may have an effect. Win Impact - Fail Test, Disrupted. Win Melee - fail test, Fragmented. 1 Break Point. Worth it if you have a POA on either.

Now the odds may well be against failing both tests so you wouldn't try the charge if the enemy had something which could pounce on your flank.

Knowing you have a move to which the enemy cannot respond encourages this sort of ahistorical attempt at points grabbing.

The clincher for a competition organiser is the potential for many late results cutting into score calculating time and visits to the trade stands for players.

Just wondered where this free move is.

By wining the terrian you go second, therefore when time in most events the player who went second moves last whats the problum with that seems fair to me.

I don't think Gino really means FREE.

What he means is you can make a move without worrying about the future consequences ... e.g. chuck in things that have flanks ahnging out knowing there is no next move for you to get creamed.

Si

"LAST BOUND SUICIDE ATTACKS” like you use to get in DBM games