Smaller and Quicker Games

[peter777]

One common request in Australia how can we make FoG quicker to play? Many players consider 3+ hours for a game is to long.

FoG looks best at 800pts as it has more BGs, more troop variatey and more troops etc.... but how can this same feel be translated into 500-600pts games on smaller tables played in less than 2hours?

How can we create an alternate version of 15mm FoG that works at say 600pts, can be played in 2 hours and still has all the colour and variety of a 800pts game?


Peter

[david53]

One common request in Australia how can we make FoG quicker to play? Many players consider 3+ hours for a game is to long.

FoG looks best at 800pts as it has more BGs, more troop variatey and more troops etc.... but how can this same feel be translated into 500-600pts games on smaller tables played in less than 2hours?

How can we create an alternate version of 15mm FoG that works at say 600pts, can be played in 2 hours and still has all the colour and variety of a 800pts game?


Peter

Seems to work well at 650 points 2 and half hours, there are quite a few tournements un UK at this level and its as good fun as 800 points.

[Strategos69]

The first thing you should do is cutting down the table size. Your table should be 1.5 meters by 1 meter (5" by 3" in Imperial?) but keep the deployment distances described in the book. There can be shooting from the first turn and that feels better if you want a quicker game. The second thing I would do is using 40% of BG instead of 50% dead or current attrition points -3. If you apply the new movement distances for troops as in the beta, the game will be faster too.

[Robert241167]

Hi Peter

Just to add to what Dave said, Hammy set up a few 650 point competitions which are very well attended.

The basics are:

- table size is 5 foot by 3 foot
- non-compulsory terrain picks are 2-3
- troops can deploy their normal distance in from their table edge

This means mounted skirmishers can sometimes charge on the first turn and deployment is more important as there is less time to redeploy.

I'm sure Hammy will add something to this thread shortly.

Rob

[berthier]

I am running a 650 point tournament in a couple of weeks and we are cutting the table down to 5x3, reducing deployement zones to 12 and 7 and using 2.5 hours plus 1d6 minutes of random time. The number of terrain pieces was left the same. Creates quite a bit of uncertainty with regards to terrain as you have to be very strategic in choosing the size of the piece. Large pieces do not fit 8" in on either person's side nor do full 12" pieces as the center line is now 18." We have enjoyed the play tests so far as it adds another element to the terrain game.

[ShrubMiK]

Ban the use of LH

I normally play quite quickly...but I do quite often find myself taking an embarassing amont of time moving my LH.

There's a lot of flexibiilty in where they can get to, so trying to maximise opportunities for concentrating fire on one target, whilst finding the optimal way to arrange them so that they aren't going to get into trouble when they evade, takes a lot more thought than e.g. deciding whether to advance a block of HF, or have it hang back slightly to cover the flank of those next to it whilst they advance.

And then once BGs are in combat the thinking time decreases further (I try to resist the temptation to spend time agonising over which colour of dice to use for each BG).

[lawrenceg]

One common request in Australia how can we make FoG quicker to play? Many players consider 3+ hours for a game is to long.

FoG looks best at 800pts as it has more BGs, more troop variatey and more troops etc.... but how can this same feel be translated into 500-600pts games on smaller tables played in less than 2hours?

How can we create an alternate version of 15mm FoG that works at say 600pts, can be played in 2 hours and still has all the colour and variety of a 800pts game?


Peter

Use 800 points but ban the use of BGs at the minimum of their size range (unless only one size is allowed), or limit the max no of BGs in an army.

[peter777]

Thanks for the feedback. I look forward to faster smaller games under V2.

The other issue with smaller points comps is that you often reduced to buying a pretty basic range of standard troops, so some 800pt players complain that the 650pt comps are boring.

Do you have the same feed back in the UK? Have you come up with ways to increase list flexibility and troop variety, like halving minimums etc....


Peter

[hazelbark]

If you search the forums we ran a "mini-FoG"

table was something like 2.5x3 feet.
400 Points.
All minimum and maximum bases were halved for the army, but BG sizes were unchanged. Round up for allowable BGs. So if the list was 6-8 per BG and 6-18 per army. then you could have 1x6 or 1x8 or 2x6 as you were allowed 3-9 bases rounded up.

We made terrain 12 for large and 8 for small

Made deployemnt zones 7 and 10 IIRC.

Worked quite well actually

[kevinj]

The other issue with smaller points comps is that you often reduced to buying a pretty basic range of standard troops, so some 800pt players complain that the 650pt comps are boring.

I've played in a few 650 point competitions in the UK and always look forward to them as something different. Yes, having less points can restrict your choices, but other aspects of the format open up otter armies that are not considered viable e.g. A 3 foot wide table with normal sized deployment zones makes HF armies much more attractive.