Sub forums

[IainMcNeil]

Hi guys

there was a thread about sub forums for FoG N but I cant find what was decided - can someone point me to it if you know where it is!

Thanks

Iain

[nosher]

viewtopic.php?f=69&t=33615

[Blathergut]

We never saw comments by authors.

[shadowdragon]

MikeK's suggestion on the above linked thread seems reasonable to me.....I'll repeat that suggestion here (noting one of the main differences with the other groups is the wealth of historical information available for the Napoleonic period:

General Discussion
FOGN After Action Reports (AARs) ---------- [I think AARs give a feel for the game and are a good place to nudge new people first. Especially if there is a video playthrough sticky there.
Historical Scenarios, Maps and Orders of Battle (OOBs) -------- [A full scenario wil combine all of these, so I think they can go in one forum, although the wealth of detailed information for this period could support multiple forums.
Rules Questions
Army Design -------- [based on the published lists.]
Player Designed Lists and Adaptations -------- [With the wealth of material and the easy player extension to later and earlier decades and areas outside Europe, this deserves its own subforum and will keep the non-canon stuff clear of the Army Design section]
Strategy and Tactics -------- [I've suggested such a forum before, but admittedly the wide variety of troop types in FOGAM and FOGR meant a lot of tactical considerations were tied uip with specific army designs. In the Napoleonic era, however, a lot more is common and a froum is desirable for such discussions as well as training and tutorial and relevant tactical/mechanical FAQs.]
Tournaments {and Demos?}
Opponent Finder/Club FOGN Info --------
{Player} Campaigns
Modelling
FOGN Suggestions for the Future -------- [A home for the complaints, comments, and constructive suggestions that this period will spawn with a density greater than any other - you know how fractious and picky the Napoleonics purists can be]
French Speaking Forum etc.
Private forums listed last

Sooner rather than later would be better as the current "one folder" approach is getting unwieldy and hard to search.

[nosher]

Sooner rather than later would be better as the current "one folder" approach is getting unwieldy and hard to search.

Hopefully a QRS and Errata will precede new boards

[shadowdragon]

Sooner rather than later would be better as the current "one folder" approach is getting unwieldy and hard to search.

Hopefully a QRS and Errata will precede new boards

I see no reason why a QRS and Errata should preclude new boards. The latter is useful, doesn't take a lot of effort and, most importantly, shouldn't take any effort away from developing a QRS and Errata. So wouldn't it be better to say, "don't forget we urgently need a QRS and Errata rather than make it into an either / or...win / lose choice".

[nosher]

I see no reason why a QRS and Errata should preclude new boards. The latter is useful, doesn't take a lot of effort

True; However boards dont enhance game play which I am guessing most people would prefer to be doing than browsing the web scouring for answers to vague and unusual situations.

FoG R has been out months now and still doesn't have an official QRS which frankly is quite poor

[SirGarnet]

FOGR rules are pretty tight and the tables in the back are solid enough. FOGR has been out for a year, and I now doubt there will be a fresh QRS. Also, in terms of interest the Renaissance & Pike n Shot period is a niche market compared with Napoleonics or Ancients. So I expect FOGN posts to outstrip FOGR if the rules do reasonably well. Indeed, FOGN has great potential to be a leading Napoleonics set if it catches on, which means sanding the rough edges of presentation with a good QRS.

That QRS is not an easy task. FOGN essential mechanisms are fairly simple (compared with FOG or FOGR) and are reflected in the QRS in the back. However, FOGN has a whole layer of detailed complexity consisting of conditions, restrictions and special cases too numerous and extensive to be described in a few QRS pages. What could be done is to include relevant checklists with just cue words/phrases and page references to jog the player's memory or curiosity so they can quickly check the rules when relevant (i.e., looking something like index entries). I've been writing page headings, paragraph captions, page references, highlights and underlines in the book to try to establish my own web of rules links to help an understanding of the rules gel properly, but the prolific details make it harder than with FOGR.

As a first step, I've been working on detailing the sequence of play so I can nail down the flow of play and do it correctly.

The QRS would be considerable work. Setting up sub-forums - not so much (though copying threads over to them could be-the more so the later they are set up).

[Blathergut]

MikeK's suggestion on the above linked thread seems reasonable to me.....I'll repeat that suggestion here (noting one of the main differences with the other groups is the wealth of historical information available for the Napoleonic period:

General Discussion
FOGN After Action Reports (AARs) ---------- [I think AARs give a feel for the game and are a good place to nudge new people first. Especially if there is a video playthrough sticky there.
Historical Scenarios, Maps and Orders of Battle (OOBs) -------- [A full scenario wil combine all of these, so I think they can go in one forum, although the wealth of detailed information for this period could support multiple forums.
Rules Questions
Army Design -------- [based on the published lists.]
Player Designed Lists and Adaptations -------- [With the wealth of material and the easy player extension to later and earlier decades and areas outside Europe, this deserves its own subforum and will keep the non-canon stuff clear of the Army Design section]
Strategy and Tactics -------- [I've suggested such a forum before, but admittedly the wide variety of troop types in FOGAM and FOGR meant a lot of tactical considerations were tied uip with specific army designs. In the Napoleonic era, however, a lot more is common and a froum is desirable for such discussions as well as training and tutorial and relevant tactical/mechanical FAQs.]
Tournaments {and Demos?}
Opponent Finder/Club FOGN Info --------
{Player} Campaigns
Modelling
FOGN Suggestions for the Future -------- [A home for the complaints, comments, and constructive suggestions that this period will spawn with a density greater than any other - you know how fractious and picky the Napoleonics purists can be]
French Speaking Forum etc.
Private forums listed last

Sooner rather than later would be better as the current "one folder" approach is getting unwieldy and hard to search.

Bumping this to the top again. Only thing I would add is "Gallery."

[Blathergut]

I'm not sure how to design the sub-forums re: MikeH's suggestions for distinct periods: 1792-1803, etc.

As well, his suggestion about asymmetrical games. Can this have its own sub-forum?

[nosher]

Dont get me wrong - FoG N is an absolute godsend after what seems like a couple of decades of flavourless or over-simplistic napoleonic rulesets, but waht worries me about this development is what feels like a lack of sinse of urgency in terms of getting simple things like forum boards, QRS and errata out there amongst the people playing the game.

I cant see a problem with a 1.1, no sorry 1.2, sorry 1.3 versioned errata/qrs as new things appear r are highlighted. Potential gamesr of FoG N are being put off by having to wait inordinate lengths of time for rules clarifications to be put in one place.

There are also shed loads of people that have complained about the typset/font size which is diffuclt to read for people with poorer eyesight. Not all of us have access or the skills set to replicate the QRS in a user friendly sight font.

What woud be good is clarity on what time scale things might take to be produced

I'll carry on playing however I know for a fact others wont and wont therefore invest in the rules because of this.

[donm]

Any chance this could be done soon please?

having terrible trouble keeping track of all the various rule questions.

Thanks in anticipation

Don

[hazelbark]

Nudge.

[Blathergut]

I thought I might ask about this again.

1. Do either of the authors have suggestions for what sub-forums could be helpful in promoting the rules?

2. Is there some particular reason sub-forums aren't happening/haven't happened?

[Trailape]

Sub forums would be helpfull. They have them for the Honour series of games, (Lasalle, Maurice) so I can't see why we don't have one for FOG-N. A no-brainer I would have thought.

[Blathergut]

Bumps this one too.

[gibby]

Well yes.

In the abscence of consensus/decision.
Surely just copy the FOgR or A and if further changes are needed we can go from that point.
At least then we would be a step ahead.
Jim

[Blathergut]

Well yes.

In the abscence of consensus/decision.
Surely just copy the FOgR or A and if further changes are needed we can go from that point.
At least then we would be a step ahead.
Jim

How about we come up with a suggestion? I'll post here one. Maybe over the next day or two we can come to an agreement.

[Blathergut]

This is taken from the various postings:

General Discussions
FoGN After Action Reports (AAR)
Rules Questions
Historical Scenarios, Maps, and Orders of Battle (OOB)
Army Design
Player Designed Lists and Adaptions
Strategy and Tactics
Tournaments and Demos
Opponent Finder/Clubs
Campaigns
Modelling/Gallery
various language sub-forums, etc.

[Blathergut]

(From the other thread, ideas):

Sections I would like to see are as follows:
Community (Blogs, Opponent Finder etc)
Modeling and Painting (a Gallery section maybe)
Rules Questions
Uniform Info (Napoleonics is a period where you are always trying to nail down specifics on uniforms)
Scenarios
Post Game Reports / AARs
Product Reviews (Miniatures, terrain etc)
Media (movies and magazine atricles etc pertaining to the period)
That's all I can think of for now