Deployment

[paulbg]

In the games played so far one main criticism from all has been deployment.
the 3 x 3 method just seems to long winded. The division criteria is great so why not just deploy division by division.

Suggestion would be

Deploy 1 division at a time, each unit to be deployed in command (maybe some allowance for detachments)
A division may not be deployed closer to the enemy (or centre line) than a previously deployed division (ie no placing second line or reserves first)

[SirGarnet]

1. One division at a time would encourag dinky divisions. 3 by 3 is neutral as to division size though not army size.
2. Requiring that units be deployed within division command is too restrictive, even for the Unreformed armies. Everyone made detachments sometime.
3. The no-closer-to-enemy idea has an interesting flavor to it, but from the linear tactics era.

&added 4. In this period we can be talking about multiple columns of march. Vanguard troops on the march may not end up in the front line when deployed for battle, or some or all may be hotly engaged, or the preliminaries may not be part of the FoG battle which represents the part where the whole or bulk of the army is on the field.

[paulbg]

Mike

The 3 x 3 just takes too long.

As I said, there may be some need for detachment but in real terms what are we considering

1. irregulars or light infantry in a terrain feature
2. building

this could be managed.

I took it that the 3 x 3 model (and division limitation) was simulating a column of march. Not sure you would lead with reserves. The discussion was no further forward to allow wings etc.. There may be situation where you want to refuse a flank and deploy that flank from the head of your column , perhaps you should sketch your front line , not necessarily just the centre line.


When different opponents all make the same comment (and no-one saying they liked the current method) its time to look at an alternative.

[Astronomican]

Myself and the other FOG-N players in my club have no problems with the 3x3 deployment method, and see no need to change it.


Jimi

[viperofmilan]

Hasn't been an issue in our group either. Hs never even come up as a matter of fact.

Kevin

[Blathergut]

No problemo here either.

[SirGarnet]

If you want an alternative suggestion, there is the LOCs going down, then the attacker putting down corps and then division commanders to indicate approximately where the "dust clouds" etc. of oncoming troops appear, the defender setting up his position while the attacker gets coffee of observes with hawklike attention, and then the attacker deploying.

Whether or not particular divisions include a lot of horsemen (due to the different nature of the dust clouds, or telescope observation) can either be revealed or not - maybe only for divisions nearer the center line.

Whether the defender need only put down his front line, etc., are other glosses on this approach.

[AlanCutner]

Only thing I'd change are the movement restrictions in the first two turns.

[Baldy]

Slight change as with others found deployment fine. However was unsure about the movement restrictions in the first two moves. Could someone clarify what the 'deployment area' (pg 91) is?

[deadtorius]

page 101

its 6 Mu from the center line back to your own table edge. Depending on your table size it would vary, but basically if you are on a 4X8 table 2 feet down the middle is the table center line. So measure in 2 feet, then measure back 6 MU from that line. That is your deployment area. As a defender, unless you are skirmishers or are close enough to a building outside your deployment area you can not move past that 6MU line. You are free to shuffle about anywhere from your table edge up to the 6 MU line so you can move troops around while the attacker moves across the table towards you, you just can't go madly dashing forwards until turn 3.
Hope that helped

[Baldy]

Thanks for that. Just wasnt sure we were doing it right. Off to have a game this afternoon french vs austrians trying 800 pts for the first time. cant wait!

[Blathergut]

French vs Austrians here today as well...a refight of the 5th Battle of Kurtstad. Viva Napoleon!

If my energy level holds up afterwards I'll try to post an AAR using Battle Chronicler (if I can manage to figure out how to position the unit boxes without driving myself crazy).

[david53]

Only thing I'd change are the movement restrictions in the first two turns.

Think it works well makes you think more and that increases the fun IMO

[deadtorius]

Last game we played the defender only had to stand for 1 turn. Made for quite an interesting counter attack.

[hazelbark]

I think the 2 turn restriction has a heavier effect on new players. Once you realize it and have a deployment and terrain picks in mind to contemplate it, it then becomes a good flavor.

[david53]

I think the 2 turn restriction has a heavier effect on new players. Once you realize it and have a deployment and terrain picks in mind to contemplate it, it then becomes a good flavor.

I agree at first I thought the two moves was hard, but with experience I now deploy at the rear of my deployment area and therefore can move and react in my first move ie you can move up to the 6mu from centre line.

Also the terrain is not so bad for the defender I place you place works better for the defender.

IIMO I like this part of the rules, with my armies I have I will in all likey hood be defending which is fine by me.

Dave