Slitherine

Given that battle wagons can fight all round, the overlap situation is not well defined. For example:
If AA, BB is a group of wagons fighting enemy bases EE and XX, YY is a two base wagon group facing to the right, I would presume XX counts as an overlap (with its rear X) given that it would be capable of fighting to its side.

EE
ABXXYY
AB

There probably ought to be sentences similar to: "For the purpose of determing overlaps, battle wagons may count any edge as their front edge. Adjacent edges are counted as side edges."

All in the camp of not wanting to clog the rules for the sake of a specific troop type that isn't that common. All such things we will clarify ont he website for those needing a specific answer. Your suggestsed noted and sensible at first glance.

Si

A web-site clarification would be appropriate.

Assming it is a permitted list, I am considering taking the Hussites to Manchester. I might be able to gather some more wagon questions.

I am considering taking the Hussites to Manchester

Marvellous. Thanks for that Roger. I expect a lot of calls of umpire from your table then...

Any list is of course allowable at the comp, but I am going to ask that people bring the "word" copy of their army list so that their opponent can at least have some sort of chance of knowing what they are about to face.

Hammy hadn't received any lists by last Monday mind, so you may have given the game away

We are still in the testing period I will accept a bit of a disadvantage here. It would be nice to get all the 'case law' on battle wagons ready for the web-site clarifications. If this is all sorted prior to publication and the web-site has the answers ready when the customers buy the real thing it will be much better. I can then get the wagons out and pursue my objective of being the Eddie Stobart of Fog fully armed with all the answers.

I've used the hussites wtice adn in fact found them fun and won with them both time. I may upgrade my fleet too ...

Its a fun army. No super army by any stretch of the imagination amd heaven forbid you meet lots of superior foot troops, but its a lot of fun to play and play against.

Si

I fought again with the Hussites last night. Another couple of items came up:

1) A wagon carrying artillery, long side facing the enemy, was fighting as an overlap. If it counts as two bases side by side, does that mean the side furthest from the combat should still be elibible to shoot (with the usual -1 penalty of course)? This is important given the effect of being shot at by artillery.

2) I had a wagon group providing rear support for another wagon group. The group in combat was long side on to the enemy. The supporting group has to be facing the BG it is supporting. Given that wagon groups are stronger when long side to the enemy, and the rules very nicely oblige them to fight this way to get the shooting, it looks and feels wrong to have to face them differently to provide rear support.

I believe that allowing wagons to allow their side edges to be counted as their front edge for overlap and support purposes is necessary. It probably needs a sentence in the rules as well as web-site clarifications.

The rules are generally working well for wagons. From current experience, you have to move them towards the enemy and at a reasonable distance halt and start dicing to turn the long side to face. This gives a rather nice feel of the wagons rolling into position and deploying to form a defensive barrier. There is also that bit of tension that they do not get deployed in time because they fail dice rolls. This is a nice way to make the player form the wagon barrier well before the contact. It avoids the 'dancing wagons' complaint.

If Dave and Hammy are reading this, can I suggest a few minutes of looking at how the wagon rules are going to be interpreted before the Manchester event starts? It might save a bit of umpiring time.

1) A wagon carrying artillery, long side facing the enemy, was fighting as an overlap. If it counts as two bases side by side, does that mean the side furthest from the combat should still be elibible to shoot (with the usual -1 penalty of course)? This is important given the effect of being shot at by artillery.

No it can't shoot

2) I had a wagon group providing rear support for another wagon group. The group in combat was long side on to the enemy. The supporting group has to be facing the BG it is supporting. Given that wagon groups are stronger when long side to the enemy, and the rules very nicely oblige them to fight this way to get the shooting, it looks and feels wrong to have to face them differently to provide rear support.

I believe that allowing wagons to allow their side edges to be counted as their front edge for overlap and support purposes is necessary. It probably needs a sentence in the rules as well as web-site clarifications.

Battle wagons cannot claim rear support - see glossary definition thereof. Not worth creating a special rule for other situations in our view - makes it hardr for BWG to provide rear support which has at least some logic.

The rules are generally working well for wagons. From current experience, you have to move them towards the enemy and at a reasonable distance halt and start dicing to turn the long side to face. This gives a rather nice feel of the wagons rolling into position and deploying to form a defensive barrier. There is also that bit of tension that they do not get deployed in time because they fail dice rolls. This is a nice way to make the player form the wagon barrier well before the contact. It avoids the 'dancing wagons' complaint.

Yes I found them working pretty well - nice feel.

If Dave and Hammy are reading this, can I suggest a few minutes of looking at how the wagon rules are going to be interpreted before the Manchester event starts? It might save a bit of umpiring time.

Roger if you want to drop me a list of queries i am happy to give an authors umpire ruling to speed things along.

Si

I didn't see an answer to the crossbow from wagons shooting at long range at full effect query.

Paul

Its 1 dice per base width at all ranges - seems to work well in balancing the shooting fest at close range and gives the wagons a better chance at longer range.

Resting weapons on a steady parapet would help at long range to a degree - not that I am caliming any super logic other than the balance seems good this way.

Similarly Art get 2 at Eff range but only 1 from a BWg. Again gives a good voerall balance for thes troops we felt and arguably justifiable as less art pieces than a full ART-only base represents.

Si

Simon, I will try and summarise my wagon comments and send them to you.

I haven't got the rules with me so I have not read the item about rear support. This seems a bit odd. If there are supporting troops to the rear do not wagon defenders get any morale boost from that.

The question was also about giving rear support. I would have thought having a defending wagon line to one's rear was a definite morale advantage to other troops, certainly as good as any other BG.

Your shooting reply is a bit challenging. Wagon crossbows are equal to other crossbows at long range but 50% inferior at effective range. I am OK with your previous argument about the number of shooters being low but the word 'balance' would not really be my choice

Ok send them to me

I was using ba;ance in overall game terms - seems to be reasonable for the agongs to have less shooters but for those shooters to be less range affected. Like shooting from barricades in later periods. Can't give a more purist answer it just seemed to work well in practice. Outshot at close range but equal at longer range. But bear in mind there is a - for shooting at them. Can't rmember what the simulation shwoed but they seemd to make sense.

The rear support exclusion was on the grounds that they have no rear to speak of and face all directions defensively. They do give rear support.

Si