Slitherine

I would like to add my thanks to Richard for arranging a great comp and to all my opponents for four really enjoyable games.

Prior to this comp I was not 100% sure how much I was going to enjoy it. While I have played a lot of games of FoG most of them have been ones where I am teaching people to play and have not really been able to play hard. As the comp over the weekend progressed I started to feel that I was playing the game rather than going through the motions.

The only real negative from the weekend is that 1000 points is I think too many even for doubles if the games are 3 hours 15 minutes long. Of our four games we only managed one 'result' but I think that at least two if not all three of the other games would have finished or been very close to finishing had we had another 30 minutes. As the BHGS doubles rounds are normally 3 hours 45 I am looking forwards to Leeds where with luck we might finish more games.

That said we did manage to chase several BG's of enemy skirmishers off table with our slave revolt army and we actually almost completely surrounded the Parthians (well appart from the cataphracts who broke through our centre with a couple of BG's).

I will try to do a brief report later but didn't take many notes although I have some photos.

For anyone who is interested our army was:

IC - Spartacus
TC - "Spartacus", "Spartacus" & "Spartacus"
3 BG - 6 Poor LF, Javelin, light spear
1 BG - 4 Average Protected Cav, light spear, swordsmen
2 BG - 10 Average Unprotected Mob, light spear
3 BG - 8 Average Unprotected Mob, light spear
4 BG - 8 Average Protected HF, impact foot, swordsmen
4 BG - 6 Average Armoured HF, impact foot, swordsmen
2 BG - 4 Superiod Armoured HF, impact foot, skilled swordsmen
1 BG - 8 Poor LF, sling

Lynda and I would like to second the thanks etc,also the pts concern.I have a feeling 1000 would work in the later periods High Medieval etc because everything is that much more expensive ,The Bosporans were unable to force a win and ended with 3 draws and an almost loss which will no doubt be read about on Madaxeman.Some spectacular dice rolling by Lynda to keep us in the game
David

davidandlynda wrote:Lynda and I would like to second the thanks etc,also the pts concern.I have a feeling 1000 would work in the later periods High Medieval etc because everything is that much more expensive.

I think you are right. Having mostly mounted, well-matched, armies also helps. Certainly we managed to finish 3 out of 4 games in the Rise of the Ottomans period - two of them with an hour and a half to spare.

My original plan was to go with 900 points for Godendag doubles, perhaps that would be more appropriate for the "slower" periods.

Also, because FoG turns are generally quicker than DBM turns, it probably isn't necessary to call "last pair of bounds" 15 mins before the end of the round.

I would agree that it felta bit to hard to fight games to a conclusion. However, may not agree that the armies are to big for doubles in an 'amount of toys to play with during the game' sort of way. If half the army that I controlled was very much smaller it may not have been enough to be a satisfying game if you see what I mean.

hammy wrote:For anyone who is interested our army was:

IC - Spartacus
TC - "Spartacus", "Spartacus" & "Spartacus"
3 BG - 6 Poor LF, Javelin, light spear
1 BG - 4 Average Protected Cav, light spear, swordsmen
2 BG - 10 Average Unprotected Mob, light spear
3 BG - 8 Average Unprotected Mob, light spear
4 BG - 8 Average Protected HF, impact foot, swordsmen
4 BG - 6 Average Armoured HF, impact foot, swordsmen
2 BG - 4 Superiod Armoured HF, impact foot, skilled swordsmen
1 BG - 8 Poor LF, sling

That is a crap-load of BGs!

I suspect part of the reason why our (Durutti & I were a team) Roman period games didnt come to a conclusion may have been that some of the armies we fought were very hard to actually beat with ours - unkillable elite legionaries and hard-to-catch skirmishers was a tough combination for our probably-underpowered Carthaginians to take on, so we spent a while chasing the other stuff before realising even if we got them all we would still need to nail some legions to get 50% of the enemy units.

We didnt really have anything to beat legions frontally (until we worked out that elephants have a decent chance, after we were forced into using them midway through our third game!!), and also didnt have materially more skirmishers than any of our opponents (which we thought going inrto the comp that we would have an advantage here) so we couldn't mop their skirmishers up through weight of numbers, so often neither side lost its skirmishing units (except that one of Lyndas that got 9 hits in one turn and evaporated = ooops!) .

Maybe if we'd known the rules better (to play faster and to know where we had better matchups), and also had a different mix of troops (something to face and maybe beat 1 or 2 units of legionaries) in our list we could have forced the pace. I'd still not want to have less points as then both of us would have been commanding a very small force indeed.

Anyway.all the lists we faced are now on my website

tim
www.madaxeman.com

I am not sure about the points, particularly when Steve and I managed to beat a miss-pointed Roman army that turned out to be 1,160 points.

Romans are very tough, if Elite, almost impossible to break in a straight fight.

Pikemen are a good match for them. But average pikemen do suffer very quickly if your dice are poor.

Sunday afternoon Simon hit three of our pike battlegroups with some impact protected superior heavy foot and routed one in the first bound and another in the next melee round. The only one remaining was luckily in an over lap position only.

I think as people get more familiar with the rules, time will not be an issue.

Big Thanks to Richard for a great weekend.

Looking forward to the challenge

Don

hammy wrote: The only real negative from the weekend is that 1000 points is I think too many even for doubles if the games are 3 hours 15 minutes long. Of our four games we only managed one 'result' but I think that at least two if not all three of the other games would have finished or been very close to finishing had we had another 30 minutes. As the BHGS doubles rounds are normally 3 hours 45 I am looking forwards to Leeds where with luck we might finish more games.

Wow. I think 3:15 is very optimistic and even more optimistic in the early knowledge of the rule stages. If you want to try to manuver that is going to burn a lot of time. And if you rely on bow shotting then you don't have time.

I really enjoy the rules, but i have found that if I want more than grind forward time is a factor for a conclusion. This is always the case of course. But the optimistic notions of time seems...well..optimistic to me.

As with all rules army design will be important to getting wins / not losing.

For the type of person who's ambition in playing a game of toy soldiers is to 'not lose' armies with a core of very hard troops who are difficult to kill supported by a decent amount of 'hard to catch' skimishers may be a popular design. May be hard to push for a win though as people will avoid the core troops and spend a fusrating game trying to nail the skirmishers.

durrati wrote:As with all rules army design will be important to getting wins / not losing.

For the type of person who's ambition in playing a game of toy soldiers is to 'not lose' armies with a core of very hard troops who are difficult to kill supported by a decent amount of 'hard to catch' skimishers may be a popular design. May be hard to push for a win though as people will avoid the core troops and spend a fusrating game trying to nail the skirmishers.

We played a Roman and a Parthian army along these lines, the Parthians would have been beaten in another half hour for sure and the Romans were looking decidedly dodgy.

It doesn't matter how tough you are if you are hit in the flank by something decent. In the Parthian game we took down two BG's of superior cataphracts with average impact foot and average cavalry and had we made one particular critical CMT we would have had a third one.

The problem with the tough stuff / skirmishers approach is that your flanks WILL be swept away even if the troops on your flanks don't die. On more than one occasion we got enemy shock BG's into the possition where they had to pass a CMT to not charge or be hit in the flank and we also managed one where even a passed CMT not to charge and a passed CMT for drilled foot still meant we got a flank charge in our next trun.

Yes the skirmish and hit armies are set up to be that rather than skirmish onl;y or run away armies.

The speed of movement is deliberately set so that a Parthian has time to pick its spot for its cataphract charge but will find it hard to simply not fight - as Hammy demonstrated. So if you play a pin and punch army you will need to punch - or you'll get hit below the belt where you don't want too.

Si

I'm still working on the final photo-montage and battle reports to add to my website later this week, but I have somehow managed to produce a short video trailer as a teaser for the full set of reports, setting the scene for those of you who were unable to attend this pivotal gathering in Fog History.

http://www.madaxeman.com/game_reports/g ... review.htm

enjoy carefully....its a scary wargaming world out there...

Tim
www.madaxeman.com

(yes Dave, I did manage to find a place for that video of you...)

A must see for all ... very funny

Si

Yes, "very pretty!"

Cheers,
Scott

Scott, are you referring to "Pretty Boy" Ruddock there ?

nikgaukroger wrote:Scott, are you referring to "Pretty Boy" Ruddock there ?

Well, if the shoe fits...

Cheers,
Scott