Slitherine

Hi,

please, please,please !!!
We have now a very good rules set. In France some many people are afraid about the old gaming tables (DBM) with scraps of carpet for hills or forest.

So please, now I hope the FOG tables are more beautifull with hill, forest ... like it's possible now.

And, it's OK to have a knight XII°s for a knight XIV° in tournament but please I hope we will not see a Knight XII°c for a Palmyrian cataphract.

Let's guy, I am ready to receive your shots

One of the nice things about FoG is that it is not as milimetric as DBM so you don't have to worry so much about exactly where every base is. As a result you can make nicer terrain even if it means your figures might not be able to be in exactly the right place.

I have the materials to start making a load of new FoG terrain that I will also be using some of to double up for Flames of War (woods, and hills at least). There are a lot of games where gorgeous armies are played on rubbish terrain and it does let the visual side of the game down.

I've just bought a load of new terrain bits for FoG as well

Not sure I agree that its Ok to use a C12th knight for a C14th one though

nikgaukroger wrote:I've just bought a load of new terrain bits for FoG as well

Not sure I agree that its Ok to use a C12th knight for a C14th one though

I wouldn't do it myself, but I'm happy to play against an opponent doing it. Geesh! Given how difficult it is to recruit historical gamers in general, I'd be happy to let an opponent proxy almost anything that is reasonably 'what you see is what you get', if that is what it takes to accommodate a new player. I would hope once someone is a regular player though, they would take enough interest in their army to model it historically accurate.

Remember, I think with what will be wide availability of these rules, we may be getting a lot of new historical gamers looking to try this system out. We shouldn't be too anal, and should do everything to hook new players in.

Peter

Hear hear! Our gaming standards should be high, but also welcoming and forgiving to newcomers. It's always best to lead by example.

Cheers,
Scott

I agree for game with newbies but in tournament we should be demanding.

Club games, etc. I don't really mind if people are trying things out, waiting for new figures, etc. - in these cases you can live with any old substitution as long as you know the person will get the correct figures in the fullness of time.

Competitions on the other hand I think you should have a fairly high standard for correct figures - with the understanding, of course, that opinions as to what is correct can genuinely differ and there may not always be a suitable figure available.

However, if you lead by example and get new players into good habits to begin with its easier than breaking bad habits later.

Applies to terrain as well as figures, of course.

I think in open tournaments especially in the early days of new FoG army lists, forgiveness and tolerance is the order of the day. I have seen people who decry the warhammer new super figure and changes of the army lists also want everyone to have a historical perfect match. But that is a bias in favor of those of us with large collections.

Personally I would not be keen on 12th century knights as a palmyran catphract. But I would be fine with Selucid cataphracts being used without batting an eye.

Just as i am not overly agitated between 1st and 4th century Roman Legionaires.

We want more people and we don't want to say your bowcases are upside down therefore we don't approve of your army. And will we have a museum quality painting minimum standard?

Here here to the man calling for more effort to go into terrain, to match the beautifully painted armies and glossy rules and army lists (nurse, pass me my sunglasses please). What a shame to see so much scruffy terrain in some of the FoG AAR photos in this forum, especially when some people have already spent big bucks on the nice table playing cloths from Rafa in Spain. I'm not advocating an annally retentive must scratch build a new Minas Tirith terrain set for every game I play, approach. Just a bit more effort than a hunk of polystyrene packaging from the new DVD player and some slapped on old primer from the garden shed!

yes i am working up some new pieces of terrain and hope to jazz it up a little. Of course it is always harder to travel with it, but a few steps in the right direction.

hazelbark wrote:yes i am working up some new pieces of terrain and hope to jazz it up a little. Of course it is always harder to travel with it, but a few steps in the right direction.

And that is the problem, right there: travel. My felt hills are light and pack easily, plus they can be reversed and used as other terrain pieces if a hill isn't what I desire for the game. I have bought some other, prettier, terrain (a plowed field, some marshes). It looks good but weighs a lot and is awkward and bulky. I will be bringing these pieces along to Cold Wars, but I doubt I will get much more "pretty" terrain.

It is great to look at, but a pain in the ass otherwise.

Marc

I'm using terrain from Miniature worldmaker of Australia .www.miniatureworldmaker.com.au.
Its made from rubber .large range of field hills woods and all sorts,not the cheapest but travels well and is light.You can see the paddyfield on madaxemansUsk report 4th game
It was quite comical when Lynda took the parcel marked "rubber toys" from the postman
David

davidandlynda wrote:I'm using terrain from Miniature worldmaker of Australia .www.miniatureworldmaker.com.au.
Its made from rubber .large range of field hills woods and all sorts,not the cheapest but travels well and is light.You can see the paddyfield on madaxemansUsk report 4th game
It was quite comical when Lynda took the parcel marked "rubber toys" from the postman
David

I expect that moment was worth the price of shipping from Oz.

Marc

It was although we did get free post on that order
David

Its a question of how you drive it along

Award points
Deduct points
Umpire remove crappy pieces

Any ideas or solutions.

Or in the end is it simply a matter of personal pride. If we get a head of steam behind this we might change perceptions

JDM

Peer pressure IMO.

Things like adding and deducting points are just too subjective to be credible.

Quite right, Nik.

Marc

jdm wrote:Its a question of how you drive it along

Award points
Deduct points
Umpire remove crappy pieces

Any ideas or solutions.

It is not about tournament results. Just give a bad piece of felt that says terrain needs improvement to the worst. Give a prize to the best. Or honors to the best terrain.

Disconnecting it from results is a good thing. It makes it a passion not a scheming gamey thing. Good terrain is a look and a passion.

A prize was awarded at Britcon for 'Best Terrain'.

Personally I'd like to see terrain items awarded as prizes - again we had the painted camps at Britcon - very desirable but beyond my reach!

My terrain isn't the best but it's starting to get better!

Pete

jdm wrote:Its a question of how you drive it along

Award points
Deduct points
Umpire remove crappy pieces

Any ideas or solutions.

Add boxes for scoring opponent's terrain on the score sheet. Then give a prize/public humiliation at the end.

Also, players who post game reports on the net or write magazine articles etc. should give terrain (and army painting, figure appropriateness etc) a higher profile.