NOOB
Moderators: hammy, philqw78, terrys, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design, Field of Glory Moderators
NOOB
Hi I am new to this forum as well as to Field of Glory. As I have yet to play it I was wondering how it plays as far as tactics go. As an axample I play Warhammer I have also played Legions Arena. Warhammer will not allow one to advance a troop and then withdraw it. When this takes place the game system views it as a retreat/rout and you must roll a check. I am really simply curious how the game playes tactically. Does one have more tactical options available to them or is it more like Warhammer ( less the magic ) Thanks All - Cheers - John
FoG plays quite differently from Warhammer and from Warhammer Ancients. A premium is placed on tactics and maneuvering your forces into advantageous positions and concntrating force on points of enemy weakness. Flanks and rear are vulnerable to attacks, so each side tries to guard the flanks and rears of its units from the other side.
To answer your specific question, troops can advance and retire, but it is only safe to do so safely outside of enemy charge range once you turn, or other friendlies are in position to block or intercept such a charge. Advancing and retreating to avoid enemy contact while harassing the enemy with shooting is the role of skirmishers such as light foot and light horse. They are very maneuverable and usually able to back off when the enemy advances and advance when the enemy halts, turns aside, or retire.
Imagine Crusader knights against Saracen light horse and cavalry - if the knights can be goaded by archery to chase enemy light horse away from their supporting troops, they can be drawn into a trap where they can be worn down by shooting and then charged in the flank and rear and destroyed. Of course, if the Knights are lucky or the enemy careless and they catch the Saracens, they have the advantage. So, rather than Knights alone, Crusader armies combine spearmen, crossbowmen and knights working together to counter Saracen tactics.
Of course, in most historical battles both sides are willing to close and fight frontally, with efforts to break through the enemy line, exploit a gap, or outflank the enemy to gain an advantage..
I think you will like FoG if you are interested in military tactics.
Mike
To answer your specific question, troops can advance and retire, but it is only safe to do so safely outside of enemy charge range once you turn, or other friendlies are in position to block or intercept such a charge. Advancing and retreating to avoid enemy contact while harassing the enemy with shooting is the role of skirmishers such as light foot and light horse. They are very maneuverable and usually able to back off when the enemy advances and advance when the enemy halts, turns aside, or retire.
Imagine Crusader knights against Saracen light horse and cavalry - if the knights can be goaded by archery to chase enemy light horse away from their supporting troops, they can be drawn into a trap where they can be worn down by shooting and then charged in the flank and rear and destroyed. Of course, if the Knights are lucky or the enemy careless and they catch the Saracens, they have the advantage. So, rather than Knights alone, Crusader armies combine spearmen, crossbowmen and knights working together to counter Saracen tactics.
Of course, in most historical battles both sides are willing to close and fight frontally, with efforts to break through the enemy line, exploit a gap, or outflank the enemy to gain an advantage..
I think you will like FoG if you are interested in military tactics.
Mike
-
Brainsnaffler
- Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
- Posts: 94
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 11:25 am
- Location: Barnsley, England
I would also add something. I don't know if you have a copy of the rules or not but: when you get them and read them through for the first time, it will be no doubt very daunting!
All I would say is keep reading them because although the text is VERY technical and almost reads like a science textbook, the actual fundamentals of the game is very simple. The complicated text is to try and cover as many variable situations as possible.
So, please don't be put off by the rules - they really are very, very good
All I would say is keep reading them because although the text is VERY technical and almost reads like a science textbook, the actual fundamentals of the game is very simple. The complicated text is to try and cover as many variable situations as possible.
So, please don't be put off by the rules - they really are very, very good
That reminds me. For an experienced gamer, first thing I suggest is look at page 168 with the full sequence of play to get perspective on the flow of the game. It brilliantly integrates the rules mechanisms. The page is downloadable and I hand it out to everyone playing a game as it's easy to follow and speeds play along for new players.
One thing to note that is unexpected - your commanders can move around during your movement phase AND during the joint action phase in your turn and the joint action phase in the other player's turn. This is just in time to go rally a nearby unit. Very nice dynamic there.
The game greatly rewards anticipating things turns ahead of time.
Mike
One thing to note that is unexpected - your commanders can move around during your movement phase AND during the joint action phase in your turn and the joint action phase in the other player's turn. This is just in time to go rally a nearby unit. Very nice dynamic there.
The game greatly rewards anticipating things turns ahead of time.
Mike
-
bigdamnhero
- Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 2:10 pm
Hi!
I play both WHAB and FoG and have found the differences to be most favourable in FoG's favour. For instance:
In WHAB when skirmishers run away (fire and flee for instance), they have to roll to rally. Therefore the way to buy skirmishers for an army are simply for two things.
1. To slow the opponent down
2. To act as speed-bumps for enemy chargers. Useless points for an army
FoG however, appears to respond to all troop types in a very historical manner. Skirmishers dont charge formed units. They run away when charged by formed units (unless they pass a test to stand) - and they lose HUGE against foprmed units, (the exception are elephants which some skirmishers can give a good fight to). All of these abilities are what skirmishers are SUPPOSED to do.
The other rules all are realistic and use common sense. I have not come across any army that is super powerful because of ferocious charge and auto-breaks. WHAB lends itself to super armies. FoG lends itself to melee and charges that take some time to break an opponent.
I like WHAB for a game that lasts an hour or so of an evening. FoG tends to take three hours in general - but FEELS correct, with a historical reflection in troop types verses troop types - not who can i charge with my uber-heavy knights!
Try Fog Bud. You will find that it takes a relatively short time to learn the rules, but much longer to master (how it SHOULD BE!).
Paul
I play both WHAB and FoG and have found the differences to be most favourable in FoG's favour. For instance:
In WHAB when skirmishers run away (fire and flee for instance), they have to roll to rally. Therefore the way to buy skirmishers for an army are simply for two things.
1. To slow the opponent down
2. To act as speed-bumps for enemy chargers. Useless points for an army
FoG however, appears to respond to all troop types in a very historical manner. Skirmishers dont charge formed units. They run away when charged by formed units (unless they pass a test to stand) - and they lose HUGE against foprmed units, (the exception are elephants which some skirmishers can give a good fight to). All of these abilities are what skirmishers are SUPPOSED to do.
The other rules all are realistic and use common sense. I have not come across any army that is super powerful because of ferocious charge and auto-breaks. WHAB lends itself to super armies. FoG lends itself to melee and charges that take some time to break an opponent.
I like WHAB for a game that lasts an hour or so of an evening. FoG tends to take three hours in general - but FEELS correct, with a historical reflection in troop types verses troop types - not who can i charge with my uber-heavy knights!
Try Fog Bud. You will find that it takes a relatively short time to learn the rules, but much longer to master (how it SHOULD BE!).
Paul
-
bigdamnhero
- Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 2:10 pm
Hi!
I play both WHAB and FoG and have found the differences to be most favourable in FoG's favour. For instance:
In WHAB when skirmishers run away (fire and flee for instance), they have to roll to rally. Therefore the way to buy skirmishers for an army are simply for two things.
1. To slow the opponent down
2. To act as speed-bumps for enemy chargers. Useless points for an army
FoG however, appears to respond to all troop types in a very historical manner. Skirmishers dont charge formed units. They run away when charged by formed units (unless they pass a test to stand) - and they lose HUGE against foprmed units, (the exception are elephants which some skirmishers can give a good fight to). All of these abilities are what skirmishers are SUPPOSED to do.
The other rules all are realistic and use common sense. I have not come across any army that is super powerful because of ferocious charge and auto-breaks. WHAB lends itself to super armies. FoG lends itself to melee and charges that take some time to break an opponent.
I like WHAB for a game that lasts an hour or so of an evening. FoG tends to take three hours in general - but FEELS correct, with a historical reflection in troop types verses troop types - not who can i charge with my uber-heavy knights!
Try Fog Bud. You will find that it takes a relatively short time to learn the rules, but much longer to master (how it SHOULD BE!).
Paul
I play both WHAB and FoG and have found the differences to be most favourable in FoG's favour. For instance:
In WHAB when skirmishers run away (fire and flee for instance), they have to roll to rally. Therefore the way to buy skirmishers for an army are simply for two things.
1. To slow the opponent down
2. To act as speed-bumps for enemy chargers. Useless points for an army
FoG however, appears to respond to all troop types in a very historical manner. Skirmishers dont charge formed units. They run away when charged by formed units (unless they pass a test to stand) - and they lose HUGE against foprmed units, (the exception are elephants which some skirmishers can give a good fight to). All of these abilities are what skirmishers are SUPPOSED to do.
The other rules all are realistic and use common sense. I have not come across any army that is super powerful because of ferocious charge and auto-breaks. WHAB lends itself to super armies. FoG lends itself to melee and charges that take some time to break an opponent.
I like WHAB for a game that lasts an hour or so of an evening. FoG tends to take three hours in general - but FEELS correct, with a historical reflection in troop types verses troop types - not who can i charge with my uber-heavy knights!
Try Fog Bud. You will find that it takes a relatively short time to learn the rules, but much longer to master (how it SHOULD BE!).
Paul
Timmy, I got mine from the Yahoo FoG group but Nik has a sticky on the General forum here with a list and links to the SOP document and more.
Mike
Mike
Mike
Once the battle line is no longer cohesive, I found shooty LH beat Elephants one on one - in a recent battle 3 IK Mongol LH BGs each took on an Indian Elephant BG. The first EL engaged tried to chase after some Mongol cavalry that were pushing into the rear areas and it got routed by LH shooting for its trouble (2 superior shots are likely to force a CT each turn). The other Elephants were wiser and charged their tormentors, reducing incoming shooting by forcing some evades. There were Indian archers nearby but they were undrilled and could not maneuver nimbly enough to do sufficient damage to stop the LH.bigdamnhero wrote:Hi!
the exception are elephants which some skirmishers can give a good fight to
Mike
This is exactly what I am looking for. I've not yet recieved the rules , it should be here any day. I cannot wait. I appreciate all th einformation! I have been playing miniatures for some time ( most lately the Warhammer series 40k Fantasy and Ancients I prefer the ancients as it is closer to realisty and usually when I play the other 2 I try to limit or request NO magic so as to make it more tactical than luck of the dice and Roll ans Smash. ) I have played Praetorians, Rome Total War and Legion Arena! Legion Arena is absolutley BRILLIANT !
I have noticed there are other booklets out. ( Rise of Rome, Legions Triumphant, Sword and Scimitar ). Are these needed to play in th ebeginning or can you purchase them afterwards? What are contained in these Booklets? - john
I have noticed there are other booklets out. ( Rise of Rome, Legions Triumphant, Sword and Scimitar ). Are these needed to play in th ebeginning or can you purchase them afterwards? What are contained in these Booklets? - john
FoG plays quite differently from Warhammer and from Warhammer Ancients. A premium is placed on tactics and maneuvering your forces into advantageous positions and concntrating force on points of enemy weakness. Flanks and rear are vulnerable to attacks, so each side tries to guard the flanks and rears of its units from the other side.
Actually, I can tell you this is not correct. WH is exactly the same as FoG in the above respect. While I like both games, I dont play Warhammer looking for "historical" outcomes. I play it for something different. Of course, Romans versus Low Countries and the like arent exactly "historical" either.
That being said, if you think it doesnt take tactics to win at Warhammer, you havent played the game. There are players out there that are brilliant, much like there are in any game system.
Said all that to say this, all games are different, almost none are completely accurate, but they also all have a bit of fun in them.
Thanks,
Clay
-
KingHassan
- Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
- Posts: 98
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:40 pm
Sorry, Clay, I was not talking about Warhammer tactics. To avoid confusion, I should have put paragraph mark after the first sentence, which was correct but not detailed, and expanded it to a more formed thought:
"The sequence and mechanisms of play and the actions players can take are quite different from Warhammer and Warhammer Ancients."
and then discussed next paragraph what I see as important in FoG. I don't imagine you would disagree with that.
Mike
"The sequence and mechanisms of play and the actions players can take are quite different from Warhammer and Warhammer Ancients."
and then discussed next paragraph what I see as important in FoG. I don't imagine you would disagree with that.
Mike
-
MARVIN_THE_ARVN
- Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
- Posts: 396
- Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 2:37 pm
Hi John,
Im new to ancients in general, not having played DBM etc etc and I like the feel of the game.
I found the rulebook a little hard going but as I have now played 9-ish games it makes much more sense.
Although they are a good set of rules in my opinion it is still a game and some of the rules reward "gamey" manouvers, so not perfect but what set are?
I bought the first four army books and I am struggling to pick what army to go for, so in the end I went for something I like the look of and gave me alot of choice to play around me.
Enjoy!!!
Clay, who won? (I like the thought of playing out of era, must be the Fantasy/SF side of me)
Conrad
Im new to ancients in general, not having played DBM etc etc and I like the feel of the game.
I found the rulebook a little hard going but as I have now played 9-ish games it makes much more sense.
Although they are a good set of rules in my opinion it is still a game and some of the rules reward "gamey" manouvers, so not perfect but what set are?
I bought the first four army books and I am struggling to pick what army to go for, so in the end I went for something I like the look of and gave me alot of choice to play around me.
Enjoy!!!
Clay, who won? (I like the thought of playing out of era, must be the Fantasy/SF side of me)
Conrad
"I'll gladly trade you some ARVN rifles, never been fired and only dropped once"
I hope I didnt give the wrong impression I do enjoy playing The warhammer series of miniature Game. ( 40k and Fantasy ) IN 40k I have played Necron and Guard , Fantasy Dwarf and Empire. They are enjoyable when looking for a little more realisitic we cut out the magic in the fantasy game.
Agreed you definitly use tactics in warhammer but some rules limit your use of tactics. Some of th erules also lend to unrealistic situations ( autobreak for instance ) Obviously this is due to the game itself ( fantasy ) and therefore not always bound to reality in all its situations. I guess what I am looking for is something close to reality giving it a real feel to it. Also to help understand and explore ancient tactics and warfare.
Agreed you definitly use tactics in warhammer but some rules limit your use of tactics. Some of th erules also lend to unrealistic situations ( autobreak for instance ) Obviously this is due to the game itself ( fantasy ) and therefore not always bound to reality in all its situations. I guess what I am looking for is something close to reality giving it a real feel to it. Also to help understand and explore ancient tactics and warfare.
-
CrazyHarborc
- Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 251/1
- Posts: 126
- Joined: Sat May 24, 2008 12:08 am
I have not played a game of FoG.....yet. Been wargaming for over 40 years. That does include WHFB, starting with the tail end of 3rd Edition. Been playing WAB since it came across the Pond. I've lost track of the other rules sets I have used.....There were many other sets.
I like the style/format of the rulebook. I have the Roman and Medieval suppliments. My regular opponents are enthused about trying out FoW. Hopefully, that will be next week.
These rules do use luck of the dice. IMHO, many times the dice represent the "happenings" of real war/life. You can make all the right moves, have the best of the best in every way.........It still takes LUCK to win/survive.
I like the style/format of the rulebook. I have the Roman and Medieval suppliments. My regular opponents are enthused about trying out FoW. Hopefully, that will be next week.
These rules do use luck of the dice. IMHO, many times the dice represent the "happenings" of real war/life. You can make all the right moves, have the best of the best in every way.........It still takes LUCK to win/survive.
It was a winning draw for the Greeks sadly. We were playing a 3.5 hour game to simulate tournament rounds, so even though there were a lot of undecided battles, we stopped at the agreed time.
I think he had one more point than I did when the game ended, so a very close match. Pike are pretty good in this system, but it is not because of their troop type alone. What makes them really special in FoG, is their price. 6 points for a stand of pike makes for 24 points per base of 4 deep frontage. Thats what makes them so good, they can now get a ton of them.
I think we did the math on Low Countries, and they could field for 480 points a 32 inch wide x 4 deep pike formation. Thats almost half the board covered in pike blocks!!!
How would you like to face that if the terrain fell just right on the flanks???
Anyway, was a good game, and I am still learning.
Clay
I think he had one more point than I did when the game ended, so a very close match. Pike are pretty good in this system, but it is not because of their troop type alone. What makes them really special in FoG, is their price. 6 points for a stand of pike makes for 24 points per base of 4 deep frontage. Thats what makes them so good, they can now get a ton of them.
I think we did the math on Low Countries, and they could field for 480 points a 32 inch wide x 4 deep pike formation. Thats almost half the board covered in pike blocks!!!
How would you like to face that if the terrain fell just right on the flanks???
Anyway, was a good game, and I am still learning.
Clay
-
flameberge
- Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
- Posts: 264
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 5:31 am
I believe Caesar wrote something along the lines of fortune playing a more central role in warfare that other aspects of life.CrazyHarborc wrote:These rules do use luck of the dice. IMHO, many times the dice represent the "happenings" of real war/life. You can make all the right moves, have the best of the best in every way.........It still takes LUCK to win/survive.