Slitherine

Focusing on the Alex Mac Hypaspists options.

If I take 12 hypaspists as pike and pay the medium foot costs I have the option to deploy either 1 BG of 12 bases of pike or 2 BG's of 6 bases each of MF Ltsp Sw.
When do I make the decision on what to deply? Is it at the point when I place them on the table, say in the final bound of deployment or do I have to decide before I start placing troops as it would change the number of BG's in the army and so alter the deployment order?

I'm also wondering if the decision between 1 pike or 2 MF changes the break point of the army?

Regards
Martyn

I'm pleased to see that the option to field the Hypaspists as 1 x 12 Pike or 2 x MF has been re-introduced. It was errated out of V1 and V2.

The simplest and fairest solution IMO is to supply 2 lists. The points will be the same but the order of march and break point of the army will be different. 2 x BGs vs 1 BG. The Alex player should decide which list to use after terrain has been placed but before deployment.

But I'm sure others will disagree.

petedalby wrote:I'm pleased to see that the option to field the Hypaspists as 1 x 12 Pike or 2 x MF has been re-introduced. It was errated out of V1 and V2.

And being honest it maybe shouldn't have gone into the new lists - when compiling the draft for Terry I used the original list documents and forgot about that errata ...

I guess one option would be to say that if you are going for the exchange option for a 12 base Hypaspist BG then the MF BGs must be deployed when the 12 base BG would normally be, you inform your opponent as to the (possibly) apparent anomaly in BG numbers, and keep army break the same. I'm not that keen on a 2 list option as it would allow you to significantly change your deployment order - undue flexibility.

My opinion is:

There should only be 1 list.
The army size should not change.
Treat them as 1 BG for deployment purposes. At the time when the single BG would be deployed you instead deploy both the smaller BGs.

We should consider how we treat dismounting cavalry...... The scouting point of the army is calculated BEFORE they dismount.
In this particular case, the break point of the army (and the army size) is calculated before the BG is split. (it should be on the list when submitted).

I guess a clarification is in order (should it go in the rules errata or the list errata ??)

terrys wrote:
I guess a clarification is in order (should it go in the rules errata or the list errata ??)

I think it is a unique case so maybe the army list errata?

But I'm sure others will disagree.

Told you so!

petedalby wrote:

But I'm sure others will disagree.

Told you so!

We'll call you Nostradamus from now on

On reflection - please reconsider my suggestion. How is that a problem?

Whereas with Terry's proposal, the Alex Mac player potentially gets the opportunity to place an additional BG in the last quarter - so 3/3/3/4.

List errata. Change the list so its a choice of one or the other IMO

BTW, unless Terry removed it (I have no published lists, just draft documents) the swap option is also available for the ordinary pikemen as well so it may not just be a single extra BG.

The original errata removing the option for replacing a 12 base pike BG was (presumably) put in because it was a clean and simple solution. May still be the best option.

philqw78 wrote:List errata. Change the list so its a choice of one or the other IMO

+1

why not symply create 2 different new lists and suppress the old one ( and add the Lydians of croesus , please)

kind regards

thefrenchjester " still loving FOG!!! "

I'm coming to the conclusion that the option should be restricted to 8-base battle groups only.
That would still allow the flexibility, but remove the confusion of what happens when the number of battle groups changes.

Words fail me.

thefrenchjester wrote: why not symply create 2 different new lists and suppress the old one ( and add the Lydians of croesus , please)

Rather suspect that won't happen. But as for the Lydians you could use the one in this topic - http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtop ... 73&t=80429 - unofficial, of course.

I can schedule in a weekly update going forwards to upload the latest FAQ to the BHGS website if you wish ... ?

terrys wrote:I'm coming to the conclusion that the option should be restricted to 8-base battle groups only.
That would still allow the flexibility, but remove the confusion of what happens when the number of battle groups changes.

Or have 12 base HF BGs replaced by 12 base MF BGs?

Also a simple solution.

nikgaukroger wrote:

terrys wrote:I'm coming to the conclusion that the option should be restricted to 8-base battle groups only.
That would still allow the flexibility, but remove the confusion of what happens when the number of battle groups changes.

Or have 12 base HF BGs replaced by 12 base MF BGs?

Also a simple solution.

+1 (I vote for that solution)


thefrenchjester