Why bother with LF?
Moderators: hammy, philqw78, terrys, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design, Field of Glory Moderators
Why bother with LF?
I've played five games of FoG, using the 2nd Punic War armies in the main rule book. I'm not an expert on the rules by any means, but based on those five games, I think the game penalizes light foot so much that it makes them useless on the table. The Roman velites can't do a thing against the enemy. The Numidian light horse don't perform anywhere near their historic level. In real life, Numidian cavalry were much prized by both Punic and Roman armies. In FoG, they're a positive liability, getting chewed up quickly and granting the enemy victory points.
As it is now, a four stand unit of velites uses two dice to fire at an enemy. That's assuming that all the velites' bases are within 2" of the enemy, which we've found is unlikely. They need two hits on a four base unit to cause a cohesion test. If the target has more than four bases, which all Punic foot battle groups have, the skirmishers can't cause a cohesion test no matter how many hits they inflict.
The velites have a 50% chance of causing two hits and a 75% chance of causing one hit on unarmored infantry; because the target gets a +2 to any death rolls caused by shooting, the target then has a 0% chance of losing their death roll and removing a stand. So overall the velites have a 0% chance of knocking off a base, and a 0% chance of causing a cohesion test; skirmishers can neither inflict losses nor cause disorder on infantry. That doesn't seem right.
The next turn, the target will charge the velites and chase them off. So velites get one shot per game. That's it. And that shot has a no chance of doing any damage.
We might introduce a house rule increasing skirmishers' range, maybe tripling it, to portray the velites' ability to run up, throw a javelin, and run back to their lines. We think of it working like skirmishers do in "Age of Eagles," our Napoleonic rules set of choice. The parent formation is represented on the table, but it can project a skirmish screen well in advance.
We might also use one die per base instead of one die per two bases. That would give skirmishers a better chance to disorder an enemy formation. We could then halve the hits (rounding up) so the skirmishers aren't as likely to cause base losses. We could even do away with death rolls on hits caused by skirmishers, or maybe allow death rolls if every "to hit" die actually did hit.
I'd also like to see skirmishers fall back in good order when charged. Right now they can automatically take a variable move roll, about face, and move directly to the rear. Now they're facing away from the enemy. It will take them a full turn to about face and move (maybe) back into range. So they lose a turn of shooting. If they fall back in good order during the impact phase, they would be in position to shoot during the shooting phase of the enemy's turn.
I'd like to have the skirmishers take a complex move test to move back in good order, facing the enemy, just out of charge range. If they fail the complex move test, they would follow the usual procedure. This would allow the skirmishers to have a better chance to harass the enemy like they did historically. It would make the Numidian cavalry perform closer to their historic record. As the rules stand, and this bears repeating, skirmishers are absolutely useless.
None of this would be automatic. A close order unit that passed its cohesion tests wouldn't get disordered or fragmented. A skirmish unit that failed its complex move test and rolled low on its variable die roll might get caught in the rear by charging close order troops. We would still have some variability, but the skirmishers would have a fighting chance.
Maybe I'll playtest these suggestions a little and see how they work out in a real game.
As it is now, a four stand unit of velites uses two dice to fire at an enemy. That's assuming that all the velites' bases are within 2" of the enemy, which we've found is unlikely. They need two hits on a four base unit to cause a cohesion test. If the target has more than four bases, which all Punic foot battle groups have, the skirmishers can't cause a cohesion test no matter how many hits they inflict.
The velites have a 50% chance of causing two hits and a 75% chance of causing one hit on unarmored infantry; because the target gets a +2 to any death rolls caused by shooting, the target then has a 0% chance of losing their death roll and removing a stand. So overall the velites have a 0% chance of knocking off a base, and a 0% chance of causing a cohesion test; skirmishers can neither inflict losses nor cause disorder on infantry. That doesn't seem right.
The next turn, the target will charge the velites and chase them off. So velites get one shot per game. That's it. And that shot has a no chance of doing any damage.
We might introduce a house rule increasing skirmishers' range, maybe tripling it, to portray the velites' ability to run up, throw a javelin, and run back to their lines. We think of it working like skirmishers do in "Age of Eagles," our Napoleonic rules set of choice. The parent formation is represented on the table, but it can project a skirmish screen well in advance.
We might also use one die per base instead of one die per two bases. That would give skirmishers a better chance to disorder an enemy formation. We could then halve the hits (rounding up) so the skirmishers aren't as likely to cause base losses. We could even do away with death rolls on hits caused by skirmishers, or maybe allow death rolls if every "to hit" die actually did hit.
I'd also like to see skirmishers fall back in good order when charged. Right now they can automatically take a variable move roll, about face, and move directly to the rear. Now they're facing away from the enemy. It will take them a full turn to about face and move (maybe) back into range. So they lose a turn of shooting. If they fall back in good order during the impact phase, they would be in position to shoot during the shooting phase of the enemy's turn.
I'd like to have the skirmishers take a complex move test to move back in good order, facing the enemy, just out of charge range. If they fail the complex move test, they would follow the usual procedure. This would allow the skirmishers to have a better chance to harass the enemy like they did historically. It would make the Numidian cavalry perform closer to their historic record. As the rules stand, and this bears repeating, skirmishers are absolutely useless.
None of this would be automatic. A close order unit that passed its cohesion tests wouldn't get disordered or fragmented. A skirmish unit that failed its complex move test and rolled low on its variable die roll might get caught in the rear by charging close order troops. We would still have some variability, but the skirmishers would have a fighting chance.
Maybe I'll playtest these suggestions a little and see how they work out in a real game.
-
MCollett
- Corporal - Strongpoint

- Posts: 68
- Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 3:41 am
- Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Re: Why bother with LF?
They won't do lasting damage to heavy troops, but then light foot didn't historically. They do have a chance of disrupting them long enough for your heavies to hit with an (extra) advantage.scomac wrote:I think the game penalizes light foot so much that it makes them useless on the table. The Roman velites can't do a thing against the enemy.
The only thing that is likely to 'chew up' light horse is superior numbers and quality of enemy light horse - they can usually outrun everything else.The Numidian light horse don't perform anywhere near their historic level. In real life, Numidian cavalry were much prized by both Punic and Roman armies. In FoG, they're a positive liability, getting chewed up quickly and granting the enemy victory points.
Only the front rank has to be within 2"; the rear rank counts as the same range as the front. All bases are way over scale depth.As it is now, a four stand unit of velites uses two dice to fire at an enemy. That's assuming that all the velites' bases are within 2" of the enemy, which we've found is unlikely.
You need 1-per-3 to cause a cohesion test, so two hits will work on a six-element unit. 1-per-2 (e.g. two hits on a four-element unit) gives a test with an additional minus. And a six element unit is likely to have a frontage of 3, so two velite units can both have a crack at it: concentration of fire is critical to effective shooting in FoG.They need two hits on a four base unit to cause a cohesion test. If the target has more than four bases, which all Punic foot battle groups have, the skirmishers can't cause a cohesion test no matter how many hits they inflict.
The javelin range for skirmishers in FoG already implicitly includes a generous allowance for this.We might introduce a house rule increasing skirmishers' range, maybe tripling it, to portray the velites' ability to run up, throw a javelin, and run back to their lines.
The "parent formation" is the unit of hastati & principes; the velites can be as far in advance of this as you please.We think of it working like skirmishers do in "Age of Eagles," our Napoleonic rules set of choice. The parent formation is represented on the table, but it can project a skirmish screen well in advance.
Bags be Scythians in the playtestsWe might also use one die per base instead of one die per two bases. [...]
I'd also like to see skirmishers fall back in good order when charged. [...] If they fall back in good order during the impact phase, they would be in position to shoot during the shooting phase of the enemy's turn.
[...]
Maybe I'll playtest these suggestions a little and see how they work out in a real game.
Best wishes,
Matthew
-
vercingetorix
- Senior Corporal - Destroyer

- Posts: 103
- Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2008 10:27 pm
I love using LF -- it is really useful. The purpose of LF is not to kill things, or even really cause cohesion tests. I use it to control the battlefield, if my skirmishers can be on the offensive (Attacking LF or skirmishing HF), it makes it easier for me to double move things and get my strike force where it needs to be while slowing down my opponent's striking force.
-
philqw78
- Chief of Staff - Elite Maus

- Posts: 8841
- Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
- Location: Manchester
To play devils advocateMaybe I'll playtest these suggestions a little and see how they work out in a real game.
Get the CT level (1 hit per 3) and ranges right, (all shoot from position of front rank).
With a six MU range for javelins, 18MU for foot bow and 12MU for mounted bow and 1 dice per base.
I would take a unit of Cretans against a unit of Spartans any day. They would destroy the Spartans by themselves.
Especially shooting the same turn as an evade after passing a CMT, which it doesn't matter too much if I fail because I still get a VMD and dont have to get closer than 12 MU any way to be in effective range.
But I'd always stay at 6 MU to stop the Spartans double move.
rant over
However it may be worth reading some of the battle reports on here to see how others have used skirmishers first
viewtopic.php?t=7139 Try this one for some hot skirmisher action
However the problem is skirmishers are used to screen the army and cause a few cohesion tests, so tend not to get a lot of most write ups. But still, my competition armies have all been 50% plus skirmish BG so far as an individual.
Last edited by philqw78 on Wed Oct 22, 2008 3:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
Matthew, thanks for taking the time to post a reply.
Sorry; thought it was 1 hit per 2 bases that caused a cohesion test, not 1 per 3. So that does give the skirmishers a small chance of disordering the enemy. But that enemy probably takes the cohesion test with a +1 for support and a +1 for commander in range. So the velites had to inflict two hits with two dice, and the enemy has to roll a natural 4 or less to fail the cohesion test. That's the only way the skirmishers affect the battle. What are the odds that happens? 25% to get both hits and 16.7% to fail the cohesion test: 4% for both to happen on the same turn.
I'm not a tournament gamer. I just want to have an historically plausible game. During the 2nd Punic War, skirmishers operated between the lines, hoping to win the skirmish battle and throw the enemy's main battle line into some confusion. With FoG, if the Roman player wins the skirmish battle, he gets a 4% chance to disorder one enemy battle group. Why bother? Skirmishers can't make a fighting withdrawl to draw close order troops on while peppering them with fire. They can't really do much at all, except get routed in melee and give attrition points to the enemy.
In the starter army lists, the Carthaginians have two battle groups of Numidian cavalry. In every game, our Numidian cavalry has tried to skirmish with Roman cavalry, but without effect. We haven't caused the Roman cavalry to disorder or lose a base in five games. The Romans charge, the Numidians evade, and eventually they get pushed off the table. What's the point? When the Carthaginian player elects to fight rather than evade, the Roman cavalry makes short work of them.
Sorry; thought it was 1 hit per 2 bases that caused a cohesion test, not 1 per 3. So that does give the skirmishers a small chance of disordering the enemy. But that enemy probably takes the cohesion test with a +1 for support and a +1 for commander in range. So the velites had to inflict two hits with two dice, and the enemy has to roll a natural 4 or less to fail the cohesion test. That's the only way the skirmishers affect the battle. What are the odds that happens? 25% to get both hits and 16.7% to fail the cohesion test: 4% for both to happen on the same turn.
I'm not a tournament gamer. I just want to have an historically plausible game. During the 2nd Punic War, skirmishers operated between the lines, hoping to win the skirmish battle and throw the enemy's main battle line into some confusion. With FoG, if the Roman player wins the skirmish battle, he gets a 4% chance to disorder one enemy battle group. Why bother? Skirmishers can't make a fighting withdrawl to draw close order troops on while peppering them with fire. They can't really do much at all, except get routed in melee and give attrition points to the enemy.
In the starter army lists, the Carthaginians have two battle groups of Numidian cavalry. In every game, our Numidian cavalry has tried to skirmish with Roman cavalry, but without effect. We haven't caused the Roman cavalry to disorder or lose a base in five games. The Romans charge, the Numidians evade, and eventually they get pushed off the table. What's the point? When the Carthaginian player elects to fight rather than evade, the Roman cavalry makes short work of them.
-
philqw78
- Chief of Staff - Elite Maus

- Posts: 8841
- Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
- Location: Manchester
You can then also tempt the enemy shock foot into rash charges to disrupt his line.With FoG, if the Roman player wins the skirmish battle, he gets a 4% chance to disorder one enemy battle group. Why bother?
5 or less if he has rear support.natural 4 or less
Why are you putting them in melee, unless against other skirmishers.can't really do much at all, except get routed in melee and give attrition points to the enemy.
If you rolled the correct dice and massed your skirmishers on a single BG the odds are you would get a CT from the Roman Cav every turn. 8 bases of javelis, 4 dice at evens = 2 hits. Get the shooting near the table edge and without a general there is a greater than 50% chance of failure.We haven't caused the Roman cavalry to disorder or lose a base in five games
Change direction with your Numidians. Try to get past him, come at him from more than one direction.The Romans charge, the Numidians evade, and eventually they get pushed off the table
Re: Why bother with LF?
You can shoot the same target with multiple battlegroups at the same time? I thought they had to be in a line to do that?MCollett wrote:You need 1-per-3 to cause a cohesion test, so two hits will work on a six-element unit. 1-per-2 (e.g. two hits on a four-element unit) gives a test with an additional minus. And a six element unit is likely to have a frontage of 3, so two velite units can both have a crack at it: concentration of fire is critical to effective shooting in FoG.They need two hits on a four base unit to cause a cohesion test. If the target has more than four bases, which all Punic foot battle groups have, the skirmishers can't cause a cohesion test no matter how many hits they inflict.
For some reason, we were playing it where each unit declared fire, then shot, then resolved, then the next unit fired, etc.
Because the Carthaginians have an inspired commander, they always win the initiative roll and deploy first. The Romans deploy second and mass their cavalry on one flank, keeping the Numidians from doubling up on one unit. We're playing on a 9'x5' table, and we still haven't had enough maneuver room on the flanks to let the Numidians hit the Romans from two sides at once.
You all have given me some points to ponder. When we run through another game, we'll try some of your ideas and see how they work. Please keep the comments coming! I'll be checking the board periodically.
You all have given me some points to ponder. When we run through another game, we'll try some of your ideas and see how they work. Please keep the comments coming! I'll be checking the board periodically.
-
MCollett
- Corporal - Strongpoint

- Posts: 68
- Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 3:41 am
- Location: Auckland, New Zealand
The player with initiative deploys second. But even against two cavalry units, the greater speed and manoeuvrability of the lights will often allow you to concentrate your shooting.scomac wrote:Because the Carthaginians have an inspired commander, they always win the initiative roll and deploy first. The Romans deploy second and mass their cavalry on one flank, keeping the Numidians from doubling up on one unit.
Best wishes,
Matthew
-
nikgaukroger
- Field of Glory Moderator

- Posts: 10287
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
- Location: LarryWorld
scomac wrote:
I'm not a tournament gamer. I just want to have an historically plausible game. During the 2nd Punic War, skirmishers operated between the lines, hoping to win the skirmish battle and throw the enemy's main battle line into some confusion.
So wargamers keep telling themselves often based on projecting Napoleonic skirmishers back 2000 years rather than looking at the historical accounts which, IMO, support no such thing.
Nik Gaukroger
"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith
nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith
nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
-
rbodleyscott
- Field of Glory 2

- Posts: 28409
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm
At the battle of Cannae, Hannibal deployed his Numidian cavalry on one wing, and his heavier Gallic and Spanish cavalry on the other. The Numidian cavalry did not defeat the Roman cavalry on their wing, but merely kept them occupied (in exactly the manner you describe above) until the Gallic and Spanish cavalry had defeated the Roman cavalry on their wing, ridden round behind the Roman centre and attacked the Roman cavalry on the other wing in the rear.scomac wrote:In every game, our Numidian cavalry has tried to skirmish with Roman cavalry, but without effect. We haven't caused the Roman cavalry to disorder or lose a base in five games. The Romans charge, the Numidians evade, and eventually they get pushed off the table. What's the point? When the Carthaginian player elects to fight rather than evade, the Roman cavalry makes short work of them.
Numidians should not historically defeat enemy heavy cavalry unaided - they should be able to keep them occupied. They can do this very handily in FoG.
-
grahambriggs
- Lieutenant-General - Do 217E

- Posts: 3080
- Joined: Fri Sep 12, 2008 9:48 am
Try the encounter with no velites on the Roman side and see what happens (perhaps replace with equivalent points of heavy foot). You might find the Numidian light foot taunting the legion into unco-ordinated charges. Or slowed down in their advance such that the flanks give way before they close with the Carthaginian heavy foot.
Respectfully, I think you may be more influenced by your experience with other rule sets than by actual historical practice. As several others have already pointed out, Numidians (and other skirmish types) work fine in FoG if they are used historically, to harass and tie up the enemy with hit-and-run tactics. After all, that is what they were famous for, not for causing casualties in melee. In fact, the primary historical tactic for dealing with Numidian horsemen was to drive them off with heavier cavalry such as Spaniards or Gauls.
The following web site does a nice job of summarizing the historical record for the Numidians: http://www.fortunecity.com/skyscraper/b ... imble.html
Cheers,
Scott
The following web site does a nice job of summarizing the historical record for the Numidians: http://www.fortunecity.com/skyscraper/b ... imble.html
Cheers,
Scott
-
Marcus_Antonius
- Private First Class - Opel Blitz

- Posts: 2
- Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 3:52 pm
I love my Numidian LH in FOG.
As others have suggesed FOG gets the light forces into the mix in a more historical manner. If you neglect to field adequate light forces to counter your opponent you are going to have problems maintaining the initiative. If you field too many in an otherwise heavy force, you are going to have trouble using them effectively.
As others have suggesed FOG gets the light forces into the mix in a more historical manner. If you neglect to field adequate light forces to counter your opponent you are going to have problems maintaining the initiative. If you field too many in an otherwise heavy force, you are going to have trouble using them effectively.
Let me be a little clearer, because I think some of you are misunderstanding me. I don't think skirmishers alone should be able to destroy an enemy force. That's not what I'm saying. Skirmishers in the game should not frequently inflict base losses. But they should have some slight chance of doing so, and if unopposed by enemy skirmishers, they should have a better than 4% chance of disordering an enemy close order formation.
My understanding of skirmishers in this period comes from Goldsworthy's book on the Second Punic War. I hope I'm not just projecting Napoleonic skirmishing back 2000 years. But Goldsworthy, working primarily from Polybius, describes skirmishers operating between the lines just as I laid out.
My understanding of skirmishers in this period comes from Goldsworthy's book on the Second Punic War. I hope I'm not just projecting Napoleonic skirmishing back 2000 years. But Goldsworthy, working primarily from Polybius, describes skirmishers operating between the lines just as I laid out.
-
BrianC
- Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL

- Posts: 427
- Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 10:57 pm
- Location: Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada
I have found that it is best as a Roman to not put your velite in front of your line to protect it but rather off to the sides to skirmish the enemy cavalry. In effect in my games the Romans lose every skirmish simply because I want to engage the lines as soon as possible. If you battle the LF in between the main lines the battle could take forever. Thats playing into the hands of the Carthaginians. I wish there was a way you could skirmish in front of your line and win the skirmish without doing battle with the LF. As the Roman its difficult because you are outclassed in cavalry. Your main punch is from the HF which is why you want to get them into it before your flanks are turned by the cavalry, unless your lucky with the dice.grahambriggs wrote:Try the encounter with no velites on the Roman side and see what happens (perhaps replace with equivalent points of heavy foot). You might find the Numidian light foot taunting the legion into unco-ordinated charges. Or slowed down in their advance such that the flanks give way before they close with the Carthaginian heavy foot.
Speaking about LH I think they are very useful. I would not melee a full cavalry BG alone but would use them to hit the flank or rear and to distract other BGs from the main fight. They are also good at taking out smaller BGs such as Triarii.
LF are more of a speed bump and annoyance out on the flanks once the main lines hit. They aren't game winners but can be used to good effect to perhaps help other BGs.
Brian
-
philqw78
- Chief of Staff - Elite Maus

- Posts: 8841
- Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
- Location: Manchester
I work it out that they have a 7%* chance if the target has no rear support and a general. No general or rear support, an 11%* chance.
But this is not the only thing they do. They also force the enemy shock troops to test not to charge. A 60%* chance they will if irregular, a 40%* chance if regular, and about 30%* if they have a general (my head hurts) This will break up the enemy formation. Giving you then more chance to get 2 units of velites shooting on 1 unit, doubling your chances of disruption. Or being able to hit the enemy line whilst it is disjointed, giving you a massive advantage in the melee. Like you said its not about causing casualties its about using the LF correctly.
*ish
But this is not the only thing they do. They also force the enemy shock troops to test not to charge. A 60%* chance they will if irregular, a 40%* chance if regular, and about 30%* if they have a general (my head hurts) This will break up the enemy formation. Giving you then more chance to get 2 units of velites shooting on 1 unit, doubling your chances of disruption. Or being able to hit the enemy line whilst it is disjointed, giving you a massive advantage in the melee. Like you said its not about causing casualties its about using the LF correctly.
*ish
Light foot used infront of an enemy line of heavy foot have a small chance of having a significant impact (i.e. disrupting the enemy).scomac wrote:Let me be a little clearer, because I think some of you are misunderstanding me. I don't think skirmishers alone should be able to destroy an enemy force. That's not what I'm saying. Skirmishers in the game should not frequently inflict base losses. But they should have some slight chance of doing so, and if unopposed by enemy skirmishers, they should have a better than 4% chance of disordering an enemy close order formation.
My understanding of skirmishers in this period comes from Goldsworthy's book on the Second Punic War. I hope I'm not just projecting Napoleonic skirmishing back 2000 years. But Goldsworthy, working primarily from Polybius, describes skirmishers operating between the lines just as I laid out.
If you only consider 4 bases of light foot then they are a minimum sized battlegroup and realistically should have a minimal impact.
A BG of 6 light foot facing a BG of 6 protected heavy foot standing 2 MU from the heavy foot will have a lot more than a 4% chance of disrupting the heavies.
3 shots needing 4s, if 2 shots hit then a test is required. 37.5% of the time this will force a test and an additional 12.5% of the time it will force a test at -1 for casualties. Assuming a general and rear support then a normal test will fail 16.66% of the time, with a n extra -1 then the test will fail 27.78% of the time even with the general and rear support. In what would seem to be a fairly good situation for the heavy foot (general and rear support) there is still a nearly 10% chance that the lights will disrupt them.
Shooting is not in the end the primary function of light foot, they role is to screen, distract and other wise get in the way and then if they are charged by something solid they evade back through your heavies.
You should only ever fight with your light foot if you want to do so or if you really messed up and they failed to evade. Occasionally they may end up being forced back off the table but actually being routed should happen very rarely.



