Slitherine

I have played about half a dozen games now and still don't get the rationale for this.

It seems to me that the differentiation between drilled and undrilled shock troops testing on the CMT to avoid this is not big enough i.e just 1 on 2D6.

I have been trying out the rules using Classical Greeks and I was under the impression that Spartan Citizens and Peroikoi were far less prone than the part time farmer Hoplites of haring off on their own( Athenians at Marathon).
Didn't the Spartans have a reputation for a slow measured advance to the sound of pipes?

There also seems to be no modifier for holding high ground; you are just as likely to go bombing off from the top of a strong defensive position as on flat ground. Very likely for undrilled troops possibly, the best example I can think of now is the Fyrd at Hastings, but drilled troops far less likely surely?

One thing I have learnt in fielding a Spartan army is to field as few Spartans as possible. Not worth the points frankly if all you get to do is re-roll ones. And certainly that ability won't make any other Greek hoplite army worried about facing them as some of their historical counterparts apparently were.

Vespasian28 wrote:One thing I have learnt in fielding a Spartan army is to field as few Spartans as possible. Not worth the points frankly if all you get to do is re-roll ones. And certainly that ability won't make any other Greek hoplite army worried about facing them as some of their historical counterparts apparently were.

In a combat between two BGs of 6 elements, one superior and the other average, both initially steady and with no external modifiers on cohesion tests, the average BG has 21% chance of losing cohesion in each round of combat, the superior one only 7.6%. On top of that, the superiors have a much better chance of turning around any initial setback. So there's a good 75% chance of the superiors winning. How many extra points do you think that is worth?

You may have a point about the high ground though.

Best wishes,
Matthew

Yes. Spartans are scary from the front. When you win a round of combat, they shrug it off or disrupt but then bolster later, but most of the time they are just grinding you down. It's very dispiriting to manage to knock one of their hoplite BGs down to disrupted, then to fragmented, then have it resolutely hang on with ties and passed cohesion tests until it bolsters back up and gets back to the job of grinding away.

There is a big difference between 7 and 8. Assuming no further modifiers,
Pass on 7: 42% chance of failure
Pass on 8: 58% chance of failure (likely to occur about 40% more often).

Add in Superior re-rolls and the odds drop a great deal.

Modelling what is important and avoiding profitless complexity is a design principle in FOG. So modifiers are few and intended to achieve appropiirate results.

By the way, if on higher ground, the feeling of confidence may make them more eager to attack the enemy. If on lower ground, their discomfort may make them more anxious to attack the enemy. Various circumstances could cut various ways in terms of troops advancing impetuously. However, I would submit that having a commander close by and being disordered/disrupted/fragmented - the modifiers actually used in the CMT table - seem to pretty unambiguously push in the direction of greater control and lesser control respectively.

Cheers,

Mike

Don't forget if you have an officer present that helps things quite a bit!

Thank you for the replies, especially about the odds. Just confirms how unlucky I must be!

Good indication of that was yesterdays game. Two BG of hoplites(not Spartan) uphill of attacking pike. Both lost impact, went fragmented and then routed after the melee phase. Not unusual for me even with Spartans