Amendments to V3?
Posted: Tue Feb 04, 2020 2:47 pm
We've been playing with V3 long enough now to properly evaluate it. I think most players agree that this is the best version yet, with a quicker, more decisive gameplay. Unfortunately, as a successful rule set, FOG-AM is probably at its lowest level yet. It's clear from Tim Porter's recent end of year report that player numbers have dwindled to the extent that MeG now has more competitive players. FOG languishes at 6th out of 7 of the most popular rulesets, barely above DBM at the bottom. I've tried in the past to make suggestions to try and reverse the process. Suggestions like a handicap system, which works perfectly well at my club MAWS, have generally met with derision. I can't help wondering if anyone is bothered at all. Anyway, here are a few ideas to try and improve matters. Sadly, I suspect they'll meet with the usual apathy but, what the heck, here goes...
One of the appeals of ancients, surely the most popular wargaming era currently being played, is the tremendous number of different armies that can be fielded. Whilst Version 3 does give a better game, with heavy foot armies gaining in popularity, one once popular type has virtually disappeared. Cavalry lancer armies such as Bosporans and Sarmatians are rarely, if ever seen. It's similar with the Steppes terrain category they used to like fighting in. I think this may be down to the three dice on impact which, although contributing to the game's improvement, have made units of four bases of cavalry very vulnerable, especially as a base loss now gives an immediate minus one for 25% losses. Would it be such a drastic or dramatic change if horse mounted troops got a plus one on the death roll (as elephants) at impact? This might help and bring a popular troop type back into play.
As for the disappearing Steppes, the last time I started a game with Terry he suggested we dice for who was the invader. Invader? I don't think the word is mentioned anywhere in the rules. We used to dice for initiative, where a more competent general and superior numbers of mounted troops could give an army an advantage at deployment. This has NOTHING TO DO with who the invader is. Let's please bring back the terrain choice to any of the terrain types listed for BOTH armies. That, along with a little death roll boost for lancers, might reintroduce that missing variety.
Finally, a suggestion for army lists. Although we now have three excellent army list books there are some armies missing that were in the original set of books (my own Early Zhou Chinese being one). What about a fourth book along the lines of The Lost Scrolls? It could include some of the missing lists and maybe some revised ones. But please lets have it as a free PDF download! In fact, couldn't we now have ALL army list books available as free PDF downloads? Other sets, like the now most popular set ADLG, include all lists with the rule book, why can't we? Free army list books might just tempt some of those missing players to have another look...
Whatever happens FOG-AM is going to be around for a long time. There are going to be players who aren't going to change sets no matter what. But carry on as we have in the past and that pool of players is going to continue shrinking. It could be so much better...
One of the appeals of ancients, surely the most popular wargaming era currently being played, is the tremendous number of different armies that can be fielded. Whilst Version 3 does give a better game, with heavy foot armies gaining in popularity, one once popular type has virtually disappeared. Cavalry lancer armies such as Bosporans and Sarmatians are rarely, if ever seen. It's similar with the Steppes terrain category they used to like fighting in. I think this may be down to the three dice on impact which, although contributing to the game's improvement, have made units of four bases of cavalry very vulnerable, especially as a base loss now gives an immediate minus one for 25% losses. Would it be such a drastic or dramatic change if horse mounted troops got a plus one on the death roll (as elephants) at impact? This might help and bring a popular troop type back into play.
As for the disappearing Steppes, the last time I started a game with Terry he suggested we dice for who was the invader. Invader? I don't think the word is mentioned anywhere in the rules. We used to dice for initiative, where a more competent general and superior numbers of mounted troops could give an army an advantage at deployment. This has NOTHING TO DO with who the invader is. Let's please bring back the terrain choice to any of the terrain types listed for BOTH armies. That, along with a little death roll boost for lancers, might reintroduce that missing variety.
Finally, a suggestion for army lists. Although we now have three excellent army list books there are some armies missing that were in the original set of books (my own Early Zhou Chinese being one). What about a fourth book along the lines of The Lost Scrolls? It could include some of the missing lists and maybe some revised ones. But please lets have it as a free PDF download! In fact, couldn't we now have ALL army list books available as free PDF downloads? Other sets, like the now most popular set ADLG, include all lists with the rule book, why can't we? Free army list books might just tempt some of those missing players to have another look...
Whatever happens FOG-AM is going to be around for a long time. There are going to be players who aren't going to change sets no matter what. But carry on as we have in the past and that pool of players is going to continue shrinking. It could be so much better...