Search found 2114 matches
- Wed Jan 25, 2017 11:30 am
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: Commanded Shot - proposal
- Replies: 97
- Views: 26494
Re: Commanded Shot - proposal
One of the other things changing in this revision is the capture of artillery, in future the norm will be that captured artillery is removed in the JAP.
- Mon Jan 23, 2017 1:29 pm
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
- Replies: 91
- Views: 24985
Re: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
The Elites would get the advantage that they wouldn't need to commit their commander.
- Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:46 am
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
- Replies: 91
- Views: 24985
Re: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
Whilst I can see that better armour reducing your opponents re-rolls rather than enhancing your own makes better thematic sense, what happens to Poor troops fighting better armoured opponents? Would they re-roll 5s and 6s?
- Mon Jan 23, 2017 8:46 am
- Forum: Tournaments
- Topic: Potential Dates for 'Way of The Warriors' 2017
- Replies: 70
- Views: 21687
Re: Potential Dates for 'Way of The Warriors' 2017
It will be down to each organiser but a lesson learnt from the FoG AM V2 update (which admittedly was more substantial than ours) was that if you take too long people lose enthusiasm. In terms of timing, I'm pretty confident that the updates will not be ready in time for Roll Call in April, but I'd ...
- Sat Jan 21, 2017 11:26 am
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: Early TYW Swedish armies
- Replies: 13
- Views: 3626
Re: Early TYW Swedish armies
Having carried out this exercise, if the points change, the most important thing will be to produce a table to issue to everyone with the revised points costs for each troop type in each army list. Three is quite a bit of work in this, but if you want people to work out their own points for their f...
- Thu Jan 19, 2017 11:20 pm
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: BG Autobreak - proposal
- Replies: 60
- Views: 18643
Re: BG Autobreak - proposal
Tim is right. Lowering Superior break points was playrested for Fog AM v2 and was universally unpopular. Currently people only take Average mounted when compulsory or for rear support. Making them cheaper would not make them more attractive.
- Wed Jan 18, 2017 6:17 pm
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
- Replies: 91
- Views: 24985
Re: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
A reroll is the nearest we have to half a POA. Remember also the current proposal gives troops with better armour if they are otherwise at a negative POA.
- Wed Jan 18, 2017 5:30 pm
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
- Replies: 91
- Views: 24985
Re: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
Your understanding is correct.
- Tue Jan 17, 2017 3:22 pm
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: Cavalry turning and moving backwards in one turn?
- Replies: 16
- Views: 3981
Re: Cavalry turning and moving backwards in one turn?
One of the bizarre changes that was made to FoG AM was that cavalry could turn 180 degrees twice in one turn and move, but couldn't turn 180 degrees once and move. This was originally considered as an option, but was found in playtesting to be too powerful, allowing the cavalry to shoot from maximum...
- Mon Jan 16, 2017 10:34 pm
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: BG Autobreak - proposal
- Replies: 60
- Views: 18643
Re: BG Autobreak - proposal
Our thought was to replace the percentages with the table so you don't have to work it out.
- Mon Jan 16, 2017 6:29 pm
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: Bows
- Replies: 109
- Views: 31069
Re: Bows
A good analysis but there are other considerations, e.g. Arquebus and Musket are Shot and hence ignore armour in melee. They also give -1 in CTs to Cavalry and Light Horse.
- Mon Jan 16, 2017 4:58 pm
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
- Replies: 91
- Views: 24985
Re: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
Is there a specific Foot interaction that you think would be irreparably affected?
- Mon Jan 16, 2017 10:10 am
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: Points Values - the whole damn lot
- Replies: 86
- Views: 26245
Re: Points Values - the whole damn lot
Thank you for your thoughts David. In the original points system Cavalry were charged a 2 point premium for the ability to evade. This was especially poor value for those that can't. They already have the disadvantage of being less resilient to firearm shooting. The Tatars are competitive against th...
- Sun Jan 15, 2017 10:15 pm
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: Dragoons - proposal
- Replies: 53
- Views: 15560
Re: Dragoons - proposal
It sounds like maybe the people at your club use them more historically. Unfortunately, it's also possible to use them as a kind of Light Horse with Musket, as Keith describes above. The purpose of the proposal is to prevent that and force more historical usage.
- Sun Jan 15, 2017 9:12 pm
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
- Replies: 91
- Views: 24985
Re: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
Thank you for spotting that. I've fixed it now.
- Sun Jan 15, 2017 6:39 pm
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: Dragoons - proposal
- Replies: 53
- Views: 15560
Re: Dragoons - proposal
It's a valid point and something I did consider when thinking about Dragoons but I think it is an added complication that we don't need. in most games it won't arise and It would require a number of additional rules such as what happens if enemy contact the marker.
- Sun Jan 15, 2017 3:09 pm
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
- Replies: 91
- Views: 24985
Re: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
As requested, here are a few examples showing how the latest suggestion compares to the existing position. Example 1 A - Louis XIV (Unarmoured, Superior) v B - L of A (Armoured Average). Both DH with Pistol/Pistol. Currently: B has + POA for better armour. A will reroll 1s Proposed: Neither have POA...
- Fri Jan 13, 2017 4:59 pm
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
- Replies: 91
- Views: 24985
Re: Better Armour - proposal (updated)
I think some of the examples have shown that the reroll option won't do the job on its own, so we've had another think. This one is somewhat inelegant but we think it may provide the fix we're looking for without breaking anything else. So, the next suggestion is (and if people like it I know we'll ...
- Wed Jan 11, 2017 10:28 pm
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: BG Autobreak - proposal
- Replies: 60
- Views: 18643
Re: BG Autobreak - proposal
I wonder whether therefore we should change the Cohesion Test wording for %age losses to:- "For each 25% of original base losses" This was introduced into Fog AM in V2. The last I heard they were proposing to revert to the original in V3. It would be worth checking with Terry why that is.
- Tue Jan 10, 2017 11:25 pm
- Forum: FOGR Update
- Topic: Other Artillery stuff - proposal
- Replies: 15
- Views: 5757
Re: Other Artillery stuff - proposal
Since these address different issues why do you regard them as an either/or option?1 or 3 - not both.