leagueofancients.org.au Forum Index leagueofancients.org.au
League of Ancients
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FOG N Version 2
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    leagueofancients.org.au Forum Index -> Napoleonics
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Richard Gordon



Joined: 15 Oct 2011
Posts: 574

PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2017 5:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

That's correct. In v2 the concept of "destroyed" is removed. Troops always make a rout move and are then removed at the end of the turn. One less concept to battle with Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Neil



Joined: 11 Mar 2015
Posts: 55
Location: Malvern East

PostPosted: Sun Mar 05, 2017 9:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

BPT wrote:


All artillery units must be in the same division (ie massed).
One reason for this is game play. The presence of enemy artillery makes attacking more difficult. Encouraging all artillery units to be located in a similar area of the table may free up other parts of the table that opponents can target, facilitating movement.

Also, as artillery units represent a smallish scale 'grand battery', it is reasonable to expect a grand battery to be in one place, rather than having 2 (or 3) grand batteries spread across the table in a Corps sized engagement.

So early armies would have most of their artillery as attachments but retain an option to field a single massed battery (unit) if they so chose.

1807+ armies can mass up to 60 guns as (2) units if desired - on top of perhaps 3-6 artillery attachments - which is a scaled 9+ batteries of artillery per Corps.

Nothing set in tone here though. The proposal of making artillery minimums '0' is an interim measure to facilitate list building for now. It is anticipated that minimums will be looked at army by army in the lists at a later date.

Brett


Setting the minimum seems fair, although a slight non-issue as Marty said because no one would dare set out without artillery. Ruling all artillery in one division is "encouragement" in the Stalinist sense of the word only, and I would have thought unnecessary. It also removes one of the most interesting and difficult choices from the game - do you mass your artillery and smash the enemy in one place, or do you try to set up cross-fire? It's a choice that depends very much on terrain and opponent and in my opinion an important part of Napoleonic grand tactics that we would be unwise to discard.
_________________
_________________
Check out my Napoleonic Austrian modelling blog : colonelinhaber.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richard Gordon



Joined: 15 Oct 2011
Posts: 574

PostPosted: Sun Mar 05, 2017 9:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Being all in one division doesn't force you to mass your artillery. One still often sees players deploying it in different parts of the table, just all under the control of a single general.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Neil



Joined: 11 Mar 2015
Posts: 55
Location: Malvern East

PostPosted: Sun Mar 05, 2017 10:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I see what you mean now, it encourages in the sense that you want to keep them within the command distance of the division commander who controls them. Perhaps it would be better to place them under the direct command of the corps commander? Isn't that more in line with what you're trying to achieve? It also gives more incentive to field higher level commanders.
_________________
_________________
Check out my Napoleonic Austrian modelling blog : colonelinhaber.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richard Gordon



Joined: 15 Oct 2011
Posts: 574

PostPosted: Mon Mar 06, 2017 12:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, we did consider putting artillery under the control of the Corps commander but felt this would introduce another layer of complexity into the Command Point system and we are trying to remove complexity not add it.

As a bit of reverse justification, we felt that while the Corps commander is the one who chooses where to send the Corps artillery, it is the Divisional commander who then has hands on control of them. Your decision as where to send them is made when you draw up your army list. (Not entirely flawless logic, but keeping things simple prevailed in our decision.)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Neil



Joined: 11 Mar 2015
Posts: 55
Location: Malvern East

PostPosted: Mon Mar 06, 2017 11:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That seems fair, save that the allocation should happen at deployment rather than creation.

What if Corps Commanders could brigade artillery? They would need to use loads of pips to get joy from it but it would encourage the sort of behaviour you're looking for and also the use of higher-rated commanders.

And another beef about the Austrian 1809 lists - can we have large units of Uhlans please? I agree with the minimum of 6 stands light cav as that seems fair looking at the orders but there were several detachments of Uhlans large enough to count as large units. Basically I'm still looking at making my Wagram 3rd Korps as historical as possible and the current list forces me to take an unhistorical extra unit of light cavalry, and there doesn't seem to be any reason why this is so.
_________________
_________________
Check out my Napoleonic Austrian modelling blog : colonelinhaber.wordpress.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mick.G



Joined: 25 Jul 2013
Posts: 139
Location: Broadmeadows

PostPosted: Wed Mar 08, 2017 10:14 am    Post subject: Clarification on artillery attachments Reply with quote

Is it worth clarifying the tables on page 28 and 29 with regard to artillery attachments? Players new to the game may need to know artillery attachments can only fire at short and medium range. And are artillery attachments still available to cavalry? There is no mention of that in the table on page 29.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mick.G



Joined: 25 Jul 2013
Posts: 139
Location: Broadmeadows

PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2017 11:13 am    Post subject: Tests for Irregulars Reply with quote

On page 49 it says Irregulars test with two dice but in the definitions on page 65 it says Irregulars test with one dice, which is correct?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richard Gordon



Joined: 15 Oct 2011
Posts: 574

PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 9:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Is it worth clarifying the tables on page 28 and 29 with regard to artillery attachments? Players new to the game may need to know artillery attachments can only fire at short and medium range.

Good idea Mick. We'll add that in.

Quote:
And are artillery attachments still available to cavalry? There is no mention of that in the table on page 29.

Yes, that's a typo. They still give 2 dice at short and medium range. We'll correct it in the update.

By the way if you want to follow the fuller discussion on the changes, there has been quite a lot of discussion on the Slitherine forum here.
http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=69
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richard Gordon



Joined: 15 Oct 2011
Posts: 574

PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 9:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
On page 49 it says Irregulars test with two dice but in the definitions on page 65 it says Irregulars test with one dice, which is correct?

Good pick up Mick. Irregulars take CMTs with 1 dice but Cohesion Tests with 2 dice. So page 49 is right for CTs. We'll fix p.65.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
leadgend



Joined: 03 Oct 2006
Posts: 685
Location: Brunswick

PostPosted: Mon May 22, 2017 6:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There appears to be an omission from the draft V2 rules: The to hit number for firing and firing at troops Defending a building are not specified anywhere. The Rules for Shooting to and from buildings section on page 31 only specifies the number of dice rolled. The Firing to hit score rule on page 32 only mentions Artillery firing at buildings and a modifier for firing at non-building cover.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Richard Gordon



Joined: 15 Oct 2011
Posts: 574

PostPosted: Mon May 22, 2017 9:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, that was a bit of an oops that we've picked up. Despite all the play testing so far, no-one noticed it. The rule is it's 5's to hit at close range and for heavy artillery and 6s for everyone else at medium range.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
leadgend



Joined: 03 Oct 2006
Posts: 685
Location: Brunswick

PostPosted: Wed May 24, 2017 5:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richard Gordon wrote:
Yes, that was a bit of an oops that we've picked up. Despite all the play testing so far, no-one noticed it. The rule is it's 5's to hit at close range and for heavy artillery and 6s for everyone else at medium range.

Will you be issuing something covering this and any other things that have been noticed before the tournament?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Richard Gordon



Joined: 15 Oct 2011
Posts: 574

PostPosted: Wed May 24, 2017 6:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes. We have a tournament in Auckland 1st week of June and will issue an update asap after that to be used at July comp.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richard



Joined: 12 Oct 2006
Posts: 1065
Location: Elsternwick

PostPosted: Wed May 24, 2017 7:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Also , to be fair , the League tournament is also a play test of the work Brett & Richard have put in .

You enter the tournament knowing that . If you want to wait for a final proof tested version ,then do so and play in 2018.

What will help the processes is playing games and spotting any inconsistencies ,as you have done .
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    leagueofancients.org.au Forum Index -> Napoleonics All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Page 6 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group