Your Move Games
May 22, 2012, 09:21:11 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Rome vs Hawkshold 2000 points rules test game 1  (Read 239 times)
RushAss
Playtester
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1849


Eat your beets - Recycle!


WWW
« on: December 20, 2011, 12:35:29 pm »

Rome vs Hawkshold 2000 points rules test game 1

This past Friday the Jersey group got together and I figured that I’d take some of the new rule proposals for a test drive.  We had 4 players in Chris, Brook, Rob, and myself so we decided to do a pair of 1-on-1 games first, then a big game.  We rolled for opponents and I got Brook.  This first game was over quickly, so we where able to play a second game while Chris and Rob where still grinding it out in a Dwarf vs. Undead match.  This is the first of those 2 games.

One of the rules we tested was voting thread 5D
http://yourmovegames.com/forum/index.php/topic,4615.0.html
where the wording for the Pila rule goes from
When a non-cavalry non-skirmisher unit throws javelins (or pila) while on Close, mark off the range indicator.  A unit does not make a range attack while the range indicator is marked. The mark is erased when one of the following happens:

--the unit's Standing Order is changed from Close.
--the unit becomes unengaged after being engaged.
--you spend a Command Action in the Movement & Command phase to erase the mark.

To
“When a non-cavalry non-skirmisher unit throws javelins (or pila), mark off the range indicator.  A unit does not make a range attack while the range indicator is marked. The mark is erased when one of the following happens:

--the unit becomes unengaged after being engaged.
--you spend a Command Action in the Movement & Command phase to erase the mark.”

The other rules is voting thread 5E
http://yourmovegames.com/forum/index.php/topic,4616.0.html
Which essentially says that Pila should lose attack dice when units go into the yellow or red just like all other ranged attacks.

Set Up



Hawkshold played by Brook
Top to bottom:
Militia
Greatswordsmen backed by Bowmen
Heavy Infantry backed by Bowmen
Heavy Infantry backed by Bowmen
Greatswordsmen backed by Bowmen
Militia

I will hereby dub this build “Crawl and Shoot”

Rome played by yours truly
Top to bottom:
Velites backed by Italian Swordsmen
Veteran Principes backed by Triarii
Veteran Principes
Italian Swordsmen
Italian Swordsmen
Italian Swordsmen backed by Triarii
Velites backed by Hastati and Italian Cavalry

Bohan made me believer in Libyan Foot over Hannibal’s Elite as breakthrough units (same offensive stats for less points) so I figured I’d field some Veteran Principes instead of Extraordinarii.  

Early Turns



Brook had his line capped at 2.5.  He targeted each of my Skirmishers with the 2 Bowmen on their respective sides.  His Bowmen also had the SM standing order so they wouldn’t lose any attack dice as they closed.  My non-skirmisher troops where set to close objectives about 1.75 inches to their right since Brook had a 6-unit wide front that would cause me alignment issues later on if I didn’t offset our lines somehow.  The Skirmishers where told to just go off on their own and do their Skirmisher thing.

The Hawk line started its slow crawl forward while Rome did it’s sidestep dance.  The Hawk archery wasn’t effective early on, but they needed 1s to hit their skirmisher targets so not surprising.  Brook placed Bravery on both of his Militia and I drew lots of cards.  My Pila throw before engagement produced expected damage across the board.  The Militia at the bottom of the pic above failed their courage check despite the bravery from the combined attack of the Italian Swordsmen Pilas and Velites Javelins.  Most embarrassing for the Hawk general.

Late Turns


Note that at this point I realized the photo quality would be much nicer from the other side of the table, so the above image depicts a view from the opposite side of the table from which the first 2 photos where taken.  You may notice little “Ps” on my line units just above the standing order circle.  I put those there to indicate that Pilas had been thrown by those units and it would take me a command action to remove the P.

Brook switched the targeting of his archers to some of my line units and frankly I can’t remember which ones.  I direct controlled my Velites at the left of my line to create space for my Italian Swordsmen to engage the Milita unit there and Brook had another severe courage meltdown as this Militia unit (also with Bravery!) blew its courage check as well and died in the return attack.  The following turn I was able to get the pinches on both sides of the Hawk line and Brook surrendered at that point so we could get another game in before Rob and Chris finished playing.

Final Thoughts  

I think the Hawks still had some fight in them as the Bowmen could pinch the Italian Swordsmen that where about to roll the line and the Italian Swordsmen are not exactly the toughest units in the land.  However, the Hastati and Italian Cavalry where going to be a problem in a few turns.  I was able to draw and play both of my For the Glory of Rome cards.  Or whatever card it is that gives you (+1) +1/+1 if your unit is backed up.  That is just a vicious card!  Sadly, none of the rules we where play testing went into effect except for the Italian Swordsmen at the very top of the last photo and I didn’t bother burning the command action to allow for another throw before they pinched the Greatswordsmen up there.  They never actually engaged the Militia unit, so where not eligible to throw again until I had burned the CA.  This brings up an interesting question concerning this rule.  If a pila using unit expends it's throw on target #1, engages with a different unit (other than the one that it threw at, so target #2), then is victorious from THAT combat, does it get another pila throw at its next target (target #3)?

We had a better result from a play testing standpoint in the next game and an even better amount of information from the big game that took place after that.


« Last Edit: December 20, 2011, 02:44:58 pm by RushAss » Logged

"Sunrise on the road behind, Sunset on the road ahead
Nothing can stop you now, nothing can stop you now"
-Rush, Ghost Rider
Kevin
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2683



« Reply #1 on: December 20, 2011, 02:13:43 pm »

Quote
One of the rules we tested was voting thread 5D
http://yourmovegames.com/forum/index.php/topic,4615.0.html
where the wording for the Pila rule goes from
“When a non-cavalry non-skirmisher unit throws javelins (or pila), mark off the range indicator.  A unit does not make a range attack while the range indicator is marked. The mark is erased when one of the following happens:

--the unit becomes unengaged after being engaged.
--you spend a Command Action in the Movement & Command phase to erase the mark.”

To
When a non-cavalry non-skirmisher unit throws javelins (or pila) while on Close, mark off the range indicator.  A unit does not make a range attack while the range indicator is marked. The mark is erased when one of the following happens:

--the unit's Standing Order is changed from Close.
--the unit becomes unengaged after being engaged.
--you spend a Command Action in the Movement & Command phase to erase the mark.

Um...is that a typo?  Otherwise it's exactly backwards.  The second rule you mention is the current one; the top one is the proposed change.

Of course, it didn't end up mattering in this game, as they functioned identically (which is what they usually will do).
« Last Edit: December 20, 2011, 02:46:02 pm by Kevin » Logged

However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results. - Winston Churchill
Kevin
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2683



« Reply #2 on: December 20, 2011, 02:23:24 pm »

Quote
This brings up an interesting question concerning this rule.  If a pila using unit expends it's throw on target #1, engages with a different unit (other than the one that it threw at, so target #2), then is victorious from THAT combat, does it get another pila throw at its next target (target #3)?

Per the rule(s), whether you threw pila at the unit which you engaged is not part of the rule, so the answer to your question would be YES.


Nice report, though always annoying when freaky dice essentially void the value of a game for playtest data.  

While it's seriously ballsy to go 6-wide, I kind of like Brook's crawl-and-shoot build.  I wonder if it would've worked better to target archery straight ahead at the Roman infantry and hope for a quick breakthrough.  The problem is those damn Triarii there to plug the gaps.

You, meanwhile, get some sort of trophy for actually using the Hastadi.   Smiley

« Last Edit: December 20, 2011, 02:45:16 pm by Kevin » Logged

However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results. - Winston Churchill
RushAss
Playtester
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1849


Eat your beets - Recycle!


WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 20, 2011, 02:49:05 pm »

Quote
One of the rules we tested was voting thread 5D
http://yourmovegames.com/forum/index.php/topic,4615.0.html
where the wording for the Pila rule goes from
“When a non-cavalry non-skirmisher unit throws javelins (or pila), mark off the range indicator.  A unit does not make a range attack while the range indicator is marked. The mark is erased when one of the following happens:

--the unit becomes unengaged after being engaged.
--you spend a Command Action in the Movement & Command phase to erase the mark.”

To
When a non-cavalry non-skirmisher unit throws javelins (or pila) while on Close, mark off the range indicator.  A unit does not make a range attack while the range indicator is marked. The mark is erased when one of the following happens:

--the unit's Standing Order is changed from Close.
--the unit becomes unengaged after being engaged.
--you spend a Command Action in the Movement & Command phase to erase the mark.

Um...is that a typo?  Otherwise it's exactly backwards.  The second rule you mention is the current one; the top one is the proposed change.

Of course, it didn't end up mattering in this game, as they functioned identically (which is what they usually will do).
Oh crap, it is a typo.  I got that all sorts of screwed up in my mad rush to get this thing up.  Hopefully I'll get the next one up later today.


Nice report, though always annoying when freaky dice essentially void the value of a game for playtest data.  

While it's seriously ballsy to go 6-wide, I kind of like Brook's crawl-and-shoot build.  I wonder if it would've worked better to target archery straight ahead at the Roman infantry and hope for a quick breakthrough.  The problem is those damn Triarii there to plug the gaps.

Yeah, I think he would have been better off shooting at Italian Swordsmen from the beginning.  It's not a bad build at all IMO.  And I even used Hastati in the next 2 games as well!  What can I say?  I think the blue shields are rather pretty...
Logged

"Sunrise on the road behind, Sunset on the road ahead
Nothing can stop you now, nothing can stop you now"
-Rush, Ghost Rider
Hannibal
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1583



« Reply #4 on: December 20, 2011, 05:48:40 pm »

Quote
“When a non-cavalry non-skirmisher unit throws javelins (or pila), mark off the range indicator.  A unit does not make a range attack while the range indicator is marked. The mark is erased when one of the following happens:

--the unit becomes unengaged after being engaged.
--you spend a Command Action in the Movement & Command phase to erase the mark.”

This is what made it through the design process?  Oy.  Wish I'd never brought the subject up.  Serious history fail.

Oh well, one more for the house rules.
Logged

BubblePig
Prince of Shadow
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1009


Belkar Rules!!!


« Reply #5 on: December 20, 2011, 07:36:29 pm »

Nice report, Marcus.  Wink

This is what made it through the design process?  Oy.  Wish I'd never brought the subject up.  Serious history fail.
To be clear: This is what made it through the voting process.
The design process produced about a thousand (okay, I exaggerate slightly) different variants, and what made it through was the one (including v 3.0) which produced the least aggregate misery among those who voted.
Logged

Hannibal
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1583



« Reply #6 on: December 20, 2011, 07:52:23 pm »

The voting process is part of the design process is it not?   Grin

M'eh, doesn't affect me either way.  Just wistfully lamenting (as nothing more than a run-of-the-mill player of BGFW) how that one seems to be shaking out.
Logged

Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2006, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!

Bad Behavior has blocked 1836 access attempts in the last 7 days.