Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Next version (unit size)  (Read 1260 times)

martin goddard

  • RFCM Admin Supporter
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 2199
    • View Profile
Next version (unit size)
« on: January 25, 2018, 11:18:12 PM »
Smaller units allow more units .
C+K presently uses 4 bases per unit.
Modify this to 3 bases to generate more units for the same number of figures.
4 figures on heavy troops and 2 for light.

e.g.  Typical army
16 units
Successor
3 generals. 3 units heavy cavalry. 1 unit skirmishing cavalry,3 units foot skirmishers,9 units heavy infantry.
Capacity of 3 units per area/rectangle but 1st skirmisher will not count.

200 figures??

Colonel Kilgore

  • RFCM Admin Supporter
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 2258
    • View Profile
Re: Next version (unit size)
« Reply #1 on: January 26, 2018, 07:48:50 AM »
What historical and geographical span do you have in mind, Martin?

martin goddard

  • RFCM Admin Supporter
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 2199
    • View Profile
Re: Next version (unit size)
« Reply #2 on: January 26, 2018, 09:04:03 AM »
Linked to earlier threads on this nature I accept that "ancients" can be lumped into one bucket but think that it should really be sub divided for flavour. I like games taht concentrate on a narrow period of warfare and try to bring out characteristics of that time. this males it more informative and intelligent. I think that in each time period the weapons we just call "spear" would have various important sub-divisions. Imagine the horror if gamers were told "it is a tank and that is the only characteristic of note".  Distance of time does blur things into one. 
The concept gets to the height of hilarity when armies fight opponents that they were never designed to fight. An extreme example might be Aztecs having a go at Wars of te Roses English. Why do those south Americans not use longbow for its effect and plate armour for protection? Not to mention their lack of cavalry involvement!


I think it is now the time to break up the "ancients " period into about 5 smaller parts. Of course this fragments rule writers and makes finding opponents more difficult.It will be a trade off. Could do a main rule book with 5 period books?  Some are doing this with WW2.

Commercially the first book could/should  be "The rise and fall of Rome.  Hannibal to the Huns".  Even that is a very wide tranche of time.  Now my own generalisations!! This might be better as "the legions of Rome versus the tribes of Europe?"


1. Trained infantry /cavalry versus all comers and each other.
2. Rome as the aggressor
3. Allies
4. Campaign problems of being the aggressor.
5. A great variety of opponents from Parthians to Pontics.
6. Scenarios would be apt/doable.

This narrowing does leave out some of my favourite armies. These being successors, Indians, Egyptians and Assyrians.

Commercially there is already a fair number of ancient figures out there. A lot of ancient figure purchases are for competition armies.  Generalising, these rules tend to be modern day clones of the WRG 6th/DBM series even to the extent of using WRG frontages.  Well done Phil Barker!

C+K came out in 1999 and may well encourage ancient rule writers to use grids too?
A PP Rome set would not be designed as a WRG clone, but would forge an original(?) path which some may choose.

As an opinion aside. Once again I think that   many gamers will follow the flow. Thus when Warlord/Workshop/glossy box et al , introduce their first "revolutionary using grids" ,  rules many (not all) gamers will suddenly  say "I always thought grids were great".     Commercially we are talking about a  "who has the right trainers" momentum.   




Colonel Kilgore

  • RFCM Admin Supporter
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 2258
    • View Profile
Re: Next version (unit size)
« Reply #3 on: January 26, 2018, 09:31:14 AM »
Thank you Martin.

For me that was the perfect answer:

a) in terms of the sensible chunking up the several thousand years of "ancient" history
b) starting with the "Friends and Enemies of Rome" theme - as I already have some WRG-centric forces of Romans and Huns :).

Looking forward to seeing how this one develops!

SimonC

  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 394
    • View Profile
    • Lurkio
Re: Next version (unit size)
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2018, 12:28:34 PM »
I would recommend making its reasonable narrow in historic scope - for pre battle chrome etc. But then you can plug in different periods.


Make the rules modular , but the periods plug in and out

martin goddard

  • RFCM Admin Supporter
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 2199
    • View Profile
Re: Next version (unit size)
« Reply #5 on: January 26, 2018, 02:59:10 PM »
All agreed

Leslie BT

  • Supporter 2019
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 1340
    • View Profile
Re: Next version (unit size)
« Reply #6 on: January 30, 2018, 08:43:51 PM »
Sounds like Lego's the way to build the units.

Colonel Kilgore

  • RFCM Admin Supporter
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 2258
    • View Profile
Re: Next version (unit size)
« Reply #7 on: January 30, 2018, 08:45:15 PM »
"Lego"? Was that the phantom spellchecker striking again?

Leslie BT

  • Supporter 2019
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 1340
    • View Profile
Re: Next version (unit size)
« Reply #8 on: January 30, 2018, 08:55:41 PM »
Have you not seen those natty figures, they come with all the weapons and armour. Nice big block to paint the heraldry on.

Colonel Kilgore

  • RFCM Admin Supporter
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 2258
    • View Profile

martin goddard

  • RFCM Admin Supporter
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 2199
    • View Profile
Re: Next version (unit size)
« Reply #10 on: January 30, 2018, 09:51:35 PM »
That really is tempting!

Colonel Kilgore

  • RFCM Admin Supporter
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 2258
    • View Profile
Re: Next version (unit size)
« Reply #11 on: January 31, 2018, 08:01:25 AM »
Good for something alternative at a show?

Leslie BT

  • Supporter 2019
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 1340
    • View Profile
Re: Next version (unit size)
« Reply #12 on: February 01, 2018, 09:15:41 PM »
The chinese lego will save martin getting distracted from other figures on the production schedule.

Real simple to create both sides. Just a simple head swap, even Sean's daughter could manage the head swaps, no sharp tools required.

Sean Clark

  • RFCM Admin Supporter
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 1463
  • In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king
    • View Profile
    • Buckets of Dice
Re: Next version (unit size)
« Reply #13 on: February 01, 2018, 11:35:15 PM »
I'll let her try this weekend Les and report back 😀

Leman

  • Supporter 2019
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 1066
  • If it's too hard, I can't do it.
    • View Profile
Re: Next version (unit size)
« Reply #14 on: February 02, 2018, 10:26:47 PM »
Apparently Rego Rand is just on the outskirts of Shanghai. Mrs May had a tour of it earlier this week.