Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Conquerors and Kings  (Read 3147 times)

martin goddard

  • RFCM Admin Supporter
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 2697
    • View Profile
Conquerors and Kings
« on: August 06, 2016, 06:17:22 PM »
A long time since i played games of C&K.  It was played on a 7 x 5 foot table(in 1 foot squares) .games last about 1.5 hours.  all units have 4 bases in them.


martin

Colonel Kilgore

  • RFCM Admin Supporter
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 2726
    • View Profile
Re: Conquerors and Kings
« Reply #1 on: August 06, 2016, 06:43:59 PM »
That's a big table - at least for this "common man"!

Maybe one to add to the list for an eventual face-lift, perhaps on a 5 x 3 table with 6" squares?

But I would hate to distract you from your current Vietnam / WWI / SCW pipeline of activities, Martin!

Simon

Stewart 46A

  • Supporter 2019
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 1002
    • View Profile
Re: Conquerors and Kings
« Reply #2 on: August 06, 2016, 07:12:22 PM »
I have built two armies,  Romans and Carthaginians in anticipation of a rewrite

Sean Clark

  • RFCM Admin Supporter
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 1539
  • In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king
    • View Profile
    • Buckets of Dice
Re: Conquerors and Kings
« Reply #3 on: August 06, 2016, 09:24:09 PM »
It'll be no surprise that I have Roman and German armies awaiting attention.  I am tempted to be heretical and base them as per DBA/M just for maximum versatility as base sizes don't matter in grid games.

DorchesterBede

  • Domestic Pig
  • *
  • Posts: 98
    • View Profile
Re: Conquerors and Kings
« Reply #4 on: August 07, 2016, 11:15:41 AM »
I assume when this gets looked at again it will be with a view to reducing the table size and army size to reduce the start up costs. As it is already a square base system  it should be adaptable to a 6 x 4 or a 5 x 3. I have recently completed a Parthian army using PP figures but have based in the DBx style as all my many ancient armies are based to this standard. That is of course the advantage of the 'square system' it can incorporate armies based other then the 3 x 3 cm PP system.

The ancients market is a difficult market to break into with a number of rule sets -DBMM/FOG/ADLG etc  (yes I have them all) so I'm not sure how easy it would be to break into this market as the rules tend to be created with competitions in mind. Perhaps a more time focused set is what is required .

Sean Clark

  • RFCM Admin Supporter
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 1539
  • In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king
    • View Profile
    • Buckets of Dice
Re: Conquerors and Kings
« Reply #5 on: August 07, 2016, 12:31:56 PM »
I agree that this is a difficult market. A bit like Napolenics.  Vast array of armies and everyone has their own loyalties with DBX FOG or ADLG plus dozens of others.

I remember playing this years ago when Martin took it to shows. I may just paint up my armies and play them as they are. I do intend to play the Fantasy version at some point too!


Leman

  • Supporter 2019
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 1312
  • If it's too hard, I can't do it.
    • View Profile
Re: Conquerors and Kings
« Reply #6 on: August 07, 2016, 04:02:29 PM »
I would certainly be interested if C&K was revitalised as I find the movement of troops in FOG to be mind-wrenching. A square system would make manoeuvre so much simpler.

SimonC

  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 490
    • View Profile
Re: Conquerors and Kings
« Reply #7 on: August 07, 2016, 05:03:19 PM »
well, just my 2p. What i like about RFCM games is the narrow scope they cater for, and the chrome that can be added for that reason. IMHO ancients is far too wide a remit for the RFCM game. As everyone has said its a crowded market, and it is primarily aimed as the - largely anachronistic - pointed army match up. ::)

I think there is are better periods that reflect RFCM ethos.  ;)

thanks
Simon

Leman

  • Supporter 2019
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 1312
  • If it's too hard, I can't do it.
    • View Profile
Re: Conquerors and Kings
« Reply #8 on: August 08, 2016, 08:09:31 AM »
My only real interest in wargaming terms is the Hellenistic period, notably the clash between Rome and the Greek world.

martin goddard

  • RFCM Admin Supporter
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 2697
    • View Profile
Re: Conquerors and Kings
« Reply #9 on: August 09, 2016, 10:09:52 PM »
Don't worry it would not be a 5 book series.
Here are some rough ideas for the future.
It might have a central area of 6" squares and the flanks as bigger zones.

Thoughts
 So you could own a flank that might be a whole column.
The game would be on a 5x3 table
This gives a 3ft centre width along with inner and outer 5" flanks to the left and right..
Might use 8 inch by 4" rectangles to better allow for lines and reserves.
This gives a centre table of 5 rectangle width by 9 rectangle depth.

Just thoughts

martin

DorchesterBede

  • Domestic Pig
  • *
  • Posts: 98
    • View Profile
Re: Conquerors and Kings
« Reply #10 on: August 10, 2016, 09:28:06 AM »
Martin

I hope you are not having 'revolutionary' thoughts here. The idea of varying squares is intriguing but might upset traditional players, the good news is that the ever increasing number of companies producing bespoke  terrain mats does mean one should not be to hard to produce and at a reasonable price (perhaps someone will soon produce double sided mats).
I think the first thing to decide is what period(s) would you want to cover given the vast array of troop types that span most ancient rule sets. However shouldn't  get ahead of ourselves my Spanish Republicans (SCW not Punic war) are awaiting an outing.
Keeps the brain matter going though.

Chris

martin goddard

  • RFCM Admin Supporter
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 2697
    • View Profile
Re: Conquerors and Kings
« Reply #11 on: August 11, 2016, 10:48:13 PM »
Agreed Chris
Dave painter is doing some militia for me


martin

toxicpixie

  • Piglet
  • *
  • Posts: 14
    • View Profile
Re: Conquerors and Kings
« Reply #12 on: October 27, 2016, 09:32:42 AM »
I suspect you might want to follow Sam Mustafa's example with "Aurelian" - it covers a pretty darn narrow period for "conventional ancients wisdom" of one set for 4500 years of pointy stick and tin pants, just  the "Crisis of the Third Century", and is a campaign of nine battles and seventy years with your commander (you) advancing through the period.

That sort of focus really helps with the flavour and feel of RFCM sets. Perhaps a "Clash at Kadesh", or "Punic Punch Up" or "Devastation of the Diadochi" might be a go-er?

Stewart 46A

  • Supporter 2019
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 1002
    • View Profile
Re: Conquerors and Kings
« Reply #13 on: October 27, 2016, 05:21:00 PM »
I have Roman and Carthaginian armies awaiting orders

peterctid

  • Piglet
  • *
  • Posts: 28
    • View Profile
Re: Conquerors and Kings
« Reply #14 on: November 01, 2016, 10:26:24 AM »
Ancients is really tied to big battles(too much)- whilst I have loads of figures tied to DBM basing, I have always fancied smaller actions on a smaller 3x3? table at warband level -sort of skirmish heavy.

Romans would fit, obviously, but a small chariot force would have great appeal to me. It would be nice to see the return of the hero into ancients.