Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Representation of units  (Read 1325 times)

j

  • Piglet
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Representation of units
« on: August 26, 2016, 01:27:25 AM »
Just downloaded the RoF2 rules. Have to say I was very happy with the original version but this new take on it does interest me. I've just read through the rules briefly & like what I see, but have a couple of questions.

1. Would it matter if a unit of foote (or horse for that matter) was represented on 1 long base, the equivalent of the 3 bases in a sabot as described? As far as I can see, the footprint of the unit stays the same (with casualty bases filling in for those 1/2 bases lost) so would it not be possible to leave the unit as it is with markers denoting losses until it must leave the field?

I ask this because I am considering 6mm armies on a small battlefield, a little like travel chess.

2. Has anyone tried to play without the grid system? An early review said it would be possible but not how. I am considering a grid the same size as the frontage of a foot unit (90mm), using a wire square of 1 grid to be placed in front/flank/rear of those units to show what is available for shooting/moving. Anyone else given this any thought?

Regards,

j

Leman

  • Supporter 2018
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 1018
  • If it's too hard, I can't do it.
    • View Profile
Re: Representation of units
« Reply #1 on: August 26, 2016, 10:51:05 AM »
The wire square is a novel idea, rather like the moveable feast hexes in Hammerin' Iron.

Sean Clark

  • RFCM Admin Supporter
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 1269
  • In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king
    • View Profile
    • Buckets of Dice
Re: Representation of units
« Reply #2 on: August 26, 2016, 11:05:57 PM »
Fixed bases not a problem so long as you mark hits on a unit.

The wire sqaures idea is something  I'd not considered before but I'd be interested to see how it works.

Leman

  • Supporter 2018
  • Hog the Limelight
  • *
  • Posts: 1018
  • If it's too hard, I can't do it.
    • View Profile
Re: Representation of units
« Reply #3 on: August 26, 2016, 11:33:27 PM »
I imagine it would work best if there were at least three or four available.

j

  • Piglet
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Representation of units
« Reply #4 on: August 27, 2016, 01:21:33 AM »
The wire grid square wold be easily moveable & could be placed on each face in turn if required. My reasoning is that we have pretty good spatial awareness so we kind of know if something is within range etc but a grid would give a handy visual confirmation if there was any doubt.

j

j

  • Piglet
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Re: Representation of units
« Reply #5 on: August 27, 2016, 01:26:38 AM »
Re: keeping units intact throughout the game, I see that

"All casualties are removed after a square carries out a morale test, regardless of when this morale test is taken. All casualty markers are also removed from any square that has just won a fight. This is because the square is elated having won a fight."

As it is recommended to replace each 1/2 base loss with a casualty base, would the removal of these casualty markers result in a smaller unit on the table? Or would it be ok that the unit seems to have had no losses unless further markers are placed on it?

Regards,

j

bunwin63

  • Piglet
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Representation of units
« Reply #6 on: October 19, 2016, 10:35:08 PM »
Hi

I've just started a (solo) game using 6mm figs on single 60mmx30mm bases. I mark casualties using 5mm dice. Seems to be working OK, you just have to mentally remember to take off the losses when counting half bases for shooting etc.

I originally intended to use 4" squares, but found that it was a bit tight to fit 3 units plus a general and a gun in the squares, so ended up going to 6" squares.

Bryan