New CK

[martin goddard]

Having a rest day so I thought about CK.
Hence, here is a new version.

It is coming together quite quickly as it is an upgrade rather than a new.

I will test out the 10x 6 zone too. Then maybe change it again. Plaese don't make a special cloth too soon.

You can use any grid size you like at this time as the game is gridded.

There is an analysis at the book start.

martin   Chchchanges in blue

[Leslie BT]

So what are you and Stewart using for your play test armies?

80 bases and 2 generals?

20 units and 2 generals.

As the author I think you may have been unfair in your A, B, C lists.  It is an analysis to substantiate your view.

[martin goddard]

Good points Les.

The rules do/will cater to my own biases; that I must admit.
But then that is to be expected surely?
Otherwise i would be playing the rules that are already there I think. Very few of the popular commercial sets out there appeal to me. This means my likes are in the minority for some reason. Not a problem for me at all.

The most interesting historical rule system from my point of view in the last 20 years has been DBA. Nothing else historical has  got me interested since.  Of course I have only tried a few. But that is the beauty of wargaming. You can play what you like. Marvellous.

So far Stewart has used Imperial Romans versus my Germans.
Then Mike and Stewart with Carthaginians versus my Germans.
There has bee another game I think too?

My Germans had 15 close order units, 2 cavalry , 2 cavalry skirmishers and 4 infantry skirmishers.It is a big army because it has no armour.

Roughly 300 figures.
Probably too many for most wargamers to consider for a new project.
If 25% were removed due to smaller units we then have 225 better.
If skirmishers become 2 bases that is another 12 figures fewer.
This gives us just over 200 for an unarmoured army. Still a lot of soldiers.
A high quality army would bring the 200 down to 140 at the high quality end. Still a lot.

We are going to try Parthians on Tuesday to see how cavalry versus infantry work out.

martin

[Leslie BT]

Looked at my Viking army for 'Vikings' and even that does not have enough bases.  So even with your reduced numbers most existing Viking armies will be too small.

[martin goddard]

Maybe work an army out and see hw far it is from what you have Les.
Also consider how close it would be with 3 base sized units and 2 base sized units for skirmishers.

martin

[Moggy]

Hmmm, interesting. Just had first scan through the rules (Thanks Martin).   Its BB with elephants. All it needs is dragons now 


I know there is some stuff different but anyone who know BB can play this with very little extra to learn unless I have miss-read some stuff here. Only problem is, unless I am mistaken, is to keep clear in the head the differences between the 2 rulesets.

Shame the Mongol list does not include one of their 2 major fighting arms. The cataphracts! Loads of bow armed cav as there should be but where are the heavy lance armed cavalry they were also famous for.


Derek

[Sean Clark]

As this is a very earyy version of the rules where some key concepts are being established, there's time for almost anything to change. I remember the very early versions of the Viking rules which weren't gridded. Now that WAS a big change once grids came along 🤣

[martin goddard]

Indeed Sean.
That  makes you a veteran.

The gridding of  Longships was Stewart's idea.
I had worked hard on arrival points and fighting.
Then along comes an idea from Stewart and then eureka.
Although I am obviously and greatly biased (it would be a bit perverse if I had no faith in RFCM?) , I do like Longships.

RFCM rules often have crucial points upon which the game gets much better.

To this end I try not to rule out new directions.
Some directions are a "no no" for me though.
Some directions are ruled out by my personal likes too (e.g poly dice, long game time, 25mm, alpha player)



martin

[Sean Clark]

How about using cards for unit arrival and dominoes as a random number generator?

Also, Romans get to use 28mm figures, to reflect how most of the world saw them as big men?

Triangles are worth experimenting with and I feel underrepresented in wargaming.

Plus a 20 sided die gives you much more options. I think German warbamd should need a 19 or a 20  to hit a Roman soldier, who then save on anything but a 1. I read a book once that supports this assertion.

Feel free to use any or all of these ideas amd we can go halves on the millions that roll in

[Colonel Kilgore]

Sean,

I think you may have forgotten the requirement for the special Hero figure in each army (Caesar, Boudicca, Hannibal, Attila, etc) that retail at £50 each for a hand-spun sculpt from a Dorestshire craftsman? It's not possible to play the game without these.

Simon

[martin goddard]

Sean and Simon. You are "bang on the money" (literally).

I am also reducing the number of figures in command packs to 3. Because "that's the way to do it" (Mr Punch?).

I am in the process of designing packs of 60 cards.
Nicely laminated and with a PP symbol. Plus a different colour for each army. 7 armies.
10 cards have a 1 on them
10 cards have a 2 on them
10 cards have a 3 on them
10 cards have a 4 on them
9 cards have a 5 on them
11 cards have a  6 on them
See the innovative new wargaming mechanism?
Best things since factions?


Enough...


martin

[Stewart 46A]

Played two games so far,
Tuesday Martins Germans were all over my Romans and destroyed them to a man (9th Legion?)
Thursday my Carthaginians got my revenge and stomped   the Germans into the ground. Must have been all my elephants.

Tonight my Romans return having been rebuilt with reinforcements from Rome

2 general bases ,17 units x 4 bases
160 Infantry, 40 Cavalry + 16 casualty bases


Stewart

[Leslie BT]

my current Viking army.
The white bases are the command stands I am short of.

[Wardy64]

Top notch Les.

David & Ben