Author Topic: (s) troops  (Read 6791 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Geoff Pearson

  • Administrator
  • Ax(O)
  • *****
  • Posts: 93
    • View Profile
    • Manchester Area Wargames Society
Re: (s) troops
« Reply #15 on: August 30, 2007, 01:21:19 AM »
OK - now I'm confused - the rules text states (to me at least) says the -1 applies in the bound of the troops who are fighting AGAINST the (S) troops - but Toby says that it applies in the bound OF the (S) troops.

If Toby is right then the wording in the rules is just crap  (sorry toby - I know you didn't write it)

Hi
The wording is not ideal but Toby is right
-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops
that score equal of more while either
(a) shooting;
or in close combat in their own bound and either
(b)foot fighting foot or
(c) mounted fighting any enemy

If you brake it down it would read:-

-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops 
that score equal of more while Shooting

-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops
that score equal of more while foot fighting foot

-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops
that score equal of more while mounted fighting any enemy

So if your element is fight (S) and the (S) scores more or equal you get -1 if you come under A,B or C

Hope this help
Best Regards
Geoff
PS I have put an Exel grading table to make it easier on www.dbmm.org.uk

Aloysius the Gaul

  • Guest
Re: (s) troops
« Reply #16 on: August 30, 2007, 06:10:25 AM »
Quote
If you brake it down it would read:-

-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops 
that score equal of more while Shooting

Yep - no problem with that one

Quote


-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops
that score equal of more while foot fighting foot

-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops
that score equal of more while mounted fighting any enemy


You haven't addressed whose bound it is, which is where my confusion comes in......

Geoff Pearson

  • Administrator
  • Ax(O)
  • *****
  • Posts: 93
    • View Profile
    • Manchester Area Wargames Society
Re: (s) troops
« Reply #17 on: August 30, 2007, 12:11:40 PM »
Quote
If you brake it down it would read:-

-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops 
that score equal of more while Shooting

Yep - no problem with that one
Quote


-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops
that score equal of more while foot fighting foot

-1 if any troops whose opponents are Superior (S) troops
that score equal of more while mounted fighting any enemy


You haven't addressed whose bound it is, which is where my confusion comes in......


shooting is in both bounds
"in close combat in their own bound" meaning the Superior (S) troops bound
So it's the Superior (S) bound
or to put another way:-
its -1 to enemy troops who are fighting (S) in the (S)'s bound

If you look at the table I've done is dose make it clearer it's at:-  http://dbmm.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=53&Itemid=35

Best Regards
Geoff





Geoff Pearson

  • Administrator
  • Ax(O)
  • *****
  • Posts: 93
    • View Profile
    • Manchester Area Wargames Society
Re: (s) troops
« Reply #18 on: August 30, 2007, 01:03:41 PM »
Hope this table makes is more clearer
Regards
Geoff

toby

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 0
    • View Profile
Re: (s) troops
« Reply #19 on: August 30, 2007, 05:30:29 PM »
I do my best to interpret it :)

Check what the other S grading QRS's come up with and see what they think.

I did get caught by one thing on my own QRS last night though - I didn't put in the exeptions for S being shot at by atrillery and war wagons (I think I ran out of space or something).

So its not perfect, but then what is.

I have to say that the new gradings are one of my least favourite parts of the rules.

madmike1

  • Guest
Re: (s) troops
« Reply #20 on: August 31, 2007, 03:27:04 AM »
Thanks for the new grading table, takes a couple of minutes to get use to it but it is a big improvement on what is provided in the rules. 

My first reaction after seeing the table is to wonder why the rules author didn?t do a similar table in the rules.  The current text description of grading factors is one of the worse features of the rules.   Don?t get me wrong, I like the grading concept, just hate the way they are served up in the rules.     

In the next revision of the rules this table should be a ?must? have!   Along with re-costing some unit types like Pike.    ;D

Aloysius the Gaul

  • Guest
Re: (s) troops
« Reply #21 on: August 31, 2007, 05:06:24 AM »
someone can actually understand THAT??!! ??? ???

loki223

  • Guest
Re: (s) troops
« Reply #22 on: August 31, 2007, 04:35:34 PM »
i just printed it off. hopefully i can follow it. :o