Piquet Field of Battle 3 Any News?

[OB]

I know that Brent Oman has been working for a couple of years on a new version of Field of Battle.  Does anyone know how it's going and when it might be available?  Brent seems to have taken to Facebook as his main platform and I don't subscribe to it.  Any info' gratefully received.

[olicana]

Brent isn't a member of the forum so can't post, but he asked me forward this:

"I've been working on writing and now edits for several months.   I'm very near getting ready for the layout phase.   My plan remains to have it available for sale this Fall."

[OB]

Thanks very much for the information.  I look forward to getting a copy.

[Leman]

That’s interesting news as FOB2 is one of my go to C19th rule sets for smaller actions. It is also my main solo rule set, for obvious reasons.

[OB]

I think FOB2 is a brilliant rule set and, as you say, the go to for solo gaming.

I understand FOB 3 will also cover the 30 Years War period and I'm very interested to see how Brent handles it.  I think we will also get a campaign system.

[vtsaogames]

FOB requires the use of multiple kinds of dice?

[OB]

It does.  The better your troops/circumstances the higher dice you throw.  In practice it's simple.

The main driver is a card deck for each player, the cards describe what you can op to do when the card is played-Movement for example. 

You each throw a dice at the start of each turn and the difference between the two scores gives you the number of cards you can turn over and act on.  You don't know which card you'll get until you turn it.

From what I can gather it's a love or hate it game.  I love it and discovering it kept me actively gaming.  Win or lose every game I've played told an interesting story which is pretty what I want at this stage of life.

[olicana]

We have been playing Piquet and FoB here in Ilkley for years. No matter what other rule sets we play, we always end up going back to them. I've even been known to write (or co-write) the odd supplement - either officially under the Piquet Inc. banner, or unofficially (usually for magazines) to cover the specific sub-periods the group, here in Ilkley, game in.

More than any other rule set, the command friction generated by the basic mechanisms is unparalleled. It's such an elegant sequence design that the narrative of the games flow like battles read. The tension of not knowing exactly what could happen next is tremendously good fun.

IMHO, the rules are Marmite - love or hate -  depending on how much control players like to have in that 'eye in the sky' way. If you like predictability, especially the ability to judge time and distance, because of a strictly regulated move sequence, you will not like Piquet or FoB.

This is because, within a Piquet / FoB turn, the number of times you will move, and when, in relation to your opponent, is variable; the same is true for when and how often you will get to fire, change formation, etc. Within a full game turn (which could mean units moving as many as 9 times and resolving several combats), time is elastic and only equalises, though often in an unbalanced way, everywhere on the table at the start and end of each turn.

In Piquet / FoB the turn sequence is determined by a deck of cards (one for each side) and initiative points. Piquet and Fob differ in the way initiative points are generated and used but, the result is the same - you very rarely get the same as the enemy for one reason or another, and the turn can end abruptly before all the sequence cards (usually 26 - 30 in each deck) are turned.

If you like excitement, tension and a good deal of frustration when you play, you'll probably love the Piquet / FoB system.

As has been stated by others in this thread, for solo play the system (because of its unpredictability) is unbeatable.

I have already said that I have penned one or two Piquet / FoB supplements but, to avoid doubt, I gave up any pecuniary interest some time ago; so you can take it as read that my only interest in Piquet Inc. these days is promoting it for the fun of the game - I collect 0 royalties on Piquet Inc. sales, and give away MS Word doc. copies of Ager Sanguinis (FoB Early Crusades) and Ager Proelli (FoB Punic Wars), both of which were published in Miniature Wargames as multi page centre fold, advertisement free, pull outs, on request by email, gratis.

The set I wrote for Ancient Naval games (called Fleet of Battle - see what I did there) was also available as a free download from Wargames Illustrated and included printable ship counters so you could play without models. I'm not sure if that is still the case.

For my email, look in the sidebar here:

http://olicanalad.blogspot.com/

[Leman]

I love the FOB system precisely because it is not like chess. To me it is an actual wargame, because the best laid plans can go horribly wrong, and thus a battle unfolds before you. I find the legalised style of wargame rules quite stultifying and seem to require a blotting paper memory for all the little rule quirks plus the weird tessellation of units coming into contact. The only DB style rules I play are FOGR because: a) they do show how to organise and use different types of pike and shot blocks, and b) it is a favoured set with one of my good friends. Otherwise I much prefer the unpredictable nature of the likes of FOB, Maurice and Longstreet.

[AdamPHayes]

More than any other rule set, the command friction generated by the basic mechanisms is unparalleled. It's such an elegant sequence design that the narrative of the games flow like battles read. The tension of not knowing exactly what could happen next is tremendously good fun.

IMHO, the rules are Marmite - love or hate -  depending on how much control players like to have in that 'eye in the sky' way. If you like predictability, especially the ability to judge time and distance, because of a strictly regulated move sequence, you will not like Piquet or FoB.

This is because, within a Piquet / FoB turn, the number of times you will move, and when, in relation to your opponent, is variable; the same is true for when and how often you will get to fire, change formation, etc. Within a full game turn (which could mean units moving as many as 9 times and resolving several combats), time is elastic and only equalises, though often in an unbalanced way, everywhere on the table at the start and end of each turn.

In Piquet / FoB the turn sequence is determined by a deck of cards (one for each side) and initiative points. Piquet and Fob differ in the way initiative points are generated and used but, the result is the same - you very rarely get the same as the enemy for one reason or another, and the turn can end abruptly before all the sequence cards (usually 26 - 30 in each deck) are turned.

If you like excitement, tension and a good deal of frustration when you play, you'll probably love the Piquet / FoB system.

As has been stated by others in this thread, for solo play the system (because of its unpredictability) is unbeatable

http://olicanalad.blogspot.com/

That.

Always edge of the seat stuff and enjoyable, win or lose...

[vtsaogames]

When it comes to non-linear games, I really like Crossfire. But some of my mates didn't get it and therefore didn't like it. It's been a few years, maybe time to bring it back up. I can't get them to play stuff they don't like.

[Antonio J Carrasco]

I have had Piquet since 2005 (plus three modules: Hallowed Ground, Zouave II and Barrage) but never gamed it. It's an intriguing concept, but it is difficult to sell. My gaming buddies back then weren't interested. I couldn't convince them to give it a try, but we discussed the concepts within the rules and some of them made valid points to explain their disinterest in the rules. Mostly their problem was that the chaos inherent to a game of Piquet looked like it was related to random events instead to the actions of the opponent and the friction of "war". They liked the inclusion of random events in the flow of the game, but not that randomness would be the chore of the game. Of course, it was a theoretical exercise as we had read the rules but none of us had actually played the game.

[OB]

Field of Battle might be an easier sell to your buddies.  It smoothed out the flow of events while still keeping the unique Piquet style.

For anyone wanting to try the system Olicana's offer above is a very generous one.  I should add I play his Italian Wars rules 'Hell Broke Loose' in preference to anything else available for the period.

[olicana]

Piquet / Fob, in play, isn't chaotic: It is unpredictable but, not outlandishly so.

When playing, PK feels much like a more regulated game because you still do the things that you do in other games. The difference is the sequence and timing of the things you do and this does make players, even the devotees of Piquet / FoB, feel uncomfortable whilst playing - because they do not know if their forces will act as required and on time - and to be fair, this is why PKers like it.

In more rigidly structured games you can make measured plans and, usually, easily undertake counter measures to enemy action in an organised way. In PK style games things don't always go to plan, because sometimes stuff doesn't always move to where you want it to on time, or do what you want when it gets there, and counter measures generally seem very ad hoc.

You might, as the player, be the eye in the sky, but that just means you see more to tear your hair out over. I once heard a very good FoB player quote which sums it up nicely - "Give me even rolls, or give me night."

[Leman]

As a predominantly historical player, who also reads a lot of military history, this is exactly why I like FOB - battle is usually an unpredictable mess which rarely goes to plan. Often the better army wins by dint of other unforeseen circumstances, eg. Mars La Tour - the Prussians assumed they were attacking a rearguard and had planned accordingly. They were in fact attacking the head of the whole French army, but French deployment was poor, command and control was lacking and the Prussians had some good luck, which the French lacked. The smaller force held the larger force to a draw, and then the larger force withdrew. Without a lot of constraints on the French player such a result would be difficult for the Prussian to achieve using more conventional rule systems,