Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Age of the Big Battalions => Topic started by: OB on August 29, 2019, 05:55:47 PM
-
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.
-
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."
-
Thanks very much for the information. I look forward to getting a copy.
-
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.
-
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.
-
FOB requires the use of multiple kinds of dice?
-
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.
-
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/ (http://olicanalad.blogspot.com/)
-
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.
-
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/ (http://olicanalad.blogspot.com/)
That.
Always edge of the seat stuff and enjoyable, win or lose...
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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."
-
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,
-
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,
Our rules of choice for this period, Bloody Big Battles, give a close game of Mars la Tour. Each unit rolls to activate, similar to Fire & Fury. A unit may move full speed, half speed, not move at all or if in a bad way take a hike to the rear. The French are saddled with a passive movement modifier. The Germans are not. In addition, they have numerous staff officers to give positive movement modifiers. This gets them move moving fairly sprightly against the sluggish French. Also, the game designer crafts good scenarios and this is one of the 8 Franco-Prussian scenarios in the rules. It's fairly simple yet does the job. Please excuse this interruption. Back to FOB.
-
BBB are also my go to big battle set. But I also like to play smaller affairs or parts of big battles in more depth. This is where FOB sits for me.
-
I've only played BBB once, up in Perth. It was a FPW game, played on the table with counters (a rules test), rather than figures if memory serves, but it was an enjoyable game and I can see it being popular for resolving big battles in good time. "Blucher" is similarly useful for resolving big Napoleonic games in an enjoyable way.
However, as Leman says, at a level of command below 'big battles' (which I usually take as under 40,000 men / 1000 figs a side using 'battalion level tactics'), PK style games are our go to because of the 'edge of your seat' tension they engender.
One thing FoB and PK do not do particularly well, is big multi-player games - though FoB are better than classic PK in this regard. PK begins to get clunky at about twenty units a side, 12 to 18 being optimum.
On a different tack, (IMHO) classic Piquet (FoB is different) is best not played with D20 initiative dice. This can throw up games where the probability of all things being equal in the long run doesn't play out and one side gets all of the initiative spoiling the enjoyment of the game for the player who gets none. We find "Domino Theory" a much better way. This gives unequal initiative to both sides but, both sides usually get to act. It works like this:
Each player has a bag containing a full set of dominoes (0 - 6 spots per half on domino; 0-0 to 6-6). Each player draws a domino unseen from the bag and they are compared.
The player with the highest number of pips on his domino wins the initiative (E.g. 5-2 beats 3-1; BTW where equal pips: 5-2 beats 4-3; 4 - 2 beats 3-3; etc.) - he gets the total number of pips on his domino as initiative points (E.g. 5-2 = 7 initiative points). The loser gets the high side of his dom (E.g. dom 3-1 equals 3 initiative for the loser).
Further, if a double domino is drawn (E.g. 4-4; 6-6) the winner adds the whole of both domino pip counts together (E.g. 5-6 Vs 4-4 the winner gets 19 initiative). If the loser drew the double he gets both halves (E.g. 5-3 Vs 3-3 the winner gets 14, the loser gets 6).
Further, the winner can go first or second.
Further, if identical dominoes are drawn the turn ends.
Sounds complicated but actually very easy and logical in practice. We have pretty much switched over to domino theory completely as it gives a much more enjoyable game.
Note: Where only one bag of dominoes is available, one player draws a domino for each side - the bag changes over to the other player if the drawer wins. Play exactly the same as above except the turn ends on double blank and odd domino pips (E.g. 0-0 and 3-2, 3-2 being 5 - an odd number).
-
I also am a long time Piquet player and it is a hard sell to get my group to play. They are such control freaks and sometimes don't get the type of game I want to play. Something that reads like a story rather than a math match.
The only time I really get to play and let my hair down (what's left of it) is at Historicon. Usually I have to referee.
It's good to see a piquet/field of battle post on the forum.
-
Sounds exactly like the kind of game I prefer and the type of opponent I don’t. Unfortunately I am in the UK.
-
Piquet rules do have a following here in Yorkshire. Not sure about about on the dark side of the Pennines though.
Did here a good Liverpool joke today though, it was about the famous mountain there. What's it called? Oh yeh, Killamanforhisgiro.
-
I think the more you know about a period the more likely you are to enjoy what Piquet/Field of Battle delivers. Things do go wrong and the unexpected can happen.
Ian of Lancashire Games is a Piquet fan and he sells all the rules too, better again he includes them when he has a Sale.
-
I remember one Piquet FPW game in which the Prussian player had a very good run of cards and was thus able to get a cavalry unit to overrun a French gun line from the flank. In a way this was very similar to von Bredow’s feat at Mars La Tour, but almost impossible to achieve with a standard set of rules.
-
That is a great example.
-
I love hearing examples of 'how battles read' that happen in Piquet.
Another example using classic Piquet:
Whilst playing Swedes in a GNW game, a historical battle set up by Mark D - aka Ilkley Old School (when he was New School) - but, I can't remember which, and having rolled a superior C-in-C (thus with two Brilliant Leader cards), I decided to move my cavalry on the left wing, which would be idle because of restrictive terrain, to bolster the cavalry on the right; furthermore, so as not to get caught up amongst the infantry or waste cards and initiative moving behind them before traversing the field, I decided to risk the move in front of the army.
With the four Cavalry Move in the Open cards, two Brilliant Leader cards, and a reasonable run of the initial initiative (using opposed D20s), I succeeded with aplomb, taking only one stand loss from the Russian artillery which, frustrated by a lack of initiative and a single turned Artillery Reload card, had to sit and watch after the first shot.
Then, the eight units of horse, now concentrated on the right, led the attack supported by the infantry attacking en echelon. Just about everything went for the Swedes that day. Ga-Pa!
This could, I suspect, only happen using classic Piquet.
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/--RMkuc0oNPQ/TZxsp3RNGjI/AAAAAAAAApE/W_CKxeX0PHw/s1600/IMG_2914.JPG)
A shot of one of Mark's GNW games. I painted the leading cavalry; I remember because that dead horse, the one with it's head stuck in the grass and covered in blood, was bent and posed that way because the horse was a miscast - it's entire 'nose' was missing! All figures Mark D's collection.
-
A great picture with so beautiful minis! :-*
-
Well, I am almost convinced! lol
Some questions, though.
I have the original Piquet rules, would you recommend me to buy Field of Battle v.2? Or should I wait until FoB v.3 is published and play classic Piquet in the meanwhile? I mean, are the differences significant enough to justify the expense on a ruleset that will become obsolete soon?
My main interest are Napoleonics (in 15mm) and 18th Century. Neither period has the models based on the sizes recommended by Piquet. Does it matter the size of the bases? Or is it irrelevant as long as both forces are based following the same guidelines?
Finally, how much terrain is recommended? I know that this looks like an odd question, but I have learnt for experience that some rulesets doesn't work too well if there are too many terrain elements on the table.
Thanks in advance!
-
Personally, I'd wait. There are big differences between classic Piquet and FoB, and 3 will probably be better than 2 - if the difference between 1 & 2 is anything to go by. If you have more than a passing interest in FoB, I have a copy of 1 you can have to look through (for an idea of the differences between classic and FoB) for the price of the postage (I'm in the U.K.). PM me.
Base size is unimportant. If units have a similar frontage, and are able to form the formations, that's good enough - I don't know anyone who actually follows the standard basing requirements. I also know of very few people who remove stands / bases of figures in games. Classic Piquet units generally have 'four stands' (unit integrity points), and these can be tracked, as casualties, with markers. Here we use stones on coins. In the pic below, the Scots have taken '3 casualties' (stones on coin) and are disordered (tuft on coin), white pom poms show unit fired and 'unloaded' - the latter really meaning unable to resolve the effect of steady fire again for a certain amount of time (fog of war).
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-bNm7Cx0rbfA/XXIojVy9bhI/AAAAAAAANxE/QAzUVGuYMgsY46OpxjzZvdTglhBpqchlQCLcBGAs/s640/IMG_2791.JPG)
Terrain in Piquet generally has quite severe impact on the game. In games here, using the descriptions in the book, we tend to downgrade everything a level, so a gentle hill is type I, stop at contact then move normally.
Woods are usually type II unless full of undergrowth. Steep hills are type II.
For something to be type III it has to be pretty dense, such as a bog, dense woodland with undergrowth, or heavily wooded slopes.
Type IV terrain (which require units to test to move in it) is seldom used but, it's a useful classification for rivers that might, and I say that might, be fordable in places, or cliffs which brave souls might attempt to climb. Type IV tends to be a scenario thing.
Buildings, using the town section principle, work as well as any rules out there.
Unless you like field boundaries (walls, hedges and the like) to play significant a part in your battles (we don't) treat such terrain as aesthetic only.
With all that in mind, put your usual amount of terrain on the table and see how it goes.
The pics below show a Peninsular game with a good amount of terrain. The woods are type III; the rocky, scrubby hills are type II, and the wall surrounding the small trees (on the hill) show the extent to which that particular hill also provides type II cover (the wall is not a wall, or 'new terrain type' it merely indicates the cover boundary); the stream is type I (stop at contact, then move normally next move); the buildings (town sections) speak for themselves; we give a 4" move bonus to troops moving in column of route but, that's a house rule to get bang for terrain buck! The haystacks are useful for defining deployment zones but are otherwise simply aesthetic.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QdRRShEm9r0/XXIoW9wckQI/AAAAAAAANww/MgQ1syyL-RkvoJJaalGkOyn0cR-SfFIvACLcBGAs/s640/IMG_2779.JPG)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Xzk5f7-8S50/XXIoW1GxE7I/AAAAAAAANw0/FgqRUAXbR_cvoJWn7C0zTNEnO8uGFJNdACLcBGAs/s640/IMG_2784.JPG)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-5eRPl9_RMw8/XXIoZpn_idI/AAAAAAAANw8/WvLG_Z4s06MR19BDa81ZO5vk8Z3Zp8aZACLcBGAs/s640/IMG_2790.JPG)
This was my Liegnitz 1760 set up. Similar definitions for most things; the bogs were type IV, the stream was type II. The fields and isolated trees are aesthetic only.
(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-uWe-JM-rTuY/WtOFbaiSFTI/AAAAAAAAMxw/DQS8vBbXZeo2oRHeU_ZFwxyDq7QhHUl3QCLcBGAs/s640/IMG_1855.JPG)
This was my Zorndorf 1758 game, with the 'effecting' terrain noted. Typically, this is an open SYW battlefield.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-BPnal6QSBnQ/WXRvUUQZItI/AAAAAAAAMOk/9pR7qDHbr4YPx91eY7E4y9lnUAoG-YBQACLcBGAs/s640/zorndorf%2B1.jpg)
(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-t_brAhh3Qv0/WXRyPIC4F2I/AAAAAAAAMOs/G-TsuXHGZ9c-3oiH-DO5JYlBV3bLAQzZwCLcBGAs/s640/Zorndorf%2B2.jpg)
You only need terrain when you don't have enough tin.
(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-8agz6CeLHrk/WXR9DObLBLI/AAAAAAAAMPs/H1eOlHRT7ro98Zo4xoO7puVnJNo--cDZwCLcBGAs/s640/IMG_1488.JPG)
Hope that helps,
James
-
I agree with what James says. Most of my armies are 10mm based on 25mm squares (artillery on oblongs). It is very convenient to build armies of four bases to a unit. Here are a couple of pictures of an FPW game using FOB2:
(https://scontent-lht6-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/69813069_170189717473630_1563677951864602624_n.jpg?_nc_cat=106&_nc_oc=AQl_VLe1iod3axDqhMXojauadyoo7wO35Aa6CpvzQr-XmXuzVWrWIvlrauw_FtsSalki7sP-hlpXPkdqaLyb9wMJ&_nc_ht=scontent-lht6-1.xx&oh=a52409c397e00e2f73f8918d195d7cf5&oe=5E11C63D)
Sample FOB2 card
(https://scontent-lht6-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/70097791_170190177473584_8303031365037719552_n.jpg?_nc_cat=105&_nc_oc=AQnsi3j7qo8jPydRep99S44-slReb7boTKHku7KbL1c9rjjBNgPxWe6kT50MZ7J6RC0WgX52l4U9j6haJy0u0t7n&_nc_ht=scontent-lht6-1.xx&oh=74b1f5a1d2f9ed71895784c417d5adcf&oe=5DFB6149)
Much firing activity - troops now waiting for an infantry fire card to continue the firefight
(https://scontent-lht6-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/70458365_170190647473537_2231519390430396416_n.jpg?_nc_cat=103&_nc_oc=AQkzZoYHfK8E4H_MUZkoGmBggwVsw-vBMofIE7xtFXvpixkxWQi_p1H9z3XK0XdiphFgxEzEaR_bUtUTRieHUhA4&_nc_ht=scontent-lht6-1.xx&oh=9c8f9cc2ae56a89d7a4556c037b2c87d&oe=5E0F6391)
I would definitely wait for v.3 as it does sound like there will be both improvements to the rules and additional theatre specific QRSs.
-
Wow! Great info, thanks!
My Napoleonics are 6 bases for the French, and 4 for the Spanish (the armies I have painted and ready to use; each base represents, roughly, 1 company). I can use the Spanish as they are and the French I can "brigade" the elite companies as independent battalions. Artillery is also 4 bases a unit? I have it organized in batteries (3 bases, representing 6 guns) which means I am a bit short of guns, in that case.
Thanks again for the information.
-
Beautiful setups!
I follow your conversation with interest.
I have never played Piquet, I'd like to know more about this set of rules.
-
Two guns per battery for artillery in Piquet/ FOB so you probably have enough already. I'm really looking forward to FOB 3.
-
Guns are generally 2 per - you have plenty.
-
We've been working on some hybrid FoB2 classic Piquet rules for the Peninsular. QRS and Army Characterisation and Deployment deck posted here:
https://olicanalad.blogspot.com/2019/10/this-wednesdays-game-another-objective.html (https://olicanalad.blogspot.com/2019/10/this-wednesdays-game-another-objective.html)
-
Beautiful setups!
I follow your conversation with interest.
I have never played Piquet, I'd like to know more about this set of rules.
Here's a review of the 1st edition https://deepfriedhappymice.com/html/rd_field_of_battle.html (https://deepfriedhappymice.com/html/rd_field_of_battle.html)
Outdated in parts but gives a general idea.
-
Here's a review of the 1st edition https://deepfriedhappymice.com/html/rd_field_of_battle.html (https://deepfriedhappymice.com/html/rd_field_of_battle.html)
Outdated in parts but gives a general idea.
Thanks for this! Cheers!
-
Hi guys,
I've played Field of battle since the 1st edition came out. I haven't always enjoyed it but its easily my primary go to rules set for Napoleonics.
I like the rules and keep coming back to them because of the turn sequence. i find in games with strict repeating turn sequences most players tend to play the game instead of the period. they game the system to be able to increase the chances of their preferred outcome to happen more often. but the inconsistent nature of the turn sequence in Field of Battle forces players to play the period and plan in generalities instead of gaming the mechanics to their favour. Even players who didn't particularly like the system when they played did like the fact that they found themselves thinking more about tactics then rules.
contrary to some people's experience, I've found that Field of battle is extremely good at handling multiplayer games. One person(sometimes a GM or assistant GM) on each side turns the deck, and everyone gets a brigade, and acts on the cards being pulled. we've played big games on 24 foot tables with 2500 figures(16 per inf battalion, 8 cav per unit) with 20 players in finished in under 6 hours. i don't know of any other rule set that can achieve a game that big to a satisfying conclusion in that little time.