Carrocio & Ark of the Covenant - Army characteristic - Mobile superior camps have the ability to recover a wound from a single UG within 10 BW each turn without needing a card.
====
Weird ... this gives the player one free wound remove , under control of the player at extended range . To me this is magic in an historical game and not matching the few texts on the subject ... good for SAGA or Warhammer But not MEG
This does not match my understanding on the text on this subject. I read , « true believer » were sometimes ( often ? ) able to rally around a ( believed, trusted ) semi-magical item . But certainly not under control of the general.
May I suggest a different approach more in line with this , close proximity , uncontrolled, aspect of the thing and the fact ( ?) that it applied to « true believers » in close proximity with « magic believed item » but not automatic to all and definitely not controlled by the general . Does not work for unbelievers tribes or mercenaries.
Suggestion :
Create , for a cost, the characteristic « true believer » An stick to the already proven game mechanics .
A the end of turn , step 6.1 , when within same range as the one used by a legendary general to remove wounds, may draw a card for each UG . Should the card be yellow or red then true believers UG receive the same effect as if a general were assigning the card within range. If other hue , no effect.
Notice that the effet IMO is more in line with what is described about the Ark :
- Sometime no effect at all ... or not immediate
- Sometime all within range will be bolstered ... or only some
I strongly disagree with the player-controlled side of 10BW on one UG ... too much like magic controlled by a wizard player.... GANDALF THE WHITE come to us.
All the best , let me know
Currently nobody takes a mobile superior camp. The aim of the change is to give the player a reason for selecting a mobile superior camp. The risk is that the camp has to be nearer the front line so has greater risk of being sacked.
The historical justification is the religious element that made armies believe their cause more. Okay that can be argued to be magic, but magic was widely believed in ancient times and doesn't make the effect any less real.
For clarity:
1. Camps are treated as loose infantry, protected.
2. The effect won't apply to allies.
A less severe change would be to allow one general to recover a wound on a single UG with a colour card one less than that normally required. Alternatively the effect of sacking the camp could be increased by upgrading the colour of the KAB tests - like elephants routing.
p.s. I won't be introducing any troop characteristic or any change to the turn sequence.
p.p.s. These are currently proposals, nothing set in stone yet.
Richard
Quote from: lionheartrjc on October 19, 2023, 08:29:10 PM
Alternatively the effect of sacking the camp could be increased by upgrading the colour of the KAB tests - like elephants routing.
I like this one :)
Quote from: lionheartrjc on October 19, 2023, 08:29:10 PM
Currently nobody takes a mobile superior camp. The aim of the change is to give the player a reason for selecting a mobile superior camp. The risk is that the camp has to be nearer the front line so has greater risk of being sacked.
what about average or poor mobile camps ? they offer no real advantage.
Perhaps allow them to flee if charged?
Quote from: Jilu on October 20, 2023, 07:13:25 AM
Quote from: lionheartrjc on October 19, 2023, 08:29:10 PM
Currently nobody takes a mobile superior camp. The aim of the change is to give the player a reason for selecting a mobile superior camp. The risk is that the camp has to be nearer the front line so has greater risk of being sacked.
what about average or poor mobile camps ? they offer no real advantage.
Perhaps allow them to flee if charged?
Although not used in every (or even most) games, the ability to move a Mobile camp can be useful. Certainly for Poor the cost is negligible and if I had the option (and the few points) I'd take it every time.
A fleeing camp sounds highly improbable IMO.
FWIW I think there may be an argument for just 2 qualities of camp. A basic type and the "upgraded" type which get an additional ability - to use mobile as an example, you either have a basic one or the "carroccio" type, no inbetween variety.
« currently nobody takes a superior mobile camp « .... True .... Just as this does not match anything in real history .
The reference is history , not the categories set as game tools .
My opinion stays : whatever you do , no player controlled magic please .
By the way , increasing the KAB effet of a sacked camp is likely to accelerate game end ... I like it too.
Ps : I do take very often mobile camp or fortified camp ... even going to reducing some second rate unit to poor unskilled to get the points
Pps : I understand those are proposals. We had some heated discussion on one french Whatsapp group , preparing tommorow's tournament in RUEIL . As you indirectly suggest I intend to encourage those that can write in English to express their opinion .
All the best
Quote from: lionheartrjc on October 19, 2023, 08:29:10 PM
Currently nobody takes a mobile superior camp. The aim of the change is to give the player a reason for selecting a mobile superior camp. The risk is that the camp has to be nearer the front line so has greater risk of being sacked.
Having an option does not mean people have to use it ... in the same vein, the existence of Middle Formative Mes-American (6201) is great, and I do not think I will see it in a tournament, even less an open, in my lifetime ;D
Quote from: lionheartrjc on October 19, 2023, 08:29:10 PM
The historical justification is the religious element that made armies believe their cause more.
This could be a justification, but what about all other instances where that could be justified as well, for example a crusade army's fragment of the Cross (even if not genuine, people would be none the wiser and believe in it all the same, just like the magic you referred to) ? IS that not opening the door of bringing more 'magic" and shenanigans ? I mean I like SAGA, but maybe not in a MeG game.
Also, I saw no italian lists with the possibility of Superior Mobile camp (whether in Byzantium or Holy Roman Empire), is it intended to add that possibility ?
Quote from: Princeps on October 20, 2023, 09:57:38 AM
Also, I saw no italian lists with the possibility of Superior Mobile camp (whether in Byzantium or Holy Roman Empire), is it intended to add that possibility ?
From Richard's draft changes list:
56 – Holy Roman Empire
5601 – Early Communal Italian - Carroccio.
5602 – Papal Italian – Carroccio.
5604 – Hungarian – Carroccio in 1167 CE.
5607 – Later Communal Italian – Carroccio.
5608 – Imperial German – Carroccio at Bouvines. Angevin allies in 1214 CE.
5615 – Early Italian Condotta – Carroccio.
Quote from: lionheartrjc on October 19, 2023, 08:29:10 PM
Currently nobody takes a mobile superior camp. The aim of the change is to give the player a reason for selecting a mobile superior camp.
An alternative would be to decrease their points cost. Make it cheap enough and people will take it.
Another alternative could be they add 1 to your break point but are worth 2 TUGs if sacked.
the "magic" aspect made people more fanatical than immortal
maybe the way forward would be to make UGs fanatic within a radius (8 or 6 BW) but if the camp is sacked, loss of fanatic with aggravated KAB
Quote from: philfigo on October 20, 2023, 10:55:08 AM
the "magic" aspect made people more fanatical than immortal
maybe the way forward would be to make UGs fanatic within a radius (8 or 6 BW) but if the camp is sacked, loss of fanatic with aggravated KAB
Well you can see things as they are "fanatic" when around the caraccio, they have a free recovery : less guys running away
it hink the option you propose would have dramatic consequences
Quote from: Jilu on October 20, 2023, 11:53:14 AM
it hink the option you propose would have dramatic consequences
Probably bump the cost of the camp to about 1500 points for a start :P
less guys running away, yes that's understandable
and 1500 points is indeed not possible
And an oversight .
In battles where it was engaged I see different items not located in the same places.
- bagage ( food, shelter, camp followers )
- carrocio and his guard brought forward to bolster army morale
Should be two different things in two different locations .
Carrocio might be worth a TUG if lost and act as a morale booster ( fanatics ? +1 morale ? Other ? ) to any friendly TUG in contact.
Ok this does not solve the non existent chimera called superior bagage
🥳
but why must there be a superior bagage...?
The various grades of baggage (currently) represent the degree to which they are "garrisoned" - gives players an option to make a vulnerable part of the army more resistant.
It may be that the additional points for Average and Superior do not reflect actual value. When list checking I hardly ever see anything other than Poor. When Average is selected it appears to be when the points cannot be usefully spent on other things.
Quote from: Onurbm on October 24, 2023, 10:45:37 AM
In battles where it was engaged I see different items not located in the same places.
- bagage ( food, shelter, camp followers )
- carrocio and his guard brought forward to bolster army morale
Should be two different things in two different locations .
This is a good point.
Quote from: nikgaukroger on October 24, 2023, 08:47:07 PM
It may be that the additional points for Average and Superior do not reflect actual value. When list checking I hardly ever see anything other than Poor. When Average is selected it appears to be when the points cannot be usefully spent on other things.
In which case, wouldn't it be easier and less controversial to reassess that value, without bringing that new mechanic ?
Best,
Antoine
Probably ;)
I'd certainly say that inventing a new effect just to justify a points value is the tail wagging the dog, however, introducing a new effect that can be justified* and adding it to an existing, possibly mispointed troop type is a different thing - and may still need the points of said troop type adjusting depending on what you are adding.
* as a theory; this leaves aside whether the proposed carroccio is or is not justified.
I am coming round to the idea of including this as a suggestion for scenario games but leaving it out of the list from a tournament perspective.
I like the idea of including it in addition to the normal camp. I was also thinking that it perhaps should be the size of a normal war-wagon base, but to be treated as a camp for fighting purposes (i.e. it has no flanks, consists of 3 loose, protected infantry) and movement purposes... If broken it is treated as a sacked camp but UGs test at one colour higher than usual.
I will also include as a scenario games idea, that fortified superior camps should shoot as if they included 2 bases of experienced bolt shooters.
I hope this is acceptable to everyone.
Richard
Seems Ok for me
Good choice for not opting for the Skaven Bell of Doom in the comp lists.
i think it went a bit to far, even if i understand the aim.
As for the camps qualities, maybe all camps should be average, there is no much advantage to have superior camps.
or do a few changes :
Mobile camp : poor moves on red, average on yellow, superior on green
Flexible : becomes fortified on green skull/wound for poor, yellow skull/wound, automatic on red
just trying to find an incentive to use upgraded camps
Quote from: Jilu on October 26, 2023, 06:13:55 AM
just trying to find an incentive to use upgraded camps
Maybe look through the army lists from comps and pitch camp upgrades where say 30% people can just about afford them with their spare points.
Hi,
why not simply use the ARK of COVENANT or the CARRIOCIO as a commander in chief base that cannot be mediocre or competent ! ;)
no magical effect, already included in the rules , you will only have the double base size to manage for the command distances :)
regards.
PUNCH :)