Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Agoz

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7
1
Pacto / Re: Pacto game size ?
« on: June 12, 2023, 03:59:03 AM »
I've been enjoying 3500, gives you enough room to include most of the goodies in a list.

2
Pacto / Imperial Romans Mistake
« on: May 13, 2023, 04:43:50 PM »
Hey, just thought I'd point out that in the Pacto version of the Imperial Romans list veteran Legionaries are graded as average, when they are superior in the Maximus version, I'm assuming this is a mistake.

3
Player Discussion / Re: Can we speed up the game
« on: March 03, 2023, 05:52:51 PM »
In my experience the fact that the game is on square bases with over 50 models per side is enough to turn away most players. Time wise for a mass battles game MEG moves at a fair clip  compared to other games. It already substitutes handfuls of dice for a single roll-off, which is a major time-saver. Really if time is a big factor, the solution is just to play DBA. I think its okay for MEG to just not be the game for people who don't want what it offers, which is a good mid-complexity ancients to medieval ruleset with an eye for simulating the historical feel of real armies.

I am not sure I agree with your first sentence.  The size of the Maximus game does turn away some players, but is also an attraction for others.

However if the number of models in Maximus is an issue, then try  playing MeG Pacto.  About the size of a double-DBA game.

It's very dependant on local sensibility,  as an American, most wargamers around here start with either 40k or some other skirmish game and, as they age, slowly dip their toes into historicals, typically something WW2 as we tend to glorify our contribution to that war in popular media, as well as just plain not having much history past that. Unfortunately the common factor in all of these tend to be games with round bases operating in loose squads. Because of this, something like SAGA, which is similar, has a sub 50 model starting point, has a decade of name recognition, has flashy special rules bordering on fantasy, and is frankly dead simple to play, is an easy sell. I think for what MeG is trying to achieve it's as streamlined as it is going to get.

4
Player Discussion / Re: Can we speed up the game
« on: March 03, 2023, 12:48:00 AM »
In my experience the fact that the game is on square bases with over 50 models per side is enough to turn away most players. Time wise for a mass battles game MEG moves at a fair clip  compared to other games. It already substitutes handfuls of dice for a single roll-off, which is a major time-saver. Really if time is a big factor, the solution is just to play DBA. I think its okay for MEG to just not be the game for people who don't want what it offers, which is a good mid-complexity ancients to medieval ruleset with an eye for simulating the historical feel of real armies.

5
Player Discussion / Re: QRS sheets removed from website?
« on: August 29, 2022, 06:27:27 PM »
The 2020 version of the QRS is still available in the 2020 rules materials section of the website. The current version is only available as a purchase.

6
Rules Queries and Clarifications / Re: Shoot and Charge
« on: August 22, 2022, 04:23:19 AM »
You're thinking of the bit from the FAQ that specifies that charge only shooters shoot as if experienced. it has no effect on units that have shoot and charge and are not charge only shooters.

7
List Queries / Re: Battle Wagons
« on: July 03, 2022, 02:41:15 AM »
The correct answer is 204, which is what you get if you plug the stats into the army builder spreadsheet.

8
List Queries / Re: Later Sargonid Assyrian
« on: June 29, 2022, 02:20:36 PM »
If you can fit 4 cavalry models on one base, go nuts! A lot of cavalry are too chunky for this to be feasible however.

9
List Queries / Re: Newly-raised Roman legions.
« on: May 20, 2022, 12:29:44 AM »
Could be, I just remember when I asked about Rhomphaia being classified as being melee expert instead of 2hcc the gladius was given as an example of a similar weapon rated as melee expert.

10
List Queries / Re: Newly-raised Roman legions.
« on: May 18, 2022, 08:04:07 PM »
I believe the justification for melee expert on Romans has always been to represent how effective a cutter the gladius was rather than the relative skill of the men wielding it. So assuming you agree that the gladius warrants melee expert I suppose raw legionaries would be poor melee expert.

11
Rules Queries and Clarifications / Re: Question on returning generals
« on: April 19, 2022, 04:04:25 AM »
The new general exists and gets cards as normal, they just don't get to show up to the battlefield until the specified time. They can play cards while off table, counting as out of command.

12
Player Discussion / Re: Do I need extra dice?
« on: April 18, 2022, 01:56:43 PM »
If you plan on playing this game a long way down the road, say 10 years, you might want some backups in case PSC stops producing them.

13
Player Discussion / Re: Maximus SUG shooting depth
« on: April 14, 2022, 07:40:32 PM »
It doesn't say they don't get to shoot at all on page 157. It just doesn't say anything about shooting in one rank, which is not the same thing. If it is the case I think maybe it should be clarified.

14
Player Discussion / Maximus SUG shooting depth
« on: April 13, 2022, 07:35:20 PM »
In maximus the QRS says a SUG shoots at full effect at 3 deep, reduced at 2. Does this get further downgraded at 1? I used a skilled unit of archers 1 deep the other day and 6 white dice felt quite a bit more powerful than 2 green.

15
Player Discussion / Re: Rule book structure comments
« on: April 13, 2022, 07:27:16 PM »
It'd be nice if each page had a footer listing which chapter you are in. To make flipping to sections easier.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 7