I'd suggest that an army that may face such a situation should perhaps have a plan for if/when it could happen - including making some army composition choices as a contingency. Like your example of a Galatian faced by Persian in lots of terrain (where I note Open Spaces would assist the Galatian) - they need a plan to deal with it.

I think you are presenting an unusual case - massive long spear army in a plain (how many such armies have Plains?) - as a likely scenario when I would suggest it isn't.

Quote1.Retain the line as today as it is simple, but add a second condition that there must be a 1BWx1BW empty space on the flank to be charged.

Can you be more specific about the "empty space" . Where should it be or is it a 1 BW distance minimum between the charging unit and the target ?

Uneven terrain : why not add a terrain . An open terrain where nothing may go . So the cavalry commander may choose some open terrain to avoid too many uneven terrain . It could be done by just having as first terrain in the list a n open/Uneven terrai option . Just my 2 cents ...

I wonder what would be the terrain limitations to open open.
Applicable to jungle ?

IMO open open anywhere ...

Quote from: badhabum on August 15, 2019, 02:23:30 PM
IMO open open anywhere ...

Then an clear advantage to close order troops

Uneven is a clear advantage to cavalry armies ...so what ...

Why are bit armies seen as an issue? To take such an army you have given up on taking anything good. Plus you get to get enough models on the board so it actually looks like a battle and not a big skirmish game

Are we try to move the game to standard number of units so it becomes more rock/stone/etc?

Presumably any rule changes will be on printable A4 pdf sheets so we can replace existing sheets which have already been paid for.

Quote from: rayfredjohn on August 14, 2019, 02:56:03 PM
Well with this and horse archers becoming cheaper, I'm sure we will see more shooty, horsey types.

Might change this trend towards big stodgy foot armies. Who knows.

Is part of the intent to get the army balance spot on. Make it still hard to use a HA army but a bit more viable for the average player vs a wall of Gauls.

S

Rino

Most welcome.  I can see you like Uneven as I did.  But it seems 9/10 players don't so we need to adjust to grow the game.  Personally I don't have an issue with Lancers. You won't face a wall of hoplites often and it would be good to encourage the latter.  Anytime you take a one dimensional army it has a nemesis and you then need to be smart in how you respond to being the underdog.

If you are on a totally open table with all CL vs all LSp then either risk a Flank March - will cause utter mayhem if it arrives.  Or go three tugs deepen one place and force a breakthrough at a price and then exploit the gap. Put rough down instead of uneven and you have the same blocking effect in that terrain.

So not as bad as you fear.

S

Quote from: badhabum on August 15, 2019, 12:04:50 PM

Quote1.Retain the line as today as it is simple, but add a second condition that there must be a 1BWx1BW empty space on the flank to be charged.

Can you be more specific about the "empty space" . Where should it be or is it a 1 BW distance minimum between the charging unit and the target ?

Uneven terrain : why not add a terrain . An open terrain where nothing may go . So the cavalry commander may choose some open terrain to avoid too many uneven terrain . It could be done by just having as first terrain in the list a n open/Uneven terrai option . Just my 2 cents ...

I'll fix it with diagram soon.  But the detailed version will be: "able to place a 1 BW square base aligned  to the flank being contacted facing away from the charger such that it doesn't touch any enemy". So essentially if you have friend 1BW or less from the far point of the contacted friend you protect the flank.

Hope that makes sense. Easier with a biccie.

S

Quote from: nigelemsen on August 15, 2019, 07:16:56 PM
Why are bit armies seen as an issue? To take such an army you have given up on taking anything good. Plus you get to get enough models on the board so it actually looks like a battle and not a big skirmish game

Are we try to move the game to standard number of units so it becomes more rock/stone/etc?

They are not an issue at all.  I prefer them.

It is just to give choice with the same game so we can draw in those who like small armies to the bright side ... 
US will do lot of Pacto comps as people travel a lot by air so carrying a small army is easy.
Magna is mainly to allow 28mm on a 6x4.

Widens our market place of potential Mortem et Gloriam players by x3 I suspect when you think about newbies and the players liking smaller number of figures.

What is great is that its a smaller army but NOT a smaller game.  The whole system still works in all three sizes.  I hope therefore that we will find many people wanting to try the game.

As for me ... I'll be fielding full armies in Maximus comps unless demoing Pacto.  And playing Magna down here as they like their 28mm.

Si

Si

Quote from: Robin on August 16, 2019, 08:14:21 AM
Presumably any rule changes will be on printable A4 pdf sheets so we can replace existing sheets which have already been paid for.

Free printed exchange as usual if you don't fancy the new book.  But I'm sure you will.

S

Quote from: badhabum on August 15, 2019, 02:23:30 PM
IMO open open anywhere ...

Indeed KISS everywhere we can

The changes to prompting through fire - this seems to be aimed at knight Vs horse archers (which I think is a bit of a problem now) but won't this also make foot even worse against horse archers ( hello FoG).