FoG

[ochoin]

I'm looking at MEG with great interest.

My little group & I are long term Field of Glory players. We field a variety of Bronze Age & Punic armies.
What I'm trying to find out is if these existing armies can be shoe horned into MEG?

There's two issues: our existing unit sizes sometimes vary from the MEG army lists eg we might have 4 bases of light cavalry when the lists state 6.
Secondly, types of figures. EG an army list might specify javelin armed skirmishers when we have bow armed.

We are not tournament gamers. I do not particularly wish to embark upon a program of adding a number of bases to existing armies & discarding units on anything like a large scale.
So: how flexible is MEG on this issue?

donald

[martymagnificent]

My group transitioned from FoG to MeG (via ADLG).

The number of figures/bases required for a MeG Maximus game is broadly similar but does vary a bit depending on list and how you collected your armies (ie do you get the bare minimum necessary to play or do you cover all possibilities for a list). I did expand my collection to make a number of armies suitable for MeG Maximus.

If you don't want to do this I would suggest playing Magna as it is a similar game and your FoG armies will comfortably cover the models provided.

Martin

[Agoz]

I'd agree, the middle scale version of MEG, Magna, sounds about right for you, it's 2/3 the number of bases as the main game. Second, if your friends are comfortable with it, its not going to break the game if you fudge the numbers a bit on what units are available. The army builder spreadsheet will comfortably  calculate points for whatever unit you want to put into a list for you. I did a test game where I replayed Alexander's first battle against the Thracians and added tribal versions of scythed chariots to the Thracian list to represent the rock filled carts that they rolled towards the phalanx. The spreadsheet calculated them at 62 points and the game played fine.

Edit: What I mean to say is the army builder doesn't enforce the army list restrictions found in the various period lists.

[ochoin]

I'd agree, the middle scale version of MEG, Magna, sounds about right for you, it's 2/3 the number of bases as the main game. Second, if your friends are comfortable with it, its not going to break the game if you fudge the numbers a bit on what units are available. The army builder spreadsheet will comfortably  calculate points for whatever unit you want to put into a list for you. I did a test game where I replayed Alexander's first battle against the Thracians and added tribal versions of scythed chariots to the Thracian list to represent the rock filled carts that they rolled towards the phalanx. The spreadsheet calculated them at 62 points and the game played fine.

Edit: What I mean to say is the army builder doesn't enforce the army list restrictions found in the various period lists.

Thanks, gentlemen. That's what I wanted to hear. Your replies are much appreciated.

I think the next step is seeking out some games being played on You tube (if such exist).
When we changed our Napoleonic rules, watching games on You tube is what decided us on General d'Armee. The price of the MeG box isn't excessive but it's considerable & I want to be fairly sure I'll be using them before I buy.

I've been sending links, army lists, reviews to my pals.  I don't mean to suggest they're not a great bunch but getting group agreement to change a rule set is not easy. We *know* FoG, we own the rule books & supplements. And FoG isn't fatally flawed or anything. It works....it's just it's a bit too ....mechanistic?....for my tastes.

So, if I have any more newbie questions I hope I won't bore you if I post them here.

donald

[martymagnificent]

I don't think anyone on here is bothered by questions.

MeG is actually a pretty cheap one to get on board with because of all the army lists being free online.

I know what you mean about how games can be 'fine' but still lack something. I feel the same about ADLG. Nothing specifically wrong with it, I just find it kind of dull (and not enough models). For me MeG consistently creates fun/entertaining games and that counts for more than any other consideration

Martin.

[ochoin]

OK a challenging question. Definitely not meant to be insulting or anything .

I have looked at the author playing a demo game involving Caesar & the Gauls:

https://mortem-et-gloriam.co.uk/meg/other-useful-videos/

There are positives but I was a bit repelled by it.
It seemed a rather soulless, solo exercise. Additionally, he table is filled with playing aides: cards, speciality & D6 dice, charge markers & wound counters. Indeed, the focus seems very much on cards & dice & not so much on the figures. The spectacle aspect of the game is not helped by this being the 'Pacto' or small version.

I'm possibly being too hard. The positives are a very quick game & it seems fairly straight forward. There seems to be great opportunity for multi=player games with separate commands (very important for our small group).

I'll look at the magna (or medium sized game) tonight. In the mean time, please shoot me down & correct any misapprehensions I've displayed.

donald

[Agoz]

Simon's videos are very useful for learning the rules. However as far as making the game look exciting, that's hard to do without an additional player for banter and close up camera shots. 

[ochoin]

Fair comment.

donald

[LawrenceG]

Additionally, he table is filled with playing aides: cards, speciality & D6 dice, charge markers & wound counters. Indeed, the focus seems very much on cards & dice & not so much on the figures.

donald

In FOG the table is filled with D6 dice and cohesion state markers. MeG cards are additional potential clutter (it's on you to keep them tidy) but I think you will probably have fewer dice on the table in total.

MeG is pretty much FoG with:
Instead of having to compare the number rolled on the combat dice with the "to hit" and/or "reroll" number, you just read off each dice whether it is 0, 1 or half a hit.
All "damage" is measured by base losses (instead of base losses plus cohesion state)
The "complex move roll" is replaced by the need to have particular cards which allows for more certainty in planning and decision-making.

If you like FoG you will probably like MeG and find it more mentally ergonomic.  Once you get used to everything having its name changed (BG=UG, POA=claim, Cohesion test= KAb Test, light spear = short spear etc).

[lionheartrjc]

An important difference from FoG is that generals have to command specific troops and cannot just command anyone.

[ochoin]

An important difference from FoG is that generals have to command specific troops and cannot just command anyone.

Now this! is an important innovation. One of our number (ex-military) has long criticised FoG for commanders who can command anybody & it isn't really accurate so there's another reason for a change.

donald

[Simon Meg-Meister]

OK a challenging question. Definitely not meant to be insulting or anything .

I have looked at the author playing a demo game involving Caesar & the Gauls:

https://mortem-et-gloriam.co.uk/meg/other-useful-videos/

There are positives but I was a bit repelled by it.
It seemed a rather soulless, solo exercise. Additionally, he table is filled with playing aides: cards, speciality & D6 dice, charge markers & wound counters. Indeed, the focus seems very much on cards & dice & not so much on the figures. The spectacle aspect of the game is not helped by this being the 'Pacto' or small version.

I'm possibly being too hard. The positives are a very quick game & it seems fairly straight forward. There seems to be great opportunity for multi=player games with separate commands (very important for our small group).

I'll look at the magna (or medium sized game) tonight. In the mean time, please shoot me down & correct any misapprehensions I've displayed.

donald

Hello and welcome aboard. 

The set you are buying had items which are designed to blend beatfully into the table top. I didn't have those when making that video.  In addition, Pacto is the small version so the ratio of damage markers to troops is at its highest, it drops rapidl with Magna and largely disappears with Maximus.    It's actually the same as Mortem et Gloriam with a cohesion marker per unit.  Justin Pacto a unit is one file.

It comes alive with 2 players due to being interactive. 

Hope that helps. And welcome aboard I hope.

Si

[ochoin]

Thanks for the welcome. The website is a credit to you & my experience on the forum has been excellent.

I think I'm fine with everything but, as you'll appreciate, I have to get my pals on board. There's 6 of us & don't get me wrong they're good guys but I've been down the road of changing rule sets before (Napoleonic) & I know inertia is strong. We're in Brisbane, Australia so the historical gaming scene is quite small & as far as we're concerned, it's just us.  I have to convince at least one other (and hopefully 4 or more)  to buy the compendium to make it a viable decision. Purchase is not only important to run viable games but means a committent from the individual who has bought himself the rules.

For the past week I've already been sending them links, thoughts, questions etc to build momentum & make it a group decision. So far, the reaction has been sort of lukewarm-positive which isn't bad. I need to build on this.

donald

[badhabum]

Hy,


I am also an old hand of FOG and switched to MEG in 2016,

If you want some idea of the difference of size between pacto and maximus you might have a look at my blog ( I do not play magna sorry )

We first used command cards, now the tokens and you will notice that the table is not full of useless things 


PACTO :

https://www.thelonesomewargamer.com/post/pacto-later-republican-romans-vs-early-germans

In general as most games are maximus :

https://www.thelonesomewargamer.com/

Anyway wathever your decision, welcome and enjoy the community , ( also on FB https://www.facebook.com/groups/763293233817810  )

[Simon Meg-Meister]

Thanks for the welcome. The website is a credit to you & my experience on the forum has been excellent.

I think I'm fine with everything but, as you'll appreciate, I have to get my pals on board. There's 6 of us & don't get me wrong they're good guys but I've been down the road of changing rule sets before (Napoleonic) & I know inertia is strong. We're in Brisbane, Australia so the historical gaming scene is quite small & as far as we're concerned, it's just us.  I have to convince at least one other (and hopefully 4 or more)  to buy the compendium to make it a viable decision. Purchase is not only important to run viable games but means a committent from the individual who has bought himself the rules.

For the past week I've already been sending them links, thoughts, questions etc to build momentum & make it a group decision. So far, the reaction has been sort of lukewarm-positive which isn't bad. I need to build on this.

donald

Always happy to do an intro game on Zoom for you a a group and answer questions.  Might just tip the balance.  Si