The 2020 MeG Compendium ... your input welcome

Simon Meg-Meister · July 09, 2019, 08:48:22 AM

Hi all

With Skulls out of the way and things a little calmer I am returning to finalising the 2020 version.
This will be called "The Mortem et Gloriam Compendium" and will be in book form complete with high grade artwork.

Compendium because in a single book it will have Pacto, Magna and Maximus (the current full version).
I am redrafting it to make all three fold into the single rule book smoothly.
At the same time I am tightening presentation and language.
The new book will be supported by a range of videos with Hydaspes as a display game in all three game sizes.

We then have MeG Games:

Maximus: full figure count of 70-120 bases played in 3 hours ... for those who like to see real armies on the table!
Magna: 40-60 bases played in 2 hours ... especially good for playing 28mm on a 6x4 standard table
Pacto: 20-30 bases played in 1 1/4 hours .... 15mm on a 3x2 using the same number of figures as double DBA or ADLG

The 2019 version is playing extremely well and specially the army feel. I have played Huns, Byzantines, Romans and Mongols this year and never had any of these armies feel so good and varied ... and I have been playing since 4th edition.

We are finding a few tweaks we would like to make for 2020 but they are minor in form. We have the flex to do so as this becomes the lasting long term version which will stand for at least 5 years and probably longer. We are also then well placed to create a few different language version thanks to volunteers of support in a few countries. My time will then switch to ReG and then WW2.

MeG has always been a listening ruleset where the intelligence of the many players is hugely valued and responded to. This is a fundamental part of my own philosophy on rule creation. So if you have ideas you want considering, tweaks you think have merit, or areas you find confusing that you want tidying up ... or indeed any special request. Then use this stream to post them up for me to think about.

To many years fo MeG in all three forms and to a big push to grow from our global base of about 1200 players in 2020.

S

Hunter · July 12, 2019, 01:37:26 PM

2 front corners and at least one back corner behind front to count as a flank attack is my fav.
HH

Simon Meg-Meister · July 12, 2019, 02:09:54 PM

Quote from: Hunter on July 12, 2019, 01:37:26 PM
2 front corners and at least one back corner behind front to count as a flank attack is my fav.
HH

That one is in. Makes them more material visually I agree.
(official base depths used if it ever matters)

Hunter · July 12, 2019, 03:12:33 PM

Roger - a little big change.
HH

nikgaukroger · July 12, 2019, 03:14:41 PM

A very sensible one.

badhabum · July 12, 2019, 08:09:37 PM

Quote from: Simon Meg-Meister on July 12, 2019, 02:09:54 PM
Quote from: Hunter on July 12, 2019, 01:37:26 PM
2 front corners and at least one back corner behind front to count as a flank attack is my fav.
HH

That one is in. Makes them more material visually I agree.
(official base depths used if it ever matters)

Base depth will always matter. So chariots will have a harder time to get behind the flanks, same for nellies ...fleet of foot more interesting as you move faster and so can reach behind the flank more easely ...BIG change

Dru · July 13, 2019, 01:13:20 AM

so 20mm for infantry, right? Even if they have used 15mm depth infantry? Otherwise an advantage to those using other game system bases.

craig.w · July 13, 2019, 02:19:26 AM

Quote from: badhabum on July 12, 2019, 08:09:37 PM
Quote from: Simon Meg-Meister on July 12, 2019, 02:09:54 PM
Quote from: Hunter on July 12, 2019, 01:37:26 PM
2 front corners and at least one back corner behind front to count as a flank attack is my fav.
HH

That one is in. Makes them more material visually I agree.
(official base depths used if it ever matters)

Base depth will always matter. So chariots will have a harder time to get behind the flanks, same for nellies ...fleet of foot more interesting as you move faster and so can reach behind the flank more easely ...BIG change

Pikes based on 15mm bases will be able to do flank charges the easiest ...

Simon Meg-Meister · July 13, 2019, 08:13:22 AM

Indeed. So propsing to KISS as easiest to see if a back corner is round a flank but has a compromise on angles.
That said whe you combine speed and base depth I suspect it makes little difference in practice.

The only alternative is to fix it a a set distance which is fiddly to measure.
So far front corner at least 1/2 BW beyond the line. Then al angles are the same.

Or leave it as is and better explain it in the context of dynamics.

Thoughts welcome as the purpose of the stream and early days ...

S

Jilu · July 13, 2019, 09:46:38 AM

why not : 2 front corner and a back corner of a
ether 4 by 2cm base
or
4 by 3 cm base
to make it a bit more difficult
or
to make it even less easy
4 by 4 cm base

regardless of the bases of the unit

in case of suobt : reblace bases by one without miniatures to check

Hunter · July 13, 2019, 11:20:18 AM

Hmmm

More complex than I though. Maybe better to leave it and folk just have to be more careful?

HH

rayfredjohn · July 13, 2019, 11:39:06 AM

don't meddle with flank charges, not broken.

look at what TuGs can do in movement phase when starting their move very close to the enemy.

give TuGs a chance to react when the TuG they are in with contact breaks off. It seems ridiculous that a TuG just stands there as their opponent breaks off. By playing a white card, the TuG broken off from should have the choice to make a full move straight ahead in 5.4

marshalney2000 · July 13, 2019, 02:05:10 PM

Quote from: rayfredjohn on July 13, 2019, 11:39:06 AM
don't meddle with flank charges, not broken.

look at what TuGs can do in movement phase when starting their move very close to the enemy.

give TuGs a chance to react when the TuG they are in with contact breaks off. It seems ridiculous that a TuG just stands there as their opponent breaks off. By playing a white card, the TuG broken off from should have the choice to make a full move straight ahead in 5.4

Do not disagree but would like clarification on your thinking. Presumably this follow up could not make contact with the enemy breaking off or if you think it could would this count as a charge in the next impact phase.

rayfredjohn · July 13, 2019, 06:55:41 PM

Quote from: marshalney2000 on July 13, 2019, 02:05:10 PM
Quote from: rayfredjohn on July 13, 2019, 11:39:06 AM
don't meddle with flank charges, not broken.

look at what TuGs can do in movement phase when starting their move very close to the enemy.

give TuGs a chance to react when the TuG they are in with contact breaks off. It seems ridiculous that a TuG just stands there as their opponent breaks off. By playing a white card, the TuG broken off from should have the choice to make a full move straight ahead in 5.4
Do not disagree but would like clarification on your thinking. Presumably this follow up could not make contact with the enemy breaking off or if you think it could would this count as a charge in the next impact phase.

Agree. No contact possible

craig.w · July 14, 2019, 04:00:43 AM

Quote from: rayfredjohn on July 13, 2019, 11:39:06 AM

give TuGs a chance to react when the TuG they are in with contact breaks off. It seems ridiculous that a TuG just stands there as their opponent breaks off. By playing a white card, the TuG broken off from should have the choice to make a full move straight ahead in 5.4

This was mentioned by one of the newer players in our group. Cataphracts can be charged by lancers and then the lancers break off and sit at 5BW (at the cost of a KAB admittedly) and it takes the cataphracts out of the game for a couple of turns. Would it be so easy for, say Norman cavalry to break off from Nikephorian cataphracts and sit outside charge range? In effect the breaking off unit get two moves while the 'pursuing' cataphracts are standing there.