I am very impressed. The only game that is so complete, is Battletech with classic rules. But here there are no hexagon cells here I am really impressed by the simulationaist realism.
If you e-mail me using the e-mail address in the channel information, I will be happy to send you a copy of these rules. But, be warned, they were written down by me, for my own use, so don't expect them to be as well set out, clear, or pretty as a set of rules prepared for public release.
One reason is that if you are within range of the enemy and you move your figures one at a time, the enemy will be able to reactively shoot at each individual figure as it moves, rather than only shooting once at the group. Another reason is that if you move figures into melee one at a time, there is a risk that you move the first figure in, fail the activation roll on the second figure, and end up fighting against somewhat adverse odds. And if you want to move a number of figures, if you activate them as a group you only have to make one roll, whereas to move them individually you have to make a number of rolls. So you need to balance the chance of making a given roll against the number of rolls you will need to make.
@@jamesathertonyt The first 2 points are true, but I don't think the last is. 4 rolls x 1 figures each x a high chance of success will always end up with more figures moving, on average, than 1 roll x 4 figures x a lower chance of success.
@@godlaydying I don't think I agree. To activate a single figure I need to roll 4+ on a d20, which is an 85% chance of success. My chance of successfully rolling 4+ four times in a row is just over 50%. But to activate 4 figures at once I need to roll 7+ on a d20, which is a 70% chance. So better odds. And, by my reckoning, the expected total number of figures that I will successfully activate if I activate figures 1 at a time is 85%/(1-85%), which is less than 6, whereas if I activate them in groups of 4, the expected number of figures I will successfully activate is 4x70%/(1-70%), which is over 9.
Thank you. That was excellent.
Cheers. Glad you liked it.
I am very impressed. The only game that is so complete, is Battletech with classic rules. But here there are no hexagon cells here I am really impressed by the simulationaist realism.
Thank you
Certainly interesting. Is there a pdf You could share for these? for non commercial purposes of course :)
If you e-mail me using the e-mail address in the channel information, I will be happy to send you a copy of these rules. But, be warned, they were written down by me, for my own use, so don't expect them to be as well set out, clear, or pretty as a set of rules prepared for public release.
@@jamesathertonyt I can’t see an email address on the channel information. I’m using the iPad youtube app. Would love to read the rules.
@@Railway_Cat The e-mail address you need is jathertonyt@yahoo.com.
It takes alot of mind power to play a game like this never mind creating it.
I'll bet you don't play miniature wargames that often. These are pretty simple compared to a log of others.
@@Cheesemonkey231 Compared to a log of what? Alot of calculations have to be done to keep track of the gameplay.
@@MoonwalkerWorshiper that was a typo. I meant lot.
@@Cheesemonkey231 Compared to a lot of other what?
@@MoonwalkerWorshiper I'll just rephrase the entire comment. These rules are pretty simple compared to a lot of other ruleset.
You ammo tracking will fail with the battle of Carras, where ammo depletion made a difference.
I really liked the spearmen figures, could you tell me the manufacturer please?
They are 1/72 scale plastic figures manufactured by HaT, from the set "El Cid Spanish Infantry."
Why wouldn't you always choose to activate figures one at a time, to make the rolls as easy as possible?
One reason is that if you are within range of the enemy and you move your figures one at a time, the enemy will be able to reactively shoot at each individual figure as it moves, rather than only shooting once at the group.
Another reason is that if you move figures into melee one at a time, there is a risk that you move the first figure in, fail the activation roll on the second figure, and end up fighting against somewhat adverse odds.
And if you want to move a number of figures, if you activate them as a group you only have to make one roll, whereas to move them individually you have to make a number of rolls. So you need to balance the chance of making a given roll against the number of rolls you will need to make.
@@jamesathertonyt The first 2 points are true, but I don't think the last is. 4 rolls x 1 figures each x a high chance of success will always end up with more figures moving, on average, than 1 roll x 4 figures x a lower chance of success.
@@godlaydying I don't think I agree. To activate a single figure I need to roll 4+ on a d20, which is an 85% chance of success. My chance of successfully rolling 4+ four times in a row is just over 50%. But to activate 4 figures at once I need to roll 7+ on a d20, which is a 70% chance. So better odds.
And, by my reckoning, the expected total number of figures that I will successfully activate if I activate figures 1 at a time is 85%/(1-85%), which is less than 6, whereas if I activate them in groups of 4, the expected number of figures I will successfully activate is 4x70%/(1-70%), which is over 9.
Btw, it was very common to use the two-handed kontos on horseback for most of the Dark Ages.....
Reading the rules is some what confusing and seem more confusing then claimed.
Apologies for any confusion. I am happy to answer any questions in the comments, and can also provide the full written rules if you drop me an e-mail.
@@jamesathertonyt Why not just put a Google drive link in the description?
@@Seth9809 Sending by e-mail works fine, and I prefer a more personal approach.
@@jamesathertonyt good for you, James