Playtest -- Welsh vs. Feudal English

[Kevin Boylan]

Dick Pagano and I ran a playtest yesterday with me running a later, North Welsh army (III/20c) and him commanding the Feudal English (IV/23). I had 1 Knight, 8 Light Spear, 2 Bow, and 1 Psiloi. He had 4 Knights, 4 Bow, 1 Light Spear, 2 Horde and 1 Psiloi.

He was the aggressor. I placed a large, steep hill the middle of the board, a good sized wood in one corner and a marsh in the opposite corner. He rolled to move terrain, but only the marsh was shifted, and this had no effect on play. However, both of us and others in attendance, were all of the opinion that the option of relocating a piece of bad going near the middle of the board was unnecessary and would have had disorting effects if, for example, I had been the invader.

The British sent their knights sweeping around the hill to their right, while their Bow and Psiloi went up the Hill. The Welsh countered by sending their Psiloi and 2 Light Spear up the hill while the rest of their force redeployed to face the knights threatening their left.

The speed with which the battle developed -- thanks to the faster movement rates -- was remarkable. As the Welsh, I had considerly less time to redeploy to meet the threat than I would have in 2.2. It seems that it's not just "light" armies that become more formidable in 2.2+, but also "fast" armies that have lots of Cav and/or Knights but are hardly "light." For the same reason, other games going on at the same time became stricly frontal clashes wherein the opposing armies simply bashed into each other with little maneuvering.

The new bow and light spear rules seemed to work reasonably well, with the English bow gradually killing the Welsh Psiloi and 2 Light, clearing the hill and putting the Welsh on the verge of defeat. The Welsh, however, held out vs. the Knights with their general and double-ranked light spear, though the general had to survive two flank attacks. In the end, however, 3 of the English knights (including their General) was killed, while an English bow was 6-1'd by a Welsh bow, yielding a narrow victory for the latter.

[Skeptical Gamer]

Originally Posted by Kevin Boylan

The speed with which the battle developed -- thanks to the faster movement rates -- was remarkable. As the Welsh, I had considerly less time to redeploy to meet the threat than I would have in 2.2. It seems that it's not just "light" armies that become more formidable in 2.2+, but also "fast" armies that have lots of Cav and/or Knights but are hardly "light." For the same reason, other games going on at the same time became stricly frontal clashes wherein the opposing armies simply bashed into each other with little maneuvering.

I've had the same experience. With most element types gaining about an inch of movement (in 15mm scale), the armies come into contact much faster. I've often felt that it happens too fast, but that feeling may change as I get in more games and get used to it...

I understand the desire to differentiate Raiders and Lt. Spear from Auxilia and Psiloi (in both feel and game balance), but I suspect I would be just as happy if the the new movement band were dropped and everything faster than 4MU were slowed down by 1MU.

Failing that (and the extra movement band has a lot of supporters, so...), perhaps the deployment area could be reduced by 2-3MU. This would give everyone a little more time to maneuver and only increase the length of the game by a turn or two (and quick turns at that since nobody would be in contact).

[Kevin Boylan]

Originally Posted by Skeptical Gamer

I've had the same experience. With most element types gaining about an inch of movement (in 15mm scale), the armies come into contact much faster. I've often felt that it happens too fast, but that feeling may change as I get in more games and get used to it...

I understand the desire to differentiate Raiders and Lt. Spear from Auxilia and Psiloi (in both feel and game balance), but I suspect I would be just as happy if the the new movement band were dropped and everything faster than 4MU were slowed down by 1MU.

Failing that (and the extra movement band has a lot of supporters, so...), perhaps the deployment area could be reduced by 2-3MU. This would give everyone a little more time to maneuver and only increase the length of the game by a turn or two (and quick turns at that since nobody would be in contact).

I'm generally in agreement with you on this. However, I don't see restricting the deployment area as a solution applicable in all cases. In this game, for instance, both sides needed to set up "forward" in order to grab the central hill.

[winterbadger]

Originally Posted by Kevin Boylan

...both of us and others in attendance, were all of the opinion that the option of relocating a piece of bad going near the middle of the board was unnecessary and would have had disorting effects if, for example, I had been the invader.

Dis{t}orting of what? Distortion implies there is a norm or standard pattern that is being twisted or skewed by an action or influence. What is being distorted? Is the course of the game being altered? I'm sure that's true, but that could be said of any action that takes place. If I don't roll a 1 when I need pips, that distorts what would otherwise happen, but that doesn't mean that what would happen otherwise is the norm and what happened when I rolled the single pip is a distortion.

[Pavane]

Was the game on a 30" board?