Set up and played another Bat Cmd solo play through, this time using my 10mm Malburian types with a replay of Ramillies scenario adapted from Lace Wars as these 'toys' have not seen table time in a while.
Units are Regiments/Brigades which works fine with FOB/Bat Cmd.
For ease I used generic unit stats and made all Commanders D10 with exception of CinCs who were D12 for Marlborough and D10 for Villeroi.
As many more rolls are determined by CinC quality this has potentially more effect in Bat Cmd (indeed feels more like FOB2 in this respect which had a bigger spread of deck quality types).
I really enjoyed this game as I am beginning to appreciate the greater depth of decisions with new Action Matrix vis the multi card decks of FOB.
Constantly one turns a card makes an Action roll and is faced with 'oh dear I have options but what is best overall ?'.
As an example turning a Infantry Fire card is no longer simply applied to every command group on a side. On said card a player might indeed get only the Inf Fire option or he might also have available Leadership, Melee or occasionally Move. But possibly (on odd Action roll) only 1 option would apply to overall army or (on even Action roll) he can apply any one of his available options to each separate command.
In FOB I would have 3 Melee cards in a standard deck and thereby 3 set opportunities to Melee with units (barring re shuffles) per deck but in Bat Cmd there may be potentially more chances to choose a Melee option than just turning the single Melee card itself.
But the caveat is that if I Melee on a Fire card I may be giving up that chance to Fire for one or more commands, whereas in FOB the Fire cards are always going to appear as distinct separate actions, a different dynamic indeed.
Game played slickly and of course being Piquet type it played to a firm conclusion over a couple of sessions. Game was very close with both sides going to zero Morale but Allies did gain a few morale chips from French and French turned an Army Morale (no Action rolls on these 'trigger' type cards) card first and failed to remain on the field. There being only 1 Army Morale in an 8 card deck as opposed to 3 in 27 is different and am unsure if this makes its presence more or less likely in game terms as many more re shuffles occur ?
In FOB I would usually include a 'Rolling Fire' optional card in deck to differentiate between Platoon and Rank firing for infantry in period. In Bat Cmd I included the Event card in Allied deck with its appearance allowing Platoon firers (Dutch and English foot) to re-load (rolling a D6 with odd meaning only 1 Cmd could re-load with evens allowing all Cmds to avail of option). Again not sure how this compared 1 in 9 to 1 in 28 but it seemed similar.
So again I am finding Bat Cmd is different to FOB but not necessarily better or worse but still do think FOB is marginally better suited to solo and multi player simply due to more straight forward card play.
Will be interesting to see how Stephen views new system
Armies at deployment (I used historical set up) with French on left
I'm not really familiar with the rules, but found your post helpful. The battle looks good. Enjoyed the post.
ReplyDeleteLatest iteration of a series of rules that started with Piquet back in 1995 (?), personally I have enjoyed them all. Just suits what I want from a game with level of abstraction/detail/complexity I enjoy. Not for those who like more predictability or control.
DeleteDefinitely making things clearer as to how the rules work. I take your point about FoB3 being more straightforward for group games though.
ReplyDeleteAs only 2 solo games played its hard to be sure but definitely more instances will occur in a multi-player game (on odd rolls) of players wanting use of different options on a card, unlike in past were each had equal opportunity on each turned card. In FOB 'debate' really only happened on turn of Move 1 Cmd Grp. CinC will have bit more commanding to do maybe :-)
DeleteHowever overall game certainly still 'feels' and plays like PK/FOB
FoB3 is a bit more straightforward, as you say, because you can only do what the card allows (other than Opp fire). I fully plan to do at least one big game with Bat Com at Historicon. my guess is that the pluses and minuses will even out. Yes, sometimes you may decide to forgo the main card usage, but other times it will get troops a chance to act when they need to (i.e., you turn infantry fire or melee, and and no troops are in range). Thus far, I like the changes.
ReplyDeleteI like Bat Cmd as there are not the big swings of initiative with multiple cards that occur quite frequently in FOB (although that can be quite dynamic as game narrative) and not so many 'dud' cards, but in some ways its more 'lucktastic' as regards the frequent Action rolls with Odds/Evens. FOB just seems marginally easier for multiplayer but most likely it will all even itself out as you say.
Delete