"Impetus popularity in UK??" Topic

I am working overseas at the moment and have been for nearly 2 years so am a little out of the UK gaming scene. Club wise my home is near to Cardiff and Swansea. On the ancients front I enjoy playing WAB and am patiently (sometimes) waiting for WAB 2. I also enjoy FOG. The bonuses for me with both of those sets is that they have a good following, good support and good products.

I have however lately seen a lot of reference to the Impetus rules and am tempted to buy them. I am a little reluctant though to add to my book case full of what I would called niche rule systems. Many very good, some excellent but simply not popular enough to enable you to get a game if travelling or if you wish to go to a themed event.

I've read pretty much every Impetus thread around and they sound to be worth giving a run (at least I can learn them here for when I get back). I would however be interested to hear if they have gained much of a foothold in the UK.

The quoted sales numbers from their site seems to indicate they are selling OK but not perhaps outstandingly well (e.g. same numbers as I get the impression WAB, FoG and FOW sell in). The site forums also seem to lack activity and the membership does not seem high. As an 'out of it' observer it is easy to take these points as sign of there being little interest.

About the only thing I am little concerned about with Impetus is the cohesion testing which sounds as if it introduces luck to such an extent that some people find just too much.

Finally, I'd be particularly interested in the views of any FoG players who prefer FoG over Impetus (or vice versa), preferably after playing both a number of times.

I don't think Impetus will ever be as popular as FoG or WAB because it isn't as wildly available and doesn't have the same marketing power behind it in the UK. However it is IMHO a really good game and this combined with the authors strong support of his ruleset by bringing out supplements and online support (he's currently on holiday and that may explain the lack of activity on the forum) make it well worth getting into and should make it more popular as time goes by. It just needs some more time than better advertised rules to get going.

I recently put on a game at my club and all six players really enjoyed it. As to the cohesion test you have probably already read my views on another thread and there is an optional rule that allows you to balance out the luck factor if you don't like that, but to be honest I haven't really had any odd results and I've played quite a few games.

All I can suggest is download the free Basic Impetus version and see how you like it. If you do and decide to invest in Impetus, you'll be making it a little less niche : )

All I can tell you is that it's really taken off at the South East Scotland Wargames Club. At the moment it's probably being played there more than WAB.

Good news is that you can play Impetus using figures based for WAB in sabots.

I have one friend who plays Impetus but have never actually found a copy when I have been browsing stands at games shows. I am sure they are out there but they are not easy to find.

I downloaded Basic Impetus and liked bits of it but not the whole package. From what people have said the full thing is better so if I ever see it I might buy it.

Some people at the Guildford Club tried Impetus and really didn't like it, not sure why but it hasn't caught on here because of that – mostly FOG and WAB for ancients.

Mike

Ok Well, I first player WAB but got fed up with some issues I then had 2 years out of ancients but when FOG came out it re-ignited my interest, However after about 10/12 games I just found it too much hard work and was not finding it fun. No problems with the rules they get the right results but after each game I was drained.

I was drifting back away from ancients when one of the clubs suggested playing Impetus, at first I was not bothered trying another games system but said OK. Now I'm really glad I did we have been playing for around a year now and loving it. The rules seam to get the right results but in a fun and fast way. It is for me the middle ground between WAB and DBM. It is not as "polished" and "tight" a set of rules as FOG but as stated any queries are quickly answered in the official forum.

As for popularity, I don't know if it will ever get as popular as FOG or WAB as both have a strong base to start with, I think Impetus suffered from very bad timing for a release as it was the same month as FOG and with the big osprey machine behind FOG it got lost. That being said it is gaining in popularity it will just take longer to get there.

For what it is worth it is now the most popular ancients game being played at our club

i am not sure whether this is helpful, but i can assure you that Impetus is the most *fun* ancient wargame system i ever played. very smooth, elegant and with enough spice thrown in too make it potentially attractive to the WAB crowd too.

i do think however that Basic Impetus gives a rather good glimpse of what Impetus is like. the main things that really work better in "full" Impetus are comand and control (different gradings of generals), skirmishers, possibly light cavalry and impetuous troops.

if you try something like vikings, dark ages and stuff like that, then Basic Impetus works just as well. if you want something a bit more refined (eg. more complex tactics) then plaing the punic wars with Impetus might be a good idea.

I have Impetus and have got quite a bit of interest from other gamers at the club,but i don't think it will ever be as popular as FOG because of the unpredicability of your troops in the game..don't get me wrong i love the game.
Sort of like the difference between FoW and Crossfire…both ww2 games but totally different…btw i really like Crossfire too…

Cheers Andy

I've played several games of full Impetus (which was really easy to acquire: 45 seconds on a website, a flourish of a debit card and a four-day wait and – Hey presto! I had it). I won't be playing any more.

Context: I play a lot of Warhammer Ancients. I prefer the classical and biblical periods with little interest in mediaevals and none at all in the dark ages. I play exclusively in 25/28 mm. I like big games – 4-7,000 points in WAB terms: I consider 2000 points a pointless skirmish. I play multi-player games at a club that has its own premises and so there is no imperative to finish a game in an evening. A game can take weeks to resolve, if necessary.

In these terms, Impetus is completely useless. It is too slow – ridiculously so. The key problem is the 'one unit at a time' mechanic. For the uninitiated, an army in Impetus has three or four divisions (battles, wings, whatever). Initiative is doled out – by competitive dice rolling – a division at a time, so player 1 may get initiative for, say, his left wing. He then moves, shoots, melees, pursues, melees again, pursues, etc with one unit of that division until that unit can do no more, then he moves on to his next unit and repeats the process until all of that division's units have performed their duties. Initiative for another division is contested again and the winning player then repeats the action process for each unit in the successful division, again one unit at a time.

So…consider a (recent, actual) battle between Republican Rome and an Antigonid Successor. In size terms, about 5000 points in WAB. The Romans line up with: a left wing of four cavalry units, four light infantry units and some skirmishers; a heavy infantry centre of 16 legionary maniples and six units of velites; a right wing of four units of cavalry, three light infantry units and a Gaulish warband. The Macedonians have: a right wing of two mounted companion units, two units of Thessalian cavalry, two units of hypaspists and three units of peltasts; the phalanx has six taxis of pikemen supported by another two units of hypaspists and four units of skirmishing types; the left wing has two more companion units, four units of thureophoroi and some Skythian horse archers.

That's three divisions each. The game starts at 13:00 and by 14:00 turn one has finished, by judicious use of the group move rules to get the units off their baseline. Turn two sees all six divisions move to missile range and perform some shooting by 15:30. In Impetus, any shooting that causes even POTENTIAL damage disorders a unit – which prevents that unit acting in concert with any 'group' – so turn three starts with two massively fragmented battle lines and most units now acting individually. This turn sees the first serious outbreaks of fisticuffs and now the full horror of the rules becomes apparent: both players, when dicing to get initiative for their divisions, want to get one of their cavalry wings behind their opponent's flank. Once this has resolved, the natural next move is to activate the heavy infantry centre – one unit at a time – to take advantage/compensate for disaster. This means that by 18.00 the remaining cavalry wings might get a chance to be activated.

To repeat – for a game played between two experienced Impetus players who are both VERY experienced Ancients wargamers, playing two well-known and uncontroversial armies, it took five HOURS from the start of the game to the point at which, in the case of the Successor player, his shock cavalry got to declare their FIRST charge.

This was excruciating enough: imagine if each wing had been commanded by an individual player? I get my stuff packed up and delivered to the venue in good time, we set up and go at 1pm, at 2 pm I move everything for 15 minutes at 3.30 pm I move everything again and shoot for 20 minutes and then do NOTHING AT ALL for 2 and a quarter hours!!

There are other, more rule-specific gripes, but that applies to every ruleset you ever play. The killer with Impetus (played, I remind you, in my ancients battles context which is VERY different to the tournament formats which dominate most battle reports) is that the game just takes too bloody long to play and means that it is a complete non-starter for large, multi-player games.

For what that's worth,
Cheers,
Steve

>To repeat – for a game played between two experienced Impetus players who are both VERY experienced Ancients wargamers, playing two well-known and uncontroversial armies, it took five HOURS from the start of the game to the point at which, in the case of the Successor player, his shock cavalry got to declare their FIRST charge.

Interesting. Neil Shuck indicated that they had no trouble concluding games in under three hours using Impetus at his game club.

I think this really depends on size;

This 5000pts WAB game would need something like a 10"x6" board and I would think most or the day to play.

For non wabers 2000pts is tournament standard.

I play Impetus with 400/500pts armies.

Last week I played a 400pts game; Crusades v Scots. From start to finish it took 1.5 hours. This is with my opponent not having played impetus since March so he had some ring rust.

Yes for very big multi player games Impetus will give some large periods of inactivity for players.

I guess it just depends what you are after, for a club night or an afternoon game Impetus is plenty fast enough.

I don't know of any game that could handle such a big Ancients game as the one above with out the problem of inactivity.

I've played several games of full Impetus (which was really easy to acquire: 45 seconds on a website, a flourish of a debit card and a four-day wait and – Hey presto! I had it). I won't be playing any more.

Steve,

I routinely play large Impetus battles (20-40 Units per side), and always find them quite enjoyable. If you are no longer interested in your copy of Impetus, I would be happy to take it off your hands – I can always use an extra one!

Cheers,
Scott
(ars_belliATyahooDOTcom)

Finally, I'd be particularly interested in the views of any FoG players who prefer FoG over Impetus (or vice versa), preferably after playing both a number of times.

I played FOG for over a year, and eventually decided that it was just too slow and 'fiddly' for my taste. I have found Impetus to be much faster-playing and more enjoyable. For example, the Impetus Discipline Test accomplishes the same basic goal as the FOG Complex Move Test, but IMHO in a much more elegant way. I also enjoy the Impetus Cohesion Test and find it to be a perfectly reasonable mechanic for representing the historical vagaries of ancient combat, although of course YMMV.

Cheers,
Scott

As Derek says, it's easy enough to mount WAB-based figures on sabot bases for a test run. Download Basic Impetus and take it for a spin. You won't be out much if you don't like it!

Allen

Hmm, so Impetus is both faster and slower, simpler and more detailed than FoG :O

I am not going to be ordering it off a website as I am still not sure I want to play it.

The downloaded basic impetus is a great idea but when I read the rules either I badly missread them or something as it seemed to me that there were 'issues'.

If I could play the game against someone who already had the rules I might find it interesting. Unfortunately I think the closest people who play Impetus live over 50 miles from me and in the UK that is a fair way.

a good way to test drive is to download basic impetus for free… then spend 12$ or so and download 2 complete paper armies from Rosser..and play as much as you like with no waiting for painting

but to make things worse, why Fog vs Impetus..what about command and colors ,too

Hi Empgamer,

I have experimented with both FoG and Impetus. I found FoG unstimulating, although this may well have been the people I was gaming with. FoG is gaining a little steam in the area, but nothing like FoW, for example. Now maybe five guys will participate in a round-robin at our local game convention, when about a dozen are playing FoW.

Impetus captures my imagination, and I want to play more. It is elegant -- you don't have to worry about memorizing "special rules" or how different things interact with different troops. I'd pick Impetus over FoG any day.

However, the point about it's weakness in multi-player games is very true. In a club game I ran, I immediately improvised and went to several players moving at once, which is not the movement system. If you're looking for a top-notch group game "off-the-shelf", it probably isn't Impetus.

Impetus is also not a run of the mill IGYG game, and many players may not like the turn sequence. However, it is a major strength of the game for me.

Additionally, I intend to experiment with house rule solutions to the "only one unit on the table is moving at time" problem to make it a fun group game for the club.

BO

@ a lot of Gaul…where are you located…Im in west palm beach..if its not too far i'd be up for some impetus
steve

Hi ThorLongus,

I am in Fort Myers, on the Gulf coast.

Cheers,
Scott

Hi ThorLongus,

I downloaded Basic Impetus and was not impressed. I found the rules hard to read and not particularly logical. OK, I didn't spend hours trying to work them out but they didn't make me feel that I wanted to spend hours trying them out.

Command and Colours is a game I bought, stuck all the lables on the bits for, played twice and then sold as to me it was deeply unsatisfying. I found that heavy infantry combat ran far too fast compared to other combat. I like Battle Cry and have bought all the other games using that system. At present I am in the process of selling them all apart from Battle Cry which I intend to keep.

"To repeat – for a game played between two experienced Impetus players who are both VERY experienced Ancients wargamers, playing two well-known and uncontroversial armies, it took five HOURS from the start of the game to the point at which, in the case of the Successor player, his shock cavalry got to declare their FIRST charge."

I'm not sure what you are doing but by my groups 3rd game, we are playing 500pt games in 2hrs. Ofcourse, we all have our own rulebooks and actually know the rules quiet well. I believe if everyone knows what they are doing, the "one unit at a time mechanic" really does not slow the game down. I find it's the one or two guys in a multi-player game that refuses to take the effort to learn the rules and relies on the rest of group to baby them through it is what slows a large game down.

Out of all the Ancients/Medieval rules I've played through the years I have found Impetus to be the most enjoyable, well produced, well supported, easy to play game out there. It may not be for everyone though, but imo it's loads better then DBM/Armati/WAB/FoG.

The main issue i have with Impetus is in melee. Why one unit is in combat and all the others are supports(even though they are pretty much just as much in base contact) confuses me.

Only the main unit takes casualties? then if you split the combats up you end up with individual units everywhere, (no clear battle line)it becomes very slow and doesnt look right to me…….

the rule work for what they are intended to work for. that is about 15 to 30 Units per side.
multiplaying a scenario with each player playing one command is ok (of course,the commands should then be made up interestingly) and wil led to less down-time than most other rulesets because there are Cohesion Tests made for the non-phasing and maybe he can even Opportunity Charge. and the dicing for Initiative means you never know when your turn will be. so you are involved all of the time – no walking away and coming back in 30 mis. for your turn. that can be a good thing, or not.

it would be nice if people would specify the "issues" they found with rulesets.

having translated Basic Impetus into german i must say it is written in a most fluid and not-hard way.
BUT Basic Impetus is less complete than full Impetus and some things are less clear.

one last thing: if you want HUGE battles, just put more figures on one Unit base. you could also make the Units bigger to fit the figures in (as lonmg as it is roughly consistent)

yorkie: not clear why the battles would "split up"? surely there is much more chaos then in DBx style games, but a huge gap in your battle line is likely to get you into trouble in Impetus.

the main unit / Support thing can be slightly strange in some situations, if you look at each "combat" isolated. only the main unit taking casualties is not necessarily true: if you gfet defeated, all your units have to fall back and if the enemy pursues chances are good that he will pursue into the former supporter. its best to see all this as just one big melee. it only ends when it ends.

From reading peoples comments I can see that Impetus may be one of those 'marmite' rulesets; you either love them or hate them. I think if you want a flexible ruleset, that gives quick results with managable armies, easy to learn but harder to master and are willing to accept a certain level of abstraction then Impetus may be for you but then it all depends on what you want. Either way its good to have an alternative to the more main stream rulesets.

The key thing about Impetus and Basic Impetus in particular is that its solutions are elegant. Alas many wargamers don't like elegant, they like complicated. So WAB is a long series of dice throws which, to the outsider seem meaningless, FOG is an over complicated mishmash, full of rules which seem to have been added on as playtesting took place. Impetus 'shortens' the complications into a simple set of attributes and rules which suit those wargamers who don't want to spend hours leafing through page after page of the rules.

I'm amazed that anyone could think that Impetus is slow. Admittedly we play Basic here in Aberdeen but I have seen us fight three battles in two and a half hours using the simplest of armies (Spartans versus Warring States Chinese). Regularly we can fight a double army sized battle in an evening and still have time to go for a pint at the end.

My advice would be to start with Basic Impetus – both rules and army lists are free, as is the sheet about multi player and bigger armies. Some of us haven't bothered moving on to the full set of rules and maybe never will. Oh, and try the Baroque extension rules and army lists – they take on some of the rules from the full Impetus set to more accurately reflect their era and a a lot of fun too.

while i like Basic Impetus (and like the fact that it is free ^^), "full" Impetus with similiarly sized armie (about 200 points) does not take longer and gives a better game.

if you want downright *simple* and *no hassle whatsoever* than maybe staying with Basic is an option.

Impetus is really elegant, obviously the product of a lone designer rather than a committee approach (of FoG) and as a result it also has some holes in it – sort of like why some episodes of "Only Fools & Horses" attain sitcom perfection and are Comedy Gold, but yet some are forgettable, however every episode of "Friends" is a consistently high standard but if you never saw one again you'd not really mind.

The biggest difference is it has a unit-by-unit activation, so sometimes units might not move much/at all. You either like this or you don't. It should also make it a better game for solo play than FoG or WAB.

Either way you can use troops based for other systems as Impetus has "4 DBX elements" as basing.

Bottom line – worth getting if only just because some of the ideas in it work so well and it appeals to the aesthetic wargamer in us all.

madaxemen: what do you mean by "it has a unit-by-unit activation, so sometimes units might not move much/at all."?

there is no case in Impetus where a unit in open ground and not in contact with an enemy unit can not move. you do not have to dice for unit activation or such. (which saves time)

disordered units can only move straight or wheel and some can not move at all if in rough or bad going. but thats all that there is to hamper movement.

stil Impetus is one of the less maneuverable rulesets. infantry will pretty much stay where it was set up (or move forwards or wheel a bit, but no movement to another flank). and even with swift units changing a units position from right flank to left flank will most likely not work out before the enemy has you cornered.

good insight @madaxeman…I think there are different rulesets that cater to our different personalities and needs
some of us want a more fluid ,fun, surprising cinematic experience when wargaming…while some may prefer hours of carefully,painstakingly preparing army lists to maximize the possibility of crushing all opposition..building a tournament worthy army that is able to adapt to different needs, tweaking the points and choices like an accountant in april, and then relishing each slow argumentative turn, hoping with each distracting rush to the rulebooks to find a loophole that might reverse your army's sudden misfortune..revelling in finding a tactic that might ,while ahistorical and limbergeresque will reward one with victory…. so basically ,yes what everyone else said already

also @hammy not familiar with battlecry- boardgame/minis?
also I like Impetus but I think it is b/c i used to love Armati
is it just me or do they seem similar?

Well said, Porthius and ThorLongus. IMHO, the fact that there are different rulesets appealing to a variety of tastes is one of the current strengths of the hobby!

Back to the original question for a moment – traffic on the main discussion forum suggests that Impetus and BI currently have a small, but steadily growing following in the UK.

Cheers,
Scott

Thanks for all the comments. Very valuable. Have had a read of BI and it seems they could produce an interesting and not too complicated game. I can't help think there is something missing but that is perhaps as a result of reading them only and because they are the basic version. Very hard to get a feel for a game unless played for me and at the moment I am away from figures, tables and dice :-(

I'm not sure I'd base for the rules specifically though, even if I got into them. Trends come and go and the WRG standard is much more common place and flexible IMO. That said I do REALLY like some of the dioramas I have seen some people create. In some cases though the figures are a bit thin on the ground for my tastes and don't seem to create an impression of a massed army. That said, that is of course down to modelling preferences, not the rules.

I'll probably buy them just as an alternative but think I will likely stick primarily to FOG and WAB upon return to gaming, if only because getting a game of them seems like it will be easier at this time.

"madaxemen: what do you mean by "it has a unit-by-unit activation, so sometimes units might not move much/at all."?"

Well, they all move a bit each go, but not that far, and there is a variable element to it after the first (small) move so they might move further some turns that others. As oposed to FoG/WAB where units always move and always move the same distance (unless charging or in other rarer situations).

Are we playing the same game MadAxeman? This doesn't sound like BI at all. The only variable movement is when units charge and distance beyond their standard movement is diced for. All units have a set movement and in their initiative phase can decide to move up to that distance or not at all (except chariots). There is no "first small move" that is any different to any other move. All units may move directly forward or at an angle, though the latter causes most unit types to become disordered. They may move directly back, also usually causing disorder. They may turn without penalty, a lengthy business for foot but if they turn and move this also usually causes disorder. We have been trying to persuade Lorenzo, the author, to allow units to turn around and face 180 degrees to the rear (also with disorder) as in Baroque for those times your line of foot find an enemy horse unit has got round the flank and is now behind you. Movement in these rules is little different from movement in most sets. The key difference is that units are activated and carry out all their movement/fire/combat one after the other, though other non-activated units may be involved in the last either as main or supporting units.

Empgamer started off this thread with the following:

"About the only thing I am little concerned about with Impetus is the cohesion testing which sounds as if it introduces luck to such an extent that some people find just too much."

This is a very valid point and it is the one which, in my opinion. will determine whether Impetus is for you or not.

Each unit has a value (VBU) which is used for both combat and morale. If a unit of Knights value 6 plus 2 impetus bonus charge a unit of peasants value 2 then the former roll 8 dice to score damage for each 6 or two 5s. On average they will score 2 damage. The peasants will usually score none. Any side taking damage now have to roll for morale. Only the peasants took damage so they alone roll. They start with their original value and deduct the number of damage hits they received 2-2=0. However they cannot go below 1 so roll on that. This is called their critical number. The number rolled on one dice in excess of this is deducted from their VBU. On average they will roll a 3 or a 4 meaning 2 or 3 points to be deducted from their VBU. Since they only had 2 to start with they are eliminated. So far so normal.

But the elegance of Impetus allows more drastic results, albeit at a rate commensurate with the liklihood of the dice rolls going that way. Say the Knights score no hits and the peasants roll two 6s. The Knights now have to roll a dice with a critical number of 4 (VBU 6 – 2 damage) Say they roll a disastrous 6. They would lose 2 points off their VBU permanently, this being the number the roll is in excess of their critical number, and become disordered. they have lost more VBU than their opponents and thus have lost the melee and must retreat.

Now this is a pretty unlikely result but Impetus allows for a range of possibilities in combat (and shooting) which some wargamers find too eclectic. One wargamer here has suggested that the final number of hits a unit inflicts should never exceed their own VBU but most of us see this width of possibilities as an asset. Who hasn't hoped and prayed that their peasants holding that gap would turn those knights back? It isnt likely but Impetus allows it as a possibility. The result is that Impetus often looks to be merely a matter of good and bad dice rolls. And that's true – but within a framework which determines the liklihood of those dice rolls happening pretty accurately. And elegantly.

Empgamer a few of us down the Taffs Well Club (Cardiff)have just tried playing Impetus and got on well with it.

if you fancy joining us for a game PM me and we'll work something out

Mike

Alas many wargamers don't like elegant, they like complicated

This is the key statement IMO. Every unit in Impetus has one primary attribute – VBU, or Basic Unit Value, which is scored on a range of 2 (incredibly poor) to 8 (fantastic).

The VBU of a unit represents:
- the unit's training
- the unit's willingness to fight
- the unit's combat experience
- the competancy of the unit's internal leader(s)
- the quality of the unit's weapons
- the quality of the unit's armour
- the unit's level of reactiveness on the field

…in short, a unit's VBU is an representation of how effective it is in battle by abstractly representing almost every influencing factor.

So for example, a unit that is VBU:4 might represent…

- a well-equipped and well-trained unit of militia with capable leadership but little combat experience.

- a moderately-equipped unit with little training but with lots of experience and a high level of zeal.

…and on an on it goes.

If you like your rules to specifically distinguish between what grade of armour is worn and other such micro-details, the Impetus may not "feel" right, even though you might love the actual gameplay itself.

Personally, I love the game because I don't mind that level of abstraction, and for mass battle gaming, I'm not interested in taking into account what each model is doing, or cross-referencing numerous charts everytime something happens to a unit.

JET

Again, many thanks. I'll give them a spin I think. Will buy direct when EI2 comes out.

Thanks for the offer in Cardiff Mike. Unfortunately I'm in the UAE at the moment and will not be back until December :-( Be glad to hook up for a game then if possible. I used to go to the St Judes Club in Swansea until I came here.

"…in short, a unit's VBU is an representation of how effective it is in battle by abstractly representing almost every influencing factor."

That's not strictly true – the Impetus value is very significant – this adds to the VBU in the first round of combat. And there are some specific troop types represented with special rules, such as long spear, pike, impetuous units.
However, the VBU does, as you say, represent a lot of different things. Whilst this simplifies the game, it does mean there is little of the rock-paper-scissors aspect typically found in ancients rules.
I'm playing my second game of Impetus tonight. I enjoyed my first game and found it much faster than FOG, but I agree that the command / unit activation mechanic does not really work in multi-player games, as only one player can actually be doing anything at one time.
I have a few issues with the rules, the main one being multi-unit combats. For example, if you have a VBU 6 unit and a VBU 1 unit fighting an enemy unit, but the VBU 1 unit is most in front contact, your total VBU would be 4 (1 plus half of 6). So you would be better if the VBU 6 unit was fighting on its own. That doesn't seem right to me.
But that and a few other minor points aside, I think they are a good, very playable set of rules.
I can't see them replacing FOG as my main game, but I think I will be happy to play Impetus occasionally as an alternative.

A point of clarification:

In a multiple-unit melee in Impetus, it is always necessary to identify the two main opposing units/bases (i.e. the ones most in contact with one another). Other bases that are less in contact are designated as support units. So if most of the contact in the above example is with the VBU 1 base, it is the one of the two main units in the melee, and fights at full strength. The VBU 6 base has less contact in the melee, and so serves as a support unit, contributing half of its VBU. The fact that the unit less in contact also contributes a smaller portion of its strength to the melee makes perfect sense to me.

One of the tactical challenges in ancient warfare was positioning and maneuvering one's troops so as to achieve 'local superiority' – one's own strong troops fighting against weaker opponents – in one or more key areas of the battlefield. Any good ancients rule set will reward the player who is able to accomplish this, and Impetus does so in part with this particular mechanic. In the above example, the player with the VBU 6 unit fighting in support appears to have been either out-positioned or outmaneuvered by his opponent. ;-)

Cheers,
Scott

Scott – "Any good ancients rule set will reward the player who is able to accomplish this, and Impetus does so in part with this particular mechanic. In the above example, the player with the VBU 6 unit fighting in support appears to have been either out-positioned or outmaneuvered by his opponent. ;-)"

In most ancients rules sets (as in real life) two units attacking an enemy would be better than any one of them individually. The more powerful unit would not be restricted to only attacking with a portion of its strength.
In Impetus two attacking units can be worse than one. And this makes sense to you ?
I think it would work better if the player could designate the stronger unit as the main unit.
Here's another version of the example.
I have a unit fighting an enemy unit. My unit is at VBU 1, after taking some losses. I charge the enemy unit in the flank with my VBU 6 unit. My flank attack is halved because the VBU 1 unit has to be the main unit. My flank attack (which I have cleverly manoeuvred my units into) would have been more effective if I did not have another unit already facing the enemy.
Compare that to FOG and DBM where flank attacks are much more effective (and often only effective) when the enemy is already fighting to it's front.

Mark -

In Impetus, VBU 1 units are normally limited to artillery; even skirmishers typically are at least VBU 2. So I am not certain that your initial example was in fact a valid one. And a unit that began as VBU 4, 5 or 6 and was worn down to VBU 1 would almost certainly have retreated or routed long before your VBU 6 unit ever engaged – poor timing, perhaps? ;-)

Also, the unit attacked in the flank is immediately disordered and loses 1 VBU (on top of any lost from the earlier frontal melee), so there is some compensation for the fact that your support unit does not fight at full strength.

In any case, it is actually quite advantageous to engage the enemy to the front and then attack him in the flank in Impetus. It's just that you are rewarded for engaging the enemy frontally with your strongest units (i.e. heavy combat troops) and using the weaker ones (i.e. light troops or skirmishers) to attack him in the flank or rear, rather than the other way around. That seems quite historical to me. YMMV, of course. :-)

Cheers,
Scott

"And a unit that began as VBU 4, 5 or 6 and was worn down to VBU 1 would almost certainly have retreated or routed long before your VBU 6 unit ever engaged – poor timing, perhaps? ;-)"

Well it happened in my first game. I can't remember the excact numbers (I'm saying VBU 1 to make an extreme case example), but a flank attack I made was less effective because the enemy unit was fighting to it's front. And that seem wrong to me.

Mark –

If you continue to play and find that the mechanic still seems wrong to you, I would recommend mentioning it to the author in either the Impetus discussion forum or Yahoo group. Lorenzo is very open to questions, comments and suggestions. And if a number of players find the rule problematic, he may even change it for a future edition. :-)

Cheers,
Scott

Scott – I was planning on bringing this up, along with a few other issues on the Impetus forum once I'd played another game or two.

hmm… but if you abstract a bit farther and assume that "the bigger part" means that that unit is really in melee with the enemy while the other unit is only partially involved and cannot do much – then it begins to make sense. i guess we have to help the logic a bit there to keep a simple game. however, as a strategy in that case it would then be a better idea to only charge witht the good unit.

still i can understand that you have a problem with that (it never occured to me). maybe you could pose that to Lorenzo and i am sure he will coime up with an elegant solution. elegance is that guys trademark somehow…

"the other unit is only partially involved and cannot do much "
When it's hitting it in the flank ? I'd hardly call that partially involved and cannot do much !

here I'm. I followed with much interest the discussion. Too many things to say. I'll try to be syntehic. Let's start from the end: flank attacks.

I don't think that flank attack is that bad, the fact that if you loose the melee your are destroyed is very drastic. But in Impetus nothing is "automatic". The game is based on the concept of coehsion. If a Unit keeps its cohesion, even suffering losses, it stays. If no it is destroyed. We are talking about masses and coehsion is the most important thing.

Lower VBUs mean lower coehsion so less chance to survive in the battlefield. Sometimes gamers complain about the poor performance of troops with low VBUs. It is up to you not to send them in melee. Basically troops with VBU=1 or 2 cannot even go in melee and troops with VBU=3 or 4 are mostly shooting troops. Shock troops are generally VBU 5+

BUT troops suffer losses and theirs VBUs drop. In the DBx system troops are always OK at 100% or destroyed, so the rock-paper-scissors aspect is more evident.
In realty troops suffer losses, fatigue etc. so it is not just a question of choosing the right troop against the one of your opponent, but how and when you use it.

I have also read 2 opposite statements in this post
1) Impetus is too slow
2) Impetus is to deadly (Cohesion test can be bloody)

Well Cohesion test can be bloody as it keeps the game fast. Hard to finish a battle with no losses!!
During the develop I took in consideration the option to use 2 dice for coehsion test, so that you can choose the best (the lower). This limits the deadly effect of the test, but at the end you have just a longer game… with a similar result. But you can try to use this simple rule.

As for Big Games at club we sometimes play what we call Super Impetus. Just use 4 Impetus Units to form 1!! We have the lucky to have a member of the club that owns thousands of 28mm for the Italian Wars. We use pike blocks of more than 100 figs (in 28!!). Thousand of figs but still a limited number of Units per side (20-30). It look gorgeus and we can always finish the game in a evening!!
If all players know the rules, at least the basics, it is very fast.

And now back to the original post: popularity in UK.
Well considering that
1) Impetus is not a British game
2) Dadi&Piombo cannot be compared to Osprey, Games Workshop or Battlefront
I think that the game is performimg well. Yes with less money it is hard to compete on the marketing. Impetus is for gamers that look first at an enjoable game (what they like) before the most popular game (what others like).
Popularity of Impetus will grow slowly, but will grow.

Ah, I will be at Derby on October 3-4 for the Impetus tournament at the Worlds. I will be pleased to answer to questions on the rules there, so come to say hello.

Lorenzo

one more thing.
The supporting Unit in Impetus is like in DBx the Unit that gives the overlap. In DBx system its contribute is a -1 to the enemy. In Impetus it just add half of its dice. In both systems it is always the Main unit to suffer the losses.

Appreciate what you say (and I am ordering the rules and the EI 2 supplement) but I'm not sure that being a British game and having a large marketing budget are the sole determinants of popularity. Sure the latter can help.

The DBx series are hardly big budget/big marketing but really caught on and getting a game was easy. Numerous other sets are not British but have a good following AND low bugeting.

I have lots of sets of good rules but few people will play them. Swaying them at times can be difficult as 'others' find enjoyment in games they do play. I am sure that others get an equal amount of enjoyment out of the games they play and that this is not something that is unique to Impetus. I will certainly try to encourage people to play if I like the rules myself and maybe we will then become 'others' too.

The main point of the OP was the extent to which the game is played and thus the extent to which getting a game might be probable. Like I said, I have a big collection of great rules in my cupboards but these days I'm a little more careful about what I take time to learn as that cupboard is full enough. You can never be sure of course but a bit of questioning prior to purchase can, for me at least, cut down on wasted time and money. I am more confident that Impetus will not be such a waste now :-)

Now, I need to go and waste money on beer.