"fields of glory or Pike and Shot" Topic

Hi look at purcasing one or other of these and looking for people oppinions pros and cons greatlt appreciated as I really dont want to go and buy both.

cheers
jon

I like Field of Glory better. I feel that FoG offers greater maneuver and thinking out my tactics a few turns in advance. A good game for big multi-player battles as well as one on one battles.
With Pike and Shotte I feel that the rules are for lighter, less intense games. Good for conventions and game nights where the players want to get at each other quickly and have a quick game with lots of dice rolling in a shorter amount of time.

Mike

Another vote for FoG-R.

Pike and Shotte are one of the best systems I have used, always gives an enjoyable game. Most games at the club are large multi player affairs which work well with the system.

P&S doesn't work very well for the ECW.

P&S – works well for ECW…

Totally different games … The learning curve for FoG can be difficult but the games are fun and rewarding. Buy the Pike and Shotte rule book for the pictures alone.

Buy both … It the only way to be sure.

Mike B

As for the ECW … While both games offer a good ECW game … The best IMHO … remains … Warhammer English Civil War …

O. Cromwell

while not having played FOG, but having looked through the rules and army lists, I have played lots of P&S.

FoG has a lot more charts, is more fiddly, and therefor probably a more in-depth simulation.

P&S seems more fluid, less competitive in nature (we call the system a gentleman's game in our group), and simpler.

it depends on what you are after, really. we like to get the guys together for an evening or drinks, conversation, and pushing our lovely models around the table, so I personally love P&S.

oh, and ECW is the period we play. its always been fun.

P&S doesn't work very well for the ECW.

P&S – works well for ECW…

Pike and Shotte doesn't work very well.

Buy both … It the only way to be sure.

I thought that was nukeing it from orbit.

Apples and Oranges:

FOG-R – Points based competition game, relatively complex. Oriented to 1v1 match ups. Good game for what it is.

P&S – Fast play system based on Black Powder. Warlord Games style of club night game.

I don't think you can rate one against the other, depends on the type of system/game you want.

Which of the sets has the best "period feel"? Especially how pike works with shot?

Pan, you might be asking the unanswerable question there.

Especially how pike works with shot

In Pike and Shotte, the pike and shot are separate distinctive units that can work together. Not sure how FoGR works. I've never played.

In Pike and Shotte, the pike and shot are separate distinctive units that can work together.

And that is exactly why P&S doesn't work very well for ECW. In the ECW the pike and shot formed a combined unit. They did not operate as a pike unit supported by two shot units the way that P&S does it.

I have not played Pike and Shotte or FOGR. However, pike and shot armed troops did not always work together. Some units were all shot and on a number of occasions the pike were held to the rear. On others the pike were massed.

Despite many theories our understanding is not as clear as wargamers would like to think.

"And that is exactly why P&S doesn't work very well for ECW. In the ECW the pike and shot formed a combined unit. They did not operate as a pike unit supported by two shot units the way that P&S does it"

I use the unit profiles from the Wars of the Sun King section for my ECW, with pike company addition. For pike heavy units I adjust the combat up and shooting down and vice versa for shot heavy. Works well and give very playable games.

However, pike and shot armed troops did not always work together.

Can you cite some primary source evidence to support that statement?

Some units were all shot

Indeed they were and were known as Commanded Muskets. They were usually deployed with the horse or to defend a fortified enclosure.

and on a number of occasions the pike were held to the rear.

Not sure what you mean by "to the rear"?

On others the pike were massed.

The pike were indeed usually massed in a regiment or brigade.

I have always had trouble understanding how (in the way it is depicted in wargames) a pike block flanked by two of shot could repel horse. The shot on either side of the pike block look so vulnerable and relatively easy to sweep aside. Clearly, you can't rely on firepower alone (otherwise why did contemporaries bother having pikes?).

In my mind, there must be more to it than that. A formation change, surely? But to what? Maybe the attached link will provide some answers (I'm sure some helpful TMP'er has provided this in the past). If there is some sort of formation change, do these wargame rules depict that (e.g., like later rules which allow you to form square) or does the unit simply stand there in this pike flanked by shot formation and we just have to use our imagination?

syler.comsubheadingLewisgunner

Major B
Cheriton is a clear example. of the shot being detached from the puke to go forward and fight in the. hedgerows. For a European example try Torhout where the shot go forwards into the close country are destroyed and then cavalry shoot up the pike blocks.
Westmarcher
This business of cavalry charging just the shot was a problem of the old Gush rules. In real life there are two big problems with hat. Firstly the cavalry cannot just puck on the wings of shot, They would have to align perfectly and the cavalry are on a large frontage. Secondly, the shot run back under and behind the pikes leaving the cavalry a nasty target and still with musket fire coming from it. This was solved in the old Trevor Halsall Newbury Rules by having any charge on a pike and shot unit in good order count as charging pike and subsequent sets of Renaissance rules have tended to follow this.

Hi, Lewisgunner. Having no knowledge of the rules quoted by you, Interesting what you say about the tabletop. However in real life perhaps we must agree to disagree.

In a real life situation with a unit of Horse facing a unit of Foot, I was thinking of a Horse unit using Shock tactics and not the type who trot up to their opponents and discharge their weapons.

With regard to the charging horse to the Shot's front, some will be shot down on the approach. If the Shot cannot stop the momentum of the charging Horse, the Shot then have a decision – retain formation or run for the shelter of the pikes. And because I think the charging horses to the Pike's front will also maintain their momentum, those that don't stop dead in their tracks and throw their riders, will swerve to avoid and sweep round the big pointy things (just like you see at the jumps in Steeplechase Horse Racing)

I'm also thinking the Shot are of the same opinion – why else, with the horse thundering towards them, would they leg it and shelter under the pikes? A de facto formation change methinks from Battle Formation (Pike block flanked by two wings of Shot) to a Hollow Square (both as described in the link above).

So from what you say, I'm guessing that there is no actual formation change on the tabletop, no re-arranging bases to represent the hollow square, with the unit remaining in Battle Formation leaving the players to use their imaginations that there is a lot going on down there that's too complicated to contemplate.

At Naseby at least one formation was shot only on the NMA side the Forelorn Hope . On the King's side the Shrewsbury foot were shot only and some sources suggest a number of other units were if not pure shot at least very shot heavy. That suggests that there might be some doubt in the minds of the horse about charging home against well disciplines and formed foot even without pike support.

On the other hand the NMA aimed for 2 musketeers to one pikeman. Suggesting pike had a reason to exist. So you pays yer money and takes yer pick!

BTW I haven't played either set of rules but I have seen BP played and it didn't feel right to me. The essential character of ECW battles seemed missing. What is that character I find it hard to define but I know it when it's not there!