"Field of Glory Wolves at the Gate Army List and Expansion" Topic

Why I am on the cusp of selling all five of my unpainted Ancients – Medieval armies. Richard Bodley Scott introduces yet another Army List Expansion for his game Field of Glory II, this time Wolves at the Gate, covering the Dark Ages up to 1049 AD.

Oh yeah, one more thing – its the miniature game imported lock, stock and Pilum to the PC :).

Seriously, though, especially for those of us who prefer historical battles vice tournament play, what are you thoughts on this thing being a pewter killer?

If so, it seems ironic that one of our own – RBS – is the guy with the gun.

link

Ciao, Colonel Bill

FoG II is an excellent game but isn't exactly the miniatures rules on the computer.In some ways the original FoG PC was closer to the original FoG tabletop rules. While I enjoy the computer game, I also still enjoy getting the lead toys out on the tabletop so I don't see it as a replacement at least for those who already have armies and enjoy playing with miniatures.

Chris

Just downloading it now. I still have LOTS of pewter. I just look at it as another way to have fun. Both are great entertainment.

Got it yesterday from GOG.com. My game was an old build and this new DLC wouldn't install, so I had to download the latest build and all the DLCs again.

However, I was most impressed as it all just worked – even though I'm on a Linux platform running it through wine. Didn't even have to tweak the options.txt like previous versions.

And yes, I don't understand people who insist that the computer game is exactly like the tabletop version. It's not.

It's a great game, and it's a great DLC, but it'll never, ever replace my miniatures hobby. Researching the history, the uniforms, finding the figures, drawing up list, taking pride in painting, spending time bantering with great friends; the computer game can never replace that!

For me it could be a great addition to my gaming interests. I have not played PC games for years. I have an unpainted pile of Celts and Romans as well as ECW Armies that I never seem to have time in my paint queue to fit in so this could give me some pleasure and inspiration to paint.

I should have said it PLAYS the same way as the tabletop version, even has Points of Advantage (POAs), etc, etc, and I do think the terrain is better than anything I've ever seen in a tournament (ahem :).

Seriously, I think Tony S and D A THB et all are indicative. It won't replace the many artistic and social aspects of the tabletop. However, I have a lot of unpainted armies and one BIG reason I haven't moved my Ancients and Medievals to the top of the queue is I prefer to play historical battles a la Pharsalus, NOT tournaments, and you don't see an awful lot of this. With FOG II I get this, so these lead armies will likely NEVER see a paint brush.

D A THB, there is a Pike and Shot version of this by Matrix, basically a direct port of Field of Glory Renaissance to the PC, and yes also designed by the original author Richard Bodley Scott (who evidently is also a very talented programmer). The big difference is that the game leans much more heavily towards historical battles, and while FOG II was designed to look exactly like properly based miniatures on a table, Pike & Shot Campaigns was designed to look like actual armies. Screen shot below.

Ciao, Colonel Bill

Looks like 2mm or 6mm figures on a table top. No pageantry. Not particularly engaging to me. I look at a screen all day at work. Hardly want to do that on my spare time.

And again not "a direct port of Field of Glory Renaissance to the PC"; and I guess it was designed "to look like actual armies" simply because that way it could be designed much simpler, quicker and cheaper than designing detailed graphics like those seen in FOG II. The visuals in FOG II could only be realized because of the success of FOG I and "Field of Glory Renaissance for PC". I don't see any "game design descision" for or against historical battles here.

All cool games, by the way

I believe the choice of how to display the troops for Pike and Shot was to give the feel of the various woodcut prints from the period more than the appearance of the actual armies.

Pike and Shot was the first in the new series from Slitherine/Matrix using a different game engine from the original FoG PC. FoG II was a further development of the system using the new engine to cover the ancient and medieval periods.

One big advantage f the computer version is that it allows the use of fractional POAs that would have been difficult to do manually for the tabletop rules, which allow finer gradations for advantages like better armor, etc.

Chris

Marcus, I pulled that particular graphic because it was ECW and I found it quickly with Bing. There is a zoom in view which this is not, and some battles such as the Renaissance Poles vs Ottoman area spectacularly colorful. Likewise, I have no idea of any design decision as regards historical battles, just stating the fact that the game leans that way.

Personal preference here, but I much prefer the P&S graphics to the FOG II, and yes, I can see the similarity with period engravings and maps now.

Ciao, Colonel Bill

As a follow-up post to my my review of Wolves at the Gate, the Boss just updated the FOG II Compendium so you can see everything out there. BTW, most all the franchise is on sale bigtime at GOG.

link

Ciao, Colonel Bill

Some people will choose one, others the other, still others both. Personally, I've played the occasional computer game but they've never held my interest for long. Wargaming for me is a combination of researching armies and the background civilisation, painting, making terrain, trying to find out what the buildings looked like and making those etc. Then the playing of the game, with all the banter etc that goes with it. None of that you really get in the same way with a computer game.

In a world where medical schools can't get students with the necessary fine motor skills, wargaming is a hobby that incorporates a really diverse range of skills and activities. I love it for that, even though I spend a lot more time thinking about doing it than actually getting on with it. Computer gaming, however well developed, just doesn't have that.

Both have their virtues.

The digital versions are a Godsend for those who love to game ancients but have limited budgets of time and/or money.

C.