"Mortem et Gloriam revisited" Topic

Mortem et Gloriam is a relatively new (3 yrs old) set of Ancients miniatures rules. It's about to be re-released with a 2nd (and hopefully final) edition of the rules set to be released in April, together with a line of plastic 15mm minis from the Plastic Soldier Company. You're likely to be seeing and hearing a lot about MeG (as it's called) in the next few months, so here's a quick review.
I've been playing MeG as my main Ancients set for 2 1/2 years now. Having played almost every major set since WRG 4th (including DBA, DBM,WAB, FoG, Hail Caesar, ADLG, and others) I can say it's easily my personal favorite. I have learned the hard way not to say ‘best', since that's so subjective, but I enjoy these rules more than any other set I've played. Here's why.

First, the rules, written by well-known gamer Simon Hall, have been thoroughly play-tested and broken by experts. Simon has maintained a very active forum, and has been extremely active about seeking input from his players about problems. The result is a 2nd Edition which is easy to read, easy to understand, and quick to learn. The core of the rules is the Command Colors system. Depending on quality of generals, each player draws a number of cards (or tokens) for use by each general in his command. The better the general, the more cards they get. The cards are colored black, white, green, yellow and red, in order from worst (black cards are bad) to best (red cards are very good). In general, better trained troops can maneuver with lesser cards, poorly trained troops need better cards. Better generals get more cards. Troops can be skirmishers, drilled, loose, or tribal (from easiest to hardest to move). Generals can be Mediocre, Competent, Talented, or Legendary (from worst to best). There is a complicated-looking chart that tells you what card you need for any particular maneuver, but it's easier than it looks and pretty intuitive. Simple maneuvers need a low card with any troops; complex moves need either big cards, or drilled troops, or both.

Combat is done by looking at troop characteristics, including, weapons, armor and morale, and getting a total number of pluses. This is compared with the opponent's numbers, and colored dice are rolled (same colors). Again, this is fairly intuitive, and easy to use once you get used to it.

Combat differs from other games in two main respects. First, everybody takes losses. Even troops who are badly outmatched (say, conscript archers fighting against Praetorian Guard) can get lucky and do a bit of
damage. Second, the large number of characteristics give real variety to troop types and you get a real feel for how the matchups play out, but the fact that no one is ever safe adds an air of tension many other systems lack.

One huge advantage MeG has over other rules is the army lists. There are lots. Once you buy the rules you get access to the online website which allows you to download a free army builder program for use with 650+ army lists, also free. The variety of army choices is stunning. Want Your T'ang Chinese militia archers behind barricades? No sweat, it's covered. Do your Roman Imperial legionaries need bolt shooters on carts and caltrops? Expensive, but doable. Want a front rank of highly motivated, heavily armored knights with a back rank of workaday sergeants? Done. Basically, you can model an enormous and growing number of historical armies, with new armies still getting added, all with no need to pay for new army books.

Obviously, I am a big fan. Try ‘em out, and I suspect you'll agree.

Are the changes to V.2 just cosmetic or are there rule mechanism changes? If so, any idea what areas they relate to?

The changes do not alter any basic rules structures. They change interactions between a few weapon types, the color card you need for certain maneuvers, point costs have been changed, things like that. The point cost changes just mean you need to download (for free) the lates version of the army builder. There are a few changes to how the pregame setup/terrain selection works.
Not sure what you mean by cosmetic, but almost all the changes are ‘tweaks' as opposed to ‘redesign' stuff.BTW, if you own the original stuff you can download all of the changes and bring your rules current from the website.

And where do we download the changes?

Download is, with the lists and other materials, from mortem-et-gloriam.co.uk.

I've only played two games of MeG and I'm not a competition player but I think it is a really clever and innovative set of rules. The army lists are outstanding, grouped historically and geographically have all been updated January 2020 along with the QRS, Army Builder and other materials. We played a Hun vs Foederate Roman 7,000 point (Magna) game recently really great fun:

link

Where are the new plastic figures. I want them for DBA.

Can armies based with big Impetus bases use MeG? I am curious about the system there but there is absolutely no way my group would consider rebasing (too much work and the big bases look so good.)

Impetus bases would require some creativity, but sure, you could do it.Wouldn't do for competitions, but a friendly? Easy.

On their site or forum m an answer exists. Can' t remember the place.

Interesting to read. Not played ancients for a long time having maxed out on DBM and FoG (that I was once an avid fan of, the combat was just such a drag, every single time) over about 10 years of playing. There's a few ancients players in these parts with DBMM being the main rule set but it still leaves me cold. Sold off all my ancients armies (around 15) and can't work up the enthusiasm to paint another just to play DBx.

MeG MIGHT tempt me back to playing, particularly as there is one of the ancient players here interested in it. The combat seems much more interesting and deeper and the cards sound interesting. I was also interested in ADLG but one of the guys I know (who is also turned off by DBMM) bought the rules and said it was too similar and was looking to give it away. So ADLG doesn't sound too promising. Not interested in a DBx variant that ends up being so close as to be barely distinguishable. Do the Romans still perform as atrociously in MeG as they do in DBx? A buddy of mine once asked me "Why are the Romans so crap in DBMM", I replied "Because Roman Consuls weren't constrained by having to fit their armies into 400AP".

Just surprised that MeG is so low in the figures that Madexeman posted re the UK comp scene compared to ADLG, MeG at around 25% the player numbers vs ADLG. Maybe that's down to availability which might improve now PSC are taking over the sale and marketing. That said, ADLG has also suffered with supply problems. I know the comp scene doesn't show the full picture with regard to popularity, particularly as competitions tend to have high representation from rules that lend themselves to competitive play.