"How does ADLG compare to FOG?" Topic

I never really like the complexity of FOG and the staggering about of bases on the table.

Is ADLG any different?

Yes, yes it is different. Not as complex, shares a bit of both FoG and DBx. At 200 points you will field between 20 to 30 bases of troops, depending on their cost/effectiveness.
I should add the author favors double ranked bases, 40x40 mm (15mm) for most infantry except skirmishers/psiloi.

I'm looking forward to the reprint of the ADLG rules. I missed the boat, but the continued good reviews have caught my attention.

It's more of the same – not my cup o tea

It's more of the same – not my cup o tea

Shakespear didn't ask whether you liked ADLG or FOG, he asked if they were very different. I think they are very different. As someone who has played both I would say ADLG games are smaller, shorter in time, and (by and large) have simpler game mechanics than FOG. It is NOT "more of the same".

The average number of units in ADLG is 20-25, which can mean you need between 20 and 50 bases (average is probably 30-40). The number of bases used in ADLG is about 1/2 to 1/3 the number required in FOG. Like all rules, some people like them, some don't. Personally, I prefer them over FOG and DBM(M). They are probably closer in spirit to DBA, only a little larger with more troop types and missile weapons.

" smaller, shorter in time, and (by and large) have simpler game mechanics"

"The number of bases used in ADLG is about 1/2 to 1/3 the number required in FOG"

Sounds right up my alley!

And,if you want to increase to 300 points later,you can.

"Shakespear didn't ask whether you liked ADLG or FOG, he asked if they were very different."

Well thank you for taking the time to sit on your morale high horse and tell me how to answer a question.

I did answer – they're more of the same over-complex, small geometric base rubbish. only I was politer the first time.

You like them that's fine. Enjoy your tedious wargaming.

Hi Zippee

What do rules do you use and why ?

Personally I like ADLG, FOG, MOA and HC have yet to try latest DBMM, and To The Strogest, Impetus and a few others

Cheers

Geometric base rubbish for ancients, they didn't have silver buttons they had gold buttons that year for napoleanics and having to use lasers to prove line of sight in FOW. All rule systems have geometric bases of stuff, napoleanics, FOW, galleys, DBA ( things don't get much simpler than that unless it's DBA3 of course :-).

All game systems have issues Zippee, actually what rule system do you play?

But to answer the question originally asked, ADLG is a lot easier and seems to flow better than FOG or DBM ( and I play mainly DBM myself). I think it has more DBM in it than FOG but that may just be the fact you don't have 5 or 6 stages to one players turn.

Has some concepts from each but on the first few play throughs it seems a very simple game, no real sneaky stuff then you will start to see it does have depth to it. The rules and army lists are all in one issue , $50 USD ish or less I think, expensive seeming but it's all there nothing else to get.

No ones really broken them yet or found the super army in there ( and I don't think they will ) unlike FOG that had the Dominate Roman ' swarm' I believe it was called. Not sure they can be broken even considering a Frenchman wrote them and I like them (coming from an Englishman that is a very high compliment by the way).

Would highly recommend them, the authors have done a good job with the army lists as well thinking about it, as in FOG and DBM you wouldn't take some armies as they were B or even C level armies and some never saw the table anywhere ever. Now in ADLG all the armies are all nigh on viable, especially in theme or date restricted comps, obviously medium foot stuff against knights is an uphill struggle but Roman British and the Spartacus army are both fine now, again in theme or date periods even more so.

Again I don't see any 'over complex' anything in it unless you buy the rules in French and don't speak French that is. I bought the rules when they first came out, been playing DBM mainly and hope the authors do another print,
Shakespeare let us know when you get them and what you think, where a outs are you as someone may be playing it at a local ish 'con to you?

Personally I like ADLG, FOG, MOA and HC have yet to try latest DBMM, and To The Strogest, Impetus and a few others

That's a healthy diverse diet of rules.

I don't know what ADLG is but I'm sure it's bound to be better than FOG. :)

"Shakespear didn't ask whether you liked ADLG or FOG, he asked if they were very different…Personally, I prefer them over FOG and DBM(M)."

OK, now that's funny.

Now if I could just find a copy of the rulebook..

"….in FOG and DBM you wouldn't take some armies as they were B or even C level armies and some never saw the table anywhere ever. Now in ADLG all the armies are all nigh on viable, especially in theme or date restricted comps…"

Would like to think this is true but my experience of all the rules sets over the years is that this is something that is only ever said about rules in their "Honeymoon" period (usually by people keen on the set). Sooner or later people work out what works and what doesn't. Some rules allow a broader range of competitive choices than others and what exactly is competitive changes but there are always haves and have-nots.

A quick look at what was played at the ADLG comp that just finished at Britcon would suggest that many players have already decided what works and much of the field has gravitated to a limited range of list-types.

I'm still enjoying the process of finding out which of my armies "work" and how (I've only had 3 games). I don't kid myself, however, that the range of "competitive" armies will turn out to be any bigger than in FOG or DBM.

Well in DBM you only mainly used 6 armies from book 1 and maybes the old 2 or 3 others and no one uses the other 50, so would say it was a reasonable statement.
but yes do agree also that the range of armies used will be larger in ADLG.

i bought the rule. it's on the way. cost me about 72USD

From where?

On Military matters has copies BTW

On Military matters has sold out, I continue to look for a copy of the rules..

Asked a friend of mine who knows the author if he knew anything about more copies.

OK, now I REALLY want to know what set Zippee plays. I have had a lot of happy hours playing rules he finds tedious. If there are more exciting rules out there, I want to know!

man I hate that…
moral high horse.
Troops' Morale went to hell with the shot of canister.
Ironically, most people get it wrong the other way and write moral, when they mean morale.

Shakspear,
Texas Toy Soldier | 972-418-2200 | texastoysoldier.com
Apparently this place has some copies.

Also I want to find out what Zippee plays to see what he finds so great compared to our tedious rule sets and see if it's worth looking at.

And apparently I'm told
'Games Plus in Mt. Prospect the other day and they had a couple of copies'.
Hope that helps shakespear, let me know how you get on.

I did find a copy, thanks!

The Britcon field referred to was in the second half of an 8-game event, and it was also the first Medieval-themed event in the UK, and so (unsurprisingly) quite a few players plumped for the "all the toys" late medieval lists. Also, with no previous 15mm medieval events it's hard to imagine how players could have picked "super winning"lists anyway….!

In the first 4 games of the competition players used Classical armies, and the range fielded was far greater.

ADLG is new in English, but has been played for 8 years in France so if super armies existed they would have been found by now.

You can also see the popularity and success rates of all armies used in competitions in the last few years in the ADLG website. link

This shows that armies that were popular in the late period at Britcon are popular generally, but have no better success rate than any other army…..

Zippee,
We're all waiting for an answer from you, come on what's this great game.

Well if the question is "like FOG with the staggering about of bases" the answer seems to be yes ? …. 30-40 stands as an average sounds like a lot.
I've never been a fan of FoG btw but Slitherine's computer game of it is awesome….spent many an inebriated evening playing that.

The author is planning a reprint in September !

The average number of units in a 200 point army is 20-25. All units have a frontage of one base. All infantry (except for lights) have a base in the second rank, but this is mostly just cosmetic. It appears the author would have preferred to have all units put on a square base (40 x 40 for 15mm) but is living within the restrictions of DBx basing.

Zippee plays Impetus as I do. An amazing set of rules that is elegant, fast moving, full of command choices and looks good on the table top (the last is something that I don`t find with ADLG.)

I am all for a good looking tabletop! What makes Impetus look better, do you think? Diorama style bases? I admit I know very little of Impetus.

The large 12cm bases that give the diorama feel.

Here is a couple of pictures of an Impetus Middle Assyrian vs New Kingdom Egyptian game I ran earlier in the year that gives the full effect. Also a picture from a Magnesia game I ran a few years ago. I don't know what To the Strongest plays like but the games look great. Same with Impetus. Not so with ADLG.

‌20160319_112455 by Eusebeia2002, on Flickr

‌20160319_113518 by Eusebeia2002, on Flickr

‌15 by Eusebeia2002, on Flickr

I guess if seeing more figures on bigger bases is your key factor in choosing a rule set, and it's putting you off playing fog or ADLG as standard sets of 15mm rules, you could try playing with 15mm (or even 10mm or 6mm) figures on "25mm-figure-sized" 60mm wide bases?

You could axeman but the beauty of Impetus is that it is built right into the game system. If you do it in ADLG you're putting yourself outside the community norms.

I played Impetus for almost two years and the movement rates are ridiculously slow…………

To many dice rolling steps for the combat process, nothing really elegant about the rules!

Just my opinion……..

Lou

Zippee I thought you had some great special rule set but it's all the same geometric base stuff…… blocks of troops in units etc………looks just like any other ancient rule set.

You like it that's fine with me just drop the preachy OK???????

A good indicator of how popular a rules set is, whether you still see it played at conventions. There are players still playing Fog, DBM, DBMM, WAB, ADLG, but I don't see very many IMpetus gams at all. There used to be a group from Canada, who wouls come down to Cold Wars or Fall In, and run an Impetus game or two, but I haven't seen them in a couple of years.

With regard to the pictures of the Impetus games, they look great, but most games, with lot's of figures displayed, tend to look good!

Yes Lou it has been a while since we've come to Lancaster. Hopefully that will change soon. I remember you from one our games.

The number of ancient gamers overall in tournaments has shrunk considerably. Small groups now cluster around one of several rules set. I did notice an Impetus tournament in Portland, Maine in one of the smaller HMGS conventions.

I think Zippee was pointing out that with the larger Impetus bases you don't see the micro geometric gymnastics that one sees in DBA etc.

Smaller frontages for 'units' naturally means more micro managing it's just how it goes. Not to everyone's taste.
We're very fortunate these days to have such a wide choice. Nothing worse than having to struggle through a game you didn't like I've done plenty of that over the years. No longer have to put up with rules because it's all there is or- 'this is what everyone plays'- either.
Shakespeare I suggest you have a look on youtube there's a few examples on there now that go through ADLG play. Might find it helpful if it's 'your thing' …or not.

In ADLG the basing of all units on identical square bases would remove some of finer micro management trickery but still require gaming the part of maintaining cohesion.

A cohesive battle line with units all of the same depth all based in the same style looks fine.

Units in lines is very much gaming from the part at which battle commences not the approach phase which works best with units that could form a column that actually looks like a column.

Of course just sabot basing two ADLG units together gives the 'jaded' gamer an opportunity to try the other set of rules.

I played Adlg at Roll call, challenge, Britcon and Worlds. From my experience this year there is no one killer list, the rules feel well balanced and after 8 years of play testing the French have kindly worked out the kinks in the rules.

I had a great learning experience at the Worlds as did the the other UK players, I lost 3 drew 1 and won 2, my losses were due to tactics and army composition, all of which I can work on. It didn't feel as though "trick rules", or over complicated rules got in the way.
I'm really enjoying playing Adlg.

A few comments:

I'm in the process of learning the French Game and so will limit comments re that system. It has more DBX in it than FOG (a very good thing). Attrition rule is tedious – it needs a Recoil rule.

Still I under stand the attempt to deal with some DBX issues that did not get resolved until DBMM (in a complex way) and DBA 3.0 (in an elegant way). The versions of DBX that the French used to create the rules are now out of date but I do appreicate the attempt to deal with some of the fiddly aspects of DBM and prior version of DBA.

For those stressed by the fiddly aspects of DBX, I strongly suggest getting a copy of DBA 3.0 which (at last) resolves most of them in a very player friendly manner.

As to the restrictive list of compition armies in DBX this was mostly a DBM 3.0 problem – many armies worked in DBM 2.0 and maybe again in DBMM.

Looking forward to my first French game tournament this summer at Historicon as they have added 25mm events.

A big improvement over FOG.

Thomas J. Thomas
Fame and Glory Games