|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Nov 23, 2019 19:07:18 GMT
New Military Rules.pdf (196.49 KB) Mostly this is Sun King, with some tinkering. Still a bit rough, but ready to go live for the September turn. Do point out issues or inconsistencies with the other rules. What I need to do to back them up: Provincal rivalry rules (should be up by the end fo the day). Court rules. Updated appointments
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Nov 24, 2019 13:09:48 GMT
Not really inconsistences with othr rules, but self-contained ones: Guards (clarifications asked): 1) Are Captains appointment or Rank? I mean, it's said that they are chosen from the Ensigns (so, each Company will have a Captainb and an Ensign at any given time), but then, if a nEnsign is promoted, will he be a Captain or receive a MiD? Likewise, in full SK rules it's specified that a Captain may be Brevet (if they are not knights), so hinting they are ranks (there are not Brevet appointments). 2) Companies structure: Guards Companies are specified to have one Captain and two ensigns, but the Captain is specified to be one of the Ensigns appointed as such. SO Iguess either the reference to the two ensigns should be deleted, the Captaincy considered a Rank, no longer an appointment, or sllow for 3 Ensigns (one of them acting as Captain) on each Company. 3) RFG structure: Similarly, the Colonel of the RFG is said to be one of the Captains, appointed as Colonel by the Royal Governor of Paris. This would need the Guards to have 5 Captains, or a Company being commanded by an Ensign (see that Regular Infantry Regiments are said to have 8 companies, but 9 officers, assuming the remaining Captain would be the Adjutatnt, and the Cavalry Regiments have 6 Captains and 4 Companies, I guess assuming the other two Captains are the Comissaire and the Adjutant). Suggestion: IMHO, the easiest way to solve all this mess would be to make the Captains a Rank, so each company would have 1 Captain and 2 Ensigns, and to allow the RFG to have 5 Such Captains, one of them appointed Colonel at every time. Again, the DMs for the Guards if they go to campaign (be it by volunteering or because the King taking command) are lacking… Regimental enemies (in combination with province rules): I’d change either Regimental or Provincial enemies so that they coincide, so that, if the Gascony province is rival with Burgundy and Picardy, the Gascon regiment should be the enemy of one of those Regiments, instead of the Champagne one… MA increase:The text and the table are inconsistent, as the text is the one from KS and the table is your own. I would be OK with any of them, but only one… As the table is, a character with MA 4- would increase a full point on a BR of 2 (+0.5 for result 2 and +0.5 for MA<(7.BR), but only 0.5 for a result of 1, as the increases for a result of 1 is only for MA 6+. Suggestion: change the MA 5 or less and BR=2 to MA 5 or less and BR=1-2. I know MA 5 cannot achieve a result of 1, but superiors good BRs. a good adjutant or having the NHBR in his division may make it possible due to effective MA increase(s). Capture:Suggested addition: if the character has enough money, allow him to offer the ransom too (no need to be his friends who do it). Medals:Do bars in medals have any effect on the pensions? Suggestion: adding 10% As always, probably more to come...
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Nov 24, 2019 13:27:07 GMT
I begin soon with the "probably more to come"...
Deployment:
As already said, I preferred the original rules where different units might be sent to different deployments. Specifically, I don't see a point to send Cavalry to an Assault ,and I guess their deployment should be biased towards Field Ops (as in Original Rules).
Personally, I'd assign a +1 MA for Cavalry units in Field Ops, and a -1 in Assault (if they are ever allowed) or Defense (see reasoning below).
Also, you failed to specify what happens if the deployment is told as New (in DK there's a tabl efor this too), that I guess will also affect if previous was Garrisson (I guess when Hositlities level goes over 2).
Troop balance:
While I see this logical for Field Ops (where Cavalry was vital) and even for siege (where cavalry was used as scouts/foragers for the bessiegers ,but most work was for infantry, I see no point to need Cavalry for an Assault (where it was most a hindrance than an asset, as they had to fight as Infantry) nor Defense (the only reason I find to allow Cavalry on Defense is that they are trapped in a Fortress ,and are also l ikely to fight as Infantry).
|
|
|
Post by Yves Eau on Nov 25, 2019 8:42:35 GMT
Regimental enemies (in combination with province rules):
I’d change either Regimental or Provincial enemies so that they coincide, so that, if the Gascony province is rival with Burgundy and Picardy, the Gascon regiment should be the enemy of one of those Regiments, instead of the Champagne one… Was this changed already? I see no inconsistency. The province rules pit Gascony against Champagne, and the respective regiments are enemies.
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Nov 25, 2019 9:46:07 GMT
Regimental enemies (in combination with province rules):
I’d change either Regimental or Provincial enemies so that they coincide, so that, if the Gascony province is rival with Burgundy and Picardy, the Gascon regiment should be the enemy of one of those Regiments, instead of the Champagne one… Was this changed already? I see no inconsistency. The province rules pit Gascony against Champagne, and the respective regiments are enemies. In the rules HM Louis XIII sent to us, Gascony is rival from Burgundy and Picardy (BTW, two regions als oruvals among themselves, so it seems there's a triangular rivality here...), OTHO, the Gascon Regiment enrmy is the Champagne one... From Province Rules: From New Military rules (quoted as table for easier reading):
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Nov 25, 2019 10:54:29 GMT
Whops...
I didn't realize the provincial rules have been changed and now you're right, they coincide....
So this point seems solved...
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Nov 25, 2019 12:19:26 GMT
I begin soon with the "probably more to come"... Deployment: As already said, I preferred the original rules where different units might be sent to different deployments. Specifically, I don't see a point to send Cavalry to an Assault ,and I guess their deployment should be biased towards Field Ops (as in Original Rules). Remember that the operation can change from month to month. So what that table does is allow a balanced force. Added the table. Because there's more to a siege than just sitting outside a fortress. Cavalry are being used as support troops, not as defenses from within. The "forced to fight as infantry" thing is treated abstractly; it's part of a bad BR. And it's already the case that there's a bias towards cavalry on field ops. Other small changes to go with the new rules. I've changed the "promoted without horses" rule to a year. Getting demoted 3 months later was way too harsh! Title attempts are now given for MiDs on a scaling basis; 2 MiDs for Chevalier, 3 for Baron etc.
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Nov 25, 2019 12:32:49 GMT
Not really inconsistences with othr rules, but self-contained ones: Guards(clarifications asked): 1) Are Captains appointment or Rank? I mean, it's said that they are chosen from the Ensigns (so, each Company will have a Captainb and an Ensign at any given time), but then, if a nEnsign is promoted, will he be a Captain or receive a MiD? Rank. After I've sent out returns I'll be posting up the new regiments, so this should all be clear. Same as core rules. Sorted already. The table is correct. That's possible, but he'll still need a friend to deliver the money. He's not going to have access to it in prison! Bars only increase SP, not pension.
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Nov 25, 2019 14:46:21 GMT
Not really inconsistences with othr rules, but self-contained ones: Guards(clarifications asked): 1) Are Captains appointment or Rank? I mean, it's said that they are chosen from the Ensigns (so, each Company will have a Captainb and an Ensign at any given time), but then, if an Ensign is promoted, will he be a Captain or receive a MiD? Rank. Then ,being equivalent to a Major, can they go for Major appointments (e.g. aides for a Marshal de France, that I guess is the equivalent to a former General). Then, IMHO, the table should be revised.
As said above, for a character with MA 4- obtaining a BR of 2 would increase MA 1 full point, while obtaining a BR of 1 just 0.5 point, and for a character with MA 5 the increase would be 0.5 with a BR of 2, but none with a BR of 1. This aside, - While the MA explanation says it can increase MA up to 6, the table only up to 3
- A sign of "+" was omited in the MA8+ and BR 1 result, before the 0.25
That's possible, but he'll still need a friend to deliver the money. He's not going to have access to it in prison! I guess he can issue a leeter of credit, or at least to write to his friend allowing him to use his founds for this... Some more points: RNHB: Does it still exist? there are no rules for it now, despite being refered in the Volunteers section (1 st paragraph)... If it does, as now a Division is just a small army, I guess it gives the +1 to effective MA to its Army commander, if large enough as for not being a Division. Right? Frontier Regiments: Each Prvince is said to have an infantry Regiment, but no erference is given for Cavalry... Suggestion: a Frontier Cavalry Regiment or Brigade exists that is itinerant, being sent to the highest hostility understrenght Province. Any Cavalry unit volunteering will be added to it (if a ful lregiment volunteers, they are formed as a Brigade). In case of several provinces qualify, either the one deployed (in this order) to Field ops, Siege, Defense or Assault, or random determination (that would also occur if several qualify in the former case). If randome, it might be biased with influence to the Inspector General of Cavalry.
|
|
|
Post by Alain Andre Durant on Nov 25, 2019 16:40:46 GMT
Not really inconsistences with othr rules, but self-contained ones: Guards(clarifications asked): 3) RFG structure: Similarly, the Colonel of the RFG is said to be one of the Captains, appointed as Colonel by the Royal Governor of Paris. This would need the Guards to have 5 Captains, or a Company being commanded by an Ensign (see that Regular Infantry Regiments are said to have 8 companies, but 9 officers, assuming the remaining Captain would be the Adjutatnt, and the Cavalry Regiments have 6 Captains and 4 Companies, I guess assuming the other two Captains are the Comissaire and the Adjutant). Suggestion: IMHO, the easiest way to solve all this mess would be to make the Captains a Rank, so each company would have 1 Captain and 2 Ensigns, and to allow the RFG to have 5 Such Captains, one of them appointed Colonel at every time. Again, the DMs for the Guards if they go to campaign (be it by volunteering or because the King taking command) are lacking… On this one, I might suggest maybe changing it to Commander of the Guard, which avoids the confusion of rank and appointment.
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Nov 25, 2019 23:11:52 GMT
Then ,being equivalent to a Major, can they go for Major appointments (e.g. aides for a Marshal de France, that I guess is the equivalent to a former General). Correct. As I said, I'll be doing the updated appointments over the next few days but this is what it's going to say: "Guards Captains are considered to be cavalry captains for the purpose of obtaining appointments. A guards ensign is the equivalent of a cavalry Lieutenant. Then, IMHO, the table should be revised.
As said above, for a character with MA 4- obtaining a BR of 2 would increase MA 1 full point, while obtaining a BR of 1 just 0.5 point, and for a character with MA 5 the increase would be 0.5 with a BR of 2, but none with a BR of 1. [/quote] We've been over this one before I believe. liminalengarde.proboards.com/thread/96/br-ma-changesGood spot. Need to alter that. (3 was the old rules, but it's been extended. Up to 5 now). The rules from the core book are still in place. No, it needs to be a Division (or smaller if it's not big enough for a Division). The RNHB really comes into its own outside the summer campaign season. You don't even start getting the chance of a full army until Hostility Level 6 and there it's rare. On top of which, members obviously get the benefit of its higher NPC Military Ability. Having done some experimentation it's not necessary. If you're at a point where cavalry are needed, you're almost certainly going to be asking for volunteers.
|
|
|
Post by Ymbert Montgomery on Nov 25, 2019 23:12:21 GMT
I'm good with that. What do people think?
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Nov 26, 2019 16:59:56 GMT
On this one, I might suggest maybe changing it to Commander of the Guard, which avoids the confusion of rank and appointment. I find it a great idea.
|
|
|
Post by huillaume on Nov 26, 2019 18:38:22 GMT
Not really inconsistences with othr rules, but self-contained ones: Guards(clarifications asked): 1) Are Captains appointment or Rank? I mean, it's said that they are chosen from the Ensigns (so, each Company will have a Captainb and an Ensign at any given time), but then, if a nEnsign is promoted, will he be a Captain or receive a MiD? Rank. Then I suggest you to delete the references about Captains being appointed by teh RFG Colonel (RFG), the Archbishop of Paris (CG) or King's Equerry (KM)... On this one, I might suggest maybe changing it to Commander of the Guard, which avoids the confusion of rank and appointment. I find it a great idea. A suggesion about this: Being an appointment, I guess ir counts as the only one a character may have... To represent this, and to make it even clearer, I'd suggest to move it from the Regiments table to the appointments one, something like: Rank/Title
| Minimum SL
| Appointment | Num Allowed
| Who appoints
| SPs
| Influence | Roll | Pay | Baron & Captain RFG
| 10 | Commandant of the Guards
| 1 | Governor of Paris
| 2 | -
| Specialnote 1
| 6 |
Note 1: Each candidate rolls 1d6, influenciable. Higher one obtains the appointment (i ncase of ties, reroll the ones tied). In the end, once the SP, pay ,etc. are added to those of a RFG Captain, the results are the same, but being clearly an appointment, it offers no doubts.
|
|
|
Post by Jacques D'Mestos on Nov 26, 2019 23:00:57 GMT
Couple of questions...
Am I correct that as a volunteer character, I may choose which frontier I go to?
I see no mention of Normandy, champagne, Languedoc and Brittany on the campaign outcome table?
|
|