Impetus - One year

Well, about one year has passed since started playing with this system. And a bit over half that time with Basic Impetus.
It was well received in our small group and allowed us to maintain a more regular and greater activity (and very importantly, leaving time for wargamers chit-chat!).

What follows is a mixed list of suggestions and/or amendments (!!!), discussed and either compiled or agreed from the players, for both rules. I'm hoping they may be of some interest to other players. And by all means, comment and criticize!


(This mail has two parts, posted in Impetus and Basic Impetus sections)

General
-To have a identifiable and proeminent Logo. The current shield is ok but should appear more
-Emphasize compatibility between the impetus basing system and the DBx standard
-Have a recommended number of figures/models per base for each troop type
-Provide a Quick reference Sheet


Rules for Basic Impetus


a)- also allow up to 3 pieces up to 25cm in size - current is 4 of 20cm
b)- in armies setup, the defender gets 1 unit to be deployed after the attacker
c)- add evasion
d)- add a special wheel of 2x normal move, with 90º maximum. Disorders unit.
e)- add coesion modifiers for shooting (similar to main rules)
f)- modify "Various Weapons" factors by -1 (explanation below)

f): Assuming it represents a variety of projectiles, shot/thrown by non specialist troops (and possibly not everyone in the unit being so armed), its current factors are too high, even comparing favorably with other weapons.

a.  There are too many pieces of terrain in many Impetus battles as it is.  Battlefields didn't have terrain all over the place as one can have in BI.  Opponents would generally search around for a sufficiently open space to be able to deploy their forces, not search for somewhere with a marsh or a wood in the middle of the battlefield.

I've argued somewhere on this forum already that we should be able to have larger pieces of terrain but only along a table edge, representing hills (for example) on a flank (Issus) or woods behind one army (Falkirk eg) but no unpassable terrain.

b. I don't think this goes far enough in equalising the defender/attacker problem.  Other rule systems using standard size units (like Spear and Shield) have rules which 'stagger' the initial placement of units.,  I would suggest BI could do something like the following:

1. Four separate sequential segments of unit placement
2. In each segment each side rolls 2 dice and adds the number of cavalry and chariot (not elephant) units to their total.  The side with the lowest resultant total places first.
3.
First Segment: Heavy Infantry
Second Segment: Elephants and Light Infantry
Third Segment: Heavy and Medium Cavalry
Fourth Segment: Light Horse and Skirmishers

This would retain the advantage the side with more horse has but allow the possibility that both sides might be able to place some elements of their army first.  It also stops the "attacker" knowingh exactly where his opponent has placed, eespecially, his horse and elephants, and placing his own troops accordingly EVERY TIME.

c. Agreed.  There are already suggested rules for this

d. That's an interesting idea well worth trying out.  It would make it easier for victorious troops to turn and join in.  At present its a rare event for any such to have enough turns left to do so before the battle ends.

With 15mm, assuming 8u diameter (base frontage) and pi as 3 for easy reckoning, a 90 degree turn takes everybody but FP a quarter of a move anyway

If you buy a set of Impetus wheeling gauges from Warbases (only £2.50) you don't even need to do a rough calculation - its done for you: http://war-bases.co.uk/ACCESSORIES/GAMING-AIDS?page=2

Sadly none of us can work out how to use the gauges. I wouldn't usually describe our bunch as dim but in this instance we are complete dunces. Probably can't see the obvious for trying to be clever.

A photo of the things in use would help the unenlightened.

Some of us here had the same problem.  Do it this way.

1. Identify the front corner that will NOT be moving when the unit turns - the pivot of the turn, if you will.  This will be the front right if turning right or front left of the unit if turning left.

2. Think of the gauge as a crooked arm with two lengths and an elbow in between.

3.  Place the INSIDE of the elbow against the pivot and line up one of the lengths of the arm along the depth/side of the unit (NOT THE FRONT) with the other length bending/leaning inwards towards the front centre of the unit.  If you want to turn right place the above on the right front corner, if left then the left front corner. The device works for both right and left turns by turning it over - the lettering doesn't have to be face up!

3. Pivoting on the pivot (obviously), move the unit in a turn so the front line/face of the unit now lies behind and on the arm length that reached from the pivot diagonally in front of the original position of the unit.  Assuming you have used the correct gauge, you have made the maximum turn allowed to a unit with that movement rate.

4. Note that you are 'turning a number of degrees' not 'moving a distance' so the device will work whatever length of frontage you use provided the relationship between frontage and movement rate is the same.  This is why there is a different set of devices for 28mm since in that scale the rules have increased movement rate and unit sizes differently.

Jim Webster wrote:With 15mm, assuming 8u diameter (base frontage) and pi as 3 for easy reckoning, a 90 degree turn takes everybody but FP a quarter of a move anyway

I'm not sure if I follow the logic, but if you take pi=3 then you have the circle length as 2x3x8cm (8 being the radius), giving 48cm. 90º is then 12cm. That means it will take from 1 turn for CL to 3 turns for FP.

Ah right so the pivot arm folds across the frontage. We had it so we were trying to align the side edge along the arm.

New it would be a woods and tree thing!

Thanks for taking the time.

"With 15mm, assuming 8u diameter (base frontage) and pi as 3 for easy reckoning, a 90 degree turn takes everybody but FP a quarter of a move anyway"

Eh?

As Jorneto says, this ain't right.  I tend to think in straight lines - then add for the fact its a curve. Lets take the simplest example, the unit which can (almost) make a 90 degree turn

A simple triangle with a right angle in it has the two sides the same length plus the hypotenuse which is longer.  These first two sides thus represent a. the frontage of the unit before it made the turn and b. the frontage after it made the turn (which we want to total 90 degrees).

If a unit frontage is 8cm then the sum of the squares of these two sides (8 times 8 plus 8 times 8 = 128) equals the square of the hypotenuse whose length is thus the square root of 128.  The square root of 11 is 121.  Add on a bit because the unit is going round a curve not a straight line and you have a distance of (close to) 12.  So units with a movement of 12 will be able (almost) to make a 90 degree turn in one move. (In fact the curve means its actually less than 90 degrees - and the Warbases MDF turn gauges accurately show that).  

Units with a lesser movement will require more turns to achieve 90 degrees. FP will, as Jorneto says, need to enter into a third turn before it breaks through 90 degrees. All other unit types need two turns.  Jorneto's prtoposal would allow all units apart from FP to make a 90 degree turn in a oner (something NONE of them can do at present) at the expense of a disorder.

In fact, digging out my trusty protractor from under the pile of junk in my Welsh Dresser, where it has languished for many a decade, I can see that a unit with movement 5 will make 35 degrees in a single turn, movement 6 will make a 40 degree turn, movement 8 a 55 degree turn, movement 10 a 70 degree turn and movement 12 an 85 degree turn. All approx based on my failing eyesight and a very small school protractor.

Who said wargaming wasn't educational !

Sorry, what I meant to say (before interrupted by discussion with lady wife and a phone call etc ) was that pretty well everything bar FP will make the 90 degree turn in a double move and has a chance of not being disordered.
So why use a 'double move' that automatically disorders you?

In Basic Impetus there are no double moves.  Well, not in the version we use up here.

I'm afraid our version of basic impetus has evolved, we've got evades as well