Ok, so part 1 of Later Crusader vs. Egyptian Mamluks is up
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8d36zyH-2kw&
Video Battle
Re: Video Battle
Yeah 
Will watch this tomorrow...
Will watch this tomorrow...
Re: Video Battle
Eagerly waiting for the second part...
And I need to correct myself - just saw that it already is online
And I need to correct myself - just saw that it already is online
Re: Video Battle
Yes, part two is up, unfortunately we are still struggling with Zoom so the audio is not as good.
I am working on the technical issues, Zoom greatly reduces video quality, but having the guys on greatly improves the value of the video in my opinion. Plus we have fun playing the game.
I am working on the technical issues, Zoom greatly reduces video quality, but having the guys on greatly improves the value of the video in my opinion. Plus we have fun playing the game.
Re: Video Battle
Had fun watching this - plus it gives a good insight in stuff people do on the battlefield!
Re: Video Battle
And already the next video out!!! 
Great work on these terrain gauges.
Yes, the video quality is a lot better now.
And yes: I'd love to see Egyptians vs. Sea People
Great work on these terrain gauges.
Yes, the video quality is a lot better now.
And yes: I'd love to see Egyptians vs. Sea People
Re: Video Battle
Greetings!
I'm back to miniature wargaming after a long (involuntary) hiatus. And yes, after much pondering I deliberated that Triumph! is still my favourite ruleset, exactly as it was the last time I actually played it (v 0.6 or something like that).
Rod's video battles are not only immensely fun to watch (I find myself reacting to some of the moves aloud without noticing, as at the best sports events )- they also are very useful in getting up to date with the subtle differences between 0.6 and 1.1.
Speaking of which, this game seem to have one rule glitch on which I'd like to hear your opinion - it happens in the first video, at 59:00. The crusaders bring a knight element from reserve to fighting the Mamluks' general with the second CP, but the move seems illegal... at least in my understanding. I'm just eyeballing it, but it seems that the moving Kn is ZOC-ed by the enemy Cv in front of it, even though there's an intervening friendly element (as, if I understand correctly, enemy ZOCs are not blocked by unengaged friendly elements). Am I missing something?
Rod, thanks again for the great work with the videos! I can't wait to go back to 1066 ASAP
I'm back to miniature wargaming after a long (involuntary) hiatus. And yes, after much pondering I deliberated that Triumph! is still my favourite ruleset, exactly as it was the last time I actually played it (v 0.6 or something like that).
Rod's video battles are not only immensely fun to watch (I find myself reacting to some of the moves aloud without noticing, as at the best sports events
)- they also are very useful in getting up to date with the subtle differences between 0.6 and 1.1.Speaking of which, this game seem to have one rule glitch on which I'd like to hear your opinion - it happens in the first video, at 59:00. The crusaders bring a knight element from reserve to fighting the Mamluks' general with the second CP, but the move seems illegal... at least in my understanding. I'm just eyeballing it, but it seems that the moving Kn is ZOC-ed by the enemy Cv in front of it, even though there's an intervening friendly element (as, if I understand correctly, enemy ZOCs are not blocked by unengaged friendly elements). Am I missing something?
Rod, thanks again for the great work with the videos! I can't wait to go back to 1066 ASAP
Re: Video Battle
Markus,
just reviewed the tape and I think you are correct. I would have to measure, but I believe that knight was in the ZOC of the two Cav in front of it since it passes through the heavy foot.
This is one that I have a tendency to miss from time to time, and I do not think Terence and Dave could see it in the video clearly, so that is on me.
ZOC is blocked by your own guys, but enemy ZOC is not. Even after the heavy foot engaged the CAV the Knight would b in ZOC of the other Cav. So the knight could have scooted over 2MU, but not engage.
Thanks for watching and glad you are back!
just reviewed the tape and I think you are correct. I would have to measure, but I believe that knight was in the ZOC of the two Cav in front of it since it passes through the heavy foot.
This is one that I have a tendency to miss from time to time, and I do not think Terence and Dave could see it in the video clearly, so that is on me.
ZOC is blocked by your own guys, but enemy ZOC is not. Even after the heavy foot engaged the CAV the Knight would b in ZOC of the other Cav. So the knight could have scooted over 2MU, but not engage.
Thanks for watching and glad you are back!
Re: Video Battle
Thank you Rod, I think I'm catching up with the rules again!
The most surprising change in 1.1 was distant combat. Maybe I need to play a pseudo-Plataea battle to really understand if/how they work differently from the legacy rules.
Another surprising change is the very elegant way in which now passing through friendly elements and difficult terrain is similar with respect to CP cost - with Sk and Rabble having the same discount rate in both cases. Clever!
Thanks again,
M
The most surprising change in 1.1 was distant combat. Maybe I need to play a pseudo-Plataea battle to really understand if/how they work differently from the legacy rules.
Another surprising change is the very elegant way in which now passing through friendly elements and difficult terrain is similar with respect to CP cost - with Sk and Rabble having the same discount rate in both cases. Clever!
Thanks again,
M
Re: Video Battle
Markus,
I actually think the shooting is much improved over the original draft rules. For one thing the mechanics now allow you to and even encourage you to spread your archers out along the line.
Rod
I actually think the shooting is much improved over the original draft rules. For one thing the mechanics now allow you to and even encourage you to spread your archers out along the line.
Rod