Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
14 Posts

Unhappy King Charles!» Forums » Rules

Subject: King and Disperal rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Steve Hojnacki
United States
Illinois
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi,

Now my buddy and I have played UKC three times...and have enjoyed each game immensely. Now we havent seen any rule stating that he cant disperse, but we are having a problem with the notion of the King Charles doing so. The game, even the battles, are a reflection of his struggle to hold political power. We feel that his dispering would be a moral wound from a political stand point and cost him the war in as much as being captured by the Roundheads.

Does anyone else feel away? Should the Victory conditions be ammended to include, "sudden victory" if the King should choose to disperse before battle.

Bessieres

(P.S. I most likely wouldnt have posted this had i read the forums alittle better and found a similar post)
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brad Miller
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yeah, it's a bit weird. We had that same question, but it appears that it is OK. Since you can recruit to the King, (with the Grandee recruitments), once he loses his troops, it's hard to have him get many more, so it seemed to me pointless, (and dangerous), to bring him back...
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim P.
United States
Thousand Oaks
CA
flag msg tools
Visit the Wargame Bootcamp guild
badge
Muppet !
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

Despite the embarrassment to the player of the King dispersing before a battle it is a legal and wise move.

If his army has only 1 or 2 brigades with him there is the danger that he might surrender and those loss the game/the war/his head.
(I have lost a game very early by letting Charles get caught with only 2 brigades..ooops...never again)

Even if he has 3 brigades he could be out-maneuvered into retreating and losing the last brigade in a costly retreat.

Just like any other Royalist general he can rebuild his army, and his seniority means that most others will be subordinated to him (it's good to be the King). yet due to his vulnerability and so-so 2-2 rating, let Rupert do the real work and let the King do some secondary campaigning.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charles Vasey
Scotland
Mortlake, London
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bessieres wrote:
Hi,

Now my buddy and I have played UKC three times...and have enjoyed each game immensely. Now we havent seen any rule stating that he cant disperse, but we are having a problem with the notion of the King Charles doing so. The game, even the battles, are a reflection of his struggle to hold political power. We feel that his dispering would be a moral wound from a political stand point and cost him the war in as much as being captured by the Roundheads.

Does anyone else feel away? Should the Victory conditions be ammended to include, "sudden victory" if the King should choose to disperse before battle.

Bessieres

(P.S. I most likely wouldnt have posted this had i read the forums alittle better and found a similar post)


Dispersing covers more than running away crying "Run away, run away" it may simply be a decision to wisely disperse before overwhelming force long before they get too close. Perhaps a heroic ride in disguise? Since the dawn of time we British have been adept at doing a runner and then inventing plausible reasons (please see the Dunkirk file).

Having Charles in command of such a small army rthat he would even consider dispersing is surely lese-majestie?

However, board games are about the historical narrative so if you feel you should do this then I can see the narrative supporting it.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charles Vasey
Scotland
Mortlake, London
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Windopaene wrote:
Yeah, it's a bit weird. We had that same question, but it appears that it is OK. Since you can recruit to the King, (with the Grandee recruitments), once he loses his troops, it's hard to have him get many more, so it seemed to me pointless, (and dangerous), to bring him back...


He's a good general with high command ability, I'd hate to lose that. I've never lost the king in any game in which I've been Royalist, and I can only remember capturing the varmint once.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charles Vasey
Scotland
Mortlake, London
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
oi_you_nutter wrote:

Despite the embarrassment to the player of the King dispersing before a battle it is a legal and wise move.

If his army has only 1 or 2 brigades with him there is the danger that he might surrender and those loss the game/the war/his head.
(I have lost a game very early by letting Charles get caught with only 2 brigades..ooops...never again)

Even if he has 3 brigades he could be out-maneuvered into retreating and losing the last brigade in a costly retreat.

Just like any other Royalist general he can rebuild his army, and his seniority means that most others will be subordinated to him (it's good to be the King). yet due to his vulnerability and so-so 2-2 rating, let Rupert do the real work and let the King do some secondary campaigning.


Rupe cannot lead the Big Armies though, so it's Raiding Rupert and Conquering Charles.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brad Miller
United States
Seattle
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Seriously, I had no armies by that time. I think I fell for the "Bristol trap" and somehow I didn't have any Welsh left. It was ugly.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Hojnacki
United States
Illinois
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
...I dont know...we're seeing alot of problems with the disperal and (no penalty for king's ability to disperse), late in the game. In five games now...(Royalist are 4-1)...but by just dispering on the turn before the last. Then popping up in areas away from the Roundhead armies...and then using Rupert/Maurice/King...run wild with just one brigade gobbling up just enough areas to have the Parl. forces loss control and the game. In three Royalist victories...they had three or less brigades (one game 4) on the board at the end, compared to large Parl. armies. Yet with commanders like rupert and maurice are far more manueverable, and win the game buy just stealing enough key areas.

Also...we're alittle concerned by the 9 to 3 brigades the Royalist (13 if you count the Lorrainers) can raise from cards compared to Parl. Because of this access to more troops, in every game the Royalist seem to be able to afford huge losses and still be viable for the win. In one Royalist game..they lost every battle...just still by using rupert/maurice..and one brigade each,,stay away from the slower worse led Parl armies and just ravage the Parl. rear areas.

I know its only 5 games...but we cant help but see this game and hugely pro-Royalist. (The one Parl. victory was just to a PC control event card as the last card played..hardly an impressive win)

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim P.
United States
Thousand Oaks
CA
flag msg tools
Visit the Wargame Bootcamp guild
badge
Muppet !
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I see the game balance as pro-Parliament... the Royalist has a harder time especially as the game progresses due to the arrival of the Conventors and the New Model Army.

The rules for dispersal of the King are fine by me, refusing battle and saving yourself and the lives of your men, but at the loss of army integrity, is not that embarrassing. Live to fight another day and blame the Generals on giving you bad advice.

Removing the ability to disperse from the King could turn the game into more of a Charlie hunt where all the Parliament has to do is corner him and game over. It is already an element of the game, but a secondary one.

Charles I own son and heir King Charles II aptly displayed the ability to "run away, run away" with the royal oaks incident and that was after a battle rather than before, much more embarrassing. Another example of a British Dunkirk incident...turn the King hiding in the tree into a national symbol aka Oak Apple Day, the very common "Royal Oak" pub name and HMS Royal Oak.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charles Vasey
Scotland
Mortlake, London
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bessieres wrote:
...I dont know...we're seeing alot of problems with the disperal and (no penalty for king's ability to disperse), late in the game. In five games now...(Royalist are 4-1)...but by just dispering on the turn before the last. Then popping up in areas away from the Roundhead armies...and then using Rupert/Maurice/King...run wild with just one brigade gobbling up just enough areas to have the Parl. forces loss control and the game. In three Royalist victories...they had three or less brigades (one game 4) on the board at the end, compared to large Parl. armies. Yet with commanders like rupert and maurice are far more manueverable, and win the game buy just stealing enough key areas.

Also...we're alittle concerned by the 9 to 3 brigades the Royalist (13 if you count the Lorrainers) can raise from cards compared to Parl. Because of this access to more troops, in every game the Royalist seem to be able to afford huge losses and still be viable for the win. In one Royalist game..they lost every battle...just still by using rupert/maurice..and one brigade each,,stay away from the slower worse led Parl armies and just ravage the Parl. rear areas.

I know its only 5 games...but we cant help but see this game and hugely pro-Royalist. (The one Parl. victory was just to a PC control event card as the last card played..hardly an impressive win)



If cards come up evenly then Parliament has the greater number of Brigades. I think you've had a pro-Royalist draw of the cards. Here is a quick analysis:

Clubmen: affects either side

Parliament
Set-up: Nine brigades

Mid War
The Army of the League of the Solemn League And Covenant: Seven Brigades

Conditional Recruitments
Early War
Eastern Association: Two Brigades
Raising The Royal Standard: One Brigade
Mid War
“Home Home”: Minus two Brigades
Faggot-Master Browne: One Brigade
Late War
New Model Army: Net one Brigade
David Leslie At Philiphaugh: Two Brigades
John Graham: Minus Two Brigades
Parliamentary Supplies to the West: A desertion saved.
Plots: May cause losses in dispersal

So Early War: 9 to 12 (say 10.5 on average)
Mid War: 16 to 18 (say 15.5 on average)
Late War: 16 to 20 (say 16.5 on average)


Royalist
Set-up: Seven brigades

Conditional Recruitments
Early War
Marquis of Worcester: One Brigade
Henrietta Maria Lands: Two Brigades
Marquis of Winchester: Two Brigades
Mid War
The Army of the League of the Solemn League And Covenant: Two Brigades
The Cessation: Three Brigades
Late War
The Northern Horse: One Brigade
King Strips The Garrisons: Two Brigades

So Early War: 7 to 12 (say 9.5 on average)
Mid War: 7 to 17 (say 12 on average)
Late War: 7 to 23 (say 13.5 on average)

Not considered:
Alt Hist
Lorrainers
Cessation


The Lorrainers damage Royalist recuitment so contain both a plus and a minus.




 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Wall
United Kingdom
Ormskirk
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
"stay away from the slower worse led Parl armies and just ravage the Parl. rear areas."

Not quite sure how you achieve this? Parliamentary rear areas are unlikely to hold handy royalist recruiting areas for the royalist to pop up in. So, presumably you're cuttiing your way in by converting parliament PC areas, which at best is two areas per move - hardly a fast game-winning pace!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Rogers
United States
Hoboken
New Jersey
flag msg tools
designer
badge
They're Young, They're in Love... They eat LARD
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In one of my early game of UKC my Royalist opponent was doing quite well having supressed the Conventers and retaining almost total control of the North, Wales and contesting the Midlands.

Following the NMA procedure, Cromwell got within striking distance of Charles. on entering his space he failed to avoid and promptly Dispersed.

In the next turn he declared his intention to leave Charles in the Reinforcement Box for the rest of the game.

I was a little puzzled, but could not see any requirement that he needs to be on the map at all. Is that correct?


I realise this is a very silly question thematically, but my opponent wanted to do just that, to keep Charles away from the battlefield for the remainder of the game.

seeing as how there is no penalty he felt no need to risk him.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Charles Vasey
Scotland
Mortlake, London
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
epilgrim wrote:
In one of my early game of UKC my Royalist opponent was doing quite well having supressed the Conventers and retaining almost total control of the North, Wales and contesting the Midlands.

Following the NMA procedure, Cromwell got within striking distance of Charles. on entering his space he failed to avoid and promptly Dispersed.

In the next turn he declared his intention to leave Charles in the Reinforcement Box for the rest of the game.

I was a little puzzled, but could not see any requirement that he needs to be on the map at all. Is that correct?


I realise this is a very silly question thematically, but my opponent wanted to to just that, to keep Charles away fromm the battlefield for the remainder of the game.

seeing as how there is no penalty he felt no need to risk him.


He's right there is no requirement, though there will be the loss of the King's capacity to command and his combat rating (which is not bad), and early in the game the Earl of Brentford. It was entirely possible for the King not to involve himself in the risky end of combat, especially if Rupert is Lieutenant-General, and it is a valid game decision.

However, in my many many games I have never lost the King but have found him very valuable so it is not a choice I would make or have, yet, made.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Rogers
United States
Hoboken
New Jersey
flag msg tools
designer
badge
They're Young, They're in Love... They eat LARD
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Charles Vasey wrote:
epilgrim wrote:
In one of my early game of UKC my Royalist opponent was doing quite well having supressed the Conventers and retaining almost total control of the North, Wales and contesting the Midlands.

Following the NMA procedure, Cromwell got within striking distance of Charles. on entering his space he failed to avoid and promptly Dispersed.

In the next turn he declared his intention to leave Charles in the Reinforcement Box for the rest of the game.

I was a little puzzled, but could not see any requirement that he needs to be on the map at all. Is that correct?


I realise this is a very silly question thematically, but my opponent wanted to to just that, to keep Charles away fromm the battlefield for the remainder of the game.

seeing as how there is no penalty he felt no need to risk him.


He's right there is no requirement, though there will be the loss of the King's capacity to command and his combat rating (which is not bad), and early in the game the Earl of Brentford. It was entirely possible for the King not to involve himself in the risky end of combat, especially if Rupert is Lieutenant-General, and it is a valid game decision.

However, in my many many games I have never lost the King but have found him very valuable so it is not a choice I would make or have, yet, made.


Thanks, and I agree with you, hasn't happenned since that game, but it did throw me for a bit. Good to know in any case.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.