I have a couple of questions that pertain to sieges...in the new Rules, it's not all together clear that when a siege ladders goes up that the persons carrying them cannot go up until the next turn. In the old SBG rules, that was pretty clear - aka you had to wait turn after the ladders went up.

Also, when the ladder goes and then someone climbs, does that effectively fix the person on the other side of the wall who is trying to push the ladder down. I ask this because, if both pieces are fixed in combat, even though there's wall between, then a good archer cannot shoot at them. Is that correct interpretation?

Hya, I can't comment with any authority as I don't have my book to hand but I will say the only thing I was disappointed with in the new Hobbit book was the siege rules. When reading them back in December I found there were an awful lot of areas (like the ones you mentioned) that were vague and/or unexplained. It was frustrating that an edition that aimed to add depth via the larger monster/Heroic Action/weapon/magic rules seemed to simplify what were an excellent set of siege rules to an almost useless degree.

As they now stand they're basically some very light escalade rules, we've taken a combination of the old siege rules and the new Hobbit ones to set up a set of house rules for use in our siege games. I'd recommend you do the same as I don't think you'll find firm answers in the rules to many of the questions that come up during siege games.

For what it's worth I'd say you have to wait a turn to climb and that the two models in your example are fixed in combat.

_________________
Finished 2nd in the 2014 GBHL. My Wife's so proud

Free SBG fanzine: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=29569

;


That is my interpretation too. You can think of it as he is shooting across the wall at the enemy he is in combat with.
The scenario was written for the old rules. Use the old rules and blend in the new. The card counters, rules lawyers, and power gamers are going to
bend the rules to their advantage so why not do what makes the scenario work. The model and photo were great

_________________
"the same as a duck you must be made of wood"

If the general consensus that Dol Guldur is besieged turns out to be true, we may see some clearer rules in the next edition of the rulebook, or at least the FAQ's.

I certainly hope so I am not sure we are going to see a new book. There is no point in speculating on what the new starter set might be. I will keep my fingers crossed.

_________________
"the same as a duck you must be made of wood"

Thanks. I noticed the siege rules in the Hobbit were not as extensive as in LOTR SBG, which I thought was rather odd. For instance, they don't have the batter points for things like walls in the Hobbit, so I had to refer back to the LOTR book. I like some of the new rules in the Hobbit. Monsters can do a lot more and I like the idea that if you move, it will affect your accuracy when it comes to shooting. The fancy stuff with the weapons like feints, seem kind of useless to me.

I really like the new hero and monster rules, making monsters capable of the sort of devastation seen in the films, and hero's capable of greater feats. Elven blades are revamped as well. Its worth noting that the volley fire rules for bows have now gone.

I noticed the volley thing missing, too, which I thought was odd. Like I said, some of the new changes I like, and then, some are kind of...eh...

I think the volley loss is ok. With the new deployment rules it doesn't come into play nearly as much anyway. The move/shoot penalty (especially wrt thrown weapons) I'm not so sure about.

_________________
Wait ye the finish! The fight is not yours.
Beowulf

http://TacticsInMiniature.com

Honestly, I like the movement penalty. It seems a little more realistic. Arrows didn't do as much damage as people thought - unless you massed them. They were more of a suppression weapon. I think of the English Long Bow where the Brits would mass literally thousands of archers. (Though the longbow was still pretty badass), and there's nothing really equivalent in the game. I mean the elven archers are good, and of course, the Uruk Hai crossbow mechanics are great.

My friends and I ask ignore the new deployment rules and we still include volley fire because volley is a nice option that remains true to the weaponry and we ignore the new deployment rules because they suck.
Changes in these two rules, the over-simplification of siege rules, weapon special strikes are among the MAJOR setbacks of the Hobbit rules. Only channeled magic, monster specials and the new heroics (I'm on the fence on the ability to boost FV) are worth keeping.

_________________
Commission Painting @FB http://www.facebook.com/squyrepainting
Commission Customers include:
GBHL Youtube Channel
MiniWargaming

I feel that the thrown weapons are massively over priced even without the movement modifyer. I would like to see this corrected. I have not readthe siege rules yet but, absolutely love the developments for heroes and monsters.

Volley fire with bows is useful in a siege and its a shame that Aragorn can no longer call one as in the siege of Helms Deep, however I only ever seemed to use it with low value "nuisance" troops that I used to draw off and distract more serious enemies from where they actually needed to be.

Siege rules could offer an option for volley fire...that would be good and make sense. I almost don't think they needed to actually remove the volley fire option personally since once we started playing with the new scenarios we just don't find as much need for volley in most games. Another 'over correction' in my opinion.

I don't think throwing weapons are overpriced IF the move penalty wasn't a factor. With Wood Elves they always more than paid for themselves and even with Rohan and Warg Riders I usually felt like I broke even. If you are stuck playing in GW stores and events then you may need to give it a second thought, but if you're playing locally just decide as a group not to apply the penalty to thrown weapons.

_________________
Wait ye the finish! The fight is not yours.
Beowulf

http://TacticsInMiniature.com

You're obviously entitled to your opinion but these are entirely subjective statements.

I was pleased to see volley fire go, IMO it never fit well with the skirmish nature of SBG and it's omission combined with the new deployment rules killed off those hideously boring games of Legolas and 70 Wood Elves sitting at the back and shooting everything to death.

I also don't understand how all the deployment rules can suck as they very across the scenarios. The varied nature of deployment in Hold Ground, Recon and Domination in particular make for some incredibly intense and dynamic games.

Weapon Strikes are a mixed bag for me, I like the tactical options that Piercing Strike and Feint have introduced but I can't see why you'd ever use Bash or the flail one over normal strikes.

IMO, all these rules (lack of volley fire, new deployment and weapon strikes) are not only not major setbacks but did something very important and positive for SBG. They gave it a shot in the arm and made a huge change to the meta/tactics, that and the multitude of new army list combinations are for my money, a massive plus for the game as a whole.

_________________
Finished 2nd in the 2014 GBHL. My Wife's so proud

Free SBG fanzine: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=29569

Very much agree, all the games where we used volley fire were tedious, long and we never bothered to finish.



They're an improvement, but I think they could be better. For several scenarios I've found that most of the time you want to deploy within 12" of the center line anyway, and since these scenarios have a "1-3 within 12", 4-6 anywhere" rule, there's almost no point rolling. I do like the fact that it pushes you into the action sooner...though I wish my son didn't have a knack for picking the deployment sweet spots

Completely agree on that actually, we've often discussed the fact that it should be the other way round. A roll of 1-3 (what most players would perceive as a bad roll) should mean that you have to start 12" away from the centre and a 4-6 should mean you can deploy anywhere.

Hold Ground is by far my favourite scenario due to the deployment rules. The way everyone's warbands turn up all over the place leads to a really interesting battle and often creates several mini games. There's also a (probably) unexpected bonus in that it often separates cheesy combos, the shade won't automatically turn up behind the goblins and the Wood Elf F5 spearmen warband won't necessarily get behind the D7 Fountain Court warband, I'm all for that!

It's interesting that the last 2 custom scenarios at tournaments in the UK have used the Hold Ground Maelstrom of Battle deployment rules - I think that proves a lot of players enjoy its chaotic nature!

_________________
Finished 2nd in the 2014 GBHL. My Wife's so proud

Free SBG fanzine: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=29569