Game: BattleLore: The Hundred Years' War - Crossbows & Polearms

Thread: Re: Transportation?

highpriestrsw2 — 2008-11-19T17:58:57+00:00

I transport everything for epic battles (x2 of EVERYTHING)in a Plano #827 "Contractor Grade" rolling Tool storage tote. (Which some people think is overkill) As a bonus it even fits the extras of my Memoir '44 game that don't fit in the campaign bag. I store all the minis in Plano boxes within the tote.

Thread: Re: Transportation?

Maus — 2008-11-07T02:31:54+00:00

There is a thread in the Battlelore section that deals with some ideas for storage.

http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/348129

Maus

Thread: Transportation?

Sturmkraehe — 2008-11-07T02:09:14+00:00

Does anyone out there have a creative way they are transporting their Battlelore collection? I have several of the expansions and am looking for a better way to haul the game around since it doesn't fit in the box anymore.

Image

samoan_jo — 2008-10-22T17:54:40+00:00

Battlelore - Der Hundertjährige Krieg - Box front of the German edition

Thread: Re: Do I need any other expansions to play this one?

Luftwaffe Flak — 2008-09-10T14:05:37+00:00

Thanks friend!

Do you perchance know of a site that has additional scenarios on it split up by each individual game? I saw DOW site has alot of fan made sites but Im have trouble deciphering which ones use which expansions etc. TIA and all the best, Jonathan

Thread: Re: Do I need any other expansions to play this one?

ColtsFan76 — 2008-09-09T21:14:03+00:00

No. Each expansion can be played with the base game by itself. The 100 y/w in particular was designed this way (as the race-specific expansions do build off of each other a bit) to help bolster the medieval portion of the game.

Thread: Do I need any other expansions to play this one?

Luftwaffe Flak — 2008-09-09T17:20:41+00:00

Im looking at picking up the base game and this expansion do I need any of the dwarve or goblin expansions to use this expansion with the base game? TIA and all the best, Jonathan

Thread: Re: BattleLore: The Hundred Years' War: my view.

squash — 2008-08-26T20:35:19+00:00

RobM wrote:
As with the other expansions, my main gripe is cost: this expansion is particularly expensive in terms of cost per figure.

But if you think of it in terms of cost per amount of plastic packaging, you got quite a deal!

Thread: BattleLore: The Hundred Years' War: my view.

RobM — 2008-08-26T19:46:55+00:00

Preamble.
This was one of the easiest decisions in terms of purchasing a Battlelore expansion. It contains both interesting new human figures, and historical scenarios from one of my favourite periods of history, the Hundred Year’s War. One of the things that I like best about Battlelore is the ability to play historical scenarios within a fantasy setting.

Components.
This expansion comprises: four units of blue banner Crossbowmen (arbalestiers); two units of blue banner spearmen; one unit of red banner halberdiers; four horn blower figures; plus associated banners and cards. There is also an eight page rule book with five additional scenarios.

The components are standard Battlelore fare, and hence of good quality. I think all the figures look good. My only gripe is that you really don’t get much at all for your money. This set retails for 25 Euros or about £17, which seems overpriced to me.

Gameplay.
The Arbaliestiers are additional bow units. They only have a range of 3 hexes, but score bonus strikes even at point blank. They do not collect lore tokens.

The Spearmen get a bonus strike (ignoring one against mounted units), and battle back at +1d.

The Halberdiers get a bonus strike, even against mounted units, and battle back at +1d.

Horn blowers are very different. They are deployed as a replacement for one figure in another unit. They make that unit capable of calling on an adjacent friendly unit to battle alongside it in melee (both units must both have been ordered during the Orders phase).

There are some additional rules to decrease the impact of lore on the Historical Battles, but I’ve enjoyed playing the scenarios both with and without these, so they can be used to just change the flavour of the game as and when you like. The scenarios themselves (Crecy, Poitiers, Cocherel, Patay, and Agincourt) may not appeal to the historical purist, but are great fun. They have historical notes for added interest, but include special rules and terrain set ups that make for highly enjoyable games.

So, What Do I Think?
Overall, I rate this as 7 out of 10. I like the historical scenarios and I like the Halberdiers and Horn Blowers in particular. I would have liked an additional unit of Halberdiers. The Spearmen and Arbalestiers add figure variety and historical interest, but have much less of an impact on the game. As with the other expansions, my main gripe is cost: this expansion is particularly expensive in terms of cost per figure.

Image

Schuk — 2008-07-19T20:14:57+00:00

Cover of the French version

Image

tom-le-termite — 2008-07-09T17:27:00+00:00

100years Gallery 4/4, Human Spearmen

Image

tom-le-termite — 2008-07-09T17:24:44+00:00

100years Gallery 3/4, Human Arbalestiers

Image

tom-le-termite — 2008-07-09T17:23:46+00:00

100years Gallery 2/4, Human Horn Blowers

Image

tom-le-termite — 2008-07-09T17:22:34+00:00

100years Gallery 1/4, human Halberdiers

Image

whoami — 2008-05-31T03:07:25+00:00

Image

whoami — 2008-05-31T03:06:13+00:00

Thread: Re: [Review] BattleLore: The Hundred Years' War

Felkor — 2008-05-12T20:12:21+00:00

After playing a couple of Hundred Wars games, I agree about the Arbelestiers. I think they're great and would take them over longbowmen. I have found them very useful and can see using them in a Call to Arms game.

Thread: Re: Longbow summary card?

squash — 2008-05-02T03:48:21+00:00

GeoMan wrote:
DrChek wrote:

Would it have killed them to include just one more card in the package?

Yes, because they also want to sell you the Call of Arms expansion.

Hey, it worked!

Thread: Re: [Review] BattleLore: The Hundred Years' War

therico — 2008-05-01T13:55:45+00:00

This review has been very informative, thanks. Since buying the game I'd like to make a few notes:

TomVasel wrote:
2.) Arbalesters: While useful, I normally wouldn’t pick them over the longbow...
Note that Arbalestiers can replace up to three of your (green) archers with one card; non-Epic Battlelore armies only typically have 2-3 archers. However:
Arbs are blue and attack with three dice.
They only have a range of three hexes.
They cannot move and attack in the same turn.
Like longbows, they hit on bonus strike and do not collect Lore.

Personally, I'd take an extra dice over combined move/attack as my archers are generally immobile.

TomVasel wrote:
5.) Hornblowers: Even better, dice can be combined when attacking terrain, finally budging some of those stubborn defensive units out.
I was disappointed (but not surprised) to see that terrain restrictions apply to both sets of dice individually. E.g. if two red units attack a forest both sets will be reduced to two dice then added for a total of four.

Obviously there is still an advantage when combining bonus strikes (vs. cavalry), flags (vs. Bold/goblins) or when using Lore or Command cards that award a dice bonus to both units: both units' bonuses are combined for the attack.

Thread: Re: Does being called count as units action?

matthewguidry — 2008-02-22T03:28:37+00:00

Just to make sure I'm playing this right..

Unit A has a Hornblower.
Unit B doesn't .

Unit A and B are both ordered.

Unit A can move per banner color, same as unit B.

Unit A can attack and call Unit B into action, taking Unit B's number of dice into battle.

Unit B cannot initiate another attack, can not gain ground, can do no more on this turn.

Does that seem about right?

Image

Yugblad — 2008-01-25T21:52:32+00:00

English Camp and Agincourt Castle - Customised Epic Battle

Thread: Re: [Review] BattleLore: The Hundred Years' War

Drewcooter — 2007-12-27T15:36:58+00:00

Tom,

Great review, except I think that although you start without any Lore or Lore cards that the end of turn Lore options are the same as the base game. I prefer the historic scenarios with the toned down Lore, there are still some pretty potent cards in the Lore deck.

Game on!

Thread: Re: [Review] BattleLore: The Hundred Years' War

TeeWee — 2007-12-27T12:55:01+00:00

Thanks for a nice review. I'd like to make an additional point here though, especially since your review is currently the only one here.

The HYW set does not include a longbow weapon summary card, even though all scenarios use the longbow extensively. While the rules for the longbow are printed in the scenario booklet and therefore quite playable, it is for me a major mistake for Days of Wonder not to include the longbow card with the expansion.

Especially for those (like me) who don't own the CtA expansion (which does field the longbow).

Even worse (though not for me personally because I don't play Epic), the Epic Agincourt scenario includes what I suspect are archer stakes. Again, I don't have those, and the rules for those are not even included. Probably information that can be looked up rather quickly online, but that's not the point. I consider it very bad form not to include this or state on the box that such a strong relationship between expansions exist.

Thread: Re: Longbow summary card?

TeeWee — 2007-12-26T16:50:15+00:00

dcorban wrote:
While it does seem weak to not include it, I thought the specialist deployment rules were in Call To Arms. So unless you are just playing by the CTA rules without actually owning that expansion, you will have two Longbow cards anyway.
The included scenarios don't need specialist cards to use. It does boggle my mind why a longbow card was not included.

Thread: Re: Longbow summary card?

dcorban — 2007-12-04T18:09:27+00:00

While it does seem weak to not include it, I thought the specialist deployment rules were in Call To Arms. So unless you are just playing by the CTA rules without actually owning that expansion, you will have two Longbow cards anyway.

Thread: Re: Does Agincourt require more than this and the base game?

dcorban — 2007-12-04T18:06:40+00:00

I noticed that the back of the box actually states that you need two copies of the base game to play the Epic scenario.

Thread: Re: Does Agincourt require more than this and the base game?

ColtsFan76 — 2007-11-16T04:11:14+00:00

I believe you will need more than the base game has to offer. I think the base game comes with 8 archers and I count 10 in the epic scenario. Base game has 4 heavy cavalry but the scenariom shows 6. The scenario also requires 34 wooded tiles but it looks like you will only have 27 or so from the game. That seems to be all that you are short from my quick glance of it.

Image

cero — 2007-11-15T21:29:13+00:00

let the goblin riders join in...

Thread: Does Agincourt require more than this and the base game?

fanaka66 — 2007-11-15T18:33:01+00:00

For the new Epic Agincourt, do you need more than this expansion and a single copy of the base game?

I am hoping you don't need 2 copies of the main game to have enough figures.

Thread: [Review] BattleLore: The Hundred Years' War

TomVasel — 2007-10-30T14:15:03+00:00

I’m very pleased with the fantasy flavor of BattleLore – it helps set it apart from the other games in the Commands and Colors series (notably the Commands and Colors: Ancient version). Still, the medieval feel is strong, and I know that many want a more historical flavor for the game. Most of the expansion packs have focused on the fantasy, now one has come out that is more concerned with history.

The Hundred Years’ War – Crossbows and Polearms (Days of Wonder, 2007 – Richard Borg) is a double sized expansion pack for the basic game, adding in four new types of units, five scenarios, and rules of how to make the lore system work in a “historical” setting. Even though I could care less about the “no fantasy” rules, I still like having the extra units and options; and it is interesting to see how the system works with no magic. (Hint: it’s better with magic)

Let’s look at what the expansion pack includes (as a side note, I now have managed to put all four specialist packs and the epic expansion in the original box. I had to remove the plastic insert and barely get the lid on, so anything new coming is going to need another box.)

1.) Five new scenarios are added, the battles of Crecy, Poitiers, Cocherel, Patay, and Agincourt. Each battle makes use of the news weapons included with the game, also attempting to follow the historical battles that actually occurred during this long and pointless war. The battle of Agincourt is an “epic” one, requiring Epic BattleLore, but is by far my favorite and most interesting scenario in the game. It takes the famous battle and manages to do a neat job of pitting many longbow units against a huge foot soldier army. Terrific, epic stuff.

2.) Arbalesters: These allow the humans to have crossbows, which have a range of three hexes, but hit on a bonus strike. While useful, I normally wouldn’t pick them over the longbow, but the command cards that put them in the game add range where no range was or allow up to three of them to join. Nice, but the least exciting part of the set.

3.) Spearmen: We’ve seen these in the Goblin and Dwarf expansions, and they are the same here – allowing foot units to battle back with one extra die. The card allows two blue spear units to be placed in the game; and if they are bold, they can become devastating to the opponents.

4.) Halberdiers: But who cares about spears when you have halberds in the game! The card allows one red banner halberd unit to be added to the game, which hits on a bonus die – even against mounted units AND rolls an extra die when battling back. The ultimate defensive unit - they can stop the advances of normal cavalry, and you’ll find an army often including one of these in their forces. (And they work well in conjunction with a Dwarf army, by the way.)

5.) Hornblowers: By far the most unique figure in the army, the command card allows two hornblowers to be embedded in two different foot units. Two command cards are included, so that a player could field four of these chaps if they desire. The hornblower allows a unit to “call” an adjacent friendly unit to fight with it in battle. If the adjacent unit is also adjacent to the unit that the hornblower is attacking, the dice are combined for the attack. This allows extra dice, which is certainly nice; but it goes beyond that. If you compare it to two units attacking the same unit, one may make the attacked unit retreat before the second gets to hit it. This combines one large attack, and has a greater chance of destroying the attacked unit. Even better, dice can be combined when attacking terrain, finally budging some of those stubborn defensive units out.

6.) Components: The figures for all the new units look good; although the units are small enough that you may easily get them mixed up with the others. But no matter, as the banners clearly delineate what type of unit everything is.

7.) Medieval time: Rules are included to utilize lore in a historical battle. No War Council is used, and players don’t start with Lore tokens or counters. Players may hold a maximum of one card, can only get lore from rolling the dice, and must pay an extra three for every card used. Any Lore card that has magic in it is removed from the game before playing, which leaves out most of the Wizard’s and Cleric’s cards. These rules are certain to please those who want straight historical scenarios without the fantasy “nonsense”, but I don’t really want to use them much – I like the increased complexity and options magic brings.

Obviously those craving more accuracy and historical simulations will be the biggest seekers of this expansion. But even those, like myself, who simply want to increase the BattleLore universe will be happy with the expansion. The hornblowers and halberdiers can be put into any army – whether human, Goblin, or Dwarf – and the scenarios involved are fantastic! Probably my least favorite of the expansions so far – I want to see new and exotic creatures; it still has appeal to me as a history lover; and the Battle of Agincourt is truly a fascinating scenario.

Tom Vasel
“Real men play board games”
www.thedicetower.com

Thread: Re: Does being called count as units action?

ColtsFan76 — 2007-10-08T15:56:45+00:00

The unit that is "called" must be legitimately ordered and forgoes the rest of its turn. It is ordered and gives its dice to the unit with the Hornblower and does no more on that turn.

Thread: Does being called count as units action?

EvanMinn — 2007-10-08T15:20:12+00:00

Hornblower: The hornblower is embedded into another unit. A unit with an embedded unit may "Call for Help." This means they can call one activated unit to join it in battle. The unit called must be adjacent to both the attacking unit and the enemy target. Both sets of dice are added together and rolled as a single set of dice, rather than being treated as separate, individual attacks. All the unit called for help does is contribute its die to the attack, so battle back, follow on attacks, etc. only apply to the unit with the Horn Blower. The Specialist Card allows players to embed a Horn Blower in up to two foot units.

"can call one activated unit" seems to say the called unit must already be ordered.

What isn't clear is whether this counts as that called units action or they can also make their regular attack.

I think it does count as their action but I know if I don't get it clarified someone is going to question that as it doesn't actually say that anywhere as far as I can tell.

Thread: Re: Longbow summary card?

jschlickbernd — 2007-09-26T17:25:44+00:00

You can find a reference sheet that has all the units here--

http://www.battleloremaster.com/guild_downloads.html

I'm not excusing DoW here, just showing you where you could get the information without having to buy Call to Arms.

Thread: Re: Longbow summary card?

JadedGamer — 2007-09-26T17:04:01+00:00

CovertDad wrote:
Flying Spaghetti Monster forbid that a company actually make a *gulp* PROFIT!
There is a difference between making a profit selling expansions and making a profit by selling expansions which turn out to be inter-dependent.

Counterexample: When you buy a Cheapass game, it tells you on the cover what extra components you need. So you know up front, before you purchase the game, that it is incomplete by design - they expect that you have enough dice, tokens etc. from other games that it would be pointless to add to that pile.

BattleLore Longbow summary cards? Not that common.

Thread: Re: Longbow summary card?

DrChek — 2007-09-26T16:19:29+00:00

mark_biggar wrote:
Come on,if they'd really wanted to try to force you to buy CtA in order to play 100yW, they wouldn't have put an image of the Longbow card in the 100yW rule book. Instead they provided you with just the extra info you needed to play with out forcing you to buy CtA.

I don't think they want to force you to buy CtA, but why not just include the actual card also?

Thread: Re: Longbow summary card?

CovertDad — 2007-09-26T16:03:52+00:00

chessduffer wrote:
This is something that I've been trying to preach, although not alone. Battlelore although a very good game, is designed to be a money machine. They say you don't need all the expansions, yet so many of them tie together, like this.

Flying Spaghetti Monster forbid that a company actually make a *gulp* PROFIT!

Thread: Re: Longbow summary card?

mark_biggar — 2007-09-26T14:55:18+00:00

Come on,if they'd really wanted to try to force you to buy CtA in order to play 100yW, they wouldn't have put an image of the Longbow card in the 100yW rule book. Instead they provided you with just the extra info you needed to play with out forcing you to buy CtA.

Thread: Re: Longbow summary card?

chessduffer — 2007-09-26T06:54:07+00:00

This is something that I've been trying to preach, although not alone. Battlelore although a very good game, is designed to be a money machine. They say you don't need all the expansions, yet so many of them tie together, like this.

Thread: Re: Longbow summary card?

aristarco — 2007-09-24T10:44:45+00:00

I'm planning to print out a homemade copy of that card, as I'm not planning to buy Call to Arms.

Thread: Re: This expansion played with regular lore-rules?

aristarco — 2007-09-24T10:42:53+00:00

Would there be any reason the medieval scenarios in the base game would not be able to incorporate the new medieval lore rules from this expansion?

You can do that. My plan is to always use the standard lore rules.

Thread: Re: This expansion played with regular lore-rules?

athmok — 2007-09-18T14:10:48+00:00

On the flip side of that:

Would there be any reason the medieval scenarios in the base game would not be able to incorporate the new medieval lore rules from this expansion?

Thread: Re: Medieval Lore Rules

Profesor Mora — 2007-09-08T18:12:53+00:00

Borg wrote:
Personally, I will no longer buy any Battlelore expansions as it seems to me that the game gets more chaotic with every release.

I prefer a game with rules which remain the same, not one with errata after every expansion.

Sell your Battlelore and buy Commands & Colors: Ancients

Thread: Re: Medieval Lore Rules

Borg — 2007-09-08T17:09:34+00:00

Personally, I will no longer buy any Battlelore expansions as it seems to me that the game gets more chaotic with every release.

I prefer a game with rules which remain the same, not one with errata after every expansion.

Sorry for the negative post but it seems the game is just "too random" for my taste overall anyway.

Thread: Re: This expansion played with regular lore-rules?

ColtsFan76 — 2007-09-04T12:20:38+00:00

You can use this expansion in one of 3 ways: 1) typical medieval game, typical lore game, or the new "medieval lore" rules. The expansion gives you the means to add units to your games. You can do that through the couple of scenarios they give you where the units are already set-up, or you can use the drafting method of taking specialist cards in your Call to Arms set, or you can take existing scenarios from the base game and swap units as you please, or create your own scenarios. It is a versatile expansion.

Thread: This expansion played with regular lore-rules?

andy_b. — 2007-09-04T09:54:31+00:00

Is there any reason for this to not work? I ask because im thinking of just playing through the official Epic adventures and give the players the opportunity to swap for example two green units from the original setup with a unit from this expansion.

Thread: Re: Longbow summary card?

GeoMan — 2007-09-03T09:05:42+00:00

DrChek wrote:

Would it have killed them to include just one more card in the package?

Yes, because they also want to sell you the Call of Arms expansion.

Thread: Re: Longbow summary card?

DrChek — 2007-09-03T05:05:02+00:00

jearles wrote:
That is correct. While the scenario lists archers with longbows these characters are not the focus of the expansion, and so (I presume) no Weapon Summary card was included.

This card is in Call To Arms.

Would it have killed them to include just one more card in the package?

Thread: Re: Longbow summary card?

mark_biggar — 2007-09-03T04:40:59+00:00

DrChek wrote:
The scenarios state that archer units have longbows and the booklet shows an image of the longbow summary card, my package contains no longbow summary card. Is this correct?

Yes. That card is in the "Call to Arms" expansion.

Thread: Re: Longbow summary card?

jearles — 2007-09-03T04:40:17+00:00

That is correct. While the scenario lists archers with longbows these characters are not the focus of the expansion, and so (I presume) no Weapon Summary card was included.

This card is in Call To Arms.

Thread: Longbow summary card?

DrChek — 2007-09-03T03:59:22+00:00

The scenarios state that archer units have longbows and the booklet shows an image of the longbow summary card, my package contains no longbow summary card. Is this correct?

Thread: Re: Medieval Lore Rules

fanaka66 — 2007-09-02T02:43:27+00:00

anarchy wrote:
1. Remove a bunch of lore cards (the magical ones; listed in the rules) and put the others (the ones that aren't so magical) together in one deck.

2. Each player gets one card no matter what.

3. All Lore cards are considered +3 Lore to use.

4. Gain Lore as normal.

I'm sure someone has already thought of this, but it will be nice if DOW will put out a Medieval Lore Deck with only the appropriate cards with each of the costs printed at +3 their current costs.

Thread: Re: Medieval Lore Rules

Yugblad — 2007-08-31T07:48:57+00:00

Diamat wrote:
Battlelore has come alive again for me with this expansion.

Well said, squire!

Thread: Re: Medieval Lore Rules

Diamat — 2007-08-30T15:53:27+00:00

Battlelore has come alive again for me with this expansion.

I am looking forward to playing through the HYW scenarios this weekend, and have split out the suggested medieval Lore deck in anticipation of doing so.

Our Lore cards have languished in the box since the first couple of 'full' Lore play-throughs with the base set, as we strongly disliked the way that some of the super-powerful cards overturned the run of play and (IMO) unbalanced the game.

After we've played through the four scenarios, I envisage that using the CtA deployment cards & all the non-magical specialist cards with the medieval Lore deck will mean that Battlelore gets a lot more trips out of the games cupboard than it has seen of late.

Thread: Re: Medieval Lore Rules

anarchy — 2007-08-30T04:33:51+00:00

1. Remove a bunch of lore cards (the magical ones; listed in the rules) and put the others (the ones that aren't so magical) together in one deck.

2. Each player gets one card no matter what.

3. All Lore cards are considered +3 Lore to use.

4. Gain Lore as normal.

Thread: Medieval Lore Rules

kes_167 — 2007-08-30T03:10:25+00:00

Could somebody please explain the Medieval Lore Rules to me in detail, as I do not have the expansion yet, and I am very interested in this! (This may be a deciding factor for deciding to buy) Thanks!

Thread: Re: 2 Specialist Cards are too few?

cero — 2007-08-26T12:14:44+00:00

I think at least for epioc battles there should be more than 2 specialist cards allowed (we use 4 specialist cards for an epic battle!)

Thread: 2 Specialist Cards are too few?

izack — 2007-08-25T16:56:29+00:00

Being able to field only 2 Spec Cards with this expansion and CtA is a bit few isn't it? Doesn't really make for exciting games. How many should I be able to field?

Thread: Re: Power of the new units

NinjaPirateAssassin — 2007-08-24T17:04:54+00:00

toddrew wrote:

I would assume the following is true, but does anyone know for sure - if a defending unit is eligible to battle back after attacked by two hornblowing influenced units, would that defending unit be able to roll against each unit separately? ie, still get the same number of battle backs if the attackers had made "normal" attacks?

From the book: "The Horn Blower's unit is considered the attacking unit and any reaction by the targeted enemy unit, such as battle back, is directed at the Horn Blower's unit."
If I'm reading that correctly, No they do not. So not only do you get to roll two sets of attacking dice as one, but you also essentially halve the potential battle back damage compared to attacking with the two units normally. All for sacrificing the second unit's chance to gain ground/pursue. Not to shabby.

Thread: Re: Hundred Years War: Crossbows and Polearms- First Look

The Preacher — 2007-08-18T14:07:19+00:00

The specialist cards have the same back as the deployment cards in CtA. I haven't found this to be a problem the way that my gaming group uses the cards (we just follow the CtA rules), but the backs on the Hundred Years War cards do not match the specialist cards from CtA.

Thread: Re: Hundred Years War: Crossbows and Polearms- First Look

kfritz — 2007-08-18T02:37:03+00:00

Are the card backs ok on this expansion? Or are they also incorrectly printed?

thanks