Huns

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Mon Apr 19, 2010 6:21 pm

In the list notes it says an entire allied contigent can be downgraded one quality level.

So despite if it is listed as Let's say, superior Cav, average Impact foot and average LF bow. You can take them as average cav, poor impact and poor LF?

Is this the only list that has that variation?

Irmin · Post by **Irmin** » Tue Apr 20, 2010 9:40 am

I hadn't seen that before even though I'd looked at playing Huns

The question i'd ask is why would you want to lower the quality of, say, the superior lance cav to average?

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Tue Apr 20, 2010 9:56 am

Irmin wrote:The question i'd ask is why would you want to lower the quality of, say, the superior lance cav to average?

For historical simulations - if you believe that the subject allies were unwilling enough to fight less well than their normal ability.

(FOG is not all about tournaments, even if discussion of tournament armies and situations do dominate the boards.)

Skullzgrinda · Post by **Skullzgrinda** » Tue Apr 20, 2010 3:28 pm

rbodleyscott wrote:
Irmin wrote:The question i'd ask is why would you want to lower the quality of, say, the superior lance cav to average?
For historical simulations - if you believe that the subject allies were unwilling enough to fight less well than their normal ability.

(FOG is not all about tournaments, even if discussion of tournament armies and situations do dominate the boards.)

One of the reasons I have really enjoyed the themed tournaments. They are a pleasant compromise.

ShrubMiK · Post by **ShrubMiK** » Tue Apr 20, 2010 9:34 pm

It's also just faintly possible that there is at least one player out there who might think the points saved by going for cheaper average allies could be more usefully spent on something else.

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Tue Apr 20, 2010 9:34 pm

ShrubMiK wrote:It's also just faintly possible that there is at least one player out there who might think the points saved by going for cheaper average allies could be more usefully spent on something else.

Irmin · Post by **Irmin** » Wed Apr 21, 2010 5:35 am

ShrubMiK wrote:It's also just faintly possible that there is at least one player out there who might think the points saved by going for cheaper average allies could be more usefully spent on something else.

Having looked at the points saving you'd be hard pressed to get anything other than 1BG of LH, which I'm not sure is such a great trade off.

ShrubMiK · Post by **ShrubMiK** » Wed Apr 21, 2010 8:30 am

One extra BG of LH in the right place at the right time could make all the difference.

Or those saved points could be the difference between you having some of your Hun LH BGs superior instead of average.

Or maybe another general, or an upgrade to one of your existing generals.

Or, of course, having an ally contingent of lesser quality could turn out to be the thing that loses you the battle

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Fri Apr 23, 2010 2:19 pm

Irmin wrote:
ShrubMiK wrote:It's also just faintly possible that there is at least one player out there who might think the points saved by going for cheaper average allies could be more usefully spent on something else.
Having looked at the points saving you'd be hard pressed to get anything other than 1BG of LH, which I'm not sure is such a great trade off.

Perhaps you are not expansive enough in your vision.

ethan · Post by **ethan** » Fri Apr 23, 2010 3:13 pm

hazelbark wrote:
Irmin wrote:
ShrubMiK wrote:It's also just faintly possible that there is at least one player out there who might think the points saved by going for cheaper average allies could be more usefully spent on something else.
Having looked at the points saving you'd be hard pressed to get anything other than 1BG of LH, which I'm not sure is such a great trade off.
Perhaps you are not expansive enough in your vision.

or 5 BG os 4 poor LF javelin...