Please don't make me come and get you.

[melm]

But all he has is massed archers and mobs, and a few Sparabara if I am correct. He surely can't confront your pikes in the open. Too suicidal. I don't really think it egregious.

An excuse that can't be applied to a tournament like the DL where players get to pick what they want.

I guess what I comment is not related to DL tournament, as the poster says the army is generated with bad luck.
______

My guess is right. He confirms that it's not DL tournament.

[Schweetness101]

checkout this screenshot

Dude, where are your skirmishers???? You're really just rolling up on him with pikes, thureos, and your xystos?

all I can say is that I'm better at the game now than I was then lol.

[rbodleyscott]

One solution could be a cohesion test malus on the edges of the map on your respective side.

This does actually exist in the tabletop version - non-light troops within a certain distance of any table edge automatically count threatened flank, and get the appropriate CT malus. (The logic being that for all they know there might be enemy off the map edge).

We very nearly put it in the computer version, but in the end decided the restrictive deployment areas mostly avoid people securing their flanks on the side table edge. However, they don't do anything to discourage using the rear table edge for this purpose.

It could be implemented in a future update.

[Cunningcairn]

I played a game a few seasons ago when my opponent had chosen one of the "cheesy" options, an Arab City State army while I was playing with Dacians. He took a defensive position between woods and I had no choice but to deploy my MF and loose formation warband in the open. To my surprise he did not advance on me and I managed to march my non HF all the way across the board to find some shelter in some terrain on the far right table edge. This took about 8 moves. Still he didn't move. I then commented that if he didn't move I was going to stay where I was. This caused a very emotional response and I was accused of corner sitting/turtling or whatever you want to call it., The player actually resigned the game which I will never understand and sent me an abusive PM. Like Mike I'm not into shaming so will not mention the players name but this behaviour is totally unacceptable and not sporting at all. So I suppose I have to agree with Mike.

[paulmcneil]

Thanks for the tip; I'll be using these tactics from now on, what's not to like?

[Cunningcairn]

Thanks for the tip; I'll be using these tactics from now on, what's not to like?

Does that mean you are surrendering our current game

[stockwellpete]

I played a game a few seasons ago when my opponent had chosen one of the "cheesy" options, an Arab City State army while I was playing with Dacians. He took a defensive position between woods and I had no choice but to deploy my MF and loose formation warband in the open. To my surprise he did not advance on me and I managed to march my non HF all the way across the board to find some shelter in some terrain on the far right table edge. This took about 8 moves. Still he didn't move. I then commented that if he didn't move I was going to stay where I was. This caused a very emotional response and I was accused of corner sitting/turtling or whatever you want to call it., The player actually resigned the game which I will never understand and sent me an abusive PM. Like Mike I'm not into shaming so will not mention the players name but this behaviour is totally unacceptable and not sporting at all. So I suppose I have to agree with Mike.

Would that have been in Season 4, Late Antiquity Division A, Martin? (I do love an archive )

[Geffalrus]

all I can say is that I'm better at the game now than I was then lol.

No worries, I was mostly joking.

I use the Antigonid list a lot, so I have lots of opinions about unit selection and stuff. I rarely bring no skirmishers, but if I do, it's usually because I went max cavalry not max infantry. I did that one time against a Byzantine player in a practice game and surprised the heck out of his own cavalry, sweeping most of it from the field before the infantry clashed.

[Geffalrus]

This does actually exist in the tabletop version - non-light troops within a certain distance of any table edge automatically count threatened flank, and get the appropriate CT malus. (The logic being that for all they know there might be enemy off the map edge).

We very nearly put it in the computer version, but in the end decided the restrictive deployment areas mostly avoid people securing their flanks on the side table edge. However, they don't do anything to discourage using the rear table edge for this purpose.

From my standpoint, I'd say that the danger of putting your back to the map edge, or even close to it, is that you make it nearly impossible for your units to rally if broken. And your skirmish units, whether cavalry or infantry, can easily be neutralized by chasing them off the board, at which point they waste multiple turns coming back (if they do). Whatever advantage you gain by edge-camping, you run a serious risk of making it easy for your opponent to fully rout your units.

Here's an example from last season. My opponent lined up against the back edge of the board and I spent turns advancing and finalizing my battle plan. The result was that my opponent's passivity allowed my superior infantry to crash into one section of his line while I held back my other flank.

Screen_00000452.jpg (410.37 KiB) Viewed 3589 times

With nowhere to run, any retreating or routing unit was immediately gone. The result: a decisive victory for me.

Screen_00000474.jpg (392.63 KiB) Viewed 3589 times

[paulmcneil]

Thanks for the tip; I'll be using these tactics from now on, what's not to like?

Does that mean you are surrendering our current game

You're offering a restart?

[vakarr]

One of my first league battles was against Romans, on a constricted mountain battlefield with water all down one side and mountain all down the other - and clear terrain between. Ideal Roman terrain! I had a hill and a wood at my end of the battlefield but I take the view that if you just sit there, you give the initiative to the enemy - who in this case will be able to line up his elephant and superior legionaries perfectly and beat me up regardless. Field of Glory 2 rewards the attacker, so I attacked. Field of Glory 2 also rewards somebody who has an overall plan and is able to put it into action. Don't complain about somebody sitting back and waiting, be happy, he's given you the initiative!!! Devise a plan of attack and attack him! I was surprised to see that I won that game but win it I did, and I can now say I have beaten Romans in open terrain with a classical Thracian army.

[MVP7]

From my standpoint, I'd say that the danger of putting your back to the map edge, or even close to it, is that you make it nearly impossible for your units to rally if broken. And your skirmish units, whether cavalry or infantry, can easily be neutralized by chasing them off the board, at which point they waste multiple turns coming back (if they do). Whatever advantage you gain by edge-camping, you run a serious risk of making it easy for your opponent to fully rout your units.

The edge campers are probably not that great players in the first place and being in a perceived defensive position with little room to maneuver easily makes them extremely passive, effectively ceding the initiative to the other player as happened in your example. Still it wouldn't hurt to have some deterrents for edge camping as it makes the battles unenjoyable for the other player.

In my experience, the odds of an unit rallying, regrouping and still having the numbers to do anything is very low and hardly offsets the concrete benefit one could gain by anchoring their army to the map corner.

Getting chased of the map edge isn't that bad either. The units return most of the time, and even if they don't, they don't count for loss percentage. Considering it takes couple turns to turn the unit around and move it back, it hardly costs any time either. It also effectively hides the unit in safe place and forces the opponent to consider the possibility that it will return and move their units accordingly or risk getting flanked. Personally I think that units literally chased off the field should not return and they should directly count towards the loss percentage.

The tabletop "solution" of penalizing the units with threatened flanks would't be perfect either as it would be a bit hard to define who is camping and who is pressing an attack. One option could be limiting the penalty to each player's own side of the map. This would give player clear incentive to move away from the map edge. Then again, even that could exploited by racing past the enemy army and camping at their end. That would be much harder cheese maneuver to pull off though.

[melm]

The units return most of the time, and even if they don't, they don't count for loss percentage.

I don't think it is true. From the experience of my current ongoing Slitherine tournament, my light horse was chased off the map, my opponent instantly got 2% in his score counter.

[melm]

you make it nearly impossible for your units to rally if broken.

And your skirmish units, whether cavalry or infantry, can easily be neutralized by chasing them off the board,

+1. So sometimes I am quite happy to see my opponent deployed along the edge of the map, so long as I think I have a plan.

[Geffalrus]

In my experience, the odds of an unit rallying, regrouping and still having the numbers to do anything is very low and hardly offsets the concrete benefit one could gain by anchoring their army to the map corner.

Getting chased of the map edge isn't that bad either. The units return most of the time, and even if they don't, they don't count for loss percentage. Considering it takes couple turns to turn the unit around and move it back, it hardly costs any time either. It also effectively hides the unit in safe place and forces the opponent to consider the possibility that it will return and move their units accordingly or risk getting flanked. Personally I think that units literally chased off the field should not return and they should directly count towards the loss percentage.

Depends on how the unit routed. If they got autodropped, failed a fallback cohesion test, etc etc......they could have routed without taking many casualties, in which case, throw a general on them, rally them back to full and they can be plenty useful. Just ask Dzonvejn about our match last season where 3 elephants, 4 massed archers, and a fricking partridge in a pear tree all rallied from routing and then chased my pursuers back the way they came.

But more importantly, while a routed unit is on the field, it can potentially rally. A routed unit that goes off the edge of the map, however, is NEVER coming back. So. Fighting in the middle, taking your lumps and getting some units routed........you still have a chance for those units to rally and bring your percentage back, potentially giving you the win. Happened at least twice for me last season in Classical. But again, if you're up against the map edge........that won't happen, and those points are lost for good.

Oh, and yes, non routed units that go off the edge of the map do count for lost percentage if they're chased off. Sometimes they come back quick, sometimes they don't. But if you get a bunch off the map at the same time, then you can win the game before they come back. And that's easier the closer your enemy is to the map edge.

[MVP7]

Hadn't realized that chased-off non-routed units can be counted for the percentage. Units that pursue their way off the map aren't I'm pretty sure. How does it work for the chased-off units exactly, do they counts towards the percentage until they return or do they only count if they are not returning?

In either case, I think it's an odd rule that units that are chased off get away from the pursuer for free and have a high chance of returning. In my opinion chased-off units should almost never return. Getting chased off is how cavalry forces were often defeated, not by decisively defeating them in shooting or melee but by denying them chance for easy win and driving them away.

[MikeC_81]

Hadn't realized that chased-off non-routed units can be counted for the percentage. Units that pursue their way off the map aren't I'm pretty sure. How does it work for the chased-off units exactly, do they counts towards the percentage until they return or do they only count if they are not returning?

In either case, I think it's an odd rule that units that are chased off get away from the pursuer for free and have a high chance of returning. In my opinion chased-off units should almost never return. Getting chased off is how cavalry forces were often defeated, not by decisively defeating them in shooting or melee but by denying them chance for easy win and driving them away.

Pretty sure they count for half of their total score or something. Its pretty rare though. The only units that do this are skirmishers and cavalry if they are likely to lose. The timing is also kind of random on if and when they ever come back.

[SnuggleBunnies]

Chased off units do indeed count as half of the usual % value. They have a 5% chance to return each turn. If they return, that % is returned.

[rbodleyscott]

The tabletop "solution" of penalizing the units with threatened flanks would't be perfect either as it would be a bit hard to define who is camping and who is pressing an attack. One option could be limiting the penalty to each player's own side of the map.

Not very logical however. Obviously the enemy board edge would be even more likely to "conceal" hidden enemy troops than the other edges.

Despite it affecting both sides, it worked pretty well in tabletop.

[rbodleyscott]

Hadn't realized that chased-off non-routed units can be counted for the percentage. Units that pursue their way off the map aren't I'm pretty sure. How does it work for the chased-off units exactly, do they counts towards the percentage until they return or do they only count if they are not returning?

In either case, I think it's an odd rule that units that are chased off get away from the pursuer for free and have a high chance of returning. In my opinion chased-off units should almost never return. Getting chased off is how cavalry forces were often defeated, not by decisively defeating them in shooting or melee but by denying them chance for easy win and driving them away.

Pretty sure they count for half of their total score or something.

They do.

The timing is also kind of random on if and when they ever come back.

Completely random.