Britcon 2010 - FoG competitions

A forum to post news about tournaments around the world. Please post any such messages here!

Moderators: hammy, philqw78, terrys, Ghaznavid, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design, Field of Glory Moderators

spike
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 554
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 4:12 pm
Location: Category 2

Thank you

Post by spike »

I'd like to thank my opponents (dave, andy, hugh, robbo and paul f and paul j) for their kind consideration, and the organizers for their assistance. The w/e was what i needed.

spike
azrael86
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 596
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 3:55 pm

Post by azrael86 »

chubooga wrote:heh... yeah.... though the later period does have some armies that can provide LH.... Im not that familar with the players or the lists in those periods to pass comment....
will have the take a look

being cynical for a while.... LH win early period... so swarm or drilled MF win later.......


jon
No shortage of armies with LH in later, Lithuanian, Hungarian, Polish (featuring Lithuanians), Fatimid and of course Ottoman. I'd guess they struggled against Swiss/Fr Ord/HYW/C Nubians with SMG...

Though mostly a combo of LH/Cv/Kn in varying proportions rather than full-on LH.

Drilled MF - depends if you count LB!
chubooga
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 240
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:00 am

Post by chubooga »

yep I would count longbow..... in fact any drilled MF in Bgs with 6 or less elements......

do the top three armies meet that criteria?

apprecite the insight gents, as a non tourney goer (for now), its the only way I get a feel for whats going on with the big cheeses....

jon
madaxeman
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3002
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 5:15 am
Location: London, UK
Contact:

Post by madaxeman »

dave_r wrote:
1 x 6 LF, Poor, Bow
1 x 6 LF, Poor, Sling
6 x 4 LH, Average, Bow, Swordsmen
2 x 4 LH, Average, Bow, Sworsmen (Skythian)
1 x 4 Cv, Undrilled, Armoured, Superior, Lancer, Swordsmen (Skythian)
4 x 4 Cv, Undrilled, Armoured, Superior, Lancer, Swordsmen
3 x TC
1 x Allied TC
That's a departure from the norm fr you Dave. Whatever came over you to pick that sort of army ?

Also very different to the Hungarians too by the looks of it

:twisted:
http://www.madaxeman.com
Holiday in Devon? Try https://www.thecaptainscottagebrixham.com
petedalby
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Lieutenant-General - Do 217E
Posts: 3116
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 5:23 pm
Location: Fareham, UK

Post by petedalby »

Nik

Don't disagree with 'Or vice versa as Pete had lost 2 of his 3 generals by about half way into the game ...' but Pete explained it to me differently on Sunday evening... something about 'winning 10-10'...
Quite so - a 10-10 at that stage against Olivier felt like a victory!

He'd lost 10 APs and 1 General - I'd lost 9 APs and 2 Generals. It was a thoroughly enjoyable game - as indeed all 6 were. Britcon is definitely my favourite competiton and it was great to see so many overseas players there this year.
Pete
batesmotel
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 3616
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 8:52 pm

Post by batesmotel »

madaxeman wrote:
dave_r wrote:
1 x 6 LF, Poor, Bow
1 x 6 LF, Poor, Sling
6 x 4 LH, Average, Bow, Swordsmen
2 x 4 LH, Average, Bow, Sworsmen (Skythian)
1 x 4 Cv, Undrilled, Armoured, Superior, Lancer, Swordsmen (Skythian)
4 x 4 Cv, Undrilled, Armoured, Superior, Lancer, Swordsmen
3 x TC
1 x Allied TC
That's a departure from the norm fr you Dave. Whatever came over you to pick that sort of army ?

Also very different to the Hungarians too by the looks of it

:twisted:
Hey, after you kill the 5 BGs of lancers you only need another 2 1/2 BGs of skirmishers to beat this list. Sounds like it should be much more of a pushover than the Skythians were where you needed 5 1/2 more BGs after you kill the 3 lancers :shock:

Chris
....where life is beautiful all the time
dave_r
General - King Tiger
General - King Tiger
Posts: 3862
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:58 pm

Post by dave_r »

madaxeman wrote:
dave_r wrote:
1 x 6 LF, Poor, Bow
1 x 6 LF, Poor, Sling
6 x 4 LH, Average, Bow, Swordsmen
2 x 4 LH, Average, Bow, Sworsmen (Skythian)
1 x 4 Cv, Undrilled, Armoured, Superior, Lancer, Swordsmen (Skythian)
4 x 4 Cv, Undrilled, Armoured, Superior, Lancer, Swordsmen
3 x TC
1 x Allied TC
That's a departure from the norm fr you Dave. Whatever came over you to pick that sort of army ?

Also very different to the Hungarians too by the looks of it

:twisted:
The jealous comments of the Ne'er do well's are music to my ears 8)
Evaluator of Supremacy
timmy1
Lieutenant-General - Nashorn
Lieutenant-General - Nashorn
Posts: 3436
Joined: Fri Feb 29, 2008 8:39 pm
Location: Chelmsford, Essex, England

Post by timmy1 »

"Ne'er do well's" or "Ne'er do turn up's"? :)
azrael86
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 596
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 3:55 pm

Post by azrael86 »

chubooga wrote:yep I would count longbow..... in fact any drilled MF in Bgs with 6 or less elements......

do the top three armies meet that criteria?

apprecite the insight gents, as a non tourney goer (for now), its the only way I get a feel for whats going on with the big cheeses....

jon
Nearest to a swarm I saw was the nubians, though mostly quite big units 6-8 except for mounted.. 16 and 17 bg's respectively. Nice to hear that my 8 base drilled MF are not deemed morally bankrupt.
dave_r
General - King Tiger
General - King Tiger
Posts: 3862
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:58 pm

Post by dave_r »

azrael86 wrote:
chubooga wrote:yep I would count longbow..... in fact any drilled MF in Bgs with 6 or less elements......

do the top three armies meet that criteria?

apprecite the insight gents, as a non tourney goer (for now), its the only way I get a feel for whats going on with the big cheeses....

jon
Nearest to a swarm I saw was the nubians, though mostly quite big units 6-8 except for mounted.. 16 and 17 bg's respectively. Nice to hear that my 8 base drilled MF are not deemed morally bankrupt.
Battlegroups of 8 Undrilled Medium Foot are not usually referred to as swamrs ;)
Evaluator of Supremacy
azrael86
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 596
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 3:55 pm

Post by azrael86 »

dave_r wrote:

Battlegroups of 8 Undrilled Medium Foot are not usually referred to as swamrs ;)
Not as in 'there's fahsands of them!'? "Dropped by, swarmed by more like"
chubooga
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 240
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 10:00 am

Post by chubooga »

Im really interested in the armies winning tourneys, not that bothered who the player is, Im sure theyre all better than me.......

Hope its ok for a ne'er turn up to ask about the armies wining though, Im hoping the victors dont mind talking about there success with some pride?

But hey, np if its a sore subject and beyond a bystanders interest.......

hey ho....
hammy
Field of Glory Team
Field of Glory Team
Posts: 5440
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 2:11 pm
Location: Stockport
Contact:

Post by hammy »

chubooga wrote:Im really interested in the armies winning tourneys, not that bothered who the player is, Im sure theyre all better than me.......

Hope its ok for a ne'er turn up to ask about the armies wining though, Im hoping the victors dont mind talking about there success with some pride?

But hey, np if its a sore subject and beyond a bystanders interest.......

hey ho....
No problem with asking about the armies. I am sure that several of the winners will post their lists. What does seem to wind people up is being told that only army type X or Y works in FoG and that the game is in some way biased towards troop type A or B

One of the key things though that I have found with FoG is that lists really need to suit the player, far more so than with DBM. I used to be able to write a DBM list and play well from the get go with almost army I chose to go for. With FoG I can write what I think is a perfectly good army list but then it simply just doesn't suit me and ends up performing really badly.
paulcummins
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Posts: 394
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 10:01 am
Location: just slightly behind your flank

Post by paulcummins »

I soooo know what you mean

I really cant find an army that works for me at the moment.
kevinj
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2379
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 11:21 am
Location: Derbyshire, UK

Post by kevinj »

I'm happy to share my Aztec army list. It was:

6 LF Ave Dr U/P Sling
6 LF Ave Dr U/P Sling
6 LF Ave Dr U/P Sling

8 MF Ave Dr Prot I/F Sw Jav
8 MF Ave Dr Prot I/F Sw Jav
6 MF Sup Dr Prot I/F Sw Jav

6 MF Sup Dr Prot I/F Sw Jav
6 MF Sup Dr Prot I/F Sw Jav
6 MF Sup Dr Prot I/F Sw Jav


6 LF Ave Dr U/P Bow
6 MF Elite Dr Prot I/F Sw Jav
6 MF Elite Dr Prot I/F Sw Jav

IC
3xTC

Kevin
peterrjohnston
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 1506
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 11:51 am

Post by peterrjohnston »

hammy wrote: One of the key things though that I have found with FoG is that lists really need to suit the player, far more so than with DBM. I used to be able to write a DBM list and play well from the get go with almost army I chose to go for. With FoG I can write what I think is a perfectly good army list but then it simply just doesn't suit me and ends up performing really badly.
There's a technical term for that. Practice. :)
dave_r
General - King Tiger
General - King Tiger
Posts: 3862
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 3:58 pm

Post by dave_r »

hammy wrote: No problem with asking about the armies. I am sure that several of the winners will post their lists. What does seem to wind people up is being told that only army type X or Y works in FoG and that the game is in some way biased towards troop type A or B
I have already donated my list.

Don't know exactly what was in Paul Brandon's list, but it was something like

1 x IC, 3 x TC
2 x 4 Cv, Armoured, Superior, Undrilled, Lt Spr, Swd
2 x 4 LH, JLS
184 x 8 MF, Superior, Unprotected, Bow
Evaluator of Supremacy
azrael86
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Sergeant Major - Armoured Train
Posts: 596
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2008 3:55 pm

Post by azrael86 »

dave_r wrote:
I have already donated my list.

Don't know exactly what was in Paul Brandon's list, but it was something like

1 x IC, 3 x TC
2 x 4 Cv, Armoured, Superior, Undrilled, Lt Spr, Swd
2 x 4 LH, JLS
184 x 8 MF, Superior, Unprotected, Bow
Not so much a swarm as an infestation. Presumably you meant 14?
waldo
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 95
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 2:30 am

Post by waldo »

hammy wrote:
chubooga wrote:Im really interested in the armies winning tourneys, not that bothered who the player is, Im sure theyre all better than me.......

Hope its ok for a ne'er turn up to ask about the armies wining though, Im hoping the victors dont mind talking about there success with some pride?

But hey, np if its a sore subject and beyond a bystanders interest.......

hey ho....
No problem with asking about the armies. I am sure that several of the winners will post their lists. What does seem to wind people up is being told that only army type X or Y works in FoG and that the game is in some way biased towards troop type A or B

One of the key things though that I have found with FoG is that lists really need to suit the player, far more so than with DBM. I used to be able to write a DBM list and play well from the get go with almost army I chose to go for. With FoG I can write what I think is a perfectly good army list but then it simply just doesn't suit me and ends up performing really badly.
Perhaps FoG should be subtitled “Wargaming rules in the world of Animal Farm”. You could use some of the lines:

“All armies are equal but some are more equal than others.”

Or the short, yet accurate:

“Four legs good, two legs bad.”

I'm not sure who Napoleon is but we certainly have the odd Squealer. Don't we, Dave and Phil?

Walter
philqw78
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Posts: 8836
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Manchester

Post by philqw78 »

waldo wrote: I'm not sure who Napoleon is but we certainly have the odd Squealer. Don't we, Dave and Phil?

Walter
Obviously Dave is Napoleon, as Napoleon is always right. I'll just be one of the dogs. What was the sixth again???? I can't quite remember. I don't know if either of us have the decency or honesty to be Sqealer.
phil
putting the arg into argumentative, except for the lists I check where there is no argument!
Post Reply

Return to “Tournaments”