The Rally Point (discussion and questions)

[stockwellpete]

Complete army ratings (Seasons 1-11 combined)

Key to table
This is very straightforward. The numbers after the army name represent wins - draws (or ties) - losses. The table takes no account of the skill levels of the players using the army, it just gives the playing record of each of the armies that have been used in the competition. Any allies used (from Season 5 onwards) are disregarded - this table just uses the main component of the army. Obviously the higher the numbers involved with a particular army then the more meaningful the figures become as the disparity in skill levels between the various users is evened out.

Achaemenid Persian (553-546BC) 54-3-43
Achaemenid Persian (547BC Thymbra) 5-0-3
Achaemenid Persian (545-481BC) 85-4-57
Achaemenid Persian (480-461BC) 67-11-81
Achaemenid Persian (460-420BC) 5-2-2
Achaemenid Persian (419-329BC) 23-7-21
Aetolian (550-461BC) 5-0-4 (TT)
Alan (25BC-650AD) 7-5-15
Alan (651-1049AD) 4-0-5
Ancient British (60BC-80AD) 76-14-69
Andalusian (756-1049AD) 130-11-66
Andalusian 1050-1154 AD 0-0-0
Andalusian (Murcia) 1155-1172 AD
Andalusian 1228-1248 AD 8-0-1
Anglo-Danish (1017-1041AD) 31-4-28
Anglo-Irish (1167-1274AD) 1-1-7
Anglo-Norman (1072-1154AD) 8-4-33
Anglo-Saxon (449-599AD) 1-1-7
Anglo-Saxon (600-870AD) 25-3-8
Anglo-Saxon (871-949AD) 4-0-4
Anglo-Saxon (950-1016) 4-1-4
Antigonid (320-301BC) 75-15-64
Apulian (420-203BC) 0-0-0
Arab (1000-313BC) 26-5-14
Arab (312BC-299AD) 4-0-5
Arab, Bedouin (300-636AD) 33-6-25
Arab, City (300-633AD) 142-9-93
Arab Conquest (629-637AD) 24-5-16
Arab Conquest (638-684AD) 115-15-59
Arab, Umayyad (685-750AD) 33-6-33
Arab, Abbasid (747-793AD) 0-0-0
Arab, Abbasid (794-814AD) 4-1-13
Arab, Abbasid (815-835AD) 15-3-9
Arab, Abbasid (836-873AD) 4-0-5
Arab, Abbasid (874-946AD) 12-1-5
Arab, North Africa (789-999AD) 10-3-14
Arab, North Africa (1000-1160AD) 6-0-12
Arab (North Africa/Sicily) 1038-1160 AD 0-0-0
Arab, Syria/Iraq (890-1008AD) 0-0-0
Arab, Syria/Iraq (1009-1150) 0-0-0
Aragonese 1050-1136 AD 0-0-0
Aragonese 1137-1154 AD 0-0-0
Aragonese 1155-1199 AD 0-0-0
Aragonese 1200-1274 AD 17-1-18
Arkanian (550-461BC) 6-0-3 (TT)
Armenian (331BC-252AD) 0-0-0
Armenian, Tigranes (83-69BC) 31-3-44
Armenian (253-476AD) 8-5-23
Armenian (477-627AD) 3-1-8
Armenian (639-717AD) 0-0-0
Armenian (885-1045AD) 5-1-3
Assyrian (681-609 BC) 92-13-109
Athenian (550-461BC) 9-0-0 (TT)
Atropatene (320-145BC) 0-0-0
Atropatene (144BC-226AD) 3-1-11
Avar (553-557AD) 5-0-3
Avar (558-631AD) 6-0-21
Avar (632-826AD) 0-0-0
Babylonian (626 -539BC) 42-2-66
Babylonian Revolts (522-482BC) 0-0-0
Baltic Tribes (1050-1283AD) 2-1-6
Berber (Murabit) 1039-1086 AD 0-0-0
Berber (Murabit) 1087-1147 AD 16-0-2
Berber (Almohad) 1121-1269 AD 5-2-2
Berber (Hafsid) 1229-1268 AD 0-0-0
Berber (Hafsid) 1269-1319 AD 0-0-0
Berber (Marinid) 1244-1319 AD 0-0-0
Bithynian (297-74BC) 3-0-6
Bohemian (1050-1154AD) 0-0-9
Bohemian (1155-1199AD) 7-0-2
Bohemian (1200-1319AD) 17-7-12
Boiotian League (550-461BC) 3-1-5 (TT)
Bosporan (348-85BC) 4-2-27
Bosporan (84-11BC) 34-3-34
Bosporan (11BC-375AD) 75-8-52
Breton (411-579AD) 63-4-41
Breton (580-931AD) 2-1-6
Breton (936-1049AD) 0-0-0
Breton (1050-1154AD) 0-0-0
Breton (1155-1319AD) 0-0-0
British (600-1030AD) 22-0-14
Bruttian or Lucanian (420-203BC) 0-0-0
Bulgar (631-679AD) 0-0-9
Bulgar, Danube (680-851AD) 0-0-0
Bulgar, Danube (852-1018AD) 3-0-6
Bulgar, Volga (675-1237AD) 0-0-0
Bulgar (Volga) (1040-1241AD) 3-2-4
Byzantine (493-550AD) 39-8-50
Byzantine (551-578AD) 100-12-114
Byzantine (579-599AD) 5-5-17
Byzantine (600-649AD) 3-0-1
Byzantine (650-739AD) 0-0-0
Byzantine (740-903AD) 1-2-6
Byzantine (904-962AD) 0-0-0
Byzantine (963-987AD) 52-7-58
Byzantine (988-1041AD) 63-8-91
Byzantine (Italy) 1038-1039 AD 3-0-6
Byzantine (Italy) 1040-1049 AD 1-0-8
Byzantine (Italy) 1050-1071 AD 0-0-0
Caledonian (50-225AD) 6-0-3
Campanian (420-281BC) 0-0-0
Campanian (280-203BC) 0-0-0
Carthaginian (550-411BC) 32-6-34
Carthaginian (410-341BC) 13-0-5
Carthaginian (340-281BC) 0-0-9
Carthaginian (280-263BC) 3-0-0
Carthaginian (262-236BC) 10-2-12
Carthaginian (235-146BC) 40-5-18
Carthaginian, Hannibal in Italy (218-217BC) 33-2-40
Carthaginian, Hannibal in Italy (216-203BC) 124-7-94
Carthaginian, Hannibal in Africa (202BC) 133-12-107
Castilian/Leónese 1050-1154 AD 0-0-0
Castilian/Leónese 1155-1199 AD 0-0-0
Castilian/Leónese 1200-1319 AD 14-0-4
Catalan 1050-1136 AD 0-0-0
Caucasian (320BC-476AD) 0-0-0
Chinese, Di (1046-701BC) 0-0-2 (SR)
Chinese, Donghu (1046-209BC) 1-0-1 (SR)
Chinese, Qiang (1046-701BC) 1-0-1 (SR)
Chinese, Zhou (1046-701BC) 2-1-9 (SR)
Chinese, Qiang (700-201BC) 0-0-2 (SR)
Chinese, Zhou and Warring States (700-351BC) 2-0-2 (SR)
Chinese, Zhou and Warring States (350-222BC) 7-0-3 (SR)
Chinese, Qin (221-207BC) 4-0-2 (SR)
Chinese, Wuhuan (208-201BC) 1-0-1 (SR)
Chinese, Han (206-100BC) 15-1-18 (SR)
Chinese, Xianbei (200BC-303AD) 0-0-2 (SR)
Chinese, Han (99BC-23AD) 5-0-3 (SR)
Chinese, Han (24-219AD) 2-0-0 (SR)
Chinese, 3 Kingdoms, Wei (220-265 AD) 4-0-6 (SR)
Chinese, 3 Kingdoms Shu (221-263 AD) 6-0-4 (SR)
Chinese, Sixteen Kingdoms (304-439 AD) 3-0-7 (SR)
Chinese, Jin (317-420 AD) 8-0-4 (SR)
Chinese, Southern Qi (480-502AD) 1-0-1 (SR)
Chinese, Chen (557-589AD) 3-1-6 (SR)
Chinese, Sui (582-617AD) 2-0-2 (SR)
Cimmerian (750-600BC) 11-1-6
Corinthian (550-461BC) 8-1-9 (TT)
Croatian (625-849AD) 0-0-0
Croatian (850-1102AD) 0-0-0
Cuman (1054-1179AD) 0-0-0
Cuman (1180-1394AD) 0-0-0
Cypriot (680-550BC) 47-6-39
Cypriot (549-490BC) 13-2-12
Dabuyid (642-760AD) 7-2-9
Dacian (50BC-88AD) 22-3-38
Dacian (89-106AD) 25-5-42
Dacian, Carpi (107-380AD) 5-2-11
Dailami (928-1055 AD) 88-12-90
Danish (1050-1154AD) 0-0-0
Danish (1155-1199AD) 0-0-0
Danish (1200-1319AD) 26-4-22
Di (200BC-300AD) 17-1-15 (SR)
Egyptian (664-571 BC) 68-6-45
Egyptian (570-525BC) 57-4-51
Egyptian (405-343BC) 14-0-13
Elamite (815-539BC) 5-0-4
English (1042-1065AD) 0-0-0
English (1066 AD) 5-1-3
English (1155-1271AD) 30-5-44
Etruscan (490-331BC) 6-1-8
Etruscan (330-280BC) 27-4-23
Fatimid Egyptian (978-1073AD) 11-2-5
Frankish (260-495AD) 6-4-8
Frankish (496-599AD) 25-6-51
Frankish (600-750AD) 7-1-1
Frankish (751-887AD) 80-7-58
Free Canton (1106-1199AD) 0-0-0
Free Canton (1200-1319AD) 7-1-17
French (888-1049AD) 30-3-48
French (1050-1154AD) 0-0-0
French (1155-1319AD) 0-0-0
Galatian (280-63BC) 52-8-43
Galatian (62-25BC) 31-2-49
Gallic (390-301BC) 13-5-12
Gallic (300-101BC) 69-7-77
Gallic (100-50BC) 12-0-15
Georgian (331BC-252AD) 0-0-0
Georgian (1008-1049AD) 5-0-4
Gepid (493-567AD) 37-7-25
Germanic Foot Tribes (105BC-259AD) 9-4-14
Germanic Foot Tribes (260-599AD) 13-3-21
Germanic Horse Tribes (260-492AD) 95-19-88
German (888-932AD) 12-2-22
German (933-1049AD) 30-5-19
German (Imperial) (1050-1154AD) 0-0-0
German (Imperial) (1155-1199AD) 9-2-7
German (Imperial) (1200-1319AD) 49-4-37
German (North/West) (1050-1154AD) 0-0-0
German (North/West) (1155-1199AD) 0-0-0
German (North/West) (1200-1319AD) 7-1-1
German (South/East) (1050-1154AD) 0-0-0
German (South/East) (1155-1199AD) 7-1-1
German (South/East) (1200-1319AD) 10-0-8
Ghaznavid (962-1187 AD) 32-4-54
Graeco-Bactrian (250-130BC) 29-2-56
Granadine 1232-1319 AD 3-0-6
Greek (680-461BC) 32-1-21
Greek (550-461BC) 11-0-5
Greek Asiatic (550-461BC) 4-0-5
Greek (460-281BC) 27-2-37
Greek, Mercenary (460-281 BC) 3-0-6
Greek (280-228BC) 2-0-1
Greek, Western (280-49BC) 0-0-0
Greek (227-146BC) 15-0-30
Hebrew (681-586BC) 34-3-38
Hepthalite (350-570AD) 29-14-34
Hungarian (1050-1154AD) 0-0-0
Hungarian (1155-1199AD) 0-0-0
Hungarian (1200-1319AD) 11-3-13
Hunnic (376-476AD) 6-5-7
Hunnic, Western (250-375AD) 0-0-0
Hunnic, Western (376-454AD) 56-16-57
Hunnic, Western (455-559AD) 5-1-3
Hunnic, Sabir (463-558AD) 11-2-17
Illyrian (680BC-25AD) 0-0-0
Indian (500BC-319AD, pre-nerf, Season 1) 71-1-22
Indian (500BC-319AD, post-nerf, Seasons 2 onwards) 53-5-61
Indian (320-545AD) 23-1-21
Indian (546-599AD) 49-2-57
Indian, Hindu North (600-1049AD) 19-4-31
Indian, Hindu South (600-1049AD) 0-0-0
Indian, Rajput 650-1049AD 15-2-28
Indo-Greek (175BC-10AD, pre-nerf, Season 1) 44-0-16
Indo-Greek (175BC-10AD, post-nerf, Seasons 2 onwards) 39-0-42
Indo-Parthian (60BC-130AD) 30-3-31
Indo-Skythian (95BC-50AD) 38-4-29
Irish (900-1049AD) 21-2-12
Irish (1050-1130AD) 8-0-1
Irish (1131-1259AD) 19-3-12
Italian (Guelf) 1050-1154 AD 0-0-0
Italian (Guelf) 1155-1199 AD 0-0-0
Italian (Guelf) 1200-1319 AD 0-0-0
Italian (Ghibelline) 1050-1154 AD 0-0-0
Italian (Ghibelline) 1155-1199 AD 0-0-0
Italian (Ghibelline) 1200-1319 AD 7-1-10
Italian Hill Tribes (490-275BC) 6-0-12
Italo-Norman 1041-1049 AD 0-0-0
Italo-Norman 1050-1060 AD 0-0-0
Italo-Norman 1061-1071 AD 0-0-0
Italo-Norman 1072-1154 AD 1-1-7
Jewish (167-164BC) 6-1-11
Jewish (163-111BC) 35-2-35
Jewish (110-64BC) 4-1-4
Jewish (64BC-6AD) 35-4-33
Jewish Revolt (66-135AD) 99-10-43
Kappadokian (260BC-17AD) 11-0-16
Khazar (568-737AD) 0-0-0
Khazar (738-969AD) 3-0-6
Khorasanian (821-1003 AD) 44-7-29
Kingdom of Sicily 1155-1199 AD 6-0-3
Kingdom of Sicily 1200-1266 AD 5-0-22
Kingdom of Soissons (461-486AD, pre-nerf, Seasons 1-7) 84-10-42
Kingdom of Soissons (461-486AD, post-nerf, Season 9 onwards) 22-5-36
Kushan (130BC-476AD) 36-6-62
Kushite Egyptian (727-656BC) 26-1-38
Kyrenean Greek (630-461BC) 38-7-18
Kyrenean Greek (460-322BC) 7-0-2
Kyrenean Greek (321-276BC) 0-0-0
Latin (490-338BC) 0-0-9
Libyan (549-301BC) 0-0-0
Libyan (300-70BC) 0-0-0
Ligurian (480-145BC) 0-0-0
Lithuanian (1100-1299AD) 9-2-7
Lombard (493-567AD) 26-4-21
Lombard (568-569AD) 26-0-30
Lombard (570-649AD) 0-0-0
Lombard (650-775AD) 0-0-0
Lombard (776-1037AD) 3-0-15
Lombard 1038-1049 AD 0-0-0
Lombard 1050-1057 AD 0-0-0
Low Countries (1200-1274AD) 0-0-0
Lydian (687-551BC) 42-2-49
Lydian (550-546BC) 73-8-86
Lysimachid (320-281BC) 82-19-93
Macedonian (355-329BC) 7-1-13
Macedonian (328-321BC) 33-4-44
Macedonian (320-261BC) 69-11-89
Macedonian (260-148BC) 11-1-6
Magyar (930-1049AD) 0-0-0
Mannaean (750-610BC) 0-0-0
Median (836-627BC) 24-1-11
Median (626-550BC) 59-7-67
Mongol (Europe) (1223-1241AD) 30-5-35
Moorish (220-56BC) 12-1-5
Moorish (350-698AD) 21-10-23
Moravian (833-907AD) 0-1-8
Mountain Indian (492-170BC) 10-0-2
Nabataean (260-106AD) 3-2-14
Navarrese (779-899AD) 0-0-0
Navarrese (900-1049AD) 0-0-0
Norman (923-1040AD) 35-2-62
Norman (1041-1071AD) 0-0-0
Norwegian (1050-1154AD) 0-0-0
Norwegian (1155-1319AD) 1-0-8
Numidian or Moorish (341-56BC) 0-0-0
Numidian or Moorish (55 BC-6AD) 20-2-14
Northern Dynasties, Northern Zhu (557-581AD) 6-1-3 (SR)
Ostrogoth (493-561AD) 40-8-50
Palmyran (258-271AD) 104-20-141
Palmyran (272-273AD) 0-0-0
Papal 1050-1154 AD 12-2-4
Papal 1155-1199 AD 0-0-0
Papal 1200-1319 AD 11-1-6
Parthian (250BC-225AD) 34-15-31
Pecheneg (850-1122AD) 0-0-0
Pergamene (262-191BC) 6-0-10
Pergamene (190-129BC) 32-3-37
Phoenician (681-539BC) 41-2-15
Phokian (550-461 BC) 8-2-8 (TT)
Pictish (210-476AD) 38-13-48
Pictish (477-850AD) 25-4-16
Polish (966-1057AD) 68-12-73
Polish (1058-1154AD) 0-0-0
Polish (1155-1199AD) 8-0-1
Polish (1200-1319AD) 29-1-13
Pontic (281-111BC) 13-1-22
Pontic (110-85BC) 45-6-63
Pontic (84-47BC) 25-3-27
Portuguese 1050-1154 AD 0-0-0
Portuguese 1155-1199 AD 0-0-0
Portuguese 1200-1319 AD 6-1-2
Ptolemaic (320-218BC) 35-6-23
Ptolemaic (217-167BC) 9-0-8
Ptolemaic (166-56BC) 56-2-41
Ptolemaic (55-30BC) 77-11-65
Pyrrhic (280-275BC) 73-10-56
Pyrrhic (274-272BC) 21-2-22
Qiang (1046-701BC) 7-1-2 (SR)
Qiang (200BC-300AD) 7-0-8 (SR)
Rhoxolani (350BC-24AD) 31-20-30
Roman (490-341BC) 25-7-22
Roman (340-281BC) 13-0-11
Roman (280-220BC) 2-0-1
Roman (219-200BC) 45-5-52
Roman (199-106BC) 136-24-114
Roman (105-25BC) 153-16-137
Roman (24 BC-196 AD) 59-9-67
Roman (197-284AD) 63-10-93
Roman (285-312AD) 26-4-42
Roman (313-378AD) 45-11-45
Roman (379-424AD) 36-6-48
Roman (425-492AD) 40-2-42
Romano-British (407-599AD, pre-nerf, Seasons 1-7) 103-12-40
Romano-British (407-599AD, post-nerf, Season 9 onwards) 18-1-17
Rus (860-959AD) 0-0-0
Rus (960-1053AD) 48-10-59
Russian (1054-1154AD) 0-0-0
Russian (1155-1264AD) 8-3-7
Saka (300BC-50AD) 18-7-44
Samnite (355-272BC) 115-5-93
Sarmatian (350BC-24AD) 10-4-4
Sarmatian (25-375AD) 3-0-6
Sassanid (224-349AD) 29-4-14
Sassanid (350-476AD) 68-14-37
Sassanid (477-590AD) 37-9-53
Sassanid (591-628AD) 53-5-41
Sassanid (629-651AD) 0-0-0
Saxon, Continental (600-804AD) 0-0-0
Scots (851-1051AD) 23-4-18
Scots (1040-1051AD) 0-0-0
Scots (Isles and Highlands) (1050-1319AD) 12-0-6
Scots (1052-1154AD) 0-0-0
Scots (1155-1161AD) 11-3-4
Scots (1162-1319AD) 7-1-19
Scots-Irish (50BC-476AD) 88-13-59
Scots-Irish (477-846AD) 23-4-18
Seleucid (320-303BC) 8-0-17
Seleucid (302-301BC) 30-1-49
Seleucid (300-206BC) 63-7-57
Seleucid (205-167BC) 23-1-24
Seleucid (166-125BC) 66-13-82
Seleucid (124-63BC) 39-6-43
Serbian (625-849AD) 0-0-0
Serbian (850-1039AD) 12-0-6
Skythian (750-551BC) 13-2-31
Skythian or Saka (550-301BC) 10-1-8
Skythian (300BC-50AD) 9-4-14
Slave Revolt (73-71BC) 7-1-46
Slav (500-832AD) 18-0-16
Spanish, Celtiberian (300-10BC) 24-4-24
Spanish, Iberian (300-10BC) 0-0-0
Spanish, Lusitanian (300-100BC) 0-0-0
Spanish, Sertorius (80-70BC) 77-4-46
Spanish (718-899AD) 0-0-0
Spanish (900-1049AD) 35-5-32
Spartan (680-551BC) 11-2-14 (TT)
Spartan (550-461BC) 29-6-37 (TT)
Spartan (460-281BC) 9-2-12
Spartan (280-228BC) 0-0-0
Spartan (227-222BC) 0-0-0
Spartan (221-146BC) 35-5-14
Swedish (1050-1154AD) 0-0-0
Swedish (1155-1319AD) 2-2-5
Sword Brethren 1204-1237 AD 11-1-6
Syracusan (550-461BC) 15-5-25 (TT)
Syracusan (412-281BC) 23-3-31
Syracusan (280-211 BC) 34-2-36
Tatar (1242-1339AD) 0-0-0
Teutonic Order (1226-1319AD) 20-2-32
Thessalian (404-352BC) 12-6-17
Thracian, Triballi (700-351BC) 0-0-0
Thracian, Getae (680-330BC) 10-1-16
Thracian (680-461BC) 40-2-42
Thracian (460-351BC) 0-0-0
Thracian, Triballi (350-46BC) 22-9-26
Thracian, Hellenistic (350-281BC) 27-5-24
Thracian, Hellenistic Getae (329-281BC) 0-0-0
Thracian, Gallic (280-212BC) 4-2-3
Thracian, Getae (279BC-46AD) 7-2-9
Thracian (211-51BC) 0-0-0
Thracian, Roman Client (50BC-46AD) 5-0-13
Tuareg 950-1500 AD 15-0-21
Turkish (552-599AD) 0-0-0
Turkish (600-1036AD) 6-0-3
Umbrian (490-260BC) 0-0-0
Urartian (681-585BC) 26-7-62
Vandal (442-499AD) 0-0-0
Vandal (500-534AD) 0-0-0
Viking (780-899AD) 24-3-25
Viking (900-1049AD) 28-4-49
Viking, Ireland (780-899AD) 15-1-20
Viking, Ireland (900-1049AD) 74-16-64
Visigoth (419-621AD) 31-2-40
Visigoth (622-717AD) 0-0-0
Welsh (477-599AD) 7-2-19
Welsh (600-1049AD) 7-2-18
Welsh (1050-1099AD) 0-0-0
Welsh (North) (1100-1295AD) 4-1-4
Welsh (South) (1100-1197AD) 0-0-0

Please note: (SR) at the end of a line means Silk Road mod army, (TT) means Table Top mod army. Armies from these 2 mods that have not been used in the FOG2DL are not included in the list.

[tyronec]

Interesting.
Is Jewish Revolt the only army with over 100 games and better than a 2:1 win/lose ratio ?
Arab conquest and Andalusian look to be the next best contenders.
Perhaps some standard size superior protected foot are too good a buy...

[Giacofa93]

Not sure if theyre plainly too good...OTOH, I think they are easy to use: just throw them against the enemy while avoiding arrows, and they give great return for your bucks...while other units need more careful management to extract all their potential

[Geffalrus]

Zealots are one of the best unit values out there, and the Revolt can bring a lot of them. Their main weakness is ranged…….but they ALSO get a bajillion light foot, so no one easily out shoots them. Cavalry in the open dies under a rain of arrows, heavy infantry are either swarmed to death or avoided by hiding in rough. And there are precious few armies that can contest the rough against superior impact foot. They’re not completely invincible……but they’re extremely easy to dominate with in good hands.

[klayeckles]

There were 4 match-ups involving different armies (as well as an Arab civil war match-up). The results were as follows . . .

Assyrians 18 wins, Urartians 9 wins, with 3 draws
Phoenicians 25 wins, Babylonians 3 wins, with 2 draws
Cypriots 17 wins, Egyptians 12 wins, with 1 draw
Achaemenid Persians 21 wins, Medians 8 wins, with 1 draw

Obviously, the Phoenician v Babylonian match-up was not a good one, but I think the other three were OK. The Medians got 8 wins and a draw, which is just under a third of battles where they avoided defeat. When you have match-ups like this that are a bit unbalanced, but not too much, it does help to make the divisions more competitive. Weaker players can sometimes get a morale-boosting win from them, while a really dominant player will still often manage to win the match-up.

Any comments?

it is fun to fight some of these off-kilter battles, as it makes for more variety. (i've often wondered if there's some other tweaks to an event that might be more than an meeting engagement). Be forewarned though, for players really working to up their player ratings, it probably hurts the top players some and helps those that are new to a higher bracket.

[oscarius]

The idea that zealots could go toe-to-toe with legionaries or a phalanx on open field is a little err out there (in FoG terms they were defending fortifications) but downgrading them to irregular foot would be a unnecessary sacrifice of fun to the altar of realism. Maybe they should be stripped of their protection though.

[SnuggleBunnies]

The idea that zealots could go toe-to-toe with legionaries or a phalanx on open field is a little err out there (in FoG terms they were defending fortifications) but downgrading them to irregular foot would be a unnecessary sacrifice of fun to the altar of realism. Maybe they should be stripped of their protection though.

They are lightly protected, and thus down 38poa vs legionaries, and are down -2 to cohesion checks in the open losing to legions. So Zealots really don't successfully take on good quality hf in the open but they're relatively cheap and supported by a massive swarm of cheap skirmishers.

[carpenkm]

I like the historical match ups and think the odd unbalanced game is ok. I am not really a history buff, so being "forced" to play armies i wouldn't normally choose is interesting and helps in learning a full range of tactics. I really liked the civil war idea too. I wouldnt over think it too much, it's the same for everyone.

[Geffalrus]

They are lightly protected, and thus down 38poa vs legionaries, and are down -2 to cohesion checks in the open losing to legions. So Zealots really don't successfully take on good quality hf in the open but they're relatively cheap and supported by a massive swarm of cheap skirmishers.

The 38 POA is only in melee, and the -2 cohesion is only - if - they lose impact, which is not impossible.......but not super likely. They're also close to 20 points cheaper and I think can be purchased in larger quantities than most 78 point legions. Plus they're immune to legions in rough ground. They won't beat expensive heavy foot in the open, but they can stick an impact pretty easily, opening expensive foot open to flanking. Granted, that's dedicating 87 points (57 plus 30 for cheap irregulars) so not necessarily point efficient. As you say, their real strength is comboing them with one of the best skirmisher swarms in the game. We've discussed this before, and it's the army design as much as the unit design that leads to their strength.

And just to reiterate something else I've said before: medium foot can dance with heavy foot out in the open for at least a shot time, but heavy foot - cannot - dance with medium foot in rough ground for any amount of time.

[Kerait]

What explains the curse on the Anglo-Normans?

[Geffalrus]

What explains the curse on the Anglo-Normans?

Good question. My theories would be:

1) Lack the heavy armor of later lists - and - have extremely few crossbows despite fighting like a typical Western European. One on one, their knights lose to late knights. Sure, they move faster, but they need to get close to do anything, and too many people know how to shoot down knights. Meanwhile, they have no obvious counter to heavy late knights.

2) Their heavy infantry get beaten by late foot knights, veteran muslim spears are more cost effective, and picked Irish foot are equal in melee and impact despite costing a LOT less. Their most common infantry are raw spears, who get instantly obliterated by knights on contact.

3) Lack of rough ground units limits them to fighting in the open where they're not as heavy as late Europeans, nor as mobile as Mongols or Muslims.

4) Haven't been picked by any of the top tier players?

5) Haven't figured out how they fit into the dominant MP meta.

[carpenkm]

What explains the curse on the Anglo-Normans?

Good question. My theories would be:

1) Lack the heavy armor of later lists - and - have extremely few crossbows despite fighting like a typical Western European. One on one, their knights lose to late knights. Sure, they move faster, but they need to get close to do anything, and too many people know how to shoot down knights. Meanwhile, they have no obvious counter to heavy late knights.

2) Their heavy infantry get beaten by late foot knights, veteran muslim spears are more cost effective, and picked Irish foot are equal in melee and impact despite costing a LOT less. Their most common infantry are raw spears, who get instantly obliterated by knights on contact.

3) Lack of rough ground units limits them to fighting in the open where they're not as heavy as late Europeans, nor as mobile as Mongols or Muslims.

4) Haven't been picked by any of the top tier players?

5) Haven't figured out how they fit into the dominant MP meta.

Yes and some of us didn't realise points 1 and 2 until they'd played 7 matches!!! I tried to counter point3 with Welsh Allies, but the Welsh spearmen proved to be very fragile (lots of double drops) - ok to start with, but once disrupted they break in a turn. I will make no comment about point 4 - i assume they research their armies better too. Overall, i think the early knights must be over priced as they are the same cost as later knights and always loose (same as foot knights i think).

[Geffalrus]

Point 4 was a wild guess as I spent my time in HMA goofing around with the Tuareg. Got beat handily by the Anglo Normans actually……..

Early knights definitely over priced. The obvious comparison is armored noble lancers to cataphracts. Cats lose one movement but gain better armor, and are 4 points more expensive. So early knights should probably lose a couple points in cost.

[SimonLancaster]

Zealots don’t do so well against the Romans. Toe to toe they will lose. You really need to get around the flanks and use your extra men. Also, the Jewish armies have little to no cavalry to support their infantry.

I had the Anglo Normans as allies for my Papal list. I had no other cavalry after selecting Early Mounted Knights. No Mounted Crossbowmen, Sergeants or any Light Lancers.

[Holien]

Hi I am hopefully getting involved with the league this autumn and new to FOG2 and the plethora of army lists and periods to choose from.

The themed league seems an easy choice as I guess everyone gets given the forces to play.

But for the others how best to choose a section and armies?

Any advice on how to go about this?

(I think I will restrict myself to one section and the themed if I can.)

[tyronec]

Pick an army that you like to play with, that has to be the prime criteria.
One consideration is that you will likely be opposed by a variety of different armies so pick something that has a chance against different opponents. So for example an army stacked with heavy lancers is not going to do great against defensive spears, if you want an army with a lot of heavy lancers then pick one that can have something else as well that can fight defensive spears.
Sometimes there can be a lot of terrain on the map, I prefer armies that have at least a few units that can operate on rough terrain.
If you are short of ideas you could look back at what armies were used last year.

[Holien]

Pick an army that you like to play with, that has to be the prime criteria.
One consideration is that you will likely be opposed by a variety of different armies so pick something that has a chance against different opponents. So for example an army stacked with heavy lancers is not going to do great against defensive spears, if you want an army with a lot of heavy lancers then pick one that can have something else as well that can fight defensive spears.
Sometimes there can be a lot of terrain on the map, I prefer armies that have at least a few units that can operate on rough terrain.
If you are short of ideas you could look back at what armies were used last year.

Thanks but I have not played enough to have a favourite army and to choose 4 is going to be tough. I guess all i can do is try and imitate others which is a tad lame but I lack the knowledge to know what I like or don't. I watched the Fluffy Rabbit with his simplistic (NOT) approach playing with no Cav, that might be a steep learning curve...

I have enjoyed the Tourneys as I did not have to choose which Army to play as it was hard enough just choosing units in the army...

Anyway good advice and I will look at the lists and try and choose something.

[deeter]

I suggest going for Romans in the Classical period. Just point them at the enemy and their infantry will kill anything it encounters. Worked for Rome despite their mostly inept generals. Be sure to bring some medium infantry though for rough terrain.

Deeter

[SimonLancaster]

Pick an army that you like to play with, that has to be the prime criteria.
One consideration is that you will likely be opposed by a variety of different armies so pick something that has a chance against different opponents. So for example an army stacked with heavy lancers is not going to do great against defensive spears, if you want an army with a lot of heavy lancers then pick one that can have something else as well that can fight defensive spears.
Sometimes there can be a lot of terrain on the map, I prefer armies that have at least a few units that can operate on rough terrain.
If you are short of ideas you could look back at what armies were used last year.

Thanks but I have not played enough to have a favourite army and to choose 4 is going to be tough. I guess all i can do is try and imitate others which is a tad lame but I lack the knowledge to know what I like or don't. I watched the Fluffy Rabbit with his simplistic (NOT) approach playing with no Cav, that might be a steep learning curve...

I have enjoyed the Tourneys as I did not have to choose which Army to play as it was hard enough just choosing units in the army...

Anyway good advice and I will look at the lists and try and choose something.

I would suggest trying out the Classical section. This has a lot of varied and well known armies. It is usually the most popular section in the league and for good reason, I think.

I have started up an army analysis series of videos on YouTube for the Classical period. If you have a look through them you may pick up a few ideas. I have covered the Carthaginian, Roman, Macedonian and Spartan army lists so far. Any of these armies would be a good start in my opinion. I also looked at a Pontic army list but they probably are a little more tricky to play with. I think it is important to have some decent infantry (heavy and medium), a fair amount of skirmishers, and a reasonable amount of cavalry. If you pick the Romans then you get less cavalry but better quality infantry.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-Fgsgz ... 4l0mpgh0kf

[Ray552]

I suggest going for Romans in the Classical period. Just point them at the enemy and their infantry will kill anything it encounters. Worked for Rome despite their mostly inept generals. Be sure to bring some medium infantry though for rough terrain.

Deeter

+1, for Classical, you can definitely do worse than Romans "straight up" (I like the 105-25 BC list) or with an ally that brings more cavalry with them, such as the Numidian/Moorish or Jewish lists.

This assumes you like impact armies; this Roman army is a bit short in archers and slingers.

If you want a full-on YOLO medium foot impact army with a metric buttload of mobile firepower, consider the Jewish 163-11 BC list - but you'll have to hope for a relatively non-open terrain map.

Take a look at this 2017 thread for other ideas: "Rate (categorize) FoG II Armies please!? (CustomMultiplayer)"

Also, remember that you have to pick four army lists (in order of preference 1-4) because you may not get your first choice. However, the lower your ranking within the division (likely Division F as a new player), the more likely you are to get your first choice.