Atlanta US Team Tournament - Runners and Riders

timmy1 · Post by **timmy1** » Thu Jan 14, 2010 9:37 pm

Dave

Sorry, I was having a bit of fun. Agree about Urartian. Never knew that there were 6 LM armies out there (I know who has the other one).

BillMc · Post by **BillMc** » Fri Jan 15, 2010 12:11 am

timmy1 wrote:I am glad to see that FoG has solved one of the percieved problems with DBM 3.n (too few varieties of armies are seen at competitions...)

'
Neo-Assyrian
Neo-Assyrian
Later Mycenaean
Later Mycenaean
Later Mycenaean
Neo-Assyrian
Later Mycenaean
Kimmerians
Later Mycaenean
'

Also keep in mind this is one of the four books/themes in the overall event. So while having only 4 different armies (you left out the NKE army) in this book - it is with just 10 participants. The entire event is hosting 10 teams of 4 players each. If you look at the entire field of playes vs army variety at the event the numbers look different. There are 23 different armies (not even considering the differences in the lists) represented out of 40 entries.

Bill

IanB3406 · Post by **IanB3406** » Fri Jan 15, 2010 3:13 am

army) in this book - it is with just 10 participants. The entire event is hosting 10 teams of 4 players each. If you look at the entire field of playes vs army variety at the event the numbers look different. There are 23 different armies (not even considering the differences in the lists) represented out of 40 entries.
------------------------------

Bill,

This is true, however I can imagine as each team got together and picked out periods they picked what was seen as the most competitive list in each period, and it seems like everybody picked on two lists (the only ones with substantial armoured infantry available)............I am suspicious of future Swifter than Beagles events because of this......

Ian

dave_r · Post by **dave_r** » Fri Jan 15, 2010 10:27 am

The Myceneaneans get a maximum of three BG's of Armoured Foot and Assyrians get two. Not a massive amount.

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Fri Jan 15, 2010 10:41 am

dave_r wrote:The Myceneaneans get a maximum of three BG's of Armoured Foot and Assyrians get two. Not a massive amount.

Can't the Mykenaians get more by dismounting chariots?

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Fri Jan 15, 2010 11:31 am

If everyone starts using armoured troops the 'solution' is to go unarmoured and swamp them.

I thought Early Libyan would be a really bad army. I picked it because I thought that lots of undrilled unprotedted foot would be rubbish and then I played three Santa Hermandad armies getting a losing draw and two winning draws (14-6 IIRC) plus a Samurai army (winning draw), a Tudor English army (win) and a Mongol army (win).

I think that for this year's team tournament it is just a case of all the Softer than Beagles players being on the same page.

There were 12 different armies in a field of 18 for the StB tournament at Warfare and only three of any one army. There was only one Later Myceneaen

petedalby · Post by **petedalby** » Tue Jan 19, 2010 1:56 pm

So who won then?

babyshark · Post by **babyshark** » Tue Jan 19, 2010 2:04 pm

The Beltway Bandits won. It was a victory for truth, justice, and the American Way.

Marc

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Tue Jan 19, 2010 2:07 pm

Beltway won the team comp.

Dan Hazlewood was top in Softer than Beagles
Marc Crotteau top in Legions
John Martin in the Early Hungarian period
Matt Iverson won the later period.

Full results are in the files section of the USA FoG list on Yahoo and will I suspect be on the new super ranking system before too long.

madcam2us · Post by **madcam2us** » Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:27 pm

Beltway 1st 250.2
CoP 2nd 234
Payne 3rd 223.4

Hart's list did him in for games 3 & 4. I finished 0.6 out of top score to Matt (we didnt get matched).

Madcam

Scrumpy · Post by **Scrumpy** » Tue Jan 19, 2010 4:36 pm

hammy wrote:Beltway won the team comp.

Dan Hazlewood was top in Softer than Beagles
Marc Crotteau top in Legions
John Martin in the Early Hungarian period
Matt Iverson won the later period.

Full results are in the files section of the USA FoG list on Yahoo and will I suspect be on the new super ranking system before too long.

Senor Martin won for truth, justice & the Panamanian way !

petedalby · Post by **petedalby** » Tue Jan 19, 2010 5:26 pm

Well done to Dan & the Beltway guys!

And I knew CofP would do better than 9th!!

dave_r · Post by **dave_r** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 1:47 pm

So did I. But the lists weren't very good though

madcam2us · Post by **madcam2us** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 2:19 pm

outside of Mikes, I have to disagree.

I was pleased with my Catalan's. I figured I'd see more Turks, but the list was designed to take on the Heavy Armor of the period. What did (but probably shouldn't have) suprise me was the number of Catalans. Each were vastly different from the other and I fancied my chances vs each. It performed well vs the foot heavy list, especially since I won initiative. IMO, I would have matched up even better vs the other but I'll have to wait till next time for my rematch vs Matt.

Madcam.

ethan · Post by **ethan** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 3:41 pm

madcam2us wrote:outside of Mikes, I have to disagree.

I was pleased with my Catalan's. I figured I'd see more Turks, but the list was designed to take on the Heavy Armor of the period. What did (but probably shouldn't have) suprise me was the number of Catalans. Each were vastly different from the other and I fancied my chances vs each. It performed well vs the foot heavy list, especially since I won initiative. IMO, I would have matched up even better vs the other but I'll have to wait till next time for my rematch vs Matt.

Madcam.

As the foot heavy list...I was equally happy with the match up there...Winning initiative was a big deal, but then that was 50-50 either way.

dave_r · Post by **dave_r** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 3:53 pm

Was the draw done by team or by individual period?

ethan · Post by **ethan** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 4:00 pm

dave_r wrote:Was the draw done by team or by individual period?

by team

madcam2us · Post by **madcam2us** » Wed Jan 20, 2010 4:05 pm

ethan wrote:
madcam2us wrote:outside of Mikes, I have to disagree.

I was pleased with my Catalan's. I figured I'd see more Turks, but the list was designed to take on the Heavy Armor of the period. What did (but probably shouldn't have) suprise me was the number of Catalans. Each were vastly different from the other and I fancied my chances vs each. It performed well vs the foot heavy list, especially since I won initiative. IMO, I would have matched up even better vs the other but I'll have to wait till next time for my rematch vs Matt.

Madcam.
As the foot heavy list...I was equally happy with the match up there...Winning initiative was a big deal, but then that was 50-50 either way.

Agreed. IMO,deploying second was key. that and that open field in the middle we both thought could be crucial. I knew with your protected foot I would have to avoid it at all costs. At least till I was able to work the flanks, hoping for an advantage. Good game and my knight held out in style.

Madcam.

hazelbark · Post by **hazelbark** » Sat Jan 23, 2010 10:08 pm

petedalby wrote:Well done to Dan & the Beltway guys!

And I knew CofP would do better than 9th!!

Thank you. I think the heavy chariots were important, the Trojans were more vulnerable to assyrians than people realized. My heavy chariots and the other assyrians took lots of mounted between that, the manuverablity of the assyrians seriously out classed the Trojans.