Page 2 of 2
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 12:15 am
by khurasan_miniatures
Ah the optional mandatory camp. So which is wrong, the optional bit or the "1" bit?
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 7:18 am
by philqw78
khurasan_miniatures wrote:Ah the optional mandatory camp. So which is wrong, the optional bit or the "1" bit?
The optional bit is wrong in the list writers opinion.
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 8:21 pm
by Ghaznavid
philqw78 wrote:khurasan_miniatures wrote:Ah the optional mandatory camp. So which is wrong, the optional bit or the "1" bit?
The optional bit is wrong in the list writers opinion.
Actually I got it from usually well informed sources that the "0-" bit is just missing.
Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 9:05 pm
by philqw78
Ghaznavid wrote:Actually I got it from usually well informed sources that the "0-" bit is just missing.
I was told that by an anonymous whistle blower just before publication after getting a sneak preview of the list. But it didn't change. That and the no bows. Its a Chinese conspiracy.
If I'm found dead tomorrow please pretend you did not read this post. And if you're in need of a new liver wait a few days 'til the next one comes along.
Posted: Wed Feb 03, 2010 5:18 am
by IanB3406
That's 'coz all the players at Usk are better than me so don't need such a simple and one dimensional army.....
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IN period there are tons of infantry with Heavy Weapons and tons of crossbow, which sorta negates some of the benefits of mounted Heavy Armor. In an open competition you would see some knights....can make these guys tough to play.
Ian
Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 10:33 am
by flamingpig0
david53 wrote:Not to sure about this army if you look at the Usk event in the empires book out of 21 teams no Tibetans?
Probably as everyone realised that the theme was 'many armies with heavy weapons and crossbows'
Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 8:49 pm
by fgilson
flamingpig0 wrote:david53 wrote:Not to sure about this army if you look at the Usk event in the empires book out of 21 teams no Tibetans?
Probably as everyone realised that the theme was 'many armies with heavy weapons and crossbows'
Although perhaps Northern Dynasty with lots of Average cataphracts in 6s would have been alright...as long as they didn't have to face elephants!
Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 2:22 pm
by david53
philqw78 wrote:khurasan_miniatures wrote:Ah the optional mandatory camp. So which is wrong, the optional bit or the "1" bit?
The optional bit is wrong in the list writers opinion.
Is this official the camp does'nt need to be fortified?
Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 2:39 pm
by philqw78
It was in the last amendments, so it is no longer compulsory
Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2010 8:17 pm
by timmy1
Phil
Thanks. I have a game coming up soon, so now it is optional I will look at seeing how good a list I can get from it.
Regards
Tim