Slitherine

Assyrians aren't half bad - and are extremely effective against shooty cavalry armies - as my Ilkhanids found to their cost at Leeds. They are less effective against heavy foot.

I have used the Neo-Babylonians on several occasions. They are, as you say, fairly effective against shooty cav armies, unfortunately I found them to be relatively uneffective against everything else. It is an army I will use, but not an army I will expect to win with

I don't rate Heavy Chariots as particularly effective for their points to be honest.

dave_r wrote:

Assyrians aren't half bad - and are extremely effective against shooty cavalry armies - as my Ilkhanids found to their cost at Leeds. They are less effective against heavy foot.

I have used the Neo-Babylonians on several occasions. They are, as you say, fairly effective against shooty cav armies, unfortunately I found them to be relatively uneffective against everything else. It is an army I will use, but not an army I will expect to win with

I don't rate Heavy Chariots as particularly effective for their points to be honest.

Sheesh Dave - there are lots of words and phrases in this post I simply don't have in my FoW vocabulary. "...used (insert obscure/any army here) on several occasions" "fairly effective against (insert type of army here)", "..effective for their points" etc etc etc. Im not sure I can say that about DBM....

I fear I will be hunkering down in a corner and going to the bar whilst being attacked by people who know what the likley outcome of combats will actuallly be before they initiate them!

madaxeman wrote:Sheesh Dave - there are lots of words and phrases in this post I simply don't have in my FoW vocabulary. "...used (insert obscure/any army here) on several occasions" "fairly effective against (insert type of army here)", "..effective for their points" etc etc etc. Im not sure I can say that about DBM....

I fear I will be hunkering down in a corner and going to the bar whilst being attacked by people who know what the likley outcome of combats will actuallly be before they initiate them!

Tim,

That is hardly the kind of talk I expect from a seed

Yours the keeper of the secrets

Hammy

You won't be the only one without any idea of what are good/bad matchups. I'll have had just one complete game ever - this Saturday. At least you know how to initiate a combat!

I took neo assyrian empire but in fact I was interested by middle assyrian list which is absent for the moment.

BTW when list as carolingian will be available?

dvorkin wrote:BTW when list as carolingian will be available?

Not for a while yet, I am afraid. I have to concentrate on the books that are earlier in the publication schedule. Essentially that means that new lists are unlikely to be added to the currently available lists until the end of this year. (That will then be 7 army lists books done).

Oh do tell which ones numbers 6 and 7 are, he asks with some trepidation ...

nikgaukroger wrote:Oh do tell which ones numbers 6 and 7 are, he asks with some trepidation ...

I thought you knew already.

Must have forgotten then.

madaxeman wrote:

dave_r wrote:

Assyrians aren't half bad - and are extremely effective against shooty cavalry armies - as my Ilkhanids found to their cost at Leeds. They are less effective against heavy foot.

I have used the Neo-Babylonians on several occasions. They are, as you say, fairly effective against shooty cav armies, unfortunately I found them to be relatively uneffective against everything else. It is an army I will use, but not an army I will expect to win with

I don't rate Heavy Chariots as particularly effective for their points to be honest.

Sheesh Dave - there are lots of words and phrases in this post I simply don't have in my FoW vocabulary. "...used (insert obscure/any army here) on several occasions" "fairly effective against (insert type of army here)", "..effective for their points" etc etc etc. Im not sure I can say that about DBM....

I fear I will be hunkering down in a corner and going to the bar whilst being attacked by people who know what the likley outcome of combats will actuallly be before they initiate them!

Yeah, yeah, yeah. When do you start asking innocently whether we want to place a small wager on the outcome?

Sheesh Dave - there are lots of words and phrases in this post I simply don't have in my FoW vocabulary. "...used (insert obscure/any army here) on several occasions" "fairly effective against (insert type of army here)", "..effective for their points" etc etc etc

Well, to be fair we are meant to be in a test here - so I felt duty bound to try every army I have in my collection. Which I have now just about done. Still waiting for Anglo-Norman though! We usually get about two games of FoG every club night and we have been playing for about 6 months now. Since there are (i think) 11 players at the club who are qualified to play then there is a lot of variety. That and the fact nobody is playing DBM.

A lot of people have had a bit of a whinge about shooting being too powerful, so I thought I would attempt to bring an army that is effective against archery. As mentioned previously I will tell you a week Monday whether it is or not

dave_r wrote:

Sheesh Dave - there are lots of words and phrases in this post I simply don't have in my FoW vocabulary. "...used (insert obscure/any army here) on several occasions" "fairly effective against (insert type of army here)", "..effective for their points" etc etc etc

Well, to be fair we are meant to be in a test here - so I felt duty bound to try every army I have in my collection. Which I have now just about done. Still waiting for Anglo-Norman though! We usually get about two games of FoG every club night and we have been playing for about 6 months now. Since there are (i think) 11 players at the club who are qualified to play then there is a lot of variety.

Hmmm - thats 8 more players than at our club, and you get more games in 3 weeks than I have ever played. Oh well, should be a rules-learning exercise.

This has been all very helpful in picking my fanasy team..... who will be this years wet dream !!!

No a much harder call is who will win DBM 2 but from the entries I suspect it could be a virgin winner


JDM

I think there are many mysteries to unfold as one plays in wider forums - if you call to early days of all games some things looked better than others and you got fashions of types of armies, and even local fashions from clubs until they found out somebody elses fashion did it harm.

We all remember fondly .........DBM
"The Samurai and Mongol days"
"The cavalry years"
"The rise and fall of the Reigate Patrician"
"Teh shiledwall era where Bd, Sp and Wb rule and mavnouvre is much less".

Part of the fun is figuring out the set, and then seeing how a couple of tweaks sensd us all back the drawing board looking for that elusive 20% edge in army design. It has usually taken sevearl years for any set to bottom out as we statw ith fashions and thn get counter fashions etc etc. All part of the fun.

I suspect that FOG has much less strong peaks and troughs from this point of view - we seem to be making any army work well if it is designed and used well. So army choices can follow the heart more than the book I hope ........... so out with my beloved Bodicae next week, and my even more beloved Samurai are warming up the box at the moment.

My personal view from develop and play - just to throw that cat amonst the pidgeons - is that shooting seems very very effective until you have figured out how to make it less so by using BG depth, support and generals well to get through it. Then it gets more balanced - still powrful but not as much as it appears at first. Britcon with 168 games will be a great test of this and i plan to anaylse the results to death and see what we find.

My Ancients Britons have no bows in the army at all - some cruddy slingers that's all who are unlikely hit anything. I would expect to do pretty well with them if I used them carefully rather than just filling the numbers up while umpiring.

My pick of the armies chosen, i.e if I were given the choice to take them over today. - and allowed to desing them my own way .......

...... in the next post for suspense ...... and more fun.

Army Choice of the Month...........a bit of side fun in the FoG camp

I have just put the 4 armies I would prefer 6o have from the list entere, iven the opposing armies (ognoring army design and just looking at headline armies and what they could have).

£10 to anyone who can get all 3 of them.

Otherwise £5 to the one who gets the most right out of the 4.

On entry per player by beginning of the last game.

One winner only - so no conspiring or you each get about 30p!!

Speculate away......

Si

OK here goes

Dailami / Later Med Scots / Pecheneg / Early Pictish

I have just put the 4 armies I would prefer 6o have from the list entere, iven the opposing armies (ognoring army design and just looking at headline armies and what they could have).

Classical Greek, Ancient British, Dynastic Egyptian, Samurai

4 of those present dave - so Samurai needs to change

Si

ok

late republican roman, lydian, ghaznavid and medieval portugese

Don't think I understand the question

I have just put the 4 armies I would prefer to have from the lists entered, given the opposing armies (ignoring army design and just looking at headline armies and what they could have).

£10 to anyone who can get all 3 of them.

Otherwise £5 to the one who gets the most right out of the 4.

I think I have corrected the pytos correctly...

Does that mean you have to pick from the lists entered or from the possible lists?