Slitherine

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

The lists entered.

In which case

Lydian, Classical Greek, Later Scots and Sassanids

dave_r wrote:In which case

Lydian, Classical Greek, Later Scots and Sassanids

Bah, that is pretty much what I would have picked. I shall have to think again. (Unless I am not permitted to enter because employees, members of their families and their intimate body servants are excluded from the contest).

I think I'll try

Ghaznavid, Late Republican Roman, Lydian and Classical Greek

So, the list is presumably not "Late Crusader, Crusaders (Late), Later Crusaders, Tardy Christians on Tour" then.

Might be a long weekend.....

madaxeman wrote:So, the list is presumably not "Late Crusader, Crusaders (Late), Later Crusaders, Tardy Christians on Tour" then.

Might be a long weekend.....

Late Crusader is not a bad list Tim. It is really all about coordinating foot and mounted and keeping your knights supported.

Hammy

Later Crusader was in the running ..... Hammy is quite right about its qualities ....and ot may well be in the envelope even..................or not!!

Of course you can have a go Richard - I doubt there is much avantage from any inside line and its just a bit of fun after all...........although the £10er is for real.

The eventual conclusion of you all might be - aha proof that Simon has lost his marbles after so long out of competition play!!

As a general point with FOG, my sense is that most armies can work if designed and used well ........... so you can choose with the heart more than the head and still have a great game.

Si

Later Crusader was in the running ..... Hammy is quite right about its qualities ....and ot may well be in the envelope even..................or not!!

Yup, Later Crusader I thought was one of the better choices! I also think Dailami might be a shrewd choice.

What is more worrying from my perspective is everybody expecting Lydians to do well. That is more pressure than I am used to coping with

hammy wrote:

madaxeman wrote:So, the list is presumably not "Late Crusader, Crusaders (Late), Later Crusaders, Tardy Christians on Tour" then.

Might be a long weekend.....

Late Crusader is not a bad list Tim. It is really all about coordinating foot and mounted and keeping your knights supported.

Hammy

So, thats seems to strongly imply you believe that taking at least some mounted in addition to the foot would be a good idea.... hmmm....

Can non players have a go or do we just get the pleasure of watching,although my DBM choice isn't going to give me the quickest results
David

davidandlynda wrote:Can non players have a go or do we just get the pleasure of watching,although my DBM choice isn't going to give me the quickest results
David

Oaky, I'll bite. What is your DBM choice?

WTF, how did I get to be number 3 seed? No pressure then.

OTOH Tim Porter is seeded 2, which seems a bit hard on him given his (much vaunted) lack of playing experience. (Not that I disagree with that ranking, however).

rbodleyscott wrote:WTF, how did I get to be number 3 seed? No pressure then.

OTOH Tim Porter is seeded 2, which seems a bit hard on him given his (much vaunted) lack of playing experience. (Not that I disagree with that ranking, however).

Blame Si

The seeding was done based on:

General ancients wargaming ability (read DBM Glicko)
Performance in FoG comps to date (Usk, Leeds, Roll Call)
and experience of the rules

Si sent me his thoughts, I suggested some changes, he considered them and adopted some but not all of them.

To be honest with 28 players and 6 games seeding is irrelevant. 6 games is enough to find a knockout winner from 64 players and IMO is plenty to get a reasonably accurate winner from a 100+ player pool.

It will be interesting to see how things pan out as an observer.

Hammy

Yes everyone can blame me ... I confess to being an imperfect ranking system ... but over the years there has been some good competition for that title !!

I took into account previous FOG success, general track record and the famous glicko, added salt, pepper and a hint fo garlic, and after simmering for 30 minutes after some good stirring from James himself arrived at these rankings. The end result has a fine taste and will do the job well enough!

I also generated some amounts for the fantasy wargaming so you are all in that too - and again can blame me for any over or under pricing - although I will of course claim that the market was perfect and it was just the players that over and under performed!!

It will all be good fun. And yes Dave and Linda you can have go at guessingthe 4 armies if you really want my £10!!

See you all there.

Si

What are our values for the Fantasy League then?

dave_r wrote:What are our values for the Fantasy League then?

3 conclusions:

The unseeded Ruddock clearly fancies himself as a wet dream.....

Si clearly thinks Later Crusader with no mounted is a list so good it can win on its own

Both will end up disappointed

Tom and I hope to be there by about lunch-time on Friday, and if so would be interested in joining in any games that might be going on in the afternoon.

We will have a 1000 point 15mm Sassanid army with us if required.

Richard, now I can see why you have been seeded - playing with a 1000 points of sassanids when everyone else is allowed 800 points.
John

Clive Vaughan and I will also arrive about lunchtime on Friday and will look for a FoG game. Dave Maddigan is playing in DBM but would also be interested in joining in on a FoG friendly doubles on Friday afternoon.

marshalney2000 wrote:Richard, now I can see why you have been seeded - playing with a 1000 points of sassanids when everyone else is allowed 800 points.

It is the only way I can win.