Slitherine

Well this ought to put to rest the "medieval knights and pikes are over cost effective" issue at least in 15mm. (But not in 28mm).



I should point out at this juncture that Mr Speed had the smallest army at Britcon in terms of BGs (8 at 650 points) and not a single pike.

Dave Allen didn't have any pikes either........

Although I did haved three BGs of knights.

Despite expectations, they cut through both Pike and Spear in five out of six games. In the sixth they couldn't even dent Swiss Halberdiers!

The predominance of Pike and Spear amongst 25mm players was, I think, partly down to them having been very good in DBM (so a lot of people had them) and partly to their value for money and effectiveness on paper (cheap and tough).

Having tried massed Pikes at Devizes I'd learnt that they are in fact quite brittle especially against tough opponents - one bad result and the Pike block declines very rapidly. Repeated charges by superior Knights with a general will eventually crack isolated pikes.

So, Pikes not over effective but the case against Knights strengthened?

Dave Allen

jlopez wrote:All I can say to those who think "Swarm" armies are invincible is to give it a try and see how well they do in an open tournament. Graham and Keith will do well whether they use Dominate or a mob because they are excellent players.

I suspect that they benefited from a certain element of surprise as most players hadn't come across such armies before. That seems to me the hallmark of a good general. It will be interesting to see if they use it again...

Julian

Even so, Keith was down at the bottom of the pond with me at the Challenge in the last round with a more "standard" army.

Good play or not however, this army in this composition does not sound like a historical "winner", so doing well with 19 bgs of 4 mf its hard to draw any other conclusion aside from "someone has gamed the system here".

At least a little....

IMHO what's happened here is Graham and Keith have found a combination that is very effective against the armies being used in competitions right now. There are undoubtedly other effective combinations, including some that will probably beat Romans running in this format. The skill in army selection isn't finding the super-army, because if the points system is balanced there isn't one .... its finding the army that is super against the opponents you'll meet ....

So, if before Britcon the concensus was that Pk and Kn are king, and most will load their army with such, take an army to beat Pk and Kn .... If everyone rushes to field multi BG Romans now you can be sure Graham and Keith will already know how to beat them ....

Quite. The Pinner boys have a long record of being able to analyse trends and find an unusual army or composition to gain advantage.

agreed.... but if 19 small units of drilled MF is the "answer" to knights and pikes, what does this say about the accuracy of the simulation aspect of the game system? I still think there is an element of the system being gamed as much as this also undoubtably represents a clever choice for this competition

all interesting points........ play it yourself, good players, bottom till the 19bg army arrived then top, nice blokes, great players, born winners, naturally talented army selectors etc etc.........

But, how does it get beaten?

Because as was wrote earlier, if the pts values are balanced then most armies should have a chance.................

this swarm doesnt seem to be selected to be flavour of the month kn and pk killer........ its a game killer against all other armies!

attack it and your flanks fold, defend against it and the best you get is a draw............ any combo of troop types you have, doesnt seem to matter...... because its the 19bgs that make it, dare I say it, impossible to kill in 3.5hrs unless the owner wants it beat.........

slip in the nice combo of Armoured, lt sp and sw, and theres no other combo that can better it melee and still compete against other armies, along with the min LH to get the deployment control............ even if it can be beaten, then the army that beats it still hasnt been suggested yet................

Surely the weight of evidence as it stands still suggests that this army, 6 months after rules release and only a couple of months after army list release, has found a way to 'not loose and probably win' games.......

Do any of the 'it can be beaten posters' have experience of using and loosing with this swarm? or of playing against it an taking it down in 3,5 hrs without your opponent letting you?

jon

Do any of the 'it can be beaten posters' have experience of using and loosing with this swarm? or of playing against it an taking it down in 3,5 hrs without your opponent letting you?

Thats the challenge now isn't it, since none of us had seen it before. But having played it twice on the bounce I'm sure it can be. Perhaps if I party less.

yep, there was a swarm of a different kind in the gay bar on the sat night!

great weekend i thought, and my first intro to FOG, really enjoyed the games...... even the one when I got mullered

Still Roman swarms are the bees knees it seems ..........

jon

Do any of the 'it can be beaten posters' have experience of using and loosing with this swarm? or of playing against it an taking it down in 3,5 hrs without your opponent letting you?

Outside Pinner less than a dozen of us have experience of playing this kind of army, at the moment, so whether or not it's beatable is an open question.

You can bet that by the next big comps (Roll Call and Warfare) a lot of players will have tried it out and those who figure out how to beat it won't be announcing their plans here. Especially as more than a few of the others (me included) will be thinking seriously about using it...

Dave Allen

chubooga wrote: Because as was wrote earlier, if the pts values are balanced then most armies should have a chance.................

I think this is not the way the game is designed. Army choice matters, I can't just take 800pts of randomly chosen troops and hope to win for instacne.

Some armies are going to be better against other armies, that is the reality of a game with match-ups.

If you take 800AP of knights do you really think they "should have a chance" against an all Pk army or all longbow army?

good points gents, and if I may, each in turn..........

1. Totally agree that some wont post solutions on here as theyre giving away trade secrets, and I completely agree that there will domrom swarms buzzing around in a sort of giant swarm in the future runners and riders........... but this means it may not have been bollocks to say it cant be beaten...

2. Again totally agree, I dont expect a random mix of equal points to have an equal chance, but more importantly to me, I dont expect a calculated and studied combo to be able to sweep all before it at at least be immune from defeat, especially in an historical set of rules where the roman army in question, AFAIK did not sweep all before it

either way, it remains open, is there a way to beat it? if there isnt then FOG is not for me. if there is then we can all sleep easy in our beds knowing the natural balance has been restored to the world

I will be trying it out, at home if I can get games in, though its not in my plans to bring it to a tourney, just doesnt feel right.

jon

daveallen wrote: You can bet that by the next big comps (Roll Call and Warfare) a lot of players will have tried it out and those who figure out how to beat it won't be announcing their plans here. Especially as more than a few of the others (me included) will be thinking seriously about using it...

Dave Allen

I am not sure it needs to be this extreme to get much of the benefit. I have come around to the idead that having a few 4 element BGs precisely to threaten flanks is pretty desirable. This may in fact be a way to defeat this army.

Instead of 9 4 element BGs (so 36 stands) go with one 8, two 6s, and four 4s (or four 6s and three 4s). The 8 and the 6s give you a somewhat more solid line and a place to park some generals for fighting power and the 4s give you the maneuverability. Is it enough to counter the superior mobility of the nine 4s config? dunno have to try it out but seems like a possibilty.

I don't think the 19 BG aspect itself is that big an issue, unless the army tries to hide but then lots of armies can do that...The only problem is can see is that this army may have a substantial capability of running away if things look bad and could be hard to catch (and trying to catch it would create the flank attack opportunities it is designed to exploit).

Of course it's gamey, but how can't it be? It's a game after all. Every mechanic can be exploited to some degree, we just have to agree on how to limit the exploitation. DBM also had the commands that were multiples of 3 plus .5 or plus 1. We have the Roman Zerg rush for now at least. Comps might have to eventually have some kind of limitations to level the playing field which is fine too - most wargames have this to some extent at least in comps. Regardless, can we calm down until more books, and potential new killer armies, come out?

Hi carlos

You are missing the point here methinks

Being able to be hysterical about this sort of thing is EXACTLY why many of us play in the first place!!!!

madaxeman wrote:Hi carlos

You are missing the point here methinks

Being able to be hysterical about this sort of thing is EXACTLY why many of us play in the first place!!!!

absolutely right!

wheres the fun in calm execution of a well considered and thought out plan! now that really is bollox, much much better is the run around in cricles waving franticly and grabbing random passers by to shout 'it cant be beaten I tell you! just cant be beaten' at them till they break free!

No limitations required, I am sure the British sense of fair play will ensure that there is a level playing field in future tourneys (well, by the fact that everyone brings the swarm along anyway )

jon

I see what you mean gents, certainly some smaller manouverable units to exploit flanks is a good thing in most circumstance, dont think it will reign in the swarm, and frontally 2 little uns are only slightly disadvantaged against one big un.........

Itll all come out in the wash I suppose, shame my attempts to talk it through with more experienced gamers here has met with accusations of talking bollocks and being a troll..............oh well, no offence intended to any of the regulars here.

jon 'chubooga' smith

chubooga wrote:Itll all come out in the wash I suppose, shame my attempts to talk it through with more experienced gamers here has met with accusations of talking bollocks and being a troll..............oh well, no offence intended to any of the regulars here.

Sorry about the troll comment. However, the "the sky is falling" type response to the surprise success of an unexpected troop combination used by 2 top players (their success in itself being no surprise, only the troop combination they used) did not become any more plausible through constant repetition. It began to look as if there might be a hidden agenda.

We have seen a sequence of such "X is invincible and overpowered" posts since play-testing began, but none have proved accurate long-term predictions.

Time will tell, but I can guarantee one thing - the bottom places in future competitions will be littered with less skilled players attempting to reproduce Graham and Keith's success.

If you really want to know what will beat it from the same book I'll tell you. Early Pictish. A fighting frontage of 40 elements against the romans fighting frontage of 18 Auxilia and 3 Legio. Evens on impact, evens in melee. Twice the fighting frontage. A few Psiloi to stop getting shot too badly and you can catch him. Not very subtle though and fragile against other armies. Pikes would be at ++ in melee for example. But still never mind the quality feel the width. I think this is what you were talking about when you said cheap filler Jon.

no worries, hazard of being new to the forum I suppose.

I kept repeating the question of 'how to beat it' because noone seemed to have an answer to it.

As you say though, I am sure the next tourney will see the answers come through.......... and book me in for on of those wannabee slots

jon

chubooga wrote:I kept repeating the question of 'how to beat it' because noone seemed to have an answer to it.

I doubt if that is because nobody has thought of an answer to it. However, as it success makes it likely to appear in further competitions soon, we don't want to give away our plans, in case we have to fight it.