Forum
https://forum.slitherine.com/
sorry, the previous one as a win for mr carphclaymore wrote:Group 7 results:
claymore (Khwarazmians) 30/43 WIN - Xiccarph (Kara Khanids) 48/43
That makes one win each
You're right Chris.This scenario seems to have the sides assigned incorrectly so each player's routers are routing to the opponent's starting edge. The game also comes up with the current players troops on the top of the map rather than the bottom.
Chris
Though I may partly agree with the preceeding statement it is also to be said that the Turks already have been assigned in the scenario 599 pts. vs the 567 pts of the Armenians, wich means that the problem lies, above all, in the way the system assigns the points, greatly emphasizing the cost of LH units in confront with LF ones.I found this scenario to be rather imbalanced. A part of my losses are only because I got lazy and began doing unrequired charges that cost me 10 points or so since I was going to clearly win. I'd say make a few of the Seljuk lancers superior and some the LH average. Maybe all the LS equipped ones to make them more useful.
pantherboy
Some of it that helps the Armenians is the big hill in the middle with the steep slopes. This allows them to get many of their infantry into play when it wouldn't be safe to do so out in the open facing the Seljuk mounted. Something else of note is that poor LH is not nearly as much of a bargain as poor LH. The Seljuks might well have been better off with fewer but better LH. You could also consider making the Ghilmen only bow or only lance. The TT army lists explicitly do not give any cavalry lance and bow. It's either one or the other or lance on bow*. Similarly with light spear and bow, it cavalry have both they are normally bow*. Any of these changes would reduce the cost of some of the Seljuk cavalry and the points could have been used instead to upgrade them to superior or to give Seljuks more troops.Lysimachos wrote:Though I may partly agree with the preceeding statement it is also to be said that the Turks already have been assigned in the scenario 599 pts. vs the 567 pts of the Armenians, wich means that the problem lies, above all, in the way the system assigns the points, greatly emphasizing the cost of LH units in confront with LF ones.I found this scenario to be rather imbalanced. A part of my losses are only because I got lazy and began doing unrequired charges that cost me 10 points or so since I was going to clearly win. I'd say make a few of the Seljuk lancers superior and some the LH average. Maybe all the LS equipped ones to make them more useful.
pantherboy
Something that can be clearly seen when building up a DAG cavalry army.