Shieldwall 2009 FOG 25mm Doubles Invitational , Glos UK

[stenic]

Code: Select all

Team                	                Army	                                Score
Richard Bodley Scott                   Early Achaemenid Persian	            72.7
Brian O'Dea, Kev Fisher 	            Anglo Danish	                        68.7
Steve Price, Keith McGlynn             Later Seleucid	                      62.8
Andy Unwin, Alan Millicheap            Ancient British	                     59.2
Mike Shepherd, Alan Paull              French Ordonnance	                   41.7
Mike Baldwin, Damian Ranasinghe        Sassanid Persian                       40.8
Ian Speed, Silvie Mills                Early Pict                             40.1
Andy Claxton, Steve Taylor             Later Seleucid	                      38.3
John Patrick, Dave Morrison 	        Kommenian Byzantine                    38.2
Gordon Malcolm, Steve Harris           Later Carthaginian	                  32.9
Mark Clarke, Dino Monticoli 	        Pontic	                              28.1
Colin Evans 	                        Mid Republican Roman                   21.5

Congrats to Richard who needed a good win in the last round to come top and for neither the Anglo-Danish nor Late Seleucids to get a 25-0 whitewash in their game against each other. Sadly for the Danes they lost too many BGs so only got an 18-7 win making them 2nd and relegating the Seleucids to 3rd.

Congrats also to Colin Evans who won the Most Generals Lost prize, A nice copy of the recent Osprey publication - Osprey Men At Arms: A Celebration, kindly donated by Osprey. For the record he lost 3 over the weekend and in fact I think overall very few generals were lost.

The format for those interested was 725AP in 25mm with at least 110AP spent on generals and played on 6by4 table with 1MU at 1inch. The Generals requirement was to reduce swarms of rubbish that would slow the games down. Games were 3hrs min plus a variable amount before last pair of bounds was called.

The format seemed to work well and with many people having FCs in their army I noticed many armies regularly flanked marched, making games very interesting.

As an aside we also ran concurrently with a DBM 15mm event at the venue and each event ran a sweepstake on the results of the other event to generate some mutual interest!! Together both events raised in the region of £200 for Cancer Research.

Steve P

[rbodleyscott]

Thanks Steve for a very enjoyable weekend.

Considering in this tournament there was some armies stronger than Achaemenid (for example Komnenan Byzantine, based on my experience of Italian FoG tournaments), could you give some advices for improving using Achaemenid ........... if you can share some of your secrets
Sergio

Well I did not fight the Komnenans. though I considered them a potential victim rather than a threat.

I fought (with approximate scores as follows - we were not given score sheets to work them out accurately).

Later Carthaginians (18-2)
Later Seleucids (10-10)
Sassanid Persians (19-1)
Early Picts (25-0)

I did not suffer any attrition points at all over the 4 games. (I would note that the number of BGs in your army makes no difference at all if you don't lose any).

Tournament was 725 points 28mm on 6 x 4 table. The army was as follows (in order of march)

2 x 4 Persian Cavalry, Cv Armoured, Superior, Undrilled, Bow, Swordsmen
1 x 4 Horse Archers, LH Unprotected, Average, Undrilled, Bow
2 x 8 Hoplites , HF Armoured, Average, Undrilled, Offensive Spearmen
1 x 4 Hoplites, HF Protected, Average, Undrilled, Offensive Spearmen
1 x 4 Greek javelinmen, LF Unprotected, Poor, Undrilled, Javelins, Light Spear
2 x 6 Immortals, MF Armoured, Superior, Drilled, Light Spear, Bow
2 x 6 Other Persian etc foot, MF Protected, Average, Undrilled, Light Spear, Bow / Bow
1 x IC
2 x TC

The army that came second, Anglo-Danish, was the one I was most dreading meeting. The Seleucids were also a tough nut.

The hard core of my Achaemenid army (the anvil) was the Medizing Greek hoplites - 2 BGs of 8, with rear support from a BG of 4 Asiatic Greek hoplites. With the assistance of generals, including an IC, this block could stand up to anything the enemy can throw at it, including pike phalanxes.

The Immortals were a strong force on one side of the hoplites. The other sparabara foot were deployed last - wherever the enemy did not have anything solid to face them. The cavalry mostly operated in support.

Judicious use of generals - often a TC in the front rank and an IC in the rear rank of the same BG - prevented any of my battle groups being lost, despite several lost combat rounds. The troops fought on and eventually won their combats.

I won the initiative in all 4 games and chose Hilly in all 4 games. This allowed me enough terrain to deter Sassanid flank marches (they won their other 3 games, sending flank marches on both flanks in each of them). Versus the Picts, it allowed me to effectively split the Pictish side of the battlefield in half, forcing them to bunch up all their troops on one side of the table and on a flank march. A judicious wheel (to avoid being flanked by the flank march, which arrived on the first turn) and they were completely unable to bring their superior numbers to bear.

No doubt more can be said, but time does not permit at present.

[stenic]

Thanks Steve for a very enjoyable weekend.

Considering in this tournament there was some armies stronger than Achaemenid (for example Komnenan Byzantine, based on my experience of Italian FoG tournaments), could you give some advices for improving using Achaemenid ........... if you can share some of your secrets
Sergio

Well I did not fight the Komnenans. though I considered them a potential victim rather than a threat.

I fought (with approximate scores as follows - we were not given score sheets to work them out accurately).

Later Carthaginians (18-2)
Later Seleucids (10-10)
Sassanid Persians (19-1)
Early Picts (25-0)

I did not suffer any attrition points at all over the 4 games. (I would note that the number of BGs in your army makes no difference at all if you don't lose any).

The army that came second, Anglo-Danish, was the one I was most dreading meeting. The Seleucids were also a tough nut.

.
.
.
.

Judicious use of generals - often a TC in the front rank and an IC in the rear rank of the same BG - prevented any of my battle groups being lost, despite several lost combat rounds. The troops fought on and eventually won their combats.

No doubt more can be said, but time does not permit at present.

Richard's main secret was to hurl abuse at my beautifull Seleucids painted in bright effeminate pastel colours We didn't succumb though and steadily swung the table 90degs. We tried to teach him a lesson with the elephants but as mentioned, the IC and rear support prevented the collapse of his right wing, just, and 3 times too!!. Arguably we could have tried to turn the battle through 90 sooner but my last experience playing against EAP left me scarred (and scared) as my Armoured MRR had been shot to bits, so we dithered as we dressed our lines and advance too late.

That said the evidence would suggest the other opponents might have been better to dither too

The Komenian had 2*4 BGs of Varangian Guard and 2 BGs of Kinghts, plus some cavalry and LH. Trouble is in open tournaments they are susceptable to longbows, pikes and swarms. Against us they hadn't realised that 25mm elephants passing a CMT to turn 90deg for a line and their knights got stuffed in the flank.

As for Richard's last game, poor Ian and Silvie never stoof a chance, unprotected MF against decent Persinan bow

The Anglo Danes were indeed tough as we played them in the last round. Whilst our mounted smashed their right flank and caught their knights in the rear our pikes collapsed against the onslaught of Superior Armoured Off Sp with an IC boosting the tests. They did lose bases but never lost a CT!!

The other army that worked a treat when used well were the ABs in 53AD with losts of chariots and some awesome elite MF.

Steve P

[rbodleyscott]

We tried to teach him a lesson with the elephants but as mentioned, the IC and rear support prevented the collapse of his right wing, just, and 3 times too!!.

Sweaty stuff indeed. Each time they rolled the exact minimum score required to pass. The last time with 5 negative modifiers (1 per 3, suffered 2 more than inflicted, table edge, fighting elephants, already lost 25%), and 3 positive (IC and rear support. Oh yes, it really does make a difference.)

[speedy]

As for Richard's last game, poor Ian and Silvie never stoof a chance, unprotected MF against decent Persinan bow

Although a couple of times the unprotected MF made it through the shooting, but even when we got there we were on even POAs against the spear wielding Immortals who had extra dice for their rear-rank shooting, and re-rolls for Superior, and when we survived the impact our reward for all that effort (and luck, in getting that far) was .... an even melee against with the re-rolls still against us ....

[steadythebuffs]

Hi Steve - thanks for an excellent weekend of gaming. Brian and I had 4 great games against decent opponents and were surprised how well we did. The Anglo-Danish are pretty tough in 25/28mm. I think that most opponents were caught out by the width of the line we could put out and winning the intiative 3 times and choosing very little terrain helped us.

Our games were :-

1. Sassanid Persians (Mike & Damian)

This was our toughest game. We debated whether to put down more terrain to counter their manoeuverability and decided against it. This proved costly as they flank marched on both sides and left just their LH in front of us. We were lucky to get away with a 13-7 loss as this exposed the Anglo-Danes big weakness which is the inability to react due to being undrilled HF. Had Brian not twice failed a complex move roll to expand a spear BG to block a flank march (including +3 with the IC attached) it might have been different. As it was we were glad when time was called.

2. Ancient British (Andy & Alan)

They only game where they seemed to lose concentration as they kept the table open and didn't flank march. I don't think they realised the width of our army. As it was we advanced in a line and pushed them off the table. Andy's dice were not great but his perception of how bad was coloured by the fact that we saved cohesion after cohesion against shooting but being armoured (only hit on 5 & 6) and having +2 from an IC did help. He really is worth the 80 points. 23-2 to us.

3. Ordonnance French (Mike & Alan)

The knights were a worry but the problem is that they are expensive and if you destroy everything else then they they're as good as useless. MF longbow in open combat with armoured HF isn't pretty.....or time consuming. This game was a lot easier than we anticipated as yet again the we pushed up fast and denied them room to manoeuvre. 21-4

4. Seleucid (Steve & Keith)

A good game against Steve's poofy Seleucids - nice pink outfits boys - which ended up as a race to destroy the pikes (I find them very brittle - once you remove casualties and a factor goes it's quite easy) before their cavalry folded our flank. In truth we cocked up deployment and contested the rough ground on the right flank which we should've ignored but the lesson has been learnt. As soon as the pikes started to go we were more worried about Keith getting cider on the troops than being beaten by them. In the end a close 18-7 win. By the way Steve our Off Sp are only average - the Hvy Weapon are superior.

We thoroughly enjoyed it and made a point of telling our opponents when they forgot factors or forgot re-rolls as we this do this at the club all of the time now and find it makes for a much better gaming experience. I haven't played FoG for a while (since September) but this has re-ignited my interest.

Congratulations to Richard on a great win.

Thanks, Kevin.

[SirGarnet]

It appears that for Shieldwall and Coast Con the prior reporting format including breakdown of opponents by round went by the wayside. I thought that was the standard format - knowing the pairings (and the points scores per round, which are sometimes reported) is much more illuminating.

Mike

[rbodleyscott]

It appears that for Shieldwall and Coast Con the prior reporting format including breakdown of opponents by round went by the wayside. I thought that was the standard format - knowing the pairings (and the points scores per round, which are sometimes reported) is much more illuminating.

Mike

Shieldwall is somewhat less formal than BHGS tournaments.

[stenic]

It appears that for Shieldwall and Coast Con the prior reporting format including breakdown of opponents by round went by the wayside. I thought that was the standard format - knowing the pairings (and the points scores per round, which are sometimes reported) is much more illuminating.

Mike

Sadly the the tournament software doesn't have an export function otherwise I'd load the details. For the record the first pairings were by date and by happy circumstance fellow clubmates avoided each other. If I get time and am really bored I'll produce something, but no promises.

Shieldwall is somewhat less formal than BHGS tournaments.

Of which we are quite proud

[sergiomonteleone]

Thanks Steve for a very enjoyable weekend.

Considering in this tournament there was some armies stronger than Achaemenid (for example Komnenan Byzantine, based on my experience of Italian FoG tournaments), could you give some advices for improving using Achaemenid ........... if you can share some of your secrets
Sergio

Well I did not fight the Komnenans. though I considered them a potential victim rather than a threat.

I fought (with approximate scores as follows - we were not given score sheets to work them out accurately).

Later Carthaginians (18-2)
Later Seleucids (10-10)
Sassanid Persians (19-1)
Early Picts (25-0)

I did not suffer any attrition points at all over the 4 games. (I would note that the number of BGs in your army makes no difference at all if you don't lose any).

Tournament was 725 points 28mm on 6 x 4 table. The army was as follows (in order of march)

2 x 4 Persian Cavalry, Cv Armoured, Superior, Undrilled, Bow, Swordsmen
1 x 4 Horse Archers, LH Unprotected, Average, Undrilled, Bow
2 x 8 Hoplites , HF Armoured, Average, Undrilled, Offensive Spearmen
1 x 4 Hoplites, HF Protected, Average, Undrilled, Offensive Spearmen
1 x 4 Greek javelinmen, LF Unprotected, Poor, Undrilled, Javelins, Light Spear
2 x 6 Immortals, MF Armoured, Superior, Drilled, Light Spear, Bow
2 x 6 Other Persian etc foot, MF Protected, Average, Undrilled, Light Spear, Bow / Bow
1 x IC
2 x TC

The army that came second, Anglo-Danish, was the one I was most dreading meeting. The Seleucids were also a tough nut.

The hard core of my Achaemenid army (the anvil) was the Medizing Greek hoplites - 2 BGs of 8, with rear support from a BG of 4 Asiatic Greek hoplites. With the assistance of generals, including an IC, this block could stand up to anything the enemy can throw at it, including pike phalanxes.

The Immortals were a strong force on one side of the hoplites. The other sparabara foot were deployed last - wherever the enemy did not have anything solid to face them. The cavalry mostly operated in support.

Judicious use of generals - often a TC in the front rank and an IC in the rear rank of the same BG - prevented any of my battle groups being lost, despite several lost combat rounds. The troops fought on and eventually won their combats.

I won the initiative in all 4 games and chose Hilly in all 4 games. This allowed me enough terrain to deter Sassanid flank marches (they won their other 3 games, sending flank marches on both flanks in each of them). Versus the Picts, it allowed me to effectively split the Pictish side of the battlefield in half, forcing them to bunch up all their troops on one side of the table and on a flank march. A judicious wheel (to avoid being flanked by the flank march, which arrived on the first turn) and they were completely unable to bring their superior numbers to bear.

No doubt more can be said, but time does not permit at present.

Hi Richard,
very interesting and good army list.
I will try it .......... if I don't have to pay for it
Perfect choice against Sassanid.

Unfortunately I realized the tournament was with 25mm, my opinion regarding Komnean is relative to 15mm, even if I guess it dependes on have good is the player.
I mean I strong player can use all kind of army list.

Sergio

[sergiomonteleone]

The Komenian had 2*4 BGs of Varangian Guard and 2 BGs of Kinghts, plus some cavalry and LH. Trouble is in open tournaments they are susceptable to longbows, pikes and swarms. Against us they hadn't realised that 25mm elephants passing a CMT to turn 90deg for a line and their knights got stuffed in the flank.

Steve P

Hi Steve,
you are completely right.
Komnean is one of my favourite army list in FoG.
Usually I don't play with HF, but only with KN (drilled), LH and LF.
You can manouvre easly and ....... deploying in the right way your Superior KN's ....... you have a strong force.
I won a tournament in Italy and in this period I'm testing some changes ......... probably for European Tournament in Rome.
Sergio