Madaxeman Warfare 4 reports
Posted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:15 am
Warfare now posted with full quality doctored photos.
Madaxman ... Loved your Roman battles! The Benny Hill music killed me!
Mike B
Page 1 of 1
Posted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 5:27 pm
Posted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 6:33 pm
There's Elvis, WW2 gunfire and a bit of Victor Meldrew in there if you look carefully enough....mbsparta wrote:Madaxman ... Loved your Roman battles! The Benny Hill music killed me!
Mike B
Posted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 8:53 pm
Yes ... I heard it all. Elvis and Benny were just too funny.
Mike
Mike
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 8:17 pm
I have quite enjoyed all of your AARs. Please keep up the excellent work. Very entertaining.
AJ
AJ
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2009 9:55 pm
Agreed.pease1 wrote:I have quite enjoyed all of your AARs. Please keep up the excellent work. Very entertaining.
AJ
Posted: Tue Dec 22, 2009 3:21 pm
madaxman ur reports are delightfull.
Posted: Sat Dec 26, 2009 4:15 am
As always a good AARs for those of us you do not go to comps. I noticed in your last two comps your armies only had about 12 BGs and you came off second best. Given most of the time you were out number in BGs would have done better by being defensive and waited for the enemy to come to you. I admire your approach of rushing out and trying to grab the enemy by the throat but if you are out numbered in BGs is it better to hold off what do other players find that works best?
Keith
Keith
Posted: Sat Dec 26, 2009 8:43 am
BlackPrince wrote:As always a good AARs for those of us you do not go to comps. I noticed in your last two comps your armies only had about 12 BGs and you came off second best. Given most of the time you were out number in BGs would have done better by being defensive and waited for the enemy to come to you. I admire your approach of rushing out and trying to grab the enemy by the throat but if you are out numbered in BGs is it better to hold off what do other players find that works best?
Keith
Sitting back in FOG dos'nt seem to work very well, like in real life your then reacting to your opponent. Much better to grab the inicative and keep it make your enemy react that way you should have a better hope for your plan to work.
Posted: Sat Dec 26, 2009 10:14 pm
Having fewer bg's implies that they cost more than your opponenets, hence they should be able to win 1-1. If the extra bg's are skirmishers then they may not matter too much except for shooting. (which can be critical). But if you adopt a defensive position you invite being overwhelmed by an opponent who picks his point of attack. Also if you are defensive then you have almost no chance of catching skirmishers at all!BlackPrince wrote:As always a good AARs for those of us you do not go to comps. I noticed in your last two comps your armies only had about 12 BGs and you came off second best. Given most of the time you were out number in BGs would have done better by being defensive and waited for the enemy to come to you. I admire your approach of rushing out and trying to grab the enemy by the throat but if you are out numbered in BGs is it better to hold off what do other players find that works best?
Keith
There is a possible approach involving trying to turn 90% and constrict frontage - but difficult to achieve with a mostly HF army...
Posted: Sat Dec 26, 2009 10:24 pm
It's not about winning, it's about adopting an approach that's morally right!david53 wrote:BlackPrince wrote:As always a good AARs for those of us you do not go to comps. I noticed in your last two comps your armies only had about 12 BGs and you came off second best. Given most of the time you were out number in BGs would have done better by being defensive and waited for the enemy to come to you. I admire your approach of rushing out and trying to grab the enemy by the throat but if you are out numbered in BGs is it better to hold off what do other players find that works best?
Keith
Sitting back in FOG dos'nt seem to work very well, like in real life your then reacting to your opponent. Much better to grab the inicative and keep it make your enemy react that way you should have a better hope for your plan to work.
Always better to come 2nd like Jimmy White rather than win like Steve Davis
Posted: Sat Dec 26, 2009 10:44 pm
Tim I would almost agree with you "it not about winning but having fun"!
In your two recent comps which armies got the top three spots in each?
Keith
In your two recent comps which armies got the top three spots in each?
Keith
Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2009 12:52 am
By using Dominate Romans?????????madaxeman wrote: It's not about winning, it's about adopting an approach that's morally right!
Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2009 9:36 am
philqw78 wrote:By using Dominate Romans?????????madaxeman wrote: It's not about winning, it's about adopting an approach that's morally right!
He might not have 20 BGs you never know!
Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2009 9:56 am
Thracian (erm, Dom Rom)BlackPrince wrote:Tim I would almost agree with you "it not about winning but having fun"!
In your two recent comps which armies got the top three spots in each?
Keith
Ancient British
Alex Mac
Anglo Irish
100YW English (the one I lost to in the last game)
SHN Cheeses (the one I lost to in the penultimate game)
At least I contributed to the podium then
Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2009 12:05 pm
I know he didn't, but he just puts himself up there to be shot down. Its like wings of war, .................................................... but we can see all his cards.david53 wrote:philqw78 wrote:By using Dominate Romans?????????madaxeman wrote: It's not about winning, it's about adopting an approach that's morally right!
He might not have 20 BGs you never know!
Posted: Sun Dec 27, 2009 2:43 pm
Would that be the same Jimmy White last seen eating bits of australian wildlife?madaxeman wrote: It's not about winning, it's about adopting an approach that's morally right!
Always better to come 2nd like Jimmy White rather than win like Steve Davis