Page 1 of 1

Later Carthaginian

Posted: Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:34 pm
by grahambriggs
Hannibal's lot are polular but bottom of the rankings. Yet looking at the list they seem an average army at worst. Why do they fare so poorly in competitions?

Posted: Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:43 pm
by petedalby
I think they are a bit of a 'swiss army knife' type of army - lots of different troop types but not really enough of any one thing to do well?

Posted: Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:46 pm
by babyshark
My guess is that, being a popular army to build, a lot of people use them early in their FoG career because they have the figures. As a result, the Carthos spend more time than most clawing their way up the learning curve, and getting roughly handled for their trouble.

There are a number of good troop types in the army, which leads me to think that there is a good list in there. The African Veterans seem like a solid base for a winning army.

Marc

Posted: Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:47 pm
by philqw78
Romantics

Posted: Wed Jan 12, 2011 5:06 pm
by Fluffy
The thing about Carthage is that it is a "toolbox army" with limited punch\shock ability, which is not a bad thing, but requires a certain skill level to use effectively

I wouldn't play this army without some African Veterans.

Posted: Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:03 pm
by olivier
I love this army and even won some comp with them but it have a terrible default. :(
it's too slow and have not enough punch to win in time in a major comp.

Posted: Thu Jan 13, 2011 3:12 am
by simone
They suffer from having their punch delivered by very fragile troops, Elephants and protected Impact MF. I suspect that if Fog 2.0 gives better resilience for Elephants, than it can be a very competitive army, having a core of strong HF troops than most Elephants armies do not have.