Slitherine

Here is the completed list of players for Britcon. I will be a playing umpire and play whoever gets a bye each round - details to be announced......25 different armies represented.

Let the banter begin and I look forward to seeing you all there next week. Her's to a great tourney.

Si

No Del No Name Club Army
1 8 Andy Ellis Impalers Ghaznavid
2 11 Gareth Evans Leicester Later Archaemenid Persian
3 13 Steve Murton Reigate Later Seleucid
4 14 Tim Porter Central London Later Crusader
5 16 Neil Hammond Peterbrough Ilkhanid Mongol
6 20 Matt Poole MAWS Principate Roman
7 27 Roger Greenwood Halifax Dailami
8 30 Pete Dalby Portsmouth Later Ottoman Turks
9 31 Jim Copeland SESWC Early Pictish
10 38 Steve Sykes MAWS WOR English
11 51 Clive Vaughan Peterbrough Ghaznavid
12 60 Lance Flint Farnbrough Later Hungarian
13 62 Paul Brandon Halifax Classical Greek
14 64 Dave Ruddock MAWS Lydian
15 74 John Munroe Perth Medieval Portuguese
16 76 Eric Thompson Perth Later Hungarian
17 77 Hunter Hope Perth Pecheneg
18 78 Stewart Riddick Perth Late Republican Roman
19 79 Mark Taylor SESWC Tatar
20 94 Alan Cutner Essex Bedouin Dynasties
21 123 Simon Hall Umpire - bye only Ancient Britons
22 130 Jerome Bodelle France Later Med Scots
23 131 Olivier Joucla France Neo-Assyrian Empire
24 138 Simon Clarke Burton Medieval German
25 145 Richard Bodley Scott Newport Sassanids
26 146 Thomas Bodley Scott Newport Ghaznavids
27 148 Bruce Brown Wycombe Warband Middle Hungarian
28 170 Stephen Clarke MAWS Alexandrian Macedonians

3 Ghaznavids ?
That is a great army. I was sure.

nicofig wrote:3 Ghaznavids ?
That is a great army. I was sure.

Nice to get them out of the box again. My son's Ghaznavids were painted by my brother over 30 years ago.

rbodleyscott wrote:

nicofig wrote:3 Ghaznavids ?
That is a great army. I was sure.

Nice to get them out of the box again. My son's Ghaznavids were painted by my brother over 30 years ago.

one of the few great 7th edition armies killed by dbm, i bet there are a fair few out there waiting to come back. but will we have to rebase the close formation infantry again - mine turned into regular dailmai-type auxilia, as did a fair few others i bet!!

Generally a good mix of armies but a few disappointments I think:

• First glance shows there are an awful lot of shooting cavalry armies - 9 at least.
  No Cataphracts unless the Sassanid takes them.
  Only two Romans which is a shame.
  Only one hairy foot army (excluding Simon).
  Very little heavy foot in general.

Are people generally happy with the troop type and army mix on show?

bddbrown wrote:Very little heavy foot in general.

I count at least 12 armies that are likely to have substantial numbers of heavy foot, and some others that may do.

First glance shows there are an awful lot of shooting cavalry armies - 9 at least.

This hardly seems unreasonable given their historical success rate, and their dominance of most of the civilised world for much of our period. (Apart from a small corner known as Europe).

Also not as many knightly armies!

rbodleyscott wrote:

bddbrown wrote:Very little heavy foot in general.

I count at least 12 armies that are likely to have substantial numbers of heavy foot, and some others that may do.

First glance shows there are an awful lot of shooting cavalry armies - 9 at least.

This hardly seems unreasonable given their historical success rate, and their dominance of most of the civilised world for much of our period. (Apart from a small corner known as Europe).

I thought in our period Europe wasn't considered part of the civilised world at all (except in part by Europeans).

lawrenceg wrote:I thought in our period Europe wasn't considered part of the civilised world at all (except in part by Europeans).

Quite.

rbodleyscott wrote:

nicofig wrote:3 Ghaznavids ?
That is a great army. I was sure.

Nice to get them out of the box again. My son's Ghaznavids were painted by my brother over 30 years ago.

What are those Ghaznavids made of ?

Pikeaddict wrote:

rbodleyscott wrote:

nicofig wrote:3 Ghaznavids ?
That is a great army. I was sure.

Nice to get them out of the box again. My son's Ghaznavids were painted by my brother over 30 years ago.

What are those Ghaznavids made of ?

Green Cheese.

(In fact they are mostly from Minifig's first 15mm range or Mike's Models.)

I find it a pretty good mix with 1 exception - a few too few chariot armies for my liking. I would have thought another biblical or two was worthwhile.

Best measure would be to see how everyone feels after the event - I will survey it then. And in fact a 30 mins get together after the event before prze giving would be appreacited.

If the Roman and Greeks walk all the cavalry armies off the table I guess the view may change somewhat.......foot troops will become more popular and then Knights more useful to break them.

I am looking foward to seeing how they are all used - especially a couple of faves of mine from having had the privelege to see them all.

A good game to play also is given the 28 armies - which one of them would you rather have in your box now......

Si

Not many heavy foot....

clivevaughan wrote:Also not as many knightly armies!

My rationale was an army ive not used in dbm competitions, and which allowed me to use some troops that rarely got onto the table, and which didnt have troop types i've used before (in my 5 games)...

Well, either I have made an inspired choice, or a very very poor one. But at least I prove the exception to both these rules!

tim

A good game to play also is given the 28 armies - which one of them would you rather have in your box now......

Well, since I designed my army to take out "shooty cavalry" armies, in theory I should be happy (I even managed to nail a couple of them in practice games over the last couple of weeks one )

The downside now of course is that the army has to deliver. If after six games I have been soundly thrashed six times it will be back to the drawing board.

Obviously, if the army does well that is purely down to the bloke behind it. If it all falls apart that is because the points system is broke.

Incidentally, the army is based around heavy foot so we will see how it goes.

Is FoG being included in the fantasy wargames thingy?

I've wanted to run the Later Achaemenids for ages but it looked such a dog under DBM even I couldn't justify using them although I have bought the figures. I have more dogs than I care to count (How many of you have a full Amazonian Indian army - what about Epirot Byzantine or Early Sumerian!). However - FoG might just make them viable.

My other choice - Kappadokian wasn't on the menu.

Gareth

Hi Gareth ,

take the early Sumerian , nobody else can play onagers apart me and follow the paths of Gilgamesh and endiku ;
good luck for Britcon , Ishtar will protect your battle cars

thefrenchjester " sad to be absent in Britcon "

As soon as there is a draft list for Sumerians I will be trying it out.

I have a feeling they might be unprotected or proctected offensive spear but am awaiting with interest.

I am seriously considering an Early Achemenid army too.

Hammy

Fantasy Wargames is being run in FOG and guess who had to create some numbers for it!!

Bear with my guts-imates therefore....

Si

shall wrote:I find it a pretty good mix with 1 exception - a few too few chariot armies for my liking. I would have thought another biblical or two was worthwhile.

To be fair, many chariot armies don't have lists done yet.

Of those that do:

Assyrians aren't half bad - and are extremely effective against shooty cavalry armies - as my Ilkhanids found to their cost at Leeds. They are less effective against heavy foot.

In my view Late Dynastic Egyptian is a seriously hot choice (armoured hoplites and bow-armed heavy chariots), but I bet nobody asked to see the list. They trump the Lydians IMO.

Also my Sassanids were seriously tonked by my son Ned's Early Carthaginians the other day - mainly due to the fighting prowess of his heavy chariots.