Page 48 of 55

Re: Revised army lists for Season 6 . . .

Posted: Sun Jul 21, 2019 10:05 am
by stockwellpete
General Shapur wrote:
Sun Jul 21, 2019 4:49 am
Will KoS be considered Roman ?
No, I hadn't planned to do that. It is arguable, I know. Any other views on this?

Re: Revised army lists for Season 6 . . .

Posted: Mon Jul 22, 2019 10:24 pm
by klayeckles
stockwellpete wrote:
Sun Jul 21, 2019 10:05 am
General Shapur wrote:
Sun Jul 21, 2019 4:49 am
Will KoS be considered Roman ?
No, I hadn't planned to do that. It is arguable, I know. Any other views on this?
i recommend you let them stand alone.
1- rome did dominate the period, yet it isn't over represented this period
2- it is a fairly unique army with lots of cav and raw troops
3-we haven't done this for other army types (one could argue that half the region was greek in the classical period)

Re: Revised army lists for Season 6 . . .

Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2019 4:43 am
by devoncop
I really do feel this whole move towards restricting army choices, either through banning a player from using the same army they used in the previous season in certain circumstances, or in restricting the number of armies from certain regions is moving in a negative direction.

I would have gone the opposite way and let folks choose the same armies if they so wish ......a level playing field and much easier to administer.

It may reduce variety a bit but many people play for enjoyment and variety and not to min/max or win at all costs so the problem would not be as bad as some seem to think.

Re: Revised army lists for Season 6 . . .

Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2019 6:51 am
by stockwellpete
klayeckles wrote:
Mon Jul 22, 2019 10:24 pm
i recommend you let them stand alone.
1- rome did dominate the period, yet it isn't over represented this period
2- it is a fairly unique army with lots of cav and raw troops
3-we haven't done this for other army types (one could argue that half the region was greek in the classical period)
Yes, I see them as a separate army from the Romans myself.

Re: Revised army lists for Season 6 . . .

Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2019 7:12 am
by stockwellpete
devoncop wrote:
Tue Jul 23, 2019 4:43 am
I really do feel this whole move towards restricting army choices, either through banning a player from using the same army they used in the previous season in certain circumstances, or in restricting the number of armies from certain regions is moving in a negative direction.

I would have gone the opposite way and let folks choose the same armies if they so wish ......a level playing field and much easier to administer.

It may reduce variety a bit but many people play for enjoyment and variety and not to min/max or win at all costs so the problem would not be as bad as some seem to think.
We do let players choose the same armies if they wish, so we do not need to move any further in that direction. :? What I wanted to do was to freshen things up a bit by introducing a variation of the old rule from LOEG so that players would have to use a different army each season. Given the wide range of army choices available, plus the recent introduction of the allies function, I hardly think this would have been an onerous requirement. There would still be nothing stopping players using their favourite army in alternative seasons in the FOG2DL and using them in friendlies in-between times.

This proposal did not have quite enough support this time and so will not be introduced for Season 6. What I will be introducing is designating the Diadochi armies (and their successors) as a single nation and allowing 2 armies per division from that group. This is to stop players picking 4 Diadochi pike armies so they can guarantee playing with a pike army. Other nations that have 6 or more armies in a tournament section list (e.g. Classical Antiquity) will also be allowed 2 armies per division (as long as they are different) so this will free-up army selections a little bit.

The tournament should be a challenge. At the moment players continually choosing the same army, or ensuring they get a pike army by picking 4 Diadochi armies, is a bit too comfortable (and boring) for my liking. I will continue to look at ways to freshen things up so that players are tested in different ways each season.

Re: Revised army lists for Season 6 . . .

Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2019 8:27 am
by devoncop
I see what you are saying.

Personally I actually enjoy knowing that if I play Geffalrus for example I am very likely to have his Antigonids to face or if Sennacherib is in my Division I will need to try a better way of combating some massed archers but I guess we are all different 😉

Re: Revised army lists for Season 6 . . .

Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2019 1:39 pm
by Geffalrus
Really seems like a solution in search of a problem to me..........

Why exactly is guaranteeing a pike army bad, but being free to guarantee an Impact Foot army is fine and dandy (pick Roman, Gallic, Samnite, and Jewish Revolt)?

Re: Revised army lists for Season 6 . . .

Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2019 2:07 pm
by stockwellpete
Geffalrus wrote:
Tue Jul 23, 2019 1:39 pm
Really seems like a solution in search of a problem to me..........

Why exactly is guaranteeing a pike army bad, but being free to guarantee an Impact Foot army is fine and dandy (pick Roman, Gallic, Samnite, and Jewish Revolt)?
Because the Diadochi pike armies are nearly identical. The four impact foot armies you have listed are much more varied, two are primarily heavy foot, two are medium foot. The Gallic have cavalry options and so on.

Re: Revised army lists for Season 6 . . .

Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2019 2:19 pm
by Geffalrus
stockwellpete wrote:
Tue Jul 23, 2019 2:07 pm
Because the Diadochi pike armies are nearly identical. The four impact foot armies you have listed are much more varied, two are primarily heavy foot, two are medium foot. The Gallic have cavalry options and so on.
200+ POA on impact is 200+ POA on impact no matter which way you slice it.

The Lysimachid and Macedonian lists have access to large amounts of cheaper heavy infantry, while the Seleucids and Ptolemies have access to masses of cheap medium foot. The Antigonids and certain Macedonian and Seleucid lists have access to large amounts of cavalry.

The Romans, Gauls, Samnites, and Jews all rely on a mainline of hard charging impact foot the same exact way that the Diadochi rely on a sturdy line of expensive pikes. All have different types of support troops, but fundamentally, the foundation of their infantry lines all use the same approach to combat - win with a big charge or failing that, hope to survive long enough due to armor (Rome), numbers (Gauls) or morale (Jews).

Re: Revised army lists for Season 6 . . .

Posted: Tue Jul 23, 2019 5:17 pm
by stockwellpete
Well, you are going to have to get used to the idea because I will be bringing it in for Season 6. The other reason for doing this is because at the moment it is possible to have 6 pike armies in the same division - Antigonid, Lysimachid, Macedonian, Ptolemaic, Seleucid plus the non-Diadochi Pyrrhic. Under the new regulation the maximum number of pike armies per division will be 3 i.e. two Diadochi armies plus the Pyrrhic. 3 out of 10 is definitely enough.

Re: Revised army lists for Season 6 . . .

Posted: Wed Jul 24, 2019 9:35 pm
by SnuggleBunnies
I for one am in favor.

Re: Revised army lists for Season 6 . . .

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2019 3:20 am
by General Shapur
roll on season 6.

Re: Revised army lists for Season 6 . . .

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2019 11:53 am
by Rob123
How will the selection of allies work? For example in the Early Middle Ages I choose Romano British they have three possible allies to select from. Two of these are Roman which are not available as a main army. Can one of these Roman armies be selected as an ally?

Re: Revised army lists for Season 6 . . .

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2019 12:06 pm
by stockwellpete
Rob123 wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 11:53 am
How will the selection of allies work? For example in the Early Middle Ages I choose Romano British they have three possible allies to select from. Two of these are Roman which are not available as a main army. Can one of these Roman armies be selected as an ally?
Yes, allies are completely unaffected by this change.

Re: dkalenda has won Classical Antiquity Division A!

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2019 3:08 pm
by stockwellpete
devoncop wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 2:38 pm
So the winner of the top Division in the entire League wins with a regular none Medium Infantry spam army.

Almost like all the demands to regulate low quality massed armies was a bit .....you know....pointless😉
Really?

The two armies that stand out for having lots of low cost, low quality units (both HF and MF) are the Romano-British and the Kingdom of Soissons. They do not feature in the Classical Antiquity section. In Late Antiquity this time the winning army in each section was as follows . . .
Division A - Romano-British
Division B - very likely to be Kingdom of Soissons
Division C - Ostrogoths (Romano-British finished eighth)
Division D - Kingdom of Soissons

The Romano-British also featured in Division B of Early Middle Ages and finished second.

So these two armies have had very successful seasons and will be among the armies with the best win ratios.

Re: Revised army lists for Season 6 . . .

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2019 4:04 pm
by batesmotel
stockwellpete wrote:
Tue Jul 23, 2019 5:17 pm
Well, you are going to have to get used to the idea because I will be bringing it in for Season 6. The other reason for doing this is because at the moment it is possible to have 6 pike armies in the same division - Antigonid, Lysimachid, Macedonian, Ptolemaic, Seleucid plus the non-Diadochi Pyrrhic. Under the new regulation the maximum number of pike armies per division will be 3 i.e. two Diadochi armies plus the Pyrrhic. 3 out of 10 is definitely enough.
Out of curiosity, how are you counting the Macedonian armies of Phillip and Alexander? Are they not pike armies or are you including them in with Diadochoi which they shouldn't be.

Chris

Re: Revised army lists for Season 6 . . .

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2019 5:14 pm
by stockwellpete
batesmotel wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 4:04 pm

Out of curiosity, how are you counting the Macedonian armies of Phillip and Alexander? Are they not pike armies or are you including them in with Diadochoi which they shouldn't be.

Chris
For the tournament, this is the list for the "Diadochi nation". I know the Diadochi period was much shorter, roughly 323- 275 BC but this works for my purposes and it is straightforward to understand. This is important in itself when dealing with 60-70 players.

Antigonid 320-301 BC
Lysimachid 320-281 BC
Macedonian 355-329 BC
Macedonian 328-321 BC
Macedonian 320-261 BC
Macedonian 260-148 BC
Ptolemaic 320-218 BC
Ptolemaic 217-167 BC
Ptolemaic 166-56 BC
Ptolemaic 55-30 BC
Seleucid 320-303 BC
Seleucid 302-301 BC
Seleucid 300-206 BC
Seleucid 205-167 BC
Seleucid 166-125 BC
Seleucid 124-63 BC

Re: dkalenda has won Classical Antiquity Division A!

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2019 6:14 pm
by devoncop
That is true but in season 1 of FOGDL massed archers dominated. These things change as folks learn to counter particular armies.

My point is that the winner of Div A could have chosen a cheap massed infantry army even in VS but didn't and he won fair and square without help from rule restrictions.

Like you have said though, you are introducing those rules and if folk want to enter they need to be able to accept them.

Re: dkalenda has won Classical Antiquity Division A!

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2019 6:22 pm
by stockwellpete
devoncop wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 6:14 pm
That is true but in season 1 of FOGDL massed archers dominated. These things change as folks learn to counter particular armies.

My point is that the winner of Div A could have chosen a cheap massed infantry army even in VS but didn't and he won fair and square without help from rule restrictions.

Like you have said though, you are introducing those rules and if folk want to enter they need to be able to accept them.
Massed archers were nerfed by Richard and were not available at all in the FOG2DL for one season. These massed infantry armies may be nerfed in the near future, but I have no plans to withdraw them for Season 6. So I am not introducing any rules at all pertaining to these sorts of armies. :?

Re: dkalenda has won Classical Antiquity Division A!

Posted: Thu Jul 25, 2019 6:39 pm
by devoncop
stockwellpete wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 6:22 pm
devoncop wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 6:14 pm
That is true but in season 1 of FOGDL massed archers dominated. These things change as folks learn to counter particular armies.

My point is that the winner of Div A could have chosen a cheap massed infantry army even in VS but didn't and he won fair and square without help from rule restrictions.

Like you have said though, you are introducing those rules and if folk want to enter they need to be able to accept them.
Massed archers were nerfed by Richard and were not available at all in the FOG2DL for one season. These massed infantry armies may be nerfed in the near future, but I have no plans to withdraw them for Season 6. So I am not introducing any rules at all pertaining to these sorts of armies. :?

I must have misunderstood then....I thought if someone used the army in season 5 they would be barred from using them in season 6 ?