superiority of Pyrrhic army

Field of Glory II is a turn-based tactical game set during the Rise of Rome from 280 BC to 25 BC.
Post Reply
Aryaman
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:12 pm

superiority of Pyrrhic army

Post by Aryaman » Thu Nov 02, 2017 11:41 am

Hi
I think the second tournament results so far has shown a clear superiority of the Pyrrhic army over the Roman army, since everytime both players won each won of the battles, they all won with the Pyrrhic army.

JaM2013
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 542
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:02 pm

Re: superiority of Pyrrhic army

Post by JaM2013 » Thu Nov 02, 2017 12:21 pm

which kinda suggests balance is a bit off towards Romans... Their main strength is set against them in FoG2.. they had number advantage, yet because their units are smaller, pikemen army has advantage.. i think unit cost should also take into account number of men in unit..
Image

jomni
Sengoku Jidai
Sengoku Jidai
Posts: 1376
Joined: Thu Dec 03, 2009 1:20 am

Re: superiority of Pyrrhic army

Post by jomni » Thu Nov 02, 2017 12:35 pm

JaM2013 wrote:which kinda suggests balance is a bit off towards Romans... Their main strength is set against them in FoG2.. they had number advantage, yet because their units are smaller, pikemen army has advantage.. i think unit cost should also take into account number of men in unit..
It does actually.

TheGrayMouser
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4637
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: superiority of Pyrrhic army

Post by TheGrayMouser » Thu Nov 02, 2017 12:40 pm

Well the Romans did lose battles to Pyrhuss, but caused him much grief and seems the way many of those MP game went.

Was it Plutarch that wrote that instead of teeth, he had one large "rim" of solid bone in which he had "teeth lines" drawn?

JaM2013
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 542
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:02 pm

Re: superiority of Pyrrhic army

Post by JaM2013 » Thu Nov 02, 2017 12:55 pm

they lost first one(Heraclea), while the second one (Asculum) was celebrated as victory by both sides... third one (Maleventum/Beneventum) was clear victory for Romans..
Image

JaM2013
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 542
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:02 pm

Re: superiority of Pyrrhic army

Post by JaM2013 » Thu Nov 02, 2017 12:56 pm

jomni wrote:
JaM2013 wrote:which kinda suggests balance is a bit off towards Romans... Their main strength is set against them in FoG2.. they had number advantage, yet because their units are smaller, pikemen army has advantage.. i think unit cost should also take into account number of men in unit..
It does actually.
I know it is, but i think it should be improved a bit, based on more aspects...
Image

TheGrayMouser
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4637
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: superiority of Pyrrhic army

Post by TheGrayMouser » Thu Nov 02, 2017 1:22 pm

JaM2013 wrote:they lost first one(Heraclea), while the second one (Asculum) was celebrated as victory by both sides... third one (Maleventum/Beneventum) was clear victory for Romans..
So? Perhaps the roman players need to pay three games in a row against a Pyrrhic army so they can learn form their mistakes. I know I would like to play that tournament battle again ;)

JaM2013
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 542
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:02 pm

Re: superiority of Pyrrhic army

Post by JaM2013 » Thu Nov 02, 2017 2:00 pm

my point is if its too one-sided, then there is some balance problem.. because in reality, these battles were close calls, with heavy losses on both sides.
Image

JaM2013
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 542
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2013 1:02 pm

Re: superiority of Pyrrhic army

Post by JaM2013 » Thu Nov 02, 2017 2:23 pm

From historical perspective - while Pyrrhus had a lot of veterans from Epirus and Macedonia, Roman army was not inexperienced, most of them fought against Samnites in quite intense conflict, therefore had plenty of combat experience. (only rookies would be young Hastati, but Principes were old enough to have combat experience from Third Samnite war which ended in 290BC)
Image

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 22234
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: superiority of Pyrrhic army

Post by rbodleyscott » Thu Nov 02, 2017 3:04 pm

JaM2013 wrote:my point is if its too one-sided, then there is some balance problem.. because in reality, these battles were close calls, with heavy losses on both sides.
That is certainly how both my battles played out.
Richard Bodley Scott

Image

MikeC_81
2nd Lieutenant - Elite Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Elite Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 730
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:28 am

Re: superiority of Pyrrhic army

Post by MikeC_81 » Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:03 pm

The early list Romans vs Pike armies definitely have the onus on the Romans executing a more complicated game plan and has a higher skill floor required.

Not necessarily unbalanced though. If would be interesting to see a pike vs early Roman matchup in round 3 of a tournament and see how the top ranked players do
FoG 2 Post Game Analysis Series on Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKmEROEwX2fgjoQLlQULhPg/

MaxDamage
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: superiority of Pyrrhic army

Post by MaxDamage » Fri Nov 03, 2017 8:23 pm

they have huge phalanxes and lance armored shock cavalry so what did you expect. As good as it gets back then.

also i would humbly note that romans are not required to auto win 24/7 365 on sight in all games

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory II”