The Rally Point (discussion and questions)

Moderator: Field of Glory 2 Tournaments Managers

Post Reply
stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 9187
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

From Cyrus to Tigranes discussion

Post by stockwellpete » Wed Apr 04, 2018 10:52 am

Just to continue, I have been keeping a statistic on the results of these match-ups. They are as follows . . .

Updated 12/4

Armenians 11 wins, Atropatenes 3 wins, 1 draw
Ancient British 4, Scots-Irish 9, 2 draws
Indo-Parthians 6, Indo-Skythians 7, 2 draws
Kushans 8, Graeco-Bactrians 5, 2 draws
Di 10, Chinese 4, 1 draw
Pontics 11, Bosporans 3, 1 draw
Romans 5, Samnites 10
Carthage 6, Spanish 7, 2 draws
Lydians 9, Achaemenid Persians 5, 1 draw

This section will continue in Season 2 but I will be looking to freshen things up with some new match-ups. Looking at the figures above the real shock is the Roman v Samnite outcomes. I was expecting it to be the other way round, to be honest. Any thoughts on these figures?

ZygfrydDeLowe
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 77
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2014 8:49 pm

From Cyrus to Tigranes discussion

Post by ZygfrydDeLowe » Wed Apr 04, 2018 12:15 pm

I think that Samnites are relatively strong when paired against the Romans for two reasons:

1. They can field more units, that are also Impact foot, Swordsmen.
2. Veteran Samnite Foot is of "Superior" quality.

Ad 1. It's quite obvious. With cheaper units one can field more of them and use them to either flank the enemy, or form a second line of reserve units waiting to attack flanks of any enemy unit that pushes back your front line units.
You can even set this up by placing some weaker units in your font line. It's risky, but if it works, it works great. Them being Impact foot (as the Romans are) mean, that they are not as disadvantaged in the first melee phase, as spear armed infantry, and therefore less likely to be disrupted, I think.

Ad 2. Your core infantry can hold out quite long, especially when paired with generals. That can give you ample time to bring your superior numbers to bear.

In my match with this particular pairing, I also managed to secure a hill with some rough ground, so I was able to hold the Romans, while my long line finally turned, broke through and encircled the remaining enemy forces (just in the nick of time, as my right flank was on the verge of collapse).
You can see the situation in this screen. I managed to win the game, just as my center was routed (with some reserves).

Image


One could argue that it's a similar case with Ancient Britons vs Scots-Irish pairing, except that Scots-Irish have also access to (less numerous) but better quality infantry.

MikeC_81
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 688
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:28 am

From Cyrus to Tigranes discussion

Post by MikeC_81 » Thu Apr 05, 2018 5:31 am

stockwellpete wrote: Looking at the figures above the real shock is the Roman v Samnite outcomes. I was expecting it to be the other way round, to be honest. Any thoughts on these figures?
The Romans are unable to exploit what is normally their greatest strength because Samnites are also Impact Foot. The Romans excel at finding the soft part of an enemy army, rapidly destroying it using Impact and then turning on the survivors while relying on unit quality for its delaying force to hold out. Unfortunately, there is nothing for the Romans to prey on in that list, unlike so many other Classical period lists. There are no expensive pike blocks to flank. No hoplite style spearman you can simply line up and charge to beat up on. So basically it is actually a mirror match except the Samnites get both a discount in terms of getting cheaper units AND the flexibility of being medium foot so rough terrain doesn't matter.

The Samnite army in a wider context will be worse off than the Romans against that same wider field of Classical opponents for the same reasons they can win that particular mirror. The relationship between Samnite Foot and Spearman, for example, is different than the Romans because the Romans have armour and better unit quality to help mitigate melee combat disadvantages should their Impact round go poorly. Being all medium foot means that you don't have +1 CT modifier when you have to try and pin and hold Pike blocks or survive extended melee with Spears and Cavalry. In fact, you inherit a -1CT modifier when you have to deal with other Heavy Foot that beats you in close combat so they are less resilient than the Romans are in the open.

Basically, it is a corner case where the Romans cannot leverage any of their advantages of being Heavy Foot or Impact Foot effectively.
FoG 2 Post Game Analysis Series on Youtube:

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

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 9187
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: From Cyrus to Tigranes discussion

Post by stockwellpete » Thu Apr 05, 2018 10:22 am

I have been doing some work on this section to draw up a provisional list of what will be offered in Season 2. I have come up with 10 historical possibilities and I am quite happy to add a couple more suggestions to make 12, before I eventually whittle it down to the required 9. The two Chinese match-ups are already fairly definite and the section title will be changed to From Zhou to Chen, or something else suitably Chinese.

The 10 I have come up with are these . . .

Chinese, Zhou (1046-701BC) v Qiang (1046-701BC)
Achaemenid Persians (545-481BC) v Greeks (550-461BC)
Carthaginians (410-341BC) v Syracusans (412-281BC)
Pyrrhus (280-272BC) v Macedonians (320-261BC)
Graeco-Bactrians (250-130BC) v Seleucids (205-167BC)
Kushans (130BC-476AD) v Indo-Skythians (95BC-50AD)
Romano-British (407-599AD) v Scots-Irish (50BC-476AD)
Roman (425-492AD) v Hunnic (Western) (376-454AD)
Kingdom of Soissons (461-486AD) v Germanic Foot Tribes (260-492AD)
Chinese, Chen (557-589AD) v Northern Dynasties, Northern Zhu (557-581AD)

All comments are welcome as well as suggestions for other historical possibilities. I think the match-ups I am suggesting are reasonably well-balanced but if you think otherwise then feel free to comment. I will leave this thread open until the end of the tournament before finalising the 9 match-ups.

MikeC_81
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 688
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:28 am

Re: From Cyrus to Tigranes discussion

Post by MikeC_81 » Thu Apr 05, 2018 2:20 pm

Picts vs Scots Irish looks lopsided.
FoG 2 Post Game Analysis Series on Youtube:

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

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 9187
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: From Cyrus to Tigranes discussion

Post by stockwellpete » Thu Apr 05, 2018 4:20 pm

MikeC_81 wrote:Picts vs Scots Irish looks lopsided.
You mean towards the Scots-Irish?

Would the Romano-British (407-599AD) be a better match-up than the Picts?

Cunningcairn
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 828
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:05 am
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand

Re: From Cyrus to Tigranes discussion

Post by Cunningcairn » Thu Apr 05, 2018 7:13 pm

Has anyone beaten the Huns when fighting Roman (425-492AD) v Hunnic (Western) (376-454AD)?

Cunningcairn
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 828
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:05 am
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand

Re: From Cyrus to Tigranes discussion

Post by Cunningcairn » Thu Apr 05, 2018 7:18 pm

stockwellpete wrote:
MikeC_81 wrote:Picts vs Scots Irish looks lopsided.
You mean towards the Scots-Irish?

Would the Romano-British (407-599AD) be a better match-up than the Picts?
Romano-Brits go well against Picts and the Scots-Irish and I enjoyed Picts vs Scots-Irish as well. I think all 3 make good match-ups.

Cunningcairn
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 828
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:05 am
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand

Re: From Cyrus to Tigranes discussion

Post by Cunningcairn » Thu Apr 05, 2018 7:19 pm

Kingdom of Soissons (461-486AD) v Germanic Foot Tribes (260-492AD) is another good match.

MikeC_81
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 688
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:28 am

Re: From Cyrus to Tigranes discussion

Post by MikeC_81 » Thu Apr 05, 2018 11:56 pm

Picts vs Romano-Brits or Scots-Irish has the makings of the Picts being swarmed by loads of cheap troops, much like the Samnite Roman matchup you guys just had. Both armies, especially Romano-Brits can field a staggering number of units and probably have more mounted troops. Picts only advantage is in the endurance of its Spears and superior skirmishers.

Seems like a very hard matchup for the Picts. Just my opinion of course.
FoG 2 Post Game Analysis Series on Youtube:

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

SpeedyCM
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 263
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 4:42 am
Location: Australia

Re: From Cyrus to Tigranes discussion

Post by SpeedyCM » Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:01 am

Cunningcairn wrote:Has anyone beaten the Huns when fighting Roman (425-492AD) v Hunnic (Western) (376-454AD)?
Beaten the AI pretty easily but haven't tried it against a human.

SpeedyCM
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 263
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 4:42 am
Location: Australia

Re: From Cyrus to Tigranes discussion

Post by SpeedyCM » Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:07 am

MikeC_81 wrote:Picts vs Romano-Brits or Scots-Irish has the makings of the Picts being swarmed by loads of cheap troops, much like the Samnite Roman matchup you guys just had. Both armies, especially Romano-Brits can field a staggering number of units and probably have more mounted troops. Picts only advantage is in the endurance of its Spears and superior skirmishers.

Seems like a very hard matchup for the Picts. Just my opinion of course.
I have to agree with this, if the Picts go all infantry they can get 15 Spearmen and 4 Warbands with enough left over for a couple of light units or 1 chariot.
The Scots-irish on the other hand can take 17 Foot, 4 Picked foot, 2 Warbands and then have 6 Chariots on top with a few light inf.

While the Spearmen are 720 men strong there are 10 extra units among the Scots-Irish that will flank and cause pretty massive disruption among the Picts.

ahuyton
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 304
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2007 4:31 pm

Re: From Cyrus to Tigranes discussion

Post by ahuyton » Fri Apr 06, 2018 1:33 pm

Cunningcairn wrote:Has anyone beaten the Huns when fighting Roman (425-492AD) v Hunnic (Western) (376-454AD)?
I have played it once, multiplayer, and won with the Romans. But it was close. By taking the artillery and archers I was able to do damage and the legionary units were very strong. I was helped by some nice rough ground and woods, I have to admit. And some pleasant die rolls.

I think it is a really interesting match-up though a lot will depend on the terrain of course.

Cunningcairn
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 828
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:05 am
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand

Re: From Cyrus to Tigranes discussion

Post by Cunningcairn » Fri Apr 06, 2018 10:08 pm

ahuyton wrote:
Cunningcairn wrote:Has anyone beaten the Huns when fighting Roman (425-492AD) v Hunnic (Western) (376-454AD)?
I have played it once, multiplayer, and won with the Romans. But it was close. By taking the artillery and archers I was able to do damage and the legionary units were very strong. I was helped by some nice rough ground and woods, I have to admit. And some pleasant die rolls.

I think it is a really interesting match-up though a lot will depend on the terrain of course.

I'm now losing these matchups with both armies :cry:

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 9187
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: From Cyrus to Tigranes discussion

Post by stockwellpete » Sun Apr 08, 2018 11:07 am

I have now replaced the Picts so it is now Romano-British (407-599AD) v Scots-Irish (50BC-476AD).

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 9187
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: The Rally Point

Post by stockwellpete » Fri Apr 13, 2018 8:36 am

There are just a few days left in the tournament now so I am inviting feedback from everyone who participated. I would be interested to hear what you thought about the tournament and whether there are things that you really enjoyed or maybe there were some features that were not so good.

We were trialling bonus points in the Classical Indian section and I would definitely like to hear some views about that. I have to say that my initial enthusiasm for the idea has mellowed a bit and I am not convinced that we should roll bonus points out across the rest of the tournament. The main reasons for this is that the existing rules do seem to be able to separate players in the league tables very well and there are hardly going to be any tied places in the final tables, which was where the original impulse from the idea came from. If there is strong support for the idea in our debate then I will run a poll on the topic next week.

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 9187
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: From Cyrus to Tigranes discussion

Post by stockwellpete » Fri Apr 13, 2018 9:09 am

stockwellpete wrote:I have been doing some work on this section to draw up a provisional list of what will be offered in Season 2. I have come up with 10 historical possibilities and I am quite happy to add a couple more suggestions to make 12, before I eventually whittle it down to the required 9. The two Chinese match-ups are already fairly definite and the section title will be changed to From Zhou to Chen, or something else suitably Chinese.

The 10 I have come up with are these . . .

Chinese, Zhou (1046-701BC) v Qiang (1046-701BC)
Achaemenid Persians (545-481BC) v Greeks (550-461BC)
Carthaginians (410-341BC) v Syracusans (412-281BC)
Pyrrhus (280-272BC) v Macedonians (320-261BC)
Graeco-Bactrians (250-130BC) v Seleucids (205-167BC)
Kushans (130BC-476AD) v Indo-Skythians (95BC-50AD)
Romano-British (407-599AD) v Scots-Irish (50BC-476AD)
Roman (425-492AD) v Hunnic (Western) (376-454AD)
Kingdom of Soissons (461-486AD) v Germanic Foot Tribes (260-492AD)
Chinese, Chen (557-589AD) v Northern Dynasties, Northern Zhu (557-581AD)

All comments are welcome as well as suggestions for other historical possibilities. I think the match-ups I am suggesting are reasonably well-balanced but if you think otherwise then feel free to comment. I will leave this thread open until the end of the tournament before finalising the 9 match-ups.
Last couple of days for this thread. Has anyone got any other suggestions, preferably involving the more obscure armies in the lists? If not, I will pick 9 from these 10.

SpeedyCM
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 263
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2014 4:42 am
Location: Australia

Re: The Rally Point

Post by SpeedyCM » Fri Apr 13, 2018 9:23 am

Got to say I have had a great time playing in the league you've done a great job organising this first season with the few issues that popped up being dealt with very efficiently.

Roll on season 2.

Cunningcairn
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 828
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:05 am
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand

Re: From Cyrus to Tigranes discussion

Post by Cunningcairn » Fri Apr 13, 2018 10:46 am

What about Jewish 167-111 BC vs Arab 312 BC - 476 AD ? I'm not sure if they ever fought historically but surely they must have had a skirmish or two.

Cunningcairn
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 828
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 6:05 am
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand

Re: The Rally Point

Post by Cunningcairn » Fri Apr 13, 2018 10:53 am

Great tournament Pete! I'm not anti bonus points but it works well without them.

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory II Digital League”