The Dustbin

Moderator: Field of Glory 2 Tournaments Managers

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 9326
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Poll on player army choices restriction

Post by stockwellpete » Wed Jul 10, 2019 12:38 pm

Morbio wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 12:20 pm
I think you misunderstand my comments, or you underestimate how long it can take to get good with specific armies, especially for the casual player. I've been playing for a few seasons now and I've taken different types of armies to give me some variation. I don't tend to play outside of league matches, so the league matches are my main learning time (yes, I agree, that's not a great way to learn if I want to be competitive) and it can be hard learning. As stated, my Indo-Greek army of this season is a hard struggle, playing pike armies takes a different sort of play, impact foot another and warband armies yet another. Some people might not mind this, but others may be deterred, whether this is a real or only in ones mind.
Yes, but in your first season you have to pick 4 armies however short a time you have been playing the game - and then you get allocated one of them (not necessarily your first choice if there are a lot of new players in your division). For your second season selection you can still choose the 3 armies you didn't get allocated last time, but you would not be able to choose the army you have already played with. So you would, at minimum, need to add just one more army to your new list of 4. Given that a new player could have been allocated any one of the first 4 armies selected in his first season I cannot see how that is a problem if he then gets one of them in his second season. Surely he will be more experienced by then? And given that new players do not usually know what the most popular armies are when they start out their choices barely impact on the issue of certain armies never being available to the higher rated players in their division.

sunnyboy
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 110
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2018 12:16 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Late Antiquity: winners post your results here . . .

Post by sunnyboy » Wed Jul 10, 2019 2:12 pm

Division C

Sunnyboy (Ostrogoths 493-561 AD) beat Bluefin (Frank 496-599 AD) 49-8

Fortune did not smile on the Franks. While Frankish warbands would frag and rout in the blink of an eye. A fragged Gothic lancer would improbably survive multiple rounds of combat, disengage then rally back to steady in successive turns.

Thanks for the game!

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 9326
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Poll on player army choices restriction

Post by stockwellpete » Wed Jul 10, 2019 2:28 pm

CLARIFICATION

JUST IN CASE THERE IS ANY CONFUSION - ALL THAT IS BEING PROPOSED IS THAT IF YOU USE AN ARMY IN ONE SEASON THEN YOU CANNOT USE IT AGAIN IN THE NEXT SEASON. THE THREE ARMIES THAT YOU SELECTED THAT WERE NOT CHOSEN IN THE PREVIOUS SEASON CAN BE CHOSEN AGAIN NEXT TIME.

General Shapur
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Administrative Corporal - SdKfz 232 8Rad
Posts: 166
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 1:25 pm
Location: Perth, Australia

Re: Poll on player army choices restriction

Post by General Shapur » Wed Jul 10, 2019 2:36 pm

I don't think its necessary. If I loose too many with an army it won't see me as its general for the next season (no more Indians or Spartans for me). Not only that, but after 9 games I feel like a change anyway based on what I've seen other players doing (against me).
Look back over the past, with its changing empires that rose and fell, and you can foresee the future, too. M.A.

devoncop
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1266
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 8:46 am

Re: Poll on player army choices restriction

Post by devoncop » Wed Jul 10, 2019 2:45 pm

Forgive me Pete. Is it not more restrictive as that as you were talking about lumping all the Diadochi armies into one category and ruling out the whole category.

So if say Geffalrus with his pike fetish played with the Antigonids one season he would not be able to choose the Lysymachids the following season ..........or am I misunderstanding ?

sunnyboy
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Senior Corporal - Destroyer
Posts: 110
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2018 12:16 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Poll on player army choices restriction

Post by sunnyboy » Wed Jul 10, 2019 3:06 pm

stockwellpete wrote:
Tue Jul 09, 2019 9:05 pm


At the moment players who are rated in the top places in a division, particularly in the A divisions which tend to be more stable in their composition from season to season, never know which army they are going to get, whereas players who receive their army allocation before the better players have a much greater chance of getting their preferred army. For instance, players who finish 6th, 7th or 8th know that they are very likely to get their first choice of army in the next season.This means that certain armies are never, or hardly ever, available to the higher rated players. One way to mitigate this a little bit is to say that players cannot have an army from the same nation in consecutive seasons. I think it is a very mild regulation, to be honest, given the number of armies (with different allied options) that are available now.
Personally I like the idea, however I also understand people wanting the opportunity to play a favourite army.

If this is primarily a concern at the top flight, and less so in the lower divisions. Maybe this could be the price of admission to the big league and the rule be introduced to Division A only?

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 9326
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Poll on player army choices restriction

Post by stockwellpete » Wed Jul 10, 2019 3:45 pm

devoncop wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 2:45 pm
Forgive me Pete. Is it not more restrictive as that as you were talking about lumping all the Diadochi armies into one category and ruling out the whole category.

So if say Geffalrus with his pike fetish played with the Antigonids one season he would not be able to choose the Lysymachids the following season ..........or am I misunderstanding ?
I think this Diadochi business is a bit of a minefield really. The period in question is roughly 322-275 BC and only the Lysimachid army fits neatly into that timespan. On top of that the first two Seleucid armies within that period (320-303 and 302-301 BC) are not really pike armies at all, with their medium sized armies fielding a maximum of only 4 pike units. Apart from that, the various Diadochi armies are fairly similar, usually with between 6-8 pike units available (the later Macedonians have 10).

At the moment a player can select Antigonids, Lysimachids, Macedonians and Ptolemaics as his four choices knowing full well that he will be allocated one of the pike armies. I would like that to stop really. And if there are four players in a division doing something similar then that division is going to end up with 4 pike armies in it and I think that is probably two too many.

To answer your question (and to deal with Geffalrus's pike fetish), one way to deal with it is to say that in Classical Antiquity if you are allocated with one from the Antigonid, Lysimachid, Macedonian, Ptolemaic or Seleucid group of armies in one season then you cannot pick from that group of armies in the next season. At least that is straightforward for players to understand. Exemptions could be offered for the two earlier Seleucid armies mentioned earlier as they only have a few pikes. So a player could still pick an early Seleucid army, plus the Pyrrhic army as well (a pike army), in the season after using a fully-fledged pike army.

The other thing to do with it is to say that the Antigonid, Lysimachid, Macedonian, Ptolemaic and Seleucid armies constitute one "nation" in the same way that Achaemenid Persian, Carthaginian, Roman, Thracian, Byzantine and Arab armies do - and then give them an exemption from the "one nation" rule so that 2 armies from the group can appear in each division. We have already agreed to this mechanism for the other armies in our most recent poll. I think this would work OK myself and increase the variety of armies selected in Classical Antiquity.

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 9326
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Poll on player army choices restriction

Post by stockwellpete » Wed Jul 10, 2019 3:49 pm

sunnyboy wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 3:06 pm

Personally I like the idea, however I also understand people wanting the opportunity to play a favourite army.

If this is primarily a concern at the top flight, and less so in the lower divisions. Maybe this could be the price of admission to the big league and the rule be introduced to Division A only?
Yes, this could be a Plan B. I would actually make it for Divisions A and B. I think it is more of an issue for the higher divisions as the A divisions only lose players through relegation, whereas the B and C divisions lose players through promotion as well. The D divisions, where they run, often have a lot of new players in them.

uneducated
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 528
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2019 12:42 pm

Re: Classical Antiquity: winners post your results here . . .

Post by uneducated » Wed Jul 10, 2019 3:52 pm

Division D

uneducated (Jewish 163-111 BC) defeated KiFi (Macedonian 320-261 BC) 60-41

The Battle of Swan Lake

This general began his battle, like every battle, afraid and feeling he would lose. In this, he is usually right, though on this occasion, he was wrong. In his tent before the battle, he instilled fear in the heart of his own army by praising the prowess of the Macedonian Phalanx and outlining how the Jews could never beat them toe-to-toe with their medium foot. He instructed his marshalls to assemble on the slopes of on the right, and to make their peace as they were unlikely to see another night through. This was to be their swan song, and it was fitting that the lake beside the slopes on which they were all to die took the form of a swan, or a duck.

By good fortune, the Jews were able to assemble a strong line with their archers on the hill behind them. As the Macedonians advanced, they prepared to die. Between them and eternity lay only a river. Methodically, the Macedonians advanced. The dance began. Nervous, last minute choreography by the Jews unsettled the men on the hill preparing to meet their maker. Macedonian heavy cavalry positioned themselves beautifully poised to utterly destroy the Jewsh line from a rear attack, if the North line fell.

The troops joined in battle. The Jewish missile men taunted and escaped unscathed up to the top of the hill, safe behind their line. Their success in escaping devestation early in the battle, meant their presence and speed was keenly felt at the end.

Somehow, after intense fighting, the Jewish West wall failed, the North wall had to withdraw in emergency, the fighting became piecemeal, and the Macedonian cavalry in particular were making mincemeat of isolated units. The remaining Macedonians were in great discipline and could defeat all around them, yet so few of their comrades were left, their heart for the battle was lost, though those gibbering Jews who surrounded them at the end could have been knocked over with a feather.

Who was the ugly duck, who the swan? It could have turned either way. At some point, the outcome of the ballet was decided and all that now remains is the echo of quiet applause heard in the rustles of the reeds round the lake.

Thank you, KiFi! You are a great dancer!

(In the image, the Jews advanced from the top to the bottom. North is incorrectly indicated and should read South.)
Swan Lake.jpg
Swan Lake.jpg (891.13 KiB) Viewed 498 times

devoncop
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1266
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 8:46 am

Re: Poll on player army choices restriction

Post by devoncop » Wed Jul 10, 2019 4:06 pm

stockwellpete wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 3:45 pm
devoncop wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 2:45 pm
Forgive me Pete. Is it not more restrictive as that as you were talking about lumping all the Diadochi armies into one category and ruling out the whole category.

So if say Geffalrus with his pike fetish played with the Antigonids one season he would not be able to choose the Lysymachids the following season ..........or am I misunderstanding ?
I think this Diadochi business is a bit of a minefield really. The period in question is roughly 322-275 BC and only the Lysimachid army fits neatly into that timespan. On top of that the first two Seleucid armies within that period (320-303 and 302-301 BC) are not really pike armies at all, with their medium sized armies fielding a maximum of only 4 pike units. Apart from that, the various Diadochi armies are fairly similar, usually with between 6-8 pike units available (the later Macedonians have 10).

At the moment a player can select Antigonids, Lysimachids, Macedonians and Ptolemaics as his four choices knowing full well that he will be allocated one of the pike armies. I would like that to stop really. And if there are four players in a division doing something similar then that division is going to end up with 4 pike armies in it and I think that is probably two too many.

To answer your question (and to deal with Geffalrus's pike fetish), one way to deal with it is to say that in Classical Antiquity if you are allocated with one from the Antigonid, Lysimachid, Macedonian, Ptolemaic or Seleucid group of armies in one season then you cannot pick from that group of armies in the next season. At least that is straightforward for players to understand. Exemptions could be offered for the two earlier Seleucid armies mentioned earlier as they only have a few pikes. So a player could still pick an early Seleucid army, plus the Pyrrhic army as well (a pike army), in the season after using a fully-fledged pike army.

The other thing to do with it is to say that the Antigonid, Lysimachid, Macedonian, Ptolemaic and Seleucid armies constitute one "nation" in the same way that Achaemenid Persian, Carthaginian, Roman, Thracian, Byzantine and Arab armies do - and then give them an exemption from the "one nation" rule so that 2 armies from the group can appear in each division. We have already agreed to this mechanism for the other armies in our most recent poll. I think this would work OK myself and increase the variety of armies selected in Classical Antiquity.

So presumably if Geffalrus decides not to enter CA the season after he has used his beloved Antigonids (or similar) or I was unable to choose my zealots in LA we would then be allowed to enter the following season and use them then ?

I am not saying that would happen I am speaking metaphorically by the way.
I

Geffalrus
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 514
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:06 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: Early Middle Ages: winners post your results here

Post by Geffalrus » Wed Jul 10, 2019 4:16 pm

Division B

Geffalrus (Poles and Vikings) defeats sunnyboy (Byzantines) 47-11. Good game man. We'll definitely have to do a rematch sometime. :)

80% of the match was spent with very little action as the Byzantines didn't want to charge the Polish formation of shieldwalls and massed archers, and the Polish hadn't yet come up with a plan for how to catch the elusive horsemen. In the end, contact was forced when the Polish cavalry surged forward to catch a few wayward skirmishers, the pursuit of which drew them into direct conflict with some nearby Arab Auxilliary Lancers. While the Polish cavalry got absolutely manhandled by the Superior Frankish Lancers in the previous match, they did A LOT better when facing the lower quality lancers brought en masse by the Byzantine army. 60 point light spear cavalry is not too shabby provided you can throw it at cheaper cavalry. The better quality Byzantine lancers were held back by supporting Viking foot and massed archers. As night drew near, the Arab lancers crumbled just in time for the Polish army to claim a victory.

The Polish army corrals the Byzantines into a corner.
Screen_00000441.jpg
Screen_00000441.jpg (515.83 KiB) Viewed 479 times

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 9326
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Poll on player army choices restriction

Post by stockwellpete » Wed Jul 10, 2019 4:36 pm

devoncop wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 4:06 pm
So presumably if Geffalrus decides not to enter CA the season after he has used his beloved Antigonids (or similar) or I was unable to choose my zealots in LA we would then be allowed to enter the following season and use them then ?

I am not saying that would happen I am speaking metaphorically by the way.
I suppose so. I haven't really thought about it, to be honest. If you miss a season in a section then you may lose your place in the division you were in so it will be harder for you to predict where you will be in the queue when the armies are allocated.

devoncop
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1266
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 8:46 am

Re: Poll on player army choices restriction

Post by devoncop » Wed Jul 10, 2019 4:38 pm

That's cool.

Thanks.

Geffalrus
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 514
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:06 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: Poll on player army choices restriction

Post by Geffalrus » Wed Jul 10, 2019 5:00 pm

stockwellpete wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 3:45 pm
At the moment a player can select Antigonids, Lysimachids, Macedonians and Ptolemaics as his four choices knowing full well that he will be allocated one of the pike armies. I would like that to stop really. And if there are four players in a division doing something similar then that division is going to end up with 4 pike armies in it and I think that is probably two too many.
This is starting to feel personal, as that has literally been my picking strategy for both my seasons of Classical. :wink:

That being said, I have come to enjoy my experience with the Palmyrans and the Polish, so I fully recognize the value trying new things. I'm still gonna #1 pick Antigonids every time in Classical, but maybe I'll choose some other types of armies for my backup picks. I don't inherently think that merging the Diadochi into one category is a bad idea. Though Morkin should watch out, as I've had my eyes on that Epirus army list for some time now.........

Geffalrus
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 514
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2019 3:06 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: Classical Antiquity: winners post your results here . . .

Post by Geffalrus » Wed Jul 10, 2019 5:17 pm

uneducated wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 3:52 pm
Between them and eternity lay only a river.
Just an FYI as this was something I didn't fully understand until fairly recently...........all streams in the game counter Macedonian pikes and lancers to some extent. Your basic stream does not count as "open ground" which is required for the Deep Pike POA and the Lancer POA to activate. Without open ground, both those units lose 100 POA on impact. The pikes will continue to lose that 100 POA in melee as well. In essence, the 72 point pike fights about as well as a 42 point hoplite. And that's just the little stream. Large Streams will disrupt most mounted and heavy infantry units, making them easy prey for medium foot. And finally, Deep Streams disrupt every unit except foot skirmishers, I believe.

The only hope a Macedonian army really has at that point is luring you across the river, or hard marching to cross somewhere else to face you on open ground. The second option is my preferred strategy. However, that is extremely hard to do against the Jewish army because of all the cheap medium foot they can bring. If you line the banks of the stream with Irregular Foot and some Zealots, there will be no open spot for an easy crossing. They'll need to try and force their way across, and that means relying on small numbers of Offensive Spears. That's a contest you want, as medium foot and offensive spears are not the strongest parts of the Hellenistic roster.

Luring you across usually involves having a ranged unit advantage. However, that's almost impossible for the Macedonians to achieve because the Jewish list ALSO has about a billion archers. Park your archers in the stream and shoot anyone who comes near. Put a line of your cheap mediums behind them, and you'll have a very strong position. Nothing is an automatic win, but you'll force the Macedonian player to work A LOT harder to beat you.

uneducated
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Master Sergeant - U-boat
Posts: 528
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2019 12:42 pm

Re: Classical Antiquity: winners post your results here . . .

Post by uneducated » Wed Jul 10, 2019 6:23 pm

Geffalrus wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 5:17 pm
uneducated wrote:
Wed Jul 10, 2019 3:52 pm
Between them and eternity lay only a river.
Just an FYI as this was something I didn't fully understand until fairly recently...........all streams in the game counter Macedonian pikes and lancers to some extent. Your basic stream does not count as "open ground" which is required for the Deep Pike POA and the Lancer POA to activate. Without open ground, both those units lose 100 POA on impact. The pikes will continue to lose that 100 POA in melee as well. In essence, the 72 point pike fights about as well as a 42 point hoplite. And that's just the little stream. Large Streams will disrupt most mounted and heavy infantry units, making them easy prey for medium foot. And finally, Deep Streams disrupt every unit except foot skirmishers, I believe.

The only hope a Macedonian army really has at that point is luring you across the river, or hard marching to cross somewhere else to face you on open ground. The second option is my preferred strategy. However, that is extremely hard to do against the Jewish army because of all the cheap medium foot they can bring. If you line the banks of the stream with Irregular Foot and some Zealots, there will be no open spot for an easy crossing. They'll need to try and force their way across, and that means relying on small numbers of Offensive Spears. That's a contest you want, as medium foot and offensive spears are not the strongest parts of the Hellenistic roster.

Luring you across usually involves having a ranged unit advantage. However, that's almost impossible for the Macedonians to achieve because the Jewish list ALSO has about a billion archers. Park your archers in the stream and shoot anyone who comes near. Put a line of your cheap mediums behind them, and you'll have a very strong position. Nothing is an automatic win, but you'll force the Macedonian player to work A LOT harder to beat you.
Oh, Geffalrus, thank you! If only you had been there...

Field of Glory could greatly benefit from enabling a third party view so that people could watch and comment on moves as they happen.

desertedfox
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 83
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 1:07 pm

Re: Biblical: winners post your results here . . .

Post by desertedfox » Wed Jul 10, 2019 8:41 pm

Div B

desertedfox - Egyptian 570-525 BC defeated MikeMUC - Assyrian 62 - 49

Truly incredible contest. At one stage I was like 45 to 25 down and looking at a big defeat.

desertedfox
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 83
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 1:07 pm

Re: Biblical: arrange your matches here . . .

Post by desertedfox » Wed Jul 10, 2019 8:46 pm

Div B

desertedfox - Egyptian 570-525 BC challenges

Ulysisgrunt - Cypriot 680-550 BC

PW 4321

PM sent.

gamercb
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 3:53 pm

Re: Poll on player army choices restriction

Post by gamercb » Wed Jul 10, 2019 10:08 pm

I am just a lowly player in Division C and my taking part is to play against different players. I choose different armies for the experience as it does not seem to matter what I choose, I am either a very bad general or my luck is low. It makes me sometimes wonder why I play, but the opponents are good.

So if others feel that they must play with the same army all the time, then so be it, it is their loss as far as I am concerned. I have never been a winning is everything person.

SnuggleBunnies
Captain - Bf 110D
Captain - Bf 110D
Posts: 895
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2015 2:09 am

Re: Poll on player army choices restriction

Post by SnuggleBunnies » Wed Jul 10, 2019 11:23 pm

I personally like any change that means more variety, and more players being exposed to different playstyles.

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory II Digital League”