Ever Green League Proposed Changes

[deeter]

I say no to allies and here (again) are my reasons: In FOG I, allies had their own general and line of command, meaning they fought as allies would, forming up together to hold one part of the front. For some reason this was ditched for FOG II and now is just a way to increase some desired troop type. I think FOG I's system was more historical.

Your chosen army is deficient in light troops? No problem just add an ally that has more. For example, classical Roman armies are strong on heavy foot but week on cavalry. Take the right ally (Pergamine) and you can have lancers too! Rome is particularly troublesome because it has a variety of allies that can morph it into a variety of army types that have little to do with Roman warfare.

This makes it very difficult to predict what type of army you're going to face. In fact, canny selection of an ally can decide a game even before armies are deployed. So Alexander the Great was great, not because of his generalship, but because he studied the lists long enough to chose the right ally?

As most tourneys allow allies, it's nice to play one where the core army and your ability to use it are what matters. But if they are allowed, they should at least be declared up front and kept throughout a tourney.

Deeter

[ericdoman1]

Hey W, how are you m80?

Good points but we play by the rules of the game. You could quite easily have one general to command all and only allied troops. Not sure then that if he dies other commands' troops take a test. I wonder if that was the original intention.

I am still playing FOG I digital. Thing is an ally general can still support any non allied troops. Also allied units can quite easily be spread amongst the troops. I do not know some of the present ancient TT rules but in the past, in FOG I and WRG 7th allied generals can only command their own troops, give them support, be part of unit and fight in the front rank so bonuses to that unit and rally them. In FOG I and II digital, yes it does help if a general joins a unit to rally it or to fight but units can rally themselves. In 7th and DBM, allies sometimes wouldn't move at all, unless they were attacked and if an "enemy command" was broken, they would then be able to move and attack. If a friendly command had been broken, they would change sides.

So once more, we play by the rules of the game

[deeter]

Doing fine, Eric.

Your points are well taken (and it's been years since I played FOG I) but just because it's in the game doesn't mean it should be used. Huns vs hoplites are allowed, but I don't want to play it. Corner camping is allowed, but that doesn't make it right. Etc.

There are a variety of tournaments available and the organizers set their own parameters of what's allowed. I like some and dislike others. I'm cool with allies, but prefer some tourneys that forbid them. I also prefer fighting with historical opponents, but that doesn't mean others shouldn't pit huns vs hoplites. Been there and am over it.

To me, good generalship is about fighting with the army you have, not the one allies provide.

Deeter

[ericdoman1]

Doing fine, Eric.

Your points are well taken (and it's been years since I played FOG I) but just because it's in the game doesn't mean it should be used. Huns vs hoplites are allowed, but I don't want to play it. Corner camping is allowed, but that doesn't make it right. Etc.

There are a variety of tournaments available and the organizers set their own parameters of what's allowed. I like some and dislike others. I'm cool with allies, but prefer some tourneys that forbid them. I also prefer fighting with historical opponents, but that doesn't mean others shouldn't pit huns vs hoplites. Been there and am over it.

To me, good generalship is about fighting with the army you have, not the one allies provide.

Deeter

As I mentioned before it is optional not compulsory

As for historical opponents. Only the larger empires could have numerous historical opponents. The majority of other armies would probably have 1, 2 or possibly 3. Ancient British, only have Romans to my knowledge. I think we'd all get a bit bored if you only played historical opponents and the same 1, 2 or 3 armies. It's best to word it as "Armies of the same era/time period".

A good general would use allies, if he felt it would aid his army.

[deeter]

True regarding historical opponents. Maybe I should say historically plausible? Anyway, I've had too many tournament games where my infantry army vainly chased a cavalry army all over the map or had to deal with a hundred slingers. These games are not much fun so I tend to play campaigns more than tournaments these days.

Deeter

[angusosborne]

AngusO - I think it would be a good idea to pm all players, as there is very little response at the mo. If you have their emails, that would be probably better.

I'm a bit slow, but I have done this now.

[angusosborne]

Should Ever Green League armies be allowed include an ally chosen by the army's current player? YES or NO

I really do not understand the impact of saying yes or no to this and why it should be either?

Can someone express why it's a good thing to allow? There was an obvious choice made when setting up the league to have it the way it is so why?

I keep wondering if your question was answered properly, and you haven't voted yes or no, so maybe it hasn't. My answer is that it seems unreasonable that a challenger can choose an ally, but the challenged player cannot. Either both players should be allowed an ally or neither. I don't see any reason at all to keep the rule as it is

[Holien]

Hmmm I still really do not have a good enough understanding on the impact of allies but in my recent game where I challenged Eric I allowed him to have Allies as did I.

I am happy to have both sides choose allies

So I guess that is a Yes?

[angusosborne]

I call and end to voting and the proposal passes.

Armies can now be changed to include a permanent ally. I will also allow players to choose a new army before their next battle.

[angusosborne]

I call and end to voting and the proposal passes.

Armies can now be changed to include a permanent ally. I will also allow players to choose a new army before their next battle.