Field of Glory II

[Agesilaus]

Chariots are hilarious. I have no idea what advantages they're supposed to have, but I always buy them. Even the gimmick ones that fall apart on impact.

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

http://www.slitherine.com/products/product.asp?gid=721

eld of Glory II: Age of Belisarius is an expansion of Field of Glory II and requires the base game to be played

Age of Belisarius expands Field of Glory II forwards from the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476 AD to 600 AD, a period when the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) army transformed itself from a mainly infantry force to a cavalry army in response to the threats it faced.

You can be part of the flowering of the new “barbarian” kingdoms that replaced the Roman Empire in the west, and the conflict between them. You can play a major role in the resurgence of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire and the reconquest by the Emperor Justinian I’s generals, especially Belisarius and later Narses, of the Vandal kingdom of Africa, the Ostrogothic kingdom of Italy and part of the Visigothic kingdom of Spain.

You can take part in the almost continuous warfare between the Byzantines and the Sassanid Persians in the East, and the Sassanids’ own troubles with their eastern neighbours, the Hephthalites and the Göktürks. You can lead the Avars to conquer a mighty empire north of the Danube, and to threaten the very existence of the Byzantine Empire – or you can defend against them.

Summary of features:

• Dismountable cavalry units
• 10 new factions
• 17 new units
• 30 new army lists
• 6 new Epic Battles
• 37 new Quick Battles
• Expanded Custom Battles module.
• Expanded Sandbox Campaign module.
• 4 new historically-based campaigns.

 

[oscar]

Been playing a few tournaments and the like (and doing quite well I do say so). Brilliant game (easy to learn, hard to master) with an awesome community (lot of grognard types so naturally good sportsmanship and conversation during matches).

I've gotten particularly deadly with horse archer based armies. The Hephthalites I'm rocking in this tournament are a particular favourite of mine boasting an odd but very effective mix of excellent Central Asian horse archers backed by elephants (love these things, max them out when I can) and cheap Indian archers and support.

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

Released on GOG.
https://af.gog.com/game/field_of_glory_ii?as=1649904300

 

[Agesilaus]

Pure cavalry armies ruin the game and should be heavily altered or removed altogether. You either find yourself at an impasse due to terrain and both armies refusing to engage, or the infantry/mixed army does not have a way of engaging cavalry effectively and automatically loses. I suppose the cavalry army might automatically lose against archer/skirmisher/spear heavy infantry armies, too.

Remove cavalry armies or make an option that restricts them from being randomly selected. They're boring & poorly balanced, and people who enjoy cavalry armies are usually very flawed individuals with an extremely low IQ.

 

[oscar]

Glad I'm not the only one who found them a bit OP then. But arguably that's not entirely unintentional as Western armies always found horse nomads extremely difficult to deal with and in general had a poor combat record against them until the late 1500s (what they solved largely via massed musketry). I think the Field of Glory series has never been too obsessed with balance either what I kind of like. Some armies are a bit underpowered (Illyrian has got to be the worst I ever played) and some a bit overpowered (horse archer armies, middle Romans, Indians till they got nerfed, warbands briefly before they got nerfed). What arguably fits the time periods quite nicely (and can be seen as if you want extra badass points kick ass with a shitty army list while big whoop if you win as Huns or 14 AD Romans).

 

[Agesilaus]

Glad I'm not the only one who found them a bit OP then. But arguably that's not entirely unintentional as Western armies always found horse nomads extremely difficult to deal with and in general had a poor combat record against them until the late 1500s (what they solved largely via massed musketry). I think the Field of Glory series has never been too obsessed with balance either what I kind of like. Some armies are a bit underpowered (Illyrian has got to be the worst I ever played) and some a bit overpowered (horse archer armies, middle Romans, Indians till they got nerfed, warbands briefly before they got nerfed). What arguably fits the time periods quite nicely (and can be seen as if you want extra badass points kick ass with a shitty army list while big whoop if you win as Huns or 14 AD Romans).

I agree that some armies should be shit, and some armies should be great. You're right that FOG definitely reflects this principle, and that's a good thing.

I think the problem would be solved if every faction was given at least some archer and slinger skirmishers, and/or the max number of skirmishers was bumped up. Also, slingers should have longer, or at least equal, range (as per classical source material; Xenophon says slingers out-ranged archers). Also, each army should have some sort of infantry that can defeat cavalry on poor terrain; some of the weaker heavy foot is incapable of defeating regular cavalry in poor terrain, and the army might not have any medium foot or only poor quality in tiny numbers.

If they do the above, then every army will at least have the option of screening effectively against horse archers, and returning fire to some degree. It would also help bait the cavalry into melee, which eliminates the primary source of boredom: endless standoff or ridiculous foot chase around the map. I think every civilization/army was capable of doing at least this much; I don't think it's unrealistic at all for any army in the time period of FOG to decide to field more skirmishers, use a bow or sling, and those armies with crap heavy foot to have the heavy foot spread out and fight as medium foot.

The crap armies would also still be crap; there is no need to improve unit quality, cheapen price of units, or any of that. The player with the crap army can just make the decision to invest more in skirmishers and, if the map calls for it, more medium foot.

 

[DakaSha V]

Has anybody tried this mod: http://slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=477&t=80562

The game is quite pricey (especially with all DLC) but if it has good AI (or can be modded to have good ai) id easily buy it.

edit: actually its not THAT pricey, but the DLC's do add up. In any case Im not too interested in MP, so am wondering about the AI

 

[DakaSha V]

So I played a battle (though not to completion, as i learned enough to consider it meaningless towards the end) and although i dont know much at all about warfare of the time period, this feels like a great representation. In fact i will probably be reading wikipedia articles in bed tonight on ancient warfare due to this fucking game.

Ai with mod seems quite a bit better than average (though im obviously a noob), and by skewing the odds in the AI's favor im pretty sure that a lot of SP fun can be garnered from the game.

In any case im enjoying my free purchase, and may actually buy it soon.

edit: only gripe is that sandbox campaigns are very limited, but i suppose its all about the battles, so they apparently function like decent battle generators

 

[oscar]

Multiplayer is painless and it's a very friendly community so I'd definitely recommend jumping in once you've completed a campaign or two. Tournaments are fun too if you can commit to reasonably prompt turn submission (even one turn a day will usually be fine, I'm in Kiwi timezone so usually doesn't get much better than that unless I'm playing an insomniac).

 

[Agesilaus]

If you see a user with the name "grumblefish", beware, he is a brilliant tactician and you should just immediately forfeit rather than risk suffering a humiliating defeat.

 

[Brancaleone]

If you see a user with the name "grumblefish", beware, he is a brilliant tactician and you should just immediately forfeit rather than risk suffering a humiliating defeat.

He told me "If you see a user with the name "Agesilaus", beware, he's a brilliant orator and you just immediately forfeit the discussion rather than risk suffering a humiliating defeat".

Pretty suspicious, if you ask me.

 

[DakaSha V]

Dis game gud.

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

http://www.slitherine.com/news/2614/Field.of.Glory.II..Age.of.Belisarius.Release.Date.Announced.

The barbarians are rising with the new expansion of Field of Glory II recently announced, Age of Belisarius. This DLC will bring you 11 new factions (Avars, Byzantines, Franks, Gepids, Lombards, Ostrogoths, Slavs, Turks, Vandals, Visigoths, Welsh), 17 new units (including the new fearsome Byzantine lance/bow cavalry) plus 30 new army lists.

Mark the date, Age of Belisarius will be available on June the 7th !

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

It seems that in this game routing elephants don't trample other units like in Great Battles -series.
Pity.

 

[DakaSha V]

It seems that in this game routing elephants don't trample other units like in Great Battles -series.
Pity.

Its modeled abstractly by an increased chance of dropping cohesion of nearby units after an elephant rout (but yes that isnt as cool/funny as a less abstract way of handling it)

 

[Beowulf]

It seems that in this game routing elephants don't trample other units like in Great Battles -series.
Pity.

Its modeled abstractly by an increased chance of dropping cohesion of nearby units after an elephant rout (but yes that isnt as cool/funny as a less abstract way of handling it)

Is the chance of dropping cohesion level actually increased? In the manual I found information only on increasing the range of such test to 2 squares.

 

[DakaSha V]

It seems that in this game routing elephants don't trample other units like in Great Battles -series.
Pity.

Its modeled abstractly by an increased chance of dropping cohesion of nearby units after an elephant rout (but yes that isnt as cool/funny as a less abstract way of handling it)

Is the chance of dropping cohesion level actually increased? In the manual I found information only on increasing the range of such test to 2 squares.

Could be remembering wrong. Ctrl click the elephant and read what it says.
I do know they have some added effect though (likely to abstractly model the elephant trampling shit)

In all honesty i wouldnt be surprised if a drop in cohesion is actually more realistic than actual troop kills.

 

[Latro]

new xpac is out

 

[Serus]

I recently bought it, damn it's tough. Or it's me playing like an idiot. Either way winning battles even on difficulty level 2 or 3 (out of 6 I think?) is not easy. That's good, not complaining here, the AI seems to be quite competent - at least as far as AI in a computer game goes.

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

Battle of Gaugamela was tricky one when played as Persians, Macedonians lost more men in my successful attempt than Persian side deployed pn the field (I'm playing on Legate difficulty-level).

 

[sser]

Napoleonic mod,

http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=492&t=82669

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

 

[Aqualung]

I need this to live

 

[Life of the Party]

IMPORTANT NOTE: Anyone who has Field of Glory II can enter. You do not need to own any of the DLCs to enter. You are all invited!

The Western Roman Empire is crumbling. The central authorities are no longer able to assure the safety of Roman citizens along the borders, or even well inside the Empire. Southern Gaul and most of Hispania are in the hands of the Visigoths.

The clock is ticking, and the fall is imminent. Will you be able to stop the apocalypse in the name of Rome or will you overthrow the oppressors and establish your own kingdom?

We are pleased to announce another Field of Glory 2 public tournament. This will be played using the normal Field of Glory 2 Multiplayer system and our automated tournament system.

To enter, go to the tournament page here:

http://www.slitherine.com/tournaments/tournaments.asp

The general tournament rules can be found here:

http://www.slitherine.com/tournaments/rules.asp?aPage=1&filterStatus=

The first round will commence on Monday 6th August 2018. No further entries can be accepted after the tournament has begun.

Specific tournament rules:

This tournament will involve three rounds. The battles will be medium-sized custom battles.

Round 1: 458 AD. The Emperor Majorian is attempting to seize back control of Gaul from the Visigoths. Roman (425-492 AD) vs Visigothic (419-621 AD). North European Agricultural.

Round 2: 486 AD. Following the murder of Majorian in 461, the Magister Equitum per Gallias Aegidius refused to recognise his successor, and set himself up as an independent ruler in northern Gaul – the so-called “kingdom” of Soissons. It is now 486 AD, and Syragrius, Aegidius’s son and successor, faces invasion by the Franks under Clovis I. Kingdom of Soissons (461-486 AD) vs Frankish (260-495 AD). North European Agricultural.

Round 3: 490 AD. In 476 Odoacer, commander of the Heruli, Rugii and Sciri foederati in Italy, deposed the last puppet emperor, Romulus Augustulus, and declared himself King of Italy. It is now 490 and Theodoric, King of the Ostrogoths, with additional troops supplied by his Visigothic allies, has invaded Italy at the instigation of the Eastern Roman Emperor Zeno. Germanic Horse Tribes (260-492 AD) vs Germanic Horse Tribes (260-492 AD). Mediterranean Wooded.

Games are paired, so each matchup will be played both ways. Each player will be able to choose his forces using the normal force selection system. Random maps are in use, so the two battles in each pair will be on different maps.

First round pairings will be selected randomly, subsequent rounds using the Swiss Chess system. Nobody will play the same opponent in more than one round.

The scoring system is as follows:

· If a game runs to the turn limit, each side scores points equal to the enemy % routed at the turn limit. If the game times out, adjustments may be made, depending on how far the game has progressed and who took longer over their turns – see below.

· If one army breaks, the victorious player scores 60 points plus the difference between the enemy % routed and his own % routed. The loser scores points equal to the winner's % routed.

Examples:

1) If Ben defeats Tamas's army, and has inflicted 45% routed on Tamas, and Tamas has inflicted 15% on Ben, Ben will score 60 + (45 – 15) = 90, Tamas will score 15.

2) However, if Ben defeated Tamas’s army by inflicting 62% routed on Tamas, and Tamas had inflicted 56% routed on Ben, Ben would get 60 + (62 – 56) = 66 points, and Tamas would get 56.

3) If the game is unfinished (or it reached the turn limit) with Ben inflicting 20% routed on Tamas, and Tamas inflicting 10% routed on Ben, Ben would score 20, and Tamas would score 10. (Provided that between them they have played at least 24 turns in all – see below).

Note that this system rewards aggressive play over desultory skirmishing. If you rout an enemy unit then hide for the rest of the game, both players will get extremely low scores - lower than if they played hard and lost.

Byes:

If an odd number of players sign up for the tournament, one player will get a bye in each round. In the first round this is random. In subsequent rounds it will be the player with the lowest score. The score for a BYE is 75 points for each game.

Round times and timing out:

Each round will last 14 days.

Any battles that are not completed by the end of the round will be timed out. The player who has had the game in his “My Turns” box the longest overall will be the one who is deemed to be timed out. This will not normally incur any penalties, unless insufficient turns have been played: If the timed-out player has played less than 12 turns, his score will be reduced proportionately, and his opponent will be granted the BYE score if it exceeds his current score. If the timed-out player has played less than 6 turns, he will not be included in the draw for the next round. This is to prevent someone else’s enjoyment being spoiled by being drawn against someone who has apparently dropped out of the tournament.

http://www.matrixgames.com/news/2655/Fall.of.the.West..A.Field.of.Glory.II.Tournament

 

[oscar]

Tournies are the only way to get any good at this game. It's a wise investment by Slitherine to manage these competitions as you really need about 10-15 online games under your belt to really get a feel for things as this is one of those 'easy to learn, hard to master' type games. So the online skill barrier isn't high per se but you'll definitely want to get in there sooner rather than later.

Pure cavalry armies ruin the game and should be heavily altered or removed altogether. You either find yourself at an impasse due to terrain and both armies refusing to engage, or the infantry/mixed army does not have a way of engaging cavalry effectively and automatically loses. I suppose the cavalry army might automatically lose against archer/skirmisher/spear heavy infantry armies, too.

Remove cavalry armies or make an option that restricts them from being randomly selected. They're boring & poorly balanced, and people who enjoy cavalry armies are usually very flawed individuals with an extremely low IQ.

I'm beating a Saka all cav army with my Dacians in a match I'm playing. Trick is to sucker them into a battle of attrition, trying to evenly distribute losses amongst your men and wear them down with your own skirmishers (you don't even need "unlimited skirmishers" like you suggested, five or six will do just fine) until they're out of ammo. Likewise I was simply out-attritioned in a game I lost as Hepthalites against Seluceids in a similar battle. The obvious common theme in both is both armies having infantry with high unit count (warbands and pike phalanxes respectively) which means you can soak up a hell of a lot of arrow fire before they score a disrupt. Crappy but dense units like raw pike blocks are perfect for this (and even garbage pikemen in square can make shish kebab of good quality cavalry). The Selly generally wisely suckered me into wasting my ammo on these chumps. Armies with smaller unit sized infantry like Romans might struggle a bit more since good unit quality doesn't necessarily equate to protection against arrows.

tl;dr survive the initial barrage of disrupts, don't panic, play the long game and you should be able to eak out at least a draw. Eventually the nomads run out of arrows.