|
Post by Haardrada on Oct 20, 2017 18:27:53 GMT
I thought I'd start a thread on what players themselves think of their armies,especially armies they would recommend to other players.The reason could be to encourage starters,an opponent to a popular army or as a general interest for players looking for another army...any reason will do.
I have Completed: Hsuing nu Late Hoplite Spartans Tamil Rajputs Viking Ghaznavids Normans Timurid Late Swiss
My favourites are the Normans, with such a diversity of supporting troops and allies I never get bored of them.I particularly like the Normans in Italy and have a few books on their History.William Iron arm defeated 3 Byzantine armies within a year.Robert Guiscard began his career as a Brigand and rose to rule Southern Italy,excommunicated then the defender of the Pope defeating the Byzantines destroying the vaulted Varangian guard and then the Holy Roman Emperor....what a guy!đ
|
|
|
Post by timurilank on Oct 20, 2017 19:05:26 GMT
Haardrada,
A good topic and I hope others will respond with their thoughts.
My first choice are the Late Imperial Roman as they have a good balance of troop types that perform well in a variety of terrain, they are highly mobile whose number can increase with the options offered and they have a list of allies that can add extra punch.
They also have pretty shield patterns.
Reviewing my blog to see the historical matches I discovered no such series was ever done. That has now been added to the list.
|
|
|
Post by ammianus on Oct 20, 2017 20:17:46 GMT
Concur, I love my LIR (W) and their cousin, the Western Patrician Roman Army.
|
|
|
Post by Baldie on Oct 20, 2017 20:50:28 GMT
Personally
I got Ancient British and Eafly Imperial Roman first as they seemed like a good pair and Romans fought pretty much everyone whereas the Bfitish also get to play the part of any number of Barbarian types.
Then the Greeks cos again they get to fight plenty of others including themselves. There are also so many types of Greek Force Early and Later Greeks with differdnt troop options. Also if you squint a bit they can be Macedonians, Seleucids etc
I also got a small force of Medieval types that recently hit the table as Swiss, they are destined to play any number of Medieval forces.
If i am honest i prefer the Greeks because they look good on the table with nice big shields
|
|
|
Post by Antoine on Oct 20, 2017 22:00:28 GMT
I'd say Romans in general, opposed to one of their charismatic ennemy, for exemple: - Polybian romans vs later carthaginians (or Seleucids) - Marian romans vs Gauls (or other barbarians such as Germans or Ancient British) - early imperial romans vs anyone Roman legions whatever the period are well known and are quite attractive and, being a blade army, easier to handle. Their ennemies, like Gauls, Carthaginians or eastern successors can field different kind or exotic troops, and offer a different look and style.
|
|
|
Post by felixs on Oct 20, 2017 22:10:28 GMT
I would say that the most important thing is that one should choose armies whose history one is interested in, or whose style one likes. Playing that army should be fun under all circumstances (i.e. even if losing multiple games in a row).
Another thing to consider is the composition of the army. If a player already has a number of armies that are mainly heavy infantry, something lighter, or something with more mounted troops might be interesting.
The armies that I recommend to myself at the moment are: Post Mongol Japanese (because I like the look and because I need another enemy for my Yi Koreans) Polybian Roman (because they have so many armies to fight against) Free Canton (because I like the style and I am interested in the history) Hussite (because of War Wagons...) Classical Indian (because of the elephants)
|
|
|
Post by hodsopa on Oct 21, 2017 21:13:33 GMT
I like armies that can invade as well as defend. I like them with lots of cavalry or camels (which can set up in the channels, close to the board edge). In case the opponents, defending, lay down lots of terrain, you need 3 or 4 infantry who don't mind that. I like these to be fast auxiliaries or war band, because these can mess with bows (my least favourite troop type) whereas psiloi cannot. Probably fast pike or blade would be even better for that, but I don't come across armies with these. Ideally I like a few heavy infantry to hold a flank.
A couple of north African armies fulfil some of these requirements quite well: the Early Moslems of North Africa (with some nice Sp as a core) and the Tuaregs (who, when they are the defender, drift their camels through dunes and oases in a way that tends to disconcert).
I am fond of the warband-heavy Welsh, because they were my first army. I like the pursuit, quick kills and double rank bonus that warband have.
And I have a guilty fondness for the Macedonians and their successors - guilty, because as a democrat I admire the Greek city states that Macedonia destroyed. But I like how the pikes roll forward, and you have to watch your flanks because they are 2 deep and the enemy is not, so the enemy is in a longer line.
|
|
|
Post by felixs on Oct 22, 2017 7:01:20 GMT
No need for guilt. The sort of "democracy" that the Greeks had was so limited and so interwoven with slavery and all kinds of other unpleasant things, that it does not in the least resemble the idea of democracy emergent from the French Revolution.
As for army composition, I would not recommend looking for effectiveness too much. Playing historical match-ups and choosing an army one really likes seems much more important to me. The army optimization mindset kills the fun in DBA for me.
|
|
|
Post by macbeth on Nov 14, 2017 22:53:41 GMT
Find an army you can love when they lose - however you get that personal connection is up to you. In 2.2 I had a couple of favourites Pre Feudal Scots - after reading "Macbeth the King" by Nigel Tranter, then discovering the army in the WRG6th lists. I have read as much as I can on the late Dark Age period in Scotland and this army remains a favourite. Sung Chinese - after seeing it get slaughtered in a multi player campaign during the early WRG7th days, I was sure I could do better and bought enough to build the army. The more I researched the era the more I liked them. (I did better but not by much I pushed on into DBA1 and then 2. They rewarded me in DBA2 with a couple of major tournament wins. Christian Nubian - okay, with this one I bought it with prize vouchers to make up a campaign set then in a fit of madness decided to use them the next year at the tournament that I won the wherewithal to buy them. I crowdsourced via Fanaticus some advice as to how I would use the eclectic mix of LH, Cm, Wb and Bw and they did quite well. I grew to love this quirky army. DBA3 has changed all of these armies markedly - the Scots (now as 3Pk rather than Sp) do not do well under my command but I still like to bring them out for fun. The Sung have split into North and South and have compulsory Hd, I have managed to get the Southern Sung to perform and still love using them. The Christian Nubian have been almost completely changed - I am still bringing them up to code. You just have to be comfortable with the army however it performs. Cheers Christian
|
|
|
Post by paddy649 on Nov 15, 2017 10:02:42 GMT
Is this "what army would I recommend" to a new starter in DBA? If so I'd advise a root army that can expand into many different variants with just the addition of a few more units each time and has a good history of civil wars or regional conflicts so can fight itself or a variety of similar units. Later Hoplites or one of the Feudal armies would fit this bill very well a well. Also the Macedonian or Successor states that once you have a core of 6-8 Pike can be used in a variety of armies - if slightly dull. I'd also recommend Indians - although they are slightly more restricted in expansion capability and enemies. Alternatively - one of the fast to paint armies is worth recommending to a new started to get them going with their own figures quickly.
If I had to pick one it would be the one I recommended to my boy - the Later Hoplite Green Thessalians - which look great, aren't hard to paint, play well and their figures are reusable is tens of other armies.
If "what army would you recommend" to an existing player? Then whatever piques your interest and suits your painting and gaming style. My next army on the painting table is Polybian Romans with Hannibal's Carthaginians waiting after that - but that suits my historical interest. Berbers and Tuaregs will follow as quick to paint armies and then I'm hankering after Lithuanian, Tibetan and Sung armies because they are different and provide gaming variety. Oh - and pretty much anything with elephants because they look great n the table!
|
|
|
Post by goragrad on Nov 16, 2017 5:21:28 GMT
As a reasonable starter army Normans are a fair choice.
Pretty good set of options and can morph into at least three other armies and provide troops for several more.
|
|