Army composition for inexperienced players

A place for questions by and for the new gamer to TRIUMPH!
User avatar
Fab
Squire
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 8:46 am
Location: Milan, Italy

Army composition for inexperienced players

Postby Fab » Sun Jan 01, 2017 9:44 am

The accuracy and completeness of the Meshwesh army lists can make the army composition a difficult task for a newbie (for example a teenager).

I think that adding a "typical" composition for the most common armies can be a valuable help for an inexperienced player.

Any thoughts ?

Fab

Snowcat
Levy
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 1:27 am
Location: Oz

Re: Army composition for inexperienced players

Postby Snowcat » Sun Jan 01, 2017 10:50 am

I agree that such examples could be useful - although there are *quite a lot* of 'most common armies'. ;)

Cheers

User avatar
Fab
Squire
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 8:46 am
Location: Milan, Italy

Re: Army composition for inexperienced players

Postby Fab » Sun Jan 01, 2017 11:08 am

Where can I find them ?

Any example ?

Thanks
Fab

Snowcat
Levy
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2016 1:27 am
Location: Oz

Re: Army composition for inexperienced players

Postby Snowcat » Sun Jan 01, 2017 11:57 am

They don't exist yet (I didn't say that they did).

My point was that there are a lot of what might be considered 'most common armies'. Not just a handful, in other words. Although even a handful of examples might be useful.

Cheers.

User avatar
David Kuijt
Grand Master WGC
Posts: 551
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 4:44 pm
Location: MD suburbs of Washington DC

Re: Army composition for inexperienced players

Postby David Kuijt » Sun Jan 01, 2017 2:34 pm

Fab wrote:I think that adding a "typical" composition for the most common armies can be a valuable help for an inexperienced player.


That might be worthwhile -- how much variation do you think it should have?

It would take some significant work, of course -- there are 650ish armies.
DK

User avatar
Fab
Squire
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 8:46 am
Location: Milan, Italy

Re: Army composition for inexperienced players

Postby Fab » Sun Jan 01, 2017 8:04 pm

No, I don't think that each one of the 650ish armies should have a typical list.

I think that a newbie will start with some of the most common armies : I imagine Roman (Republican and Imperial), Gallic, Macedonian, Hoplite Greek, Anglo-Saxon, Viking, Indian, Persian, Crusader, Medieval English and French and so on.

Having one list, just one example, for 20-30 armies or, better, for 20-30 couples of historical enemies could be helpful.

Cheers
Fab

Marc Romanych
Levy
Posts: 6
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2016 11:05 am

Re: Army composition for inexperienced players

Postby Marc Romanych » Sun Jan 01, 2017 9:25 pm

I see Fab's point. For me, as an occasional wargamer and a newbie to the ancient period, I do not have the acumen, or perhaps even the patience, to assemble an army that is 'playable.' I have felt this everytime when I face off against a more experienced gamer who knows what they want in an army, leaving me to use unit selection criteria such as "that one looks nice" or "oh, chariots could be fun." What that functionally means as a newbie, is that I immediately step off into a game at a big disadvantage, and am handily defeated in a few moves before I even get exercise the gaming system. The only game I have done well with was the eight-player Chalon games held at Fall-in in which the army and terrain was already decided for me and 'all' I had to do was maneuver and fight my army. It was fun, and I did not win, but the competition was close enough to hold interest. Now, I know the experienced gamers may simply say that I all I need to do is learn the various types of troops and armies and go from there. Sure, but how does one do that without investing more time that one may have? What is the priority of learning - armies, rules, terrain, tactics - oh my!!? To my way of thinking, it could be useful to have starter-scenarios that pre-determine certain aspects of the game - army composition and battlefield terrain come to mind - so one can start playing and exercising tactics and having fun! Just a thought.

Regards,
Marc

User avatar
David Kuijt
Grand Master WGC
Posts: 551
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 4:44 pm
Location: MD suburbs of Washington DC

Re: Army composition for inexperienced players

Postby David Kuijt » Mon Jan 02, 2017 12:17 am

Fab wrote:No, I don't think that each one of the 650ish armies should have a typical list.

I think that a newbie will start with some of the most common armies : I imagine Roman (Republican and Imperial), Gallic, Macedonian, Hoplite Greek, Anglo-Saxon, Viking, Indian, Persian, Crusader, Medieval English and French and so on.

Having one list, just one example, for 20-30 armies or, better, for 20-30 couples of historical enemies could be helpful.


That sounds good, Fab. And achievable, with some work. I do think that your 40-60 armies (20-30 couples) would end up being bigger, maybe 100 armies total at the end, after all the "most common" or most memorable armies are counted in. But still quite achievable.

How much variation, though? No variation at all stuck in the list, or 2-3 choices, or?
DK

User avatar
Bill Hupp
Squire
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2016 3:55 pm
Location: Glen Ellyn, Illinois
Contact:

Re: Army composition for inexperienced players

Postby Bill Hupp » Mon Jan 02, 2017 3:33 am

I would suggest that the typical starter armies be matched historical pairs that give a good game.

Could there be a posting here or on Meshwesh of these typical matches? You could use the armies you have already used in the demo games at the conventions. That would give a quick 20 armies I would think where the work has already been done.

And if there were pictures of the armies (thinking photo box here) that would be even better! I'd be happy to help.

Bill
Bill Hupp
Thistle & Rose Miniatures
I play lots of games and I like Triumph!

User avatar
Fab
Squire
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 8:46 am
Location: Milan, Italy

Re: Army composition for inexperienced players

Postby Fab » Mon Jan 02, 2017 9:05 am

David Kuijt wrote:That sounds good, Fab. And achievable, with some work. I do think that your 40-60 armies (20-30 couples) would end up being bigger, maybe 100 armies total at the end, after all the "most common" or most memorable armies are counted in. But still quite achievable.

How much variation, though? No variation at all stuck in the list, or 2-3 choices, or?


I think just one list, no variation. Just to avoid strange choices by a newbie, as Marc pointed out, and let him play and learn the game system.

As Bill suggested, the composition of historical pairs at an important and famous battle could be interesting.

Cheers
Fab


Return to “Newbie Questions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest