|
Post by wstevens on Aug 12, 2009 10:12:47 GMT
Round one Skirmish game: Look at page 82 in the 1st edition book for Warhammer Ancients Battles. Here the sides are 750pts each that should comply with your army percentage choices – you should have one hero (not general) who acts like a general. Battles out of a hat!!
Deployment: This will be played on a 4 x 4 table. Terrain will be d3 woods, d3 hills, and one other piece of terrain other than aforementioned (optional). Arrange this amicably or by sectioning by dice roll. Armies are deployed no closer than 12inches to the sides or edges as per standard deployment. They will be placed in Order of Battle as they have been marching. To introduce a random element each player rolls a dice and the side with the highest score places one unit, and so on until one player has placed all his troops. The other player then places any remaining units.
Turns: This will play for no more than 6 turns or until one player concedes or until all his units have been destroyed or are fleeing.
Who Goes First: The first player that completed their deployment first will go first.
Skirmish: In a skirmish game all units involved are allowed to skirmish as described in the rulebook. However, this does not mean that they have to unless they are designated skirmishing units in respective army lists / books.
Victory Points:
This is the player who scores the most victory points at the end of round six – (unless the opponent has conceded prior to this). Team battle points are 3 points for a win, 2 points for a draw and 1 point for a loss.
Bonus: If you win two matches in the round robin you will be able to add a skirmishing foot unit of no more than 75pts to their 1500pt core army (not the 500pts reserve) for future games.
Further notes: It has been remarked that a player could actually take an elephant or two here. This is perfectly within the rules but generally elephants are at a disadvantage against skirmishers and they are very expensive in this type of army. Please also bear in mind the rules for your army when considering this – (the number that you are allowed).
Please note again that your skirmishing army is be led by a hero (not general). He will act as the general. However, all troops that are skirmishing troops will not be able to use his leadership.
If you wish to take a war machine this is also legal however what will you shoot? As troops will be skirmishers you could only hit one model with a bolt thrower. Stone throwers could get you one or two more – but I don’t think they are worth the points in this game. Again it’s your choice.
For troops that fight usually shoulder-to-shoulder (in rank formation) they have the option to adopt a skirmish formation (and revert back). This can only be done if the unit has a musician and counts as reforming. Remember that the unit that reforms either way cannot move or shoot in the same round. This cannot be done if the unit is engaged in hand-to-hand combat. Remember that Light Infantry only have a maximum of 2 ranks as they adopt a slightly looser formation than regular infantry (+3 ranks). Troops in skirmish formation that were not already fighting must move into combat in subsequent turns if they can do so – remember than skirmish formation allows for 360 sight.
All the above goes for Cavalry as well. Note that regular ranked infantry or cavalry can actually start in skirmish formation. They are allowed to move as normal from the off.
So with the round robin a possible 9 points by an individual could be had. Remember though that because we are doing this you will have to win at least two battles to qualify for the extra skirmish foot unit (up to 75pts) for the 1500pts roster that will be used in the pitched battle.
Any questions please fire away.
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Aug 19, 2009 15:05:34 GMT
So with the round robin a possible 9 points by an individual could be had. Remember though that because we are doing this you will have to win at least two battles to qualify for the extra skirmish foot unit (up to 75pts) for the 1500pts roster that will be used in the pitched battle. Any questions please fire away. In Retrospect I don't think this is a good idea at all for the team battle points. Imagine one round robin team mustering 27points for winning all their games, and the other just gaining 9 points for the losses. This would give the first team too much of a commanding lead and would certainly dispirit the other team. So a better solution is this: 1) Win one game = 2pts 2) Win two games = 3pts 3) Win three games = 4pts. (1-3 are not accumulative). 4) Clocking at least one loss (to a maximum) = 1pt By the rules there should be no draws - you fight to the death or until all the opposition is either fleeing or he has conceded. Let's say Julie wins two matches and loses one she would get 3Pts for the 2 wins + 1pt for the loss which equals 4pts max. Let's say I win one game and lose 2, I would get 2pts plus one point max for my losses generating just 3points. This would make for tighter points and makes it more competitive. Please note this is just for the skirmish round robin games. Still in place will be the 75pts skirmish unit reward for your 1500pts army should you win two battles at least.
|
|
|
Post by Simon Robinson on Aug 19, 2009 15:21:47 GMT
Victory Points: This is the player who scores the most victory points at the end of round six – (unless the opponent has conceded prior to this). Team battle points are 3 points for a win, 2 points for a draw and 1 point for a loss.
|
|
|
Post by Simon Robinson on Aug 19, 2009 15:23:27 GMT
according to the above quote from the skirmish rules draws are possible, unless we are fighting to the death / fleeing / conceeding.
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Aug 19, 2009 15:58:48 GMT
I forgot to scrub that out in the original post - done now.
The reason for my latest post is because it stops a winning team from overstretching their lead or have such a commanding lead that it puts the other team off.
The new battle points rules is a lot fairer for both sides.
I'm sure we talked about this last night Simon?
We are fighting to the death - or until the other side flees or concedes. This will stop people tactfully playing for a draw and boring the pants off their opponent with incessant hiding - when all they need to do is come out and get a hiding!
|
|
|
Post by Simon Robinson on Aug 19, 2009 16:14:37 GMT
cool, I thought it had changed but just wanted to be sure.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen Mawson on Aug 19, 2009 16:27:32 GMT
Hmm.
I think this will favour certain armies more than others frankly, most especially those armies with expensive elite units as under these conditions you have to fight them sooner or later.
My tactics against say Warrens Greek Phlanx would be to completely avoid engaging the Phlanx unless I could flank or rear charge it, while trying to take out the rest of the army. Playing to points I could win that game without ever having to fight the Phlanx at all, assuming my play is good enough to achieve that.
I think this is likely to draw games out as well, purely as actually wiping your opponent out is tough. If my army was reduced to simply my Numideans and my army general, most armies would then find it next to impossible to catch or corner such a unit. My responce to being in that situation would probably be to try make the game last as long as humanly possible until my opponent concedes out of sheer boredum.
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Aug 20, 2009 2:48:30 GMT
Ok I can see your point on this - if I said it a different way - you would have probably found a flaw in that too - its your nature to do so and I applaud it.
If I said six rounds then we are back to people playing out for draws rather than being beaten or trying to win - which would heavily favour an army of let's say running around Missile cavalry. My army is pretty static and small - so how would it be an advantage to avoid where the points are? You have already stated that you would beat it by flanking and rear charging it so I don't see why you then say you would avoid it. So the way that you have described it actually puts my army at a big disadvantage - but there are another five lists to play against.
Yet on picking on this very small issue you completely did not comment on the points allocation - which struck me as odd. There was no intention on my part to allocate points to suit myself or my army.
Now this has been turned on its head and I will have to rethink the points system again. The only way around this is to employ the warhammer battle system - six rounds max (not enough? what about 7 - 8 - 9? too much??).
Loss = 0 points Draw = 1 point Minor win = 2 points Major win = 3 points Massacre = 4 points Surely this makes it more an incentive to win rather than hiding or tactfully running away from the enemy.
I just hope that one team does not get three massacres each. That would be 36 points to 0 points which would have one team saying - I can't be bothered anymore. Now if you have any other suggestions on how to get around this then please fire away.
I can't keep changing it to appease everybody so make your minds up now or forever hold your peace - sorry it sounds a bit ranty but look at the time - I 've been working and preparing for school new year until now - and I just want to go to bed.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen Mawson on Aug 20, 2009 10:11:43 GMT
I have to admit I am better at picking holes in things than buildings them. Although I did spend a good hour yesterday evening trying to think up a better mechanism for encouraging positive play. Couldn’t come up with anything properly workable.
I certainly wasn’t trying to imply that you were attempting to subtly favour your own army, in fact that thought hadn’t actually even crossed my mind, I simply picked your army as an example as I know what sort of units you own, have played against it before and am reasonably familiar with the basic list.
I was quite happy with your modified points allocation as it happens, which I was why I didn’t comment on it. It made sense, rewarded wins, without over rewarding them. About the only thing I might say is that perhaps give out an extra point if you loose two games out of the three, rather than for a single loss. Purely as that would mean that 2 wins and a loss is not the same as 3 wins.
Thinking about it again, fighting to the death probably doesn’t favour the elite army that much.
I was more concerned about the time a fight to the death would potentially take, especially if you have fast moving missile troops, who have everything to gain by staying out of arms reach and trying to whittle your opponent down.
Perhaps my explanation on my tactics was not very clear. The basic point I was trying to get across is that you don’t want to engage in circumstances that put you at a disadvantage, such as front on into a Greek Phalanx. Therefore I would try for a flank attack, but would only carry through if I could get one.
If it was me I’d simply stick a 6 turn limit on the games to keep them reasonably short in terms of time taken. Considering the small points size, all of the armies are going to have to close on each other to some extent. Purely as the way the lists work means that you can’t simply load up on missile troops to the exclusion of everything else. You should get a definite result in 6 turns from most of the games, and if you don’t, just hand out a point each for the draw and move on.
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Aug 20, 2009 12:44:45 GMT
Ah yes I see what you mean - didn't see that silly bit of maths (not my strong point but I make do). Indeed it would mean that 2wins and a loss would be equal to 3 wins - 4 points each. So I think we have our final evaluation on this - I'm glad this has been ironed out.
So one loss = 0 points two or three losses = 1 point max. Draw = 1 point Win one game = 2 points win two games = 3 points Win three games = 5 points.
Matches to played to six rounds (sorry to keep changing stuff but it did need looking at). As you can see from this its ok to play for a draw but it won't help your team that much. However thinking about it 2 wins and a draw is the same as three wins so I've changed the three wins to 5 points to accomodate.
***STOP PRESS****
I have looked at possible scenarios on points and still we are going to have problems even with the above ie 1 wins and 2 draws is the same as 2 wins and a draw.
The other possible way to do this is to look at the way Fantasy doubles is done.
Massacre = 20 points Massacred = 0 points Major victory = 17 points Major loss = 3 points Minor victory = 13 points minor loss = 7 points draw = 10 points a piece.
Then when we tot up the points for each individual Round robin evening there will be a simple accumulated amount of points which will transpire into another equivalent table. Basically if the Europa league scores more aggregated points overall they get the 3 battle points for that evening as a collective. If its a draw (within 10 points of each other) then 2 points each obviously the losing team of the evening would get just 1 point. Individual Vps etc would go onto a seperate table.
Ok let's say the first evening Robert, Simon and Darrell score 97 points accumulated between them and Stephen, Edmund and Kieron score 110 points accumulated / aggregate score this would be a difference of 13 points which is larger than the 10 points differential for a draw. So Stephen's team would take the overall night battle points at 3 points and Robert's team would have to settle for 1 point.
This I think is the fairest way to do it. There may be individuals wondering how they can show their prowess on the table top but as explained I will do a seperate Vps board for everybody.
Please let me know - and don't worry about the maths I have excel to take care of any calculations that need to be done.
|
|
|
Post by Simon Robinson on Aug 20, 2009 17:50:15 GMT
Warren, your campaign, your rules. My plan is to turn up and kill what is in front of me (hopefully it will be the enemy) and see what happens.
|
|
|
Post by Kierons on Aug 20, 2009 18:22:34 GMT
See.. I get to bring an elephant, which means i get to kill anything close, friend or foe... kieron
|
|
|
Post by Simon Robinson on Aug 20, 2009 18:29:22 GMT
there's good eating on an elephant
|
|
|
Post by wstevens on Aug 21, 2009 9:59:45 GMT
Warren, your campaign, your rules. My plan is to turn up and kill what is in front of me (hopefully it will be the enemy) and see what happens. Its not quite that its about getting the rules right so that nobody and everybody benefits (it makes more sense if you read that again). The last set of battle points regs are a lot fairer for the teams. This is how we will do this. If there are any objections from anybody please tell me by this evening otherwise this is it.
|
|