Results for Warfare 2009

Ghaznavid · Post by **Ghaznavid** » Thu Nov 26, 2009 10:03 pm

The results for Warfare 2009 are now on the Hall of Honour

http://www.fieldofglory.com/hallofhonour.html

azrael86 · Post by **azrael86** » Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:05 pm

From the above, it seems that the bye in the IF/ROR comp is wrong.

In round 1 the recipient got 1 pt, round 2 0 pts, round 3 24 and round 4 13pts ??

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:35 pm

Why do you think that is wrong?

Warfare does the bye score in a different way to many other comps - there is not a set score.

peterrjohnston · Post by **peterrjohnston** » Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:49 pm

0 points for a bye?! How do they do it then?

azrael86 · Post by **azrael86** » Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:52 pm

It just seems odd - unless they did play a game and those were their scores?

Also as published the draw matched a player on 17 after two rounds with one on 2, but who had had a bye scoring 0?

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:58 pm

I believe that a bye at Warfare gets you 13 points temporarily for the purposes of the next round draw. After a bye player plays their next game the score for the bye is changed to be the same as the score they get in said next game.

Hope that makes sense.

Robert241167 · Post by **Robert241167** » Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:07 pm

Hi guys

Wouldn't it be fairer for the bye to be the average of all the other games a competitior has played?

A potential zero or 25 under the current scoring for it to be based on just 1 game seems both unduly harsh or unduly beneficial.

My two-penneth.

Rob

azrael86 · Post by **azrael86** » Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:22 pm

hammy wrote:I believe that a bye at Warfare gets you 13 points temporarily for the purposes of the next round draw. After a bye player plays their next game the score for the bye is changed to be the same as the score they get in said next game.

Hope that makes sense.

It does explain the results posted, although it is a rather strange system, and a bit unfair on the player who gets the bye in the 4th round. It also allowed a spectacular piece of submarining !

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Fri Nov 27, 2009 5:15 pm

Robert241167 wrote:Hi guys

Wouldn't it be fairer for the bye to be the average of all the other games a competitior has played?

A potential zero or 25 under the current scoring for it to be based on just 1 game seems both unduly harsh or unduly beneficial.

My two-penneth.

Rob

Well as the bye goes to the player in bottom place scoring it at your average would not be particuarly attractive.

As far as I can tell no bye system is perfect. The Warfare one is 'different'

dave_r · Post by **dave_r** » Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:01 pm

Wouldn't it be fairer for the bye to be the average of all the other games a competitior has played?

This was thought about, but it would make it far too complicated if the person with the bye was in contention for winning the tournament as nobody would know their actual score. It is very unlikely that somebody in contention for the trophies would have a bye in the third round. It also neatly solves the problem of somebody getting 25 points from their first game when, erm, their skill level wouldn't warrant it. Which usually means a fairly unpleasant second game.

rich · Post by **rich** » Sat Nov 28, 2009 5:41 am

As far as I can tell no bye system is perfect. The Warfare one is 'different'

How do other competitions handle byes does anyone know?
Don’t BHGS have a standard system for scores and byes for ranked competitions?

Basing the score on one game does seem to have given some extremes at Warfare.
It seems it can make or break your competition for the lucky and unlucky.

Rich

kevinj · Post by **kevinj** » Sat Nov 28, 2009 9:27 am

The norm is for players to be given a score as if they had got a win. In the BHGS doubles the practice has been to give 20 pts rather than the 25 maximum. Some competitions in the past have awarded the average winning score from the round in question.

Cheers,

Kevin

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Sat Nov 28, 2009 12:00 pm

rich wrote:
As far as I can tell no bye system is perfect. The Warfare one is 'different'
How do other competitions handle byes does anyone know?
Don’t BHGS have a standard system for scores and byes for ranked competitions?

Basing the score on one game does seem to have given some extremes at Warfare.
It seems it can make or break your competition for the lucky and unlucky.

Rich

The BHGS used to award 32 points to a bye in DBM but this meant that a player getting a round 1 bye often ended up getting badly slapped in round 2 as well as giving a big boost to someone who won big in game 1.

For FoG tournaments 20 points seems to be the expected bye score although playing a game against the umpire and getting the score you actually achieve is sometimes used.

Warfare is not a BHGS event. It is run by the Wargames Association of Reading

peterrjohnston · Post by **peterrjohnston** » Sat Nov 28, 2009 8:03 pm

We use 20 for a bye in Italy. The one tournament I player/umpired, playing last place, I offered a 20 point bye and play a friendly if they wanted, or whatever the game score was from a competition game. Everyone took the competition game.

rich · Post by **rich** » Sun Nov 29, 2009 8:01 am

Everyone took the competition game.

This seems a good offer if there is a umpire with time.
At least you get a game, which is what I would be there for.

Rich

marco · Post by **marco** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:34 am

is it possible to get informations about the army of m nikgaukroger
i like the skythians army

thanks

merlin marc

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 10:49 am

marco wrote:is it possible to get informations about the army of m nikgaukroger
i like the skythians army

thanks

merlin marc

From memory it was Kimmerian:

IC
TC

3 BGs of 8 Poor archers
2 BGs of 6 Poor MF Spearmen
9 BGs of 4 LH

Urartian TC ally

2 BGs of 4 Cv Armoured, Superior, Drilled, half Light Spear, Swordsmen hald Bow, Swordsmen
1 BG of 8 MF, Average, protected, Undrilled, half Light Spear Swordsmen, half Bow

marco · Post by **marco** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:18 am

thanks and interesting

marco

nikgaukroger · Post by **nikgaukroger** » Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:54 am

It was interesting to use in the period but (obviously) lacks much punch so can be prone to incomplete games whilst running around like a bunch of girls if the shooting isn't effective

Results for Warfare 2009

Results for Warfare 2009

ror/IF