AoW @ Leeds

bddbrown · Post by **bddbrown** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 2:37 pm

I am looking to try and run another AoW playtest at the Leeds Doubles (3rd/4th March) this year. I've spoken with the designers and they are happy for us to go ahead. I figure this is a good way to keep a constant flow of high quality feedback coming, interest up in the doubles and continue to cross pollinate the game. This will also be a chance to include more doubles people into the playtesting fold.

In order to figure out whether this is feasible or not, I'd like to get a feel for numbers. If anyone is interested then please let me know asap, preferrably by the end of Monday next week. If there are sufficient numbers then I continue discussions with the designers and starting organising.

Thanks.

hammy · Post by **hammy** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 2:40 pm

I'm in.

Would you be running the games doubles or singles? I suspect we could persuade Martin to play as well.

Hammy

plewis66 · Post by **plewis66** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:50 pm

I would probably be able to make it down, and will hopefully have enough experience to be able to not make too many serious blunders by then.

I think Graham will not be available that weekend, depends if he can make adjustments.

Syd is an outside possibility.

neilhammond · Post by **neilhammond** » Mon Jan 22, 2007 5:51 pm

Hi,

I'm a possible. I'd need to negotiate on that at home first. Would it be a doubles AoW format or a singles?

Neil

bddbrown · Post by **bddbrown** » Tue Jan 23, 2007 9:58 am

hammy wrote:I'm in.

Would you be running the games doubles or singles? I suspect we could persuade Martin to play as well.

Hammy

That is a good question. I am not fussed. On the one hand it is a doubles venue and it would be nice to keep that flavour. On the other hand singles games would provide the potential for more games and more feedback.

Certainly I also don't see any problem in a mix up as well. Shall we say doubles by preference, but if someone cannot find a doubles partner or just plain wants to play as a single then that would not be a problem either?

shall · Post by **shall** » Tue Jan 23, 2007 11:21 am

I am hoping to be there.

Si

bddbrown · Post by **bddbrown** » Mon Jan 29, 2007 9:17 pm

JD and I will be sorting out the details over the next week or so - stay tuned!

If you know anyone who would be interested in joining in the fun at Leeds then please get them in contact with me. If you have any thoughts about what you would like to see happen at Leeds then please let me know.

wakeful11 · Post by **wakeful11** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:00 am

Can't get the saturday off sadly. Can make the Sunday, and would be keen to do so......

Phil Giles

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:12 am

I may be able to come if allowed to play. It is a bit of a long way for me to come to observe.

clivevaughan · Post by **clivevaughan** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 9:44 am

I'd certainly like to have another go at another AoW competition and have already floated it with she who must be obeyed.

bddbrown · Post by **bddbrown** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 10:17 am

rbodleyscott wrote:I may be able to come if allowed to play. It is a bit of a long way for me to come to observe.

I have absolutely no problems with you playing Richard, and I am sure that no one else would either. More the merrier!

Any chance that Thomas would also be able to make it?

bddbrown · Post by **bddbrown** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 10:20 am

clivevaughan wrote:I'd certainly like to have another go at another AoW competition and have already floated it with she who must be obeyed.

It would be great to see you there. Maybe we need to pursuade JD to start a "better half" persuasion fund - getting time off for wargaming can be an expensive proposition!

rbodleyscott · Post by **rbodleyscott** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 10:31 am

bddbrown wrote:
rbodleyscott wrote:I may be able to come if allowed to play. It is a bit of a long way for me to come to observe.
I have absolutely no problems with you playing Richard, and I am sure that no one else would either. More the merrier!

Any chance that Thomas would also be able to make it?

I hope so. I haven't asked him yet. He may be only too glad to escape from wedding preparations. (He is getting married in April).

bddbrown · Post by **bddbrown** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:23 am

I thought I heard the word financee at the Chinese meal. Please pass on my congratulations. I hope to see you both there.

bddbrown · Post by **bddbrown** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 11:25 am

Just a heads up, but we'restill talking over the doubles / singles format at the moment. It looks like singles might be the best way to go in order to accomodate many players who won't be able to find partners and increase the number of games (and hence feedback).

If you have strong objections then please let me know.

donm · Post by **donm** » Tue Jan 30, 2007 8:16 pm

Bruce,

I am away a fair bit for work during March, but will try my best. It may have to be a last minute thing, so fingers crossed.

Don M

bddbrown · Post by **bddbrown** » Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:33 am

Just a quick check with numbers for Leeds. There is a strong amount of interest outside the current play-testing group, so the more play-testers we can get to go the better.

Currently the list of possible play-testers is:

Bruce Brown
James Hamilton
Simon Hall
Terry Shaw
Clive Vaughn
Neil Hammond
plewis66 - sorry don't know your real name
Richard Bodley-Scott
Don McHugh
Phil Giles (sunday)

Anyone else or anyone on the list cannot make it?

plewis66 · Post by **plewis66** » Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:37 am

Phil Lewis

I'll be there.

shall · Post by **shall** » Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:06 am

Terry and I are both planning to be there Bruce. Could you summarise numbers expresing input so far and we might even - if epople wouldn't mind - want to suggest a few armies we want to see in play.

Si

shall · Post by **shall** » Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:08 am

Singles might be best as long as we make sure the authors are not too tied up playing. If you need us to make up numbers too much then next to go doubles so there are less games from the free author to cover.

Si