I resign!

Old_Warrior · Post by **Old_Warrior** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 3:52 am

Either play password protected games or use an army that can field a goodly amount of skirmishers like the Byzantines or Syrians when you play open challenges.

As I find more friends on the MP format I am going to move to Password matches more and more. I am teaching a new guy the system and he and I will probably become fast opponents for new games.

Honestly I like the challenge of mismatches because they happened historically. But if you do not enjoy the matchups and do not want to use massive amounts of skirmishers why not pick a scenario and use the dual play format? That means even up all around and the better player emerges the winner.

Usually that is my opponent!

stockwellpete · Post by **stockwellpete** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 8:03 am

TheGrayMouser wrote:Hmm, that might be going a little too far, some armies are so flexible and or have so many ally options they could tailor make themselves to be ideal againt almost anyone. (of course you could argue the acceptor of a challenge can do so anyhow)

But it would be more realistic and it would create that extra element that league games have whereby you have to think a bit about the opposing army and what they might turn up with before you make your selection. It would be the same for both players and it would remove the "ambush" element, which is really my main gripe.

Geordietaf · Post by **Geordietaf** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 9:16 am

I too am wearied by placing open challenges and naming my army and then being faced with an opponent whose idea of fun is to stand back and shoot me to pieces while keeping hordes of cataphracts ready to mop up the survivors. To paraphrase the french guy, 'c'est la guerre mais ce n'est pas magnifique'

I will however keep on posting open challenges and naming my army because that way I get to meet new players and there are still lots of people around who want a competitive game where both sides stand a chance of victory. If we all resort to closed challenges against people we know, how will newcomers get a look in?

stockwellpete · Post by **stockwellpete** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 10:22 am

Geordietaf wrote:If we all resort to closed challenges against people we know, how will newcomers get a look in?

If newcomers post open challenges that name their armies then I will still pick them up and choose suitable historical opponents (unless they are skirmisher-heavy type armies, of course).

stockwellpete · Post by **stockwellpete** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 10:23 am

dazzam, got your PM. But "debug mode" is prevening me from replying to you at the moment - good idea you have though.

Adraeth · Post by **Adraeth** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 1:02 pm

A good way shold be for DAG challenges:

The player that issue the challenge will choose his army and 5 available opponent armies, the player that accept the challenge is compelled to use one of them.

This should be a choice in making DAG battles (not the only way to make DAG battles), like "DAG battle - closed army list" or something similar

For example i Issue Medieval Welsh 300 pts Vs Englis HYW/French HYW/Scots Isles/Irish/Medieval Germans.... the opponent will choose one of the 5 armies posted

Xiggy · Post by **Xiggy** » Mon Apr 04, 2011 4:10 pm

I would just make a list of people you would like to play and PM them. Asking to play a match. Negotiate points armies etc.

That would solve your problem.

I did not play league this time because you have to play 2 many games in to short a time. It was becoming work, not fun for me. I may go back to it next season, but I am not sure. The league is fun.

davouthojo · Post by **davouthojo** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 4:43 am

The simplest solution is the one we have asked Slitherine for....oh, a year - the ability to write a short comment when you post a challenge. Then you can have full flexibility - speed, terrain, opposition army etc

Morbio · Post by **Morbio** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:24 am

davouthojo wrote:The simplest solution is the one we have asked Slitherine for....oh, a year - the ability to write a short comment when you post a challenge. Then you can have full flexibility - speed, terrain, opposition army etc

I fully agree. It's one of the most simple and most flexible solutions.

It allows for all preferences including those that like total surprises.

omarquatar · Post by **omarquatar** » Tue Apr 05, 2011 7:07 pm

stockwellpete wrote:
deeter wrote:I feel your pain. That's why I don't accept blind challenges or offer open challenges anymore.

Deeter
I think that I am heading in that direction too, deeter.

it was my fear from the beginning, pete; competitive league play is killing the free, friendly, informal, history-oriented game

Morbio · Post by **Morbio** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:38 am

omarquatar wrote:
stockwellpete wrote:
deeter wrote:I feel your pain. That's why I don't accept blind challenges or offer open challenges anymore.

Deeter
I think that I am heading in that direction too, deeter.
it was my fear from the beginning, pete; competitive league play is killing the free, friendly, informal, history-oriented game

No, it's not, they are not mutually exclusive things.

You can play competitive (league or otherwise) games and play social or historical games. I like the competitive element of the leagues and do my best to win, but I also play fun games with both people I know (as much as you can on the internet) and with random people via pickup games.

The current system allows all possibilities. The only thing that needs doing to improve it (IMO) is to allow some text to explain preferences on open posts.

Xiggy · Post by **Xiggy** » Wed Apr 06, 2011 6:39 pm

I would like for them to list each book with a checkmark when issuing challenges. IF, ror, LTR and the 2 fog lists are compatible histoircally more or less. (Parthian fought the Sasanids and the Saleucids as an example) There is some overlap between the books. But now your choices are the 1 book (Which is kind of limiting) or everyone.

JocaRamiro · Post by **JocaRamiro** » Fri Apr 08, 2011 1:41 pm

I for one, would like to see a report on how "Pantherboy vs the Horde" went.

Xiggy · Post by **Xiggy** » Fri Apr 08, 2011 2:09 pm

Pantherboy had to win. He even wins with numidians.

I had a new resignation the other night. Happened after turn 1 against a saleucid army. That is a first.

stockwellpete · Post by **stockwellpete** » Sat Apr 09, 2011 7:07 am

JocaRamiro wrote:I for one, would like to see a report on how "Pantherboy vs the Horde" went.

The horde were destroyed - I lost 70pts, pantherboy lost 20pts. I am pleased to say that that was the one and only time that I will ever play with a horde army. It was excruciating!

JocaRamiro · Post by **JocaRamiro** » Sun Apr 17, 2011 6:21 pm

This is interesting tp hear.

Now for the details? I think many would like to know more about the art of defeating hordes.

stockwellpete · Post by **stockwellpete** » Sun Apr 17, 2011 8:00 pm

JocaRamiro wrote:This is interesting tp hear.

Now for the details? I think many would like to know more about the art of defeating hordes.

Well, I can't give away all his secrets but you need 40BG's+ and you need to think "fishing net". Ooops, I've said too much already, you'll have pantherboy after me now!

Morbio · Post by **Morbio** » Mon Apr 18, 2011 9:30 pm

stockwellpete wrote:
JocaRamiro wrote:This is interesting tp hear.

Now for the details? I think many would like to know more about the art of defeating hordes.
Well, I can't give away all his secrets but you need 40BG's+ and you need to think "fishing net". Ooops, I've said too much already, you'll have pantherboy after me now!

Not a pleasant thought - RUN!

Ooops, no point running, there is nowhere to hide and he will get you in the end!

I resign!

Challenges - Password Games