Special Tourney Rules

[hazelbark]

There have been many references t people using special tourney rules.
1) Are these listed somewhere?
2) Shouldn't they all be brought into these discussions for consideration or rejection?

[nikgaukroger]

The ones I am aware of are:

1. mandated numbers of battle troop infantry per med/hvy artillery base
2. removal of captured artillery
3. med/hvy artillery cannot be deployed such that they can shoot into the flank sectors


All those have been included in discussions so far (and 1 and 2 seem set to be in the update) - if there are any others I'd agree that it would be good to bring them into the discussions.

[timmy1]

I seem to remember reading about Superior/Ave Mounted restrictions but can't recall the detail.

[Vespasian28]

The ones Nic mentions are pretty much univeral in all themes whereas, as far as I know:

I seem to remember reading about Superior/Ave Mounted restrictions but can't recall the detail.

these apply to tournaments where there is a perceived weakness in the lists as published

[nikgaukroger]

Yup, missed the superior/average mounted one

Not uncommon to say that no more than half the mounted can be Superior and that if a list doesn't have any superior mounted then the most expensive Average types can be upgraded up to the half limit.

We have not suggested introducing this one, but hope that autobreak changes (and points when we get to work on the properly) will make Average more attractive to use. Additionally we have made a suggestion for allowing Superior mounted to Duty & Glory lists which don't have them as the lists from that book seem to be the ones needing the change.

[hazelbark]

3. med/hvy artillery cannot be deployed such that they can shoot into the flank sectors

Is this still being considered?

[nikgaukroger]

Its on the table as far as I am concerned.

There have been some comments about it in, IIRC, the other artillery topic. Please comment if you have thoughts on it

[donm2]

Its on the table as far as I am concerned.

There have been some comments about it in, IIRC, the other artillery topic. Please comment if you have thoughts on it

I still think the best way around this, is to deploy them in the first batch of troops.

Simple and easy.

Don

[RonanTheLibrarian]

And no more than 50% superior foot BGs, too.

[timmy1]

Don - still disagree re artillery in first batch - fine 1st or second batch.

Ronan's idea I ain't too fussed about either way other than for Swiss when it makes them even worse.

[ravenflight]

And no more than 50% superior foot BGs, too.

Is this realistic?

Swiss come swiftly to mind.

[RonanTheLibrarian]

No, I wasn't proposing this, just reminding everyone that it is commonly used in tournaments.

Personally, I'm not a fan of the 50:50 rule for foot or horse.

[ravenflight]

No, I wasn't proposing this, just reminding everyone that it is commonly used in tournaments.

Personally, I'm not a fan of the 50:50 rule for foot or horse.

I wasn't neccessarily posting at you but at the idea

[ravenflight]

How about those ideas/commonly used themes that aren't included in v1.1 we create a table with various options, then tourney organisers can refer directly to that?

[kevinj]

The reality is that there are no universal tournament rules. The ones mentioned are common but you'll often find a subset of them used as part of the tournament theme. Common uses are to mitigate the generosity of the lists, to push armies towards what is believed to be a more historical composition and to apply restrictions to artillery use. Many of the proposed changes are intended to rectify these issues and hopefully v1.1 (or whatever we call it) will achieve this and I would certainly want to try using them unchanged for a while to allow them to bed in.