Stratford Scramble Tournament #1(Completed)

[kronenblatt]

Hi friends, I updated the main post to tidy things up. If you have a moment please just look it over to see if there are any errors since I intend to just do copy/paste when setting up the next tournament.

Looks good. A couple of suggestions:
5) As per standard Swiss tournament rules, no player will meet the same opponent twice.
7) The winner is determined by the standard game rules. In a scenario where a draw occurs (i.e., no army has been routed at the end of the full 24 turns), the tournament will determine the winner by army loss inflicted by percentage as indicated on the final turn in the game. In the event that the draw is an exact tie, a coin will be flipped to determine the winner.

Also, how does the "Winners will play winners, and losers will play losers" work?

[MikeC_81]

Hi friends, I updated the main post to tidy things up. If you have a moment please just look it over to see if there are any errors since I intend to just do copy/paste when setting up the next tournament.

Looks good. A couple of suggestions:
5) As per standard Swiss tournament rules, no player will meet the same opponent twice.
7) The winner is determined by the standard game rules. In a scenario where a draw occurs (i.e., no army has been routed at the end of the full 24 turns), the tournament will determine the winner by army loss inflicted by percentage as indicated on the final turn in the game. In the event that the draw is an exact tie, a coin will be flipped to determine the winner.

Also, how does the "Winners will play winners, and losers will play losers" work?

So after round 1, 4 players will be 1-0 and 4 players will be 0-1. All 1-0 players will be paired up against each other and all 0-1 players will be paired up. After round 2, the two 2-0 players will meet in round 3, the two 0-2 players will play and the 4 1-1 players will play against each other.

Will implement your text suggestion, thanks!

[TheGrayMouser]

TGM (arabs) win versus Wmpryor (arabs) 53-60

I went cavalry heavy, and Wmpryor went off. spear heavy, An initial utter defeat of wmpryor's left wing cavalry force with my stinky legions of camels did not provide any benefit as my cavalry men scattered in pursuit of booty, taking quite a bit of time to get back into the fight. Meanwhile Wmpryror's tough superior spears grounf me down and evened things out, and the score was pretty much tied all the way to the 5050 mark, but finally my cavalry got back into it an I was able to claw my way to victory by snagging light troops here an there. Great game, cheers!

[MikeC_81]

Players welcome to Round 2!

In the 1 win - 0 loss bracket we have Rob123, Karvon, MikeC, GrayMouser

In the 0 win - 1 loss bracket we have Wmpyryor, GaryS, Captain, Kronenblatt

If this is incorrect, let me know asap.

Just a note on the armies, since we have 2 copies of the Arab Conquest list, RNG has determined that Karvon will be using Gary S's copy this round. That means he will be playing the Arab list twice, once using Gary's copy and then in the third round, his own.

The deadline is August 7th 00:01 GMT.

Code: Select all

Rob123		Dailami 928 AD		vs	Karvon(W)		Arab Conq 638 AD
				
MikeC(W)	Macedonian 328 BC	vs	GrayMouser		British 600 AD
				
Wmpryor		Assyrian 681 BC		vs	GaryS(W)		Byzantine 988 AD
				
Captain(W)	Arab Conq 638 AD	vs	Kronenblatt		Ghaznavid 962 AD

[Karvon]

Challenge posted for Rob123

Pw karvon

[kronenblatt]

Challenge posted for Captainwaltersavage (Arab Conq 638 AD) vs me (Ghaznavid 962 AD).

Password: GhaznavidArab

PM sent.

[MikeC_81]

MikeC is activating my terrain reroll for Round 2. Just posting for record keeping. New game is up.

[kronenblatt]

MikeC is activating my terrain reroll for Round 2. Just posting for record keeping. New game is up.

Too hilly?

[MikeC_81]

A lot of difficult slopes and rough. Pikes don't tend to like those types of maps

[MikeC_81]

Thank you for a great game WMPryor,

You found excellent terrain and held there using your missile fire to decimate my archers and shield wall.

I think my Byzantine superior numbers of cavalry made the difference in the south to wrestle a victory from you.

I am not sure how to post the results and which result. Could you please do that for me.

Casualties (routing) were : Byzantine 21 Assyrian 48
and for the final figures Byzantine 23% Assyrian 50% with a win to the Byzantines

Best,

Gary

Got this via PM.
Just to comfirm, Gary S defeated wympryor 50-23?

[kronenblatt]

A lot of difficult slopes and rough. Pikes don't tend to like those types of maps

True. Did you get luckier on the second roll?

[MikeC_81]

A lot of difficult slopes and rough. Pikes don't tend to like those types of maps

True. Did you get luckier on the second roll?

Open in the middle flanked by woods. Mouser surely has surprises in store for me.

[Karvon]

Karvon (Arab Conquest) defeated Rob123 (Dailami) 41-5

I fought these guys in the first round so had mixed feelings about having to deal with them again. The superior medium impact foot core is a very tough customer.

A long gentle ridge rising to higher ground on the right ran across the front of the Arab deployment zone. large woods lay in both corners of our side as well. There was a large gentle hill in the left corner of the Dailami side with large woods running along the inner side. A large patch of rough ground lay next to those woods. As it turned out, only the long ridge played any significant role in the battle.

Facing an expected horde of impact foot, I took my maximum allotment of superior spear and my own pair of veteran Dailami. I max'ed out my light foot for screening and elephant hunting. I took camels to support my lancers against his expected cavalry. I deployed my army hidden from view behind the ridge, initially massed to the right, intending to move up to the ridge and shift in response to his deployment. My spears were in the center screened by my light foot. The medium foot were on the right and my cavalry and camels were in reserve behind the spears.

The Dailami deployed a line of mixed medium foot, impact foot interspersed with a 2-3 bow, extending from woods and rough on their left towards the center. A few light foot screened his line. His elephant was in reserve behind the line on the right. A body of cavalry, mostly bow, but a couple of lancers formed up on the right end of the line. A few more cavalry were in reserve behind the infantry line, lancers as I recall.

I immediately shifted my whole army hard to the left behind the ridge and out of sight initially of the cautiously advancing Dailami. My plan was to use my lancers and camels to drive back and destroy his opposing horse and turn his right flank. My spears would advance in echelon with my medium foot serving as the covering force on my right.

The plan unfolded about as I hoped, my lancers and camels drove back or destroyed most of the opposing horse and my spears dealt with his elephant and turned the flank of his infantry line leading to the eventual collapse of his army.

A view of the final positions

[MikeC_81]

It would be unlikely that I could guarantee that you never face the same army twice (since each person must play their own army in the final round) but would you make avoiding that as much as possible be a priority?

[Karvon]

It would be unlikely that I could guarantee that you never face the same army twice (since each person must play their own army in the final round) but would you make avoiding that as much as possible be a priority?

It would be nice in the second round to not have to face the same list again. The final round people are using their own, so that can't be helped.

Karvon

[Captainwaltersavage]

Captain Walter Savage Arab Conq 638 AD defeated Kronenblatt Ghaznavid 962 AD 61-39

A very tense battle. The Ghaznavid cavalry supported by an elephant smashed by left flank of lancers and armoured archers. My right flank of infantry supported by some camel archers, advanced through some rough ground and a swamp to battle with their infantry where there was another elephant. I was able to win the infantry battle before the Ghaznavid cavalry returned form chasing my defeated troops. By the time we were finished I was defending the starting position of the Ghaznavids. The battle finally turned in my favour when two Ghaznavid generals fell in the same turn charging my weakened troops. The chain demoralisation that followed, allowed me to rush out from my line and secure a victory in melee before the archer cavalry turned me into a pincushion. It could have gone either way. Great battle.

[kronenblatt]

Captain Walter Savage Arab Conq 638 AD defeated Kronenblatt Ghaznavid 962 AD 61-39

A very tense battle. The Ghaznavid cavalry supported by an elephant smashed by left flank of lancers and armoured archers. My right flank of infantry supported by some camel archers, advanced through some rough ground and a swamp to battle with their infantry where there was another elephant. I was able to win the infantry battle before the Ghaznavid cavalry returned form chasing my defeated troops. By the time we were finished I was defending the starting position of the Ghaznavids. The battle finally turned in my favour when two Ghaznavid generals fell in the same turn charging my weakened troops. The chain demoralisation that followed, allowed me to rush out from my line and secure a victory in melee before the archer cavalry turned me into a pincushion. It could have gone either way. Great battle.

Yes, it was a great and fun battle! You're very kind attributing your win to my two killed generals at the end, but the truth is that you'd most likely earned a well deserved win anyway. I struggle with my d-n elephants: the second one at least doing its job, but what did I do with my first jumbo, Captain so skillfully taking advantage and finishing it off?!? Also, I learnt that marshes hide foot. And it was very interesting and useful to play lancers versus archer cavalry. Congrats to victory. Now I'm on to new losses.

[MikeC_81]

Man, you guys finished fast. I forced a map reroll so Mouser and I are delayed by a day or so but we are starting to get into fighting now.

Karvon already brought up not facing the same army twice unless it is the final round. Is there anything else you guys want to see done different next time? Ex. Veto on army selection if someone picked an army you absolutely didn't want to use? Or a format change like paired mirror matches?

[Karvon]

I don't think veto of army is really viable and sort of defeats the point of random assignment. What would you do in place of a vetoed list?

I hate mirrored matches and only rarely play them, only if I happen to like both armies reasonably well. I definitely wouldn't play in a league/tourney using them.

[kronenblatt]

Man, you guys finished fast. I forced a map reroll so Mouser and I are delayed by a day or so but we are starting to get into fighting now.

Karvon already brought up not facing the same army twice unless it is the final round. Is there anything else you guys want to see done different next time? Ex. Veto on army selection if someone picked an army you absolutely didn't want to use? Or a format change like paired mirror matches?

I like the current setup with the very simple score allocation and no paired mirror matches. Possible changes could include no map veto available (only if both players mutually agree), because it's just random map selection, right, and let's play with what we get (die rolls, etc.) I also agree with Karvon in not meeting the same army twice unless it is the final round. Also, chosen armies should be from different countries (i.e., no two Arabs armies, whether from same or different time periods), which will increase variety.