Ruin and Conquest of Britain - Tournament I: Concluded

[kronenblatt]

Now, questions to the following players:
Army 4 Doyley50: 85 FP deficit (41)
Army 5 Giacofa93: 31 FP deficit (31)
Army 7 Giacofa93: 36 FP deficit (0)
Army 10 carpenkm: 53 FP deficit (0)

=> Do you this round want to remove units in order to eliminate your army pool deficits?
= If yes, which unit? (Please keep in mind your deficit previous round (within brackets above), disallowing choosing certain units, whose FP costs fell below the deficit at that time.)

[Giacofa93]

No removals

[Doyley50]

Remove 2 Sub-Roman foot please.

[carpenkm]

can i remove 1 noble cav?

[kronenblatt]

can i remove 1 noble cav?

Absolutely.

[kronenblatt]

Time has come for round 8's order giving and movement instructions and the 12 MP each of you have.

Please send to me through replying to my PM by Thursday October 28 (9 PM, Swedish time) at the latest, and just as a simple sequence of individual moves (e.g., 2 4 2 6 0 6), with no other symbols in between, only blanks (for easy copy-pasting by the administrator). I will not open the PMs from any of the factions other than my own until I've published the movement instructions of the Pictish armies.

For details, please check Giving orders and Movement in the RULES.

Any questions? Please ask them in this thread, for everyone else to see question and answer.

Still don't worry: we'll all hold each other's hands to get to know and understand the rules, etc., together. This is for fun, after all!

[kronenblatt]

Aetius39 and I have talked about that some additions to this tournament, such as each faction having a designated capital and a simple supply line system, all in order to make it (even?) more fun.

It could be something like the following:

Capital

• Needs to be a controlled "Kingdom or Civitas Capital" or "City".

• Can be moved freely to another controlled "Kingdom or Civitas Capital" or "City" connected to the faction's supply line system each round, but during that round the faction lacks a capital and the benefits it provides.

Supply line system

• A faction's supply line system originates from its capital, along roads not within the ZoC of another faction's structures or armies and through structures controlled by the faction, provided however that the supply line system can never extend farther than 20 road hexes away from the capital.

• Only controlled structures that are connected to a faction's supply line system will provide the benefits outlined in the rules, under Structures (such as additional FP for engagements, reinforcing lost FP).

• An army not having its faction's supply line system within its ZoC will deplete twice the FP from casualties incurred in engagements and battles (e.g., if an non-supplied army wins an engagement 50-20 against a supplied army, 40 (2x20) FP will be depleted from its army pool and 50 FP from the pool of the losing supplied army).

This will hopefully stimulate strategic considerations: where to move your armies, which structures to protect and to control before advancing further, where to reallocate the capital and when, etc.

Thoughts?

[Giacofa93]

I think in general it would be a nice addition, but I personally don't like the idea of moving them. This would make them more important and maybe even add in the strategic considerations of defending it from an enemy attack.
Together with it, I would remove the 20 hexes limit, bc of course it wouldn't make any more sense.

Giacofa

[kronenblatt]

I think in general it would be a nice addition, but I personally don't like the idea of moving them. This would make them more important and maybe even add in the strategic considerations of defending it from an enemy attack.
Together with it, I would remove the 20 hexes limit, bc of course it wouldn't make any more sense.

Giacofa

The idea is to have a royal court with a retinue that could be seen as following the ruler, thereby allowing the capital to move. Also, the problem with a stationary capital with an unlimited range is that it could be placed far away, very safe, like in far-north Lucuvalium for the Picts or far-south Venta Silurium for the Welsh.

[kronenblatt]

[Giacofa93]

I think in general it would be a nice addition, but I personally don't like the idea of moving them. This would make them more important and maybe even add in the strategic considerations of defending it from an enemy attack.
Together with it, I would remove the 20 hexes limit, bc of course it wouldn't make any more sense.

Giacofa

The idea is to have a royal court with a retinue that could be seen as following the ruler, thereby allowing the capital to move. Also, the problem with a stationary capital with an unlimited range is that it could be placed far away, very safe, like in far-north Lucuvalium for the Picts or far-south Venta Silurium for the Welsh.

I see your points. But still think the moving capital, with the bonus-missing turn during the change, kinda overcomplicates it too much. I would prefer at this point a fixed capital which is automatically chosen at the beginning in a neutral or historic position, so the only input from the players would be to attack/ defend along axes of roads branching off it

[TomoeGozen]

But what happens if a Capital is lost? Presumably a new one can be selected if you still have men to fight with? If that's the case we might as well have movable capitals , no?

[kronenblatt]

The following two "engagements" (as FoG2 games are called in this campaign) will be fought:

Battle 1

• Engagement 1.1: Welsh army 12 (carpenkm) 1200 FP versus Pictish army 6 (kronenblatt) 1200 FP. North European Wooded. carpenkm sets up.

=> carpenkm defeats kronenblatt 61-19.

Battle 2

• Engagement 2.1: Welsh army 10 (carpenkm) 1200 FP versus Pictish army 7 (Giacofa93) 1200 FP. North European Agricultural. Giacofa93 sets up.

Please set up as follows in Field of Glory II: Ancients in accordance with rules' Engagements and battles:

• Conquestu Britanniae v2 module (downloaded for MP in-game).

• Open Battle scenario.

• 24 turns.

• 32 x 32 map size.

• 2000 FP force size for both armies, but only 1200 FP (adjusted for any effects from e.g. structures, such as controlled Forts nearby) are spent on units from the army's pool of remaining units, see below.

• Map type on the terrain as specified in the rules' Map terrain of engagements.

• Always Mercenary Warbands as allies (even if no mercenary units selected) with the actual number of mercenary units that can be used depending on the following:
  • A faction can in total select four plus twice as many units of mercenaries as the number of Mines that it controls at the beginning of the round, to be distributed among its armies during that round.
  • However, a maximum of six mercenary units can be used by an army in any individual engagement.
  • Examples:
    • If seven Mines are controlled by the faction, it can select up to eighteen (4 + 2x7 = 18) mercenary units as a whole for its armies during a round, but for no individual army more than six mercenary units.
    • If no Mines are controlled by the faction, it can still select up to four mercenary units as a whole for its armies during a round, distributed among its armies.

• 1200 FP worth of units (adjusted for any ally units selected from Mercenary Warbands) are thus picked from the following list so that 800 FP remain of the 2000 FP set up when the engagement begins:
  • Again, the 1200 FP may be adjusted (and correspondingly the 800 FP) due to e.g. structures, such as controlled Forts nearby.

Resolving and reporting the battles:

• Please create the challenge (with yourself always as Side B) by November 2 at the latest, and thereafter send a PM to your opponent and make a post in the tournament thread.

• Please conclude games by November 30 at the latest.

• The winner, or the player having incurred the fewest casualties, reports the results in the tournament thread.

Example of how an engagement between Romano-Britons and Anglo-Saxons (no longer in the tournament) is set up (again always with Mercenary Warbands as allies for both armies):

[Giacofa93]

Challenge posted, pwd: carpe

[carpenkm]

Challenge set for Kronenblatt. Apologies for the delay

[kronenblatt]

Challenge set for Kronenblatt. Apologies for the delay

What's the password?

[carpenkm]

Engagement 1.1: Welsh army 12 (carpenkm) 1200 FP versus Pictish army 6 (kronenblatt) 1200 FP. North European Wooded.

I am happy to announce that the Welsh saw off the barbarian Picts 61 - 19.

After some skirmishing the warbands met. Some heroics from a Welsh light cav unit disrupted the Pictish advance and allowed time for the Welsh to break the left centre. A cascade rout at the end (rather unfair) led to a score line which doesnt reflect the match at all. Well played Kronenblatt this really could have gone the other way.

[kronenblatt]

Engagement 1.1: Welsh army 12 (carpenkm) 1200 FP versus Pictish army 6 (kronenblatt) 1200 FP. North European Wooded.

I am happy to announce that the Welsh saw off the barbarian Picts 61 - 19.

After some skirmishing the warbands met. Some heroics from a Welsh light cav unit disrupted the Pictish advance and allowed time for the Welsh to break the left centre. A cascade rout at the end (rather unfair) led to a score line which doesnt reflect the match at all. Well played Kronenblatt this really could have gone the other way.

Yes, that last turn was truly brutal, a clean sweep... I believe I went from 31 to 61 in one go...! Congrats to the victory of an (otherwise) fun game.

[carpenkm]

Engagement 1.1: Welsh army 12 (carpenkm) 1200 FP versus Pictish army 6 (kronenblatt) 1200 FP. North European Wooded.

I am happy to announce that the Welsh saw off the barbarian Picts 61 - 19.

After some skirmishing the warbands met. Some heroics from a Welsh light cav unit disrupted the Pictish advance and allowed time for the Welsh to break the left centre. A cascade rout at the end (rather unfair) led to a score line which doesnt reflect the match at all. Well played Kronenblatt this really could have gone the other way.

Yes, that last turn was truly brutal, a clean sweep... I believe I went from 31 to 61 in one go...! Congrats to the victory of an (otherwise) fun game.

Yes those warband armies seem to do that. You dont really see the romans doing it. Is there something in the rules. Warbands seem to break very quickly from disrupted where Romans seem to last for ever - it cant just be a matter of troop quality? Good match as ever though.

[Giacofa93]

I think it is just quality in the end. Pictish spearmen are similarly unreliable. Though it's not a value that's displayed in-game, so it's a bit hard for me (I don't go mess with the code) to figure out exactly how it works...