Slitherine

Gday Mac im sure ive played played 2 challanges.Will have to check my completed games. Yes i agree with your proposal so we can wind this campaign up.

Ok have checked my records ive played Phlewis and Iandavidsmith but only one was my challange.

CHALLANGE for Macsen password=goatherder

I actually checked the average win in points and it varies by player. Those at the top win by, on average, over 50 and it trends down to the bottom of the table as you would expect.

So we could play two players each in a round but if two people beat say Pat then who gets his one region?

macsen wrote:I actually checked the average win in points and it varies by player. Those at the top win by, on average, over 50 and it trends down to the bottom of the table as you would expect.

So we could play two players each in a round but if two people beat say Pat then who gets his one region?

They could duke it out in a quick 250 pt game or a roll of the die on your part.
Ian

I like the idea of a quick duke-out! But we are trying to shorten the campaign... Also if it is just via coin flip, might make less worthwhile to go for a guy with just one province...

Aristides wrote:I like the idea of a quick duke-out! But we are trying to shorten the campaign... Also if it is just via coin flip, might make less worthwhile to go for a guy with just one province...

250 pts could be quick , plus you could out a 8 turn time limit on it like Eric did in his comp.

I really like the smaller games - but experience would seem to indicate that a new game, even a small one, might delay things. Somebody has to make the challenge, it needs to be picked up, weekends, ppl busy with loeg, and even 8 turns might be the best part of a week, depending on time differences etc... I like the idea but my 2 drachma says given the context, it wouldnt help.

Its quite the cunnundrum really but with having only six players left it will become very monotonous.600 pts armies and sudden death after this season ends to decide the final 3.Then we look at who is where on the existing ladder top player sits it out and the other 2 battle to see who takes on the winner.Another option is to play another saeson whover is on top when the season is over is the winner.What do you all think ?

As suggested previously, my preference would be:

One (or two) more rounds, and then the top 4 go through to a knock-out round.
Then the two winners play for 1st and 2nd place and the 3rd and 4th play off for bronze.

Fast, fair and fun.

Is the desire just to get the campaign over with or are we planning to replace it with a new campaign?

If you just want to get it over just declare the person at the top the winner. They have obviously been doing the best so far.

I think the desire is to speed it up so it can be concluded satisfactorily rather than just chucking it away. Also, some if us like campaign format but want it more so (ie rather than just a league table with chrome, something where strategic decisions matter and substantially affect the battles played (and vice versa)).

Two victories vs tiavals:

My Buzzy Teens (24/43) vs his Tahirids (44/41)
My Tahirids (41/43) vs his Avars (48/44)

Aristides wrote:Two victories vs tiavals:

My Buzzy Teens (24/43) vs his Tahirids (44/41)

T lost all his generals, i believe... T?

Two games to go, Tiavals v Batesmotel and me v the turk.

Now to the end. My notes....

I don't like 250 pt games, too much to chance or even more so than 500 pts.

Coin tossing is best left to ANZAC day. If you win you win, you don't get the chance to test your luck even further.

Top four going to knock out is fine except we already know who they are, Turk and Pat are just too far back to catch up in a round or two.

Yes Pat there will be another campaign, I want to do one on the fall of Roman Britain using Wolves, when it finally appears . Yes Aristides a real campaign where decisions matter and you have to think strategically as well as win battles. I may even include plagues

So we have plenty of ideas out there but how do we decide how to wrap this up?

"Turk and Pat are just too far back to catch up in a round or two."

No offense to these two worthies, but do we need to find a concluding form to the campaign that includes the possibility of them winning? Turk would have to win about 10 games by the old system to get in the top 4 so maybe it's fair to say that by this stage of the campaign they're not contenders (this is for them to say, though)?

Battle Report

Turk1964(Saminids)13/36 def Macsen(Abbisads)40/40

I think i killed one of Macs FCs not sure.

Thanks for the game Mac.

Ok since im down the bottom and its technically impossible for me to reach the top 4 i would be happy to go along with a top 4 Knockout.Looking at the scores thus far it would also be practical just to award Batesmotel the crown.Lets see the standings at the end of this round and decide from there

batesmotel (Nikephorian Byzantine-early) 43/44
tiavals (Avars) 43/43

Definitely a Pyrrhic victory in this case. Byzatnies lost 2 TCs and their camp. Avars lost no commanders and weren't looted so I suspect this is actually an Avar victory on points. Tiavals, thanks as always for a great game.

Chris

batesmotel wrote:batesmotel (Nikephorian Byzantine-early) 43/44
tiavals (Avars) 43/43

Definitely a Pyrrhic victory in this case. Byzatnies lost 2 TCs and their camp. Avars lost no commanders and weren't looted so I suspect this is actually an Avar victory on points. Tiavals, thanks as always for a great game.

Chris

Dead right, -14 to 10 to the Avars.

Aristides wrote:

Aristides wrote:Two victories vs tiavals:

My Buzzy Teens (24/43) vs his Tahirids (44/41)

T lost all his generals, i believe... T?

looks like 2 FCs...

I have no problem with a knockout round for the top 4. I have no illusions about winning. I just like having a reason for the battles to matter.

Since Wolves isn't out yet are we going to do anything in the interim?