Pike & Shot Caracole Tournament Thread

[Dortmund]

Dortmund (Spanish 1621-1634) won vs Vadim84 (Swedish 1630-1634).

A close game in a flat land that changed after a kuirasser unit won two combats in a short period of time and some of the swedish units, smaller in numbers than the tercios, began to retreat. Well played, Vadim.

[flatsix518]

45 of 46 R1 games complete.

23 of 46 R2 games complete.

Tomorrow I'll announce R3 match ups.

John

[Vadim84]

Challenge for Batsemotel :

Me Scott Convenant VS You as New Model Army.

pword: Batesmotel. I forgot if I put the maj or not, so you may have to try with a B maj or without the maj, dunno. But it is there and feel free to start whenever you wish.

My second game against Dortmund is not over yet buuuuttt I feel he will post the result very soon m at 39% loss now, wont held very long. Good game and it was very funny to see you moving your artillery all around the village in the center of the map ! Lighter cav. made the difference on your right/my left, well played.

[Blathergut]

Suggestions for Round 3:

A. Challenger picks two armies. Challengee gets first choice of which army to use.

B. Challenger picks his army. Challengee gets to pick from available opponents (if more than one).

In round two I had both opponents give me Ottomans. While some, like RBS or others who have figured out how to use that army, might have a good game with them, I found both games to be a complete waste. I didn't know how to use the army effectively. Didn't like playing with the army. Found it (or more likely me) was totally outclassed by tercios and pike/shot units as well as enemy horse.

[rbodleyscott]

Suggestions for Round 3:

A. Challenger picks two armies. Challengee gets first choice of which army to use.

B. Challenger picks his army. Challengee gets to pick from available opponents (if more than one).

In round two I had both opponents give me Ottomans. While some, like RBS or others who have figured out how to use that army, might have a good game with them, I found both games to be a complete waste. I didn't know how to use the army effectively. Didn't like playing with the army. Found it (or more likely me) was totally outclassed by tercios and pike/shot units as well as enemy horse.

I have to agree. It is very easy to set up challenges in which the challengee is disadvantaged - many armies have an Achilles heel which can be exploited. And as Blathergut says, Ottomans really are a difficult army to use well on an open field. (And don't imagine that RBS does very well with them either).

I like option A.

[Blathergut]

Oh, Mr. 8 for 8, I bet you dance with them like Fred Astair!!!!!!!!

[rbodleyscott]

Oh, Mr. 8 for 8, I bet you dance with them like Fred Astair!!!!!!!!

I try, but it doesn't always work.

[Blathergut]

Ah, at least there are some different armies in the game. Let's you work on learning them if you care to. Much better than some games where every army is the same except for the graphics.

[Triarii]

Triarius - Scots 0% vs Iandavidsmith New Model 42%

I got lucky with the terrain and then with the fire combat (and having been taught a lesson in the effectiveness of fire power by RBS in round 1)- Parliament was shot to defeat with very little close combat.

[flatsix518]

45 of 46 R1 games complete.

24 of 46 R2 games complete.

I had intended to announce R3 match ups today -- but I have sort of run out of time. I'll try to get them up tomorrow.

John

[flatsix518]

All,

Blathergut's suggestion (see above) may be a good idea. However, I would rather not mandate a change in mid-tournament. Especially since there has been some misunderstanding of the existing format (to post challenges, understanding everyone continues thru 3 rounds, etc.)

As I have said, I will initiate a thread to discuss the tournament format/organization and am open to new ideas.

While I do not want to mandate Blathergut's change -- if any two players want to do that arrangement -- I'm OK with that. I just don't want to dictate a change in mid-tournament.

What happens between two consenting players is their business.



Best,

John

[pantherboy]

pantherboy (German Catholic 1632-1638) 30% won vs Iosef (Swedish 1630-1634) 63%

pantherboy (French 1643-1648) 12% won vs Iosef (Polish 1633-1648) 43%

pantherboy (Parliamentarian 1642-1643) 5% won vs iandavidsmith (Royalist Edgehill 1642) 47%

pantherboy (French 1643-1648) 20% won vs iandavidsmith (Polish 1633-1648) 47%

[Tiopepe]

Round 2:

Tiopepe (Spanish) 21% won Blathergut (Ottomans) 47%

Blathergut is a hard opponent, but its possible that the quality of Tercios are unmatched against the Turks on hand to hand. Nevertheless, i think the firepower of their musketeers could break the heavy and slow squares spanish formations.

In this battle the turkish musketeers entered into battle too late. If they had entered before in combat the result probably will be other. I had to minimized these units. They were my real danger. And could distract them from battlefront for enough time to break your morale before could enter at his maximum firepower.

Good battle. And sorry if you are bored in this battle. Anther time we can change the sides. I like challenges.

[flatsix518]

45 of 46 R1 games complete.

29 of 46 R2 games complete.

John

[flatsix518]

All,

I am ready to announce Round 3 match ups.

I have some concern about some players who have fallen behind in play.

1) Greyhunter -- are you still playing and intending to finish the tournament?

2) Cromlechi -- are you ready to return to play for Round 3?

3) Moncholee -- Are you interested in additional games to "catch you up" in the tournament?

4) Is anyone having a problem wrapping up games with any opponents? Please let me know who they are -- I may make adjustments to who is in/out for Round 3 to avoid players having trouble keeping up with the tournament...

Thanks,

John

[Hrothgar]

Just wanted to second Blathergut's suggestion. I've restrained myself, otherwise I'd pick Poles vs Ottomans for every challenge. I've lost as the Poles, but perhaps only once, and that was against RBS, so I don't think it would have mattered what the match-up was.

However, I think I'd go with option "B," so the challenger could play as the army he wants.

[flatsix518]

We'll give this proposal a thorough vetting post-mortem.

Again, if you want to offer this to your opponent in Round 3 -- go for it.

I just don't want to change horses in mid-stream.

Best,

John

[flatsix518]

All,

Please take a look at my scoring on the first page of this thread.

It's been brought to my attention that I have (most likely) made a mistake.

If anyone sees something in error -- feel free to either PM me or publicly embarrass me on this thread. (Joking, I don't get easily embarrassed.)

I'll try to sort it out.

[Dortmund]

Dortmund (italian 1494-1525) won vs. Vadim84 (french 1494-1530).

A very interesting battle with hilarious moments, like my artillery chariots going forward and returning back. Well played and a lot of fun with Vadim. That's what really matters.


I agree that the tournament can be more equal if some rules like the proposed ones are applied. Another option is that we play each round with two proposed armies, each battle against the same opponent with one different army. Flatsix or another referee should propose the armies to fight with each round.

[flatsix518]

All -- I went through all the reported results and I think I've got everyone scored correctly.

45 of 46 R1 games complete.

30 of 46 R2 games complete.

John