Slitherine

Some people have expressed concern over the role of cavalry in the game - that infantry dominates too much. Some of the suggested solutions would perhaps tip the balance too far the other way. In particular, reducing the vulnerability of cavalry to shooting would almost certainly make the eastern armies too effective.

Anyway, no changes to the Pike and Shot "rules" will be made without extensive testing, and that will take time.

However, it is quite possible that the only change required to restore the historical balance is to widen the map so that it is harder for infantry armies to avoid being outflanked by making use of the "edge of the world" effect, and this can be tested without any change to the existing program.

As we no longer have a beta program to produce lots of test games by lots of different players, may I suggest and request that we could use the next tournament to test this theory, and that the games be played with "Medium" sized armies on "Very Wide" maps.

Because of the way that deployment works, this will leave at least eight squares either side of the infantry deployment area, and often more, depending on the army. An eight square no-infantry-deployment zone on each flank was part of the original design of the game, but had to be reduced for narrower maps as it was not leaving enough room in the centre for infantry to deploy properly. In hindsight, a better solution would probably have been to increase the default widths of the maps for each army size.

If testing shows that this does have the desired effect, the next iteration of the program could have altered default map widths for Skirmishes, and perhaps increase the width of the no-infantry-deployment zone to more than 8 squares.

I guess I haven't had any problem with the infantry-cavalry relationship. It seems to me that the period marks the consolidation of infantry superiority, so cavalry ought to be subordinate. I think that, by this time, cavalry was not able to prevail over well-formed, pike-and-shot armed infantry.

In the east, where infantry had not been developed in the same fashion, cavalry retained its dominance, but that is clearly shown in the game, thanks to the Polish hussars and other excellent eastern cavalry. So, I guess I haven't felt the need to tamper with the interrelationship.

Also, especially in the west, terrain seems generally to be more constricted. Finding a broad open plain which would give free rein to cavalry flanking maneuvers might not be easy. In that case, the restricted size of the battlefields might better represent the possibilities than if the maps were extended. Again, in the east, the steppe may have offered a more wide-open stage for extended battle lines and sweeping cavalry envelopments, but it doesn't seem like that was easy to come by in the west.

I admit I have no hard data for the above. It's simply the impression I've gained from years of reading.

Aryaman (French 1494) won 0% vs 42% Flatsix (Italian 1494)
Again much closer than the result suggests

Aryaman wrote: "Again much closer than the result suggests"

About as close as a skunk encountering a SUV on a Texas highway...

I stunk the place out...



John

All,

Results posted to here...

100% of R1 games complete!!!!

39 of 46 R2 games complete. (Since greyhunter rejoined...)

6 R3 games complete.

John

All,

It seems that enough critical mass of angst has evolved and we're close enough to the end of the Caracole to initiate a side discussion on ways to improve Pike & Shot tournament formats.

I had pushed back on having this discussion because I wanted to keep focus on the tournament to completion. I was concerned early perceptions might prematurely shape opinions. I also did not want to alter the tournament format/organization on the basis of some early points of view. At this point most of us have 8 or more games under out belt and have strong points to bring to a discussion.

So expect later today for a new thread to appear where we can have a thorough discussion so that the next Pike & Shot tournament can be better for everyone involved.

Best,

John

Aryaman (Swedish 1630) won 5% vs 42% Flatsix (Imperials 1618-1632)

This one went a little better for me...

More like an armadillo encountering a Volvo on a Texas highway.

I at least scratched the Volvo a little bit...



John

Cavehobbit (Transylvanian 1618-31) 9% won vs AEMIL (Catholic 1618) 41%

Pantherboy (French 1635-42) 15% won vs Cavehobbit (Polish 1633-48) 40%

Challenges posted for

Batesmotel
Royalist 43-44 vs Parliament 43-45
password seveneleven

Triarus
GC 32-38 vs GP 32-38
password triplanetary

Blathergut
Transylvanian vs Poles
password bubblegum

Challenges:

the Mouser: bubblegum
iandavidsmith: bubbles

I went with medium forces on very wide maps.

Aryaman (Swiss 1494) won 11% vs 40% Iandavidsmith (French 1494)

pantherboy (Royalist 1643-1644) 40% won vs cavehobbit (Parliamentarian 1643-1645) 61%

pantherboy (French 1635-1642) 15% won vs cavehobbit (Polish 1633-1648) 40%

pantherboy (Transylvanian 1618-1631) 13% won vs Tiopepe (Catholic League 1619-1632) 64%

pantherboy (French 1635-1642) 4% ? vs Tiopepe (Polish 1633-1648) 41%

Iosef with French won against my Spanish so swiftly that I barely noticed.

Greyhunter and I managed to rout both armies (protestant and catholic germans respectively) at the same time! Yes, at the same stage of the same turn. Half a point maybe?

Regards,

Javier.

To moncholee -- yes -- I think that should be a draw. We'll formalize the definition of draws for next tournament.

To Pantherboy -- I am assuming the fourth match you reported was another win for you.

All -- I'll catchup scoring this weekend.

John

Looking for Greetings44 since 13th december.. My challenge its ready from this day, no news of his challenge.

rbodleyscott wrote:
However, it is quite possible that the only change required to restore the historical balance is to widen the map so that it is harder for infantry armies to avoid being outflanked by making use of the "edge of the world" effect, and this can be tested without any change to the existing program.

It's that, In Punta de lanza web we are going to play a tournament with medium force and very wide map, to much realistic. And the results are going to change a lot.

Results round 3:

Tiopepe 63% (Spanish) won Flatsix 28% (French)

Cavehobbit (French 1643-48) 10% won vs AEMIL (Spanish 1635-48) 43%

Thanks for the game!

All,

Results posted to here...

100% of R1 games complete!!!!

41 of 46 R2 games complete. (Since greyhunter rejoined...)

15 R3 games complete.

John
flatsix518
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E
Master Sergeant - Bf 109E

Posts: 483
Joined: 14 Dec 2010 22:43
Location: Texas