Caracole II -- Phase 2

[iandavidsmith]

Att : rumguff

Challenge proposed

ECW
Royalist 1642 to 1643
vrs
Parliament 1642 to 1643

Your choice and good luck
Ian

[susji]

Result Pod C

Susji (Spanish 1560/1568) 6% won to Deadtorious (Dutch 1568/1577) 49%

The battlefield was wooded and quite uneven ground, between forest and forest had little by units (at most 2 by 2) could advance "clear path". That is true mousetraps. I decided to go in a rush for a single point to the right of my deployment confident that the forest would plug his artillery until they kicked me over his left wing ... and trust that the superiority in the melee of my troops, as there was a hill it would be a fort.
He reacted very fast and deadtorious took all their troops quickly to that point, but the result of that speed, several of its units cut off the retreat of others, rapidly losing its reitres who could not go back and broke. The lace was with my cavalry which exceed got his flank and attack his rear while the "tercios" in the melee did the rest.
Good battle with their dose of luck on my part because it was a risky plan. Thank you for the battle Deadtorious!

[flatsix518]

Result posted.

John

[susji]

Pod C

I would like to propose the followings Challenges (it´s from Tercio to Salvo; if this is a problem please let me know)

egos: Dutch 1568 - 1577 vs Spanish 1569 - 1599

ggarynorman : Dutch 1578 - 1589 vs Spanish 1569 - 1599

hrothgar : Dutch 1590 - 1610 vs Spanish 1569 - 1599

kmaher : Dutch 1590 - 1610 vs Spanish 1600 - 1609

ulysisgrunt : Dutch 1610 - 1639 vs Spanish 1610 - 1620

Terrain: Pot Luck

[pantherboy]

Opponent challenges posted:

cavehobbit (NMA 1646-60) vs pantherboy (Royalist 1645-48) Agricultural PW: cavehobbit

Aryaman (French Catholic 1562-88) vs pantherboy (French Huguenot 1577-88) Agricultural PW: Aryaman

My challenges for all Pod "A" players:

Russian 1630-48 vs Scotts Covenanter 1639-41 (Agricultural)

[rbodleyscott]

My challenges for all Pod "A" players:

Russian 1630-48 vs Scotts Covenanter 1639-41 (Agricultural)

Hmm, fiendish. Tough choice.

[ulysisgrunt]

Pod C result
My Poles 59% defeated susji's Ottomans 62%
When the results are this close, they should be considered a draw as both armies are near collapse.
I foolishly sent my light horse ahead and they were destroyed. It was only the quality of my Polish lancers that saved me.
Many thanks

Danny Weitz

[ulysisgrunt]

challenge for susji

pw: susji

[ulysisgrunt]

When I try to create a challenge the force selection for "Player" does not appear. The only choices are "Default" or "Auto".
What am I doing wrong?

Thank you

Danny Weitz

[rbodleyscott]

When I try to create a challenge the force selection for "Player" does not appear. The only choices are "Default" or "Auto".
What am I doing wrong?

Nothing. Select "Default".

[flatsix518]

Results posted to here.

John

[rbodleyscott]

A further suggestion about the tournament set up. This currently requires the Historical filter to be set ON, which is very sensible. However, this does not allow Russians to fight Swedes or Ottomans, which they did historically.

Can I suggest that the requirement to have the historical filter on be relaxed to allow (only) Swedish-Russian and Ottoman-Russian challenges using armies that share a common date in their date range. We will correct this in the next update by adding the Russian lists to the Pro-imperial as well as the Anti-Imperial set.

Not allowing historical Russian-Swedish and Russian-Ottoman matchups is particularly egregious given the sheaf of Russian-Scots Covenanter matchups currently under way in Pod A!

[cavehobbit]

Pod A result.

Cavehobbit (Swedish 1560-1603) (5%) won vs Rbodleyscott (Danish 1560-1574) (48%)

Thanks for the game.

[rbodleyscott]

Pod A result.

Cavehobbit (Swedish 1560-1603) (5%) won vs Rbodleyscott (Danish 1560-1574) (48%)

Thanks for the game.

I realised as soon as I saw your OOB that I was doomed. Well played.

The Swedes have the most firepower of any army of that period.

It is all rather fragile, but only if you can make it to contact without being shot to ribbons.

[pantherboy]

Pod A results

My challenges:

Pantherboy (Covenanter 1639-1641) (33%) won vs rbodleyscott (Russian 1630-1648) (59%)
Pantherboy (Covenanter 1639-1641) (%) ? vs Aryaman (Russian 1630-1648) (%)
Pantherboy (Covenanter 1639-1641) (26%) won vs Cavehobbit (Russian 1630-1648) (55%)
Pantherboy (Russian 1630-1648) (64%) lost vs Tiopepe (Covenanter 1639-1641) (49%)
Pantherboy (Covenanter 1639-1641) (45%) won vs batesmotel (Russian 1630-1648) (64%)
Pantherboy (Covenanter 1639-1641) (%) ? vs moncholee (Russian 1630-1648) (%)
Pantherboy (?) (%) ? vs Dortmund (?) (%) - challenge not accepted yet

Opponents challenge:
Pantherboy (French Huguenot 1577-1588) (10%) won vs Aryaman (French Catholic 1562-1588) (47%)
Pantherboy (Royalist 1645-1648) (50%) won vs Cavehobbit (New Model Army 1646-1660) (60%)
Pantherboy (?) (%) ? vs rbodleyscott (?) (%) - no challenge yet
Pantherboy (?) (%) ? vs Tiopepe (?) (%) - no challenge yet
Pantherboy (?) (%) ? vs batesmotel (?) (%) - no challenge yet
Pantherboy (?) (%) ? vs moncholee (?) (%) - no challenge yet
Pantherboy (?) (%) ? vs Dortmund (?) (%) - no challenge yet

[Hrothgar]

Not allowing historical Russian-Swedish and Russian-Ottoman matchups is particularly egregious given the sheaf of Russian-Scots Covenanter matchups currently under way in Pod A!

Yes, that is rather outlandish. I'd definitely support allowing the Russian matches you suggested.

[flatsix518]

I'll modify the instructions to allow the Russian-Swedish and Russian-Ottoman matches.

John

[cavehobbit]

Result Pod A

Cavehobbit (French Catholic (1562-1588)) 12% won vs Aryaman (French Huguenot (1577-1588)) 42%

Thanks for a good game.

[flatsix518]

Results posted to here.

John

[flatsix518]

Well, I have to say I am liking how the new Caracole scoring system is working.

I think it deals with a lot of the "issues" the Caracoles have had with player participation and game completion.

It is also the easiest of the now three systems I've used to keep up with the scoring.

I'm open to feedback, but from where I perch, so far, so good.

John