Le Roi Soleil - Results

[LFDLM]

Box4 round 2 :
LFDLM (49-88 Dutch) : 61% : (30/10) = 3
Doyley50 (80-96 Swedish) 30% : 6 + (61-30/10) = 9.1

Both rounds :
LFDLM : 3 + 7.4 = 10.4
Doyley50 : 4.7 + 9.1 = 13.8

Doyley50 wins ! Well played

__________________________________

Well, at this moment (for both games) :

LFDLM : 0 + 9.4 = 9.4
TheGrayMouser : 10.5 + 2.7 = 13.2

LFDLM :4.7 + 7 = 11.7
Youngr : 7.6 + 5 = 12.6

LFDLM : 3 + 7.4 = 10.4
Doyley50 : 4.7 + 9.1 = 13.8

9.4 + 11.7 + 10.4 = 31.5

I hope I did not make any mistake.

[youngr]

Box 4 Results

Youngr (Russian 1662-94) won vs TheGrayMouser (Swedish 1680-96)

Youngr losses 51
TheGraymouser losses 60

Youngr : 6.0 + 0.9 = 6.9
TheGrayMouser : 5.1

Another close game that could have gone either way!

Richard

[TheGrayMouser]

You maximized the use of those damned Cossack light cavalry, that's for sure!

[rexhurley]

Box 2 results:

SnuggleBunnies (German States 89-98): 10%
Cromlechi (Russian 95-98): 41%

So...

SnuggleBunnies: 9.1
Cromlechi: 1

Is that correct?

Yup

[rexhurley]

Bonnie Prince Charles would certainly have established his own English dynasty with an army like this.

Bonnie Prince Charlie's army consisted of Scottish Highlanders over 50 years later. The results people are having with Jacobite Scots demonstrate why he did not re-establish the Stuart dynasty.

James II's Irish army was a lot more conventional, and though outmatched by William III's army was not that bad an army. (Albeit I am finding it a struggle to achieve anything with it).

Richard I dont think that is the issue here, the issue is that there is meant to be balance including in pot luck as shown in my previous post on the topic as mentioned Page 19 of the Game Manual states it WILL be against historical opponenets fomr the same era clearly that is not happening for some reason.

Game Manual, pg19

5.2. Army Lists
The armies for skirmish mode battles are chosen from
historically-based army lists for a particular nation and date
range. If you select “Pot Luck”, the computer will set up a battle
between two historically opposing forces of the same date.

The above game and some other matchups would suggest this may be a little bit broken.....

[rbodleyscott]

The above game and some other matchups would suggest this may be a little bit broken.....

The filter only picks armies of the same date and overall faction (pro-imperial or anti-imperial).

This seems to work reasonably well for the TYW era, but not so well for Le Roi Soleil.

The next game will also test for geographical proximity.

[rbodleyscott]

RBS slaying everyone.

Hardly, I am doing much worse in all my other games.

[rbodleyscott]

I feel your pain on reinforcements, rex. I just had enemy troops show up on my flank and attack in the same turn, instantly throwing my whole army into chaos and routing 9% of it before i had any knowledge of reinforcements being involved.

Well there wouldn't be much point in a flank march if the enemy was obliged to notify you in advance.

[awesum4]

In my reverse game against Ianow my flank march has turned up on move 12, way to late to have any real influence on the game. If it was only one or two units it wouldn't have mattered, but its 11 units over 25% of my army.
I've rationalized it as I have split my forces as the roads through the mountainous terrain we are fighting in are too narrow for my entire army to move in one block. This contingent has got lost on the way as being British we refuse to learn another language and cannot read Norwegian signposts. I'm presuming its Norway as Denmark has no mountains.

[SnuggleBunnies]

RBS - but my men would have seen enemy units approaching, if they had not appeared suddenly and attacked from "the edge of the world." Since we don't have line of sight beyond the map edge, reinforcements are marching invisibly forward until the turn they show up and strike.

[TheGrayMouser]

TGM (English 49-60) win Vs Doyley50 (49-60 French) 66% to 38%
Points 8.8 to 3.8

We both jammed our armies into a gap in the black forest, and let attrition decide. In the end I had much more expendable cavalry to feed into the grinder!

[awesum4]

My reverse match against Lascar was a victory for French 39% 8.4points over Russians 63% 3.9 points.
My veteran cavalry rode down his bow armed cavalry while my impact foot slaughtered his pike and musketeers. The Russians failed to withstand the shock of impact so his counterattack into the flanks of pursuers had little effect.

[rbodleyscott]

In my reverse game against Ianow my flank march has turned up on move 12, way to late to have any real influence on the game. If it was only one or two units it wouldn't have mattered, but its 11 units over 25% of my army.
I've rationalized it as I have split my forces as the roads through the mountainous terrain we are fighting in are too narrow for my entire army to move in one block. This contingent has got lost on the way as being British we refuse to learn another language and cannot read Norwegian signposts. I'm presuming its Norway as Denmark has no mountains.

That is exactly the reason why the flank march was so large. The autodeploy routine could not deploy them in their normal position because of mountains, so sends them on a flank march rather than place them completely randomly. The rationalisation is exactly as you have stated.

[rbodleyscott]

RBS - but my men would have seen enemy units approaching, if they had not appeared suddenly and attacked from "the edge of the world." Since we don't have line of sight beyond the map edge, reinforcements are marching invisibly forward until the turn they show up and strike.

True, but in reality it would take time for your army to react to the unexpected approach of the enemy. As the game has no built in delay for command and control, the only way to simulate the confusion that would occur is to have the flank marchers appear suddenly.

There is an easy solution to the danger of flank marches and that is not to deploy your troops right up to the map edge. The initial autodeployment never goes close to the map edge. As moving troops to fill up the gap between the original autodeployment and the map edge is often an attempt to take advantage of the "edge of the world effect" to protect a flank, it is only right that the "edge of the word effect" should sometimes come back and bite.

[SnuggleBunnies]

I guess that makes sense. This was on a map where the only gap through the mountains was the left third of the map, and there was a hill on the edge,which was why i raced my troops there. I suppose next time i may be more cautious and hang back.

[jomni]

Jomni Danish 1681 - 1698 41%
Awesum4 Swedish 1697 - 1689 6%

Humiliating defeat for the Danes. The Danish Infantry crumbed upon impact against Swedish Salvo Foot. Weak Danish horses got annihilated by superior Swedish cavalry.
The Swedes have lots of horse meat for their Ikea meatballs.

To my opponents, I will be out of action until 27 February.

[Kelen2]

Kelen2: Swedish 1676-1679
GDod: Danish 1678-1680

The Danes defended 3 woods, the centre packed with musketeers, and those on the flanks with mix forces of foot and horse. With no room to manoeuvre, and with little or no sight of the enemy the Swedes were compelled to advance into the woods resulting in a long and bloody up close and personal battle. The Danes were eventually victorious on their left, but isolated Swedish units fought on preventing the total collapse of their flank and gave the rest of their forces just enough time for their pikes to expel the musketeers, and for their superior horse to gain the advantage on the right.

An incredibly close game which ended in a Swedish victory.

losses,

Swedish 60%
Danish 64%

Kelen: (64%-60%)/10 = 0.4 + 6 = 6.4
GDod: 60/10 = 6.0

A Pyrrhic victory if there ever was one!

[Kelen2]

Kelen2: German States 1649-1688
Seaport: Danish 1681-1698

On a fairly open field the German pikes had the advantage over the Danish musketeers, whilst, apart from a vicious little scrap on the left, either sides horse stood around trading insults involving bacon and sausages. A German victory

Losses,

German States 26%
Danish 51%

Kelen2: (51%-26%)/10 =2.5 + 6 = 8.5
Seaport: 26%/10 = 2.6

[Kelen2]

Kelen: German States 1689-1698
Iandavidsmith: Danish 1681-1698

On another open field the German pikes were again victorious against the Danish musketeers. This time though the horse had enough of trading insults and got stuck in on both flanks. This only led to more bloodshed but did not change the outcome as in the end though the Germans again prevailed.

losses,

German States 50%
Danish 74%

Kelen2: (74%-50%)/10 = 2.4 + 6 = 8.4
Iandavidsmith: 50%/10 = 5.0

[lascar]

Lascar Danes: 54%

Jomni French: 62%