Slitherine

11 feels about right

2 x 12, 2 x 11, 2 x 10, 16 x neutral/abstaining/not read this yet

What has happened to the rest of you gents.

ericdoman1 wrote:2 x 12, 2 x 11, 2 x 10, 16 x neutral/abstaining/not read this yet

What has happened to the rest of you gents.

One of the challenges with this tournament as I saw it, was the 10 turns only. So 10 turns for me.

/P-A

I vote for 12. I think some games you need time to move around.

3 x 12, 2 x 11, 3 x 10, 14 x neutral/abstaining/not read this yet

Any is okay for me, so I guess I'll abstain.

In other news, my game with gazxtrix has ground to a halt, for the last turn he sent me was on friday.

I vote for 12 if my mis-post in the cup thread wasn't counted.

Chris

Turk1964 (Med Crown of Aragon) 20/36 zumHeuriger (Low countries Maxamillian) 34/35
Points for Turk 1+3 =4pts Points For zumHeuriger 1+2 =3

Played to 10th turn.

Couldnt quite get over the line great game Tom,you were coming back quite well at the end.

Cheers Turk

4 x 12, 3 x 11, 3 x 10, 12 x neutral/abstaining/not read this yet

Looking like 11 turns for round 2 but not halfway there yet on votes

4 x 12, 3 x 11, 3 x 10, 12 x neutral/abstaining/not read this yet

Looking like 11 turns for the mo (as an average/mean) and we are halfway there, 11 votes as above, including 1 abstaining

for me 12...

HI Guys

Based on, I believe Fedem's message to SLitherine.

They now have a system set up that will inform a player that he may have cheated.

This is great news as it again confirms that this game is fair and open.

Hopefully Slitherine will announce to the community if a player, players, (better still nobody at all) are breaking the rules.

Might be worth pming all friends and foes you have to inform them about this.

5 x 12, 3 x 11, 3 x 10, 11 x neutral/abstaining/not read this yet

I think players should have as many turns as it takes to complete the game, as some situations/armies encourage caution/patience. Why are we trying to force players to play quickly? Thus I vote for as many turns as possible (I suppose 12 if that's the highest option).

ericdoman1 wrote: They now have a system set up that will inform a player that he may have cheated.

Good news - I just had a player charge his Average MI into my Pks on a hill in the open and "D"ed all 5 of them; i confess to being ever so slightly suspicious at that point.
However, I hope it isnt merely a record of when one simply closes a game (not the programme), as there are several valid reasons to do so.

I vote for 12 please. I get far to impetuous with only 10 which in this instance led to abject defeat.

7 x 12, 3 x 11, 3 x 10, 9 x neutral/abstaining/not read this yet

1 person has actually abstained

Daniel - Is it just me then who's average games finish below 10 turns. Could you all just check on results.

Also yes the point has been made about the differences in computer shut downs. It can be acts of nature, electrical faults but these are evry rare. It could be a very old computer that can not do more than a few things at once or it could be outright cheating. Waiting on the answer. Your example sounds unbelievable really. Were the MF average, must have been imp foot, ahd you received damage before, were you even disrupted or disordered, you can be on a clear hill with broken ground, were they all on top of the hill and so had the advantage of another +1. Just give me all of the facts LOL. Maybe it was a one off.

How long do you and Mike have left.

Supervark, Burinius - awaiting the result please.

Round 2 will hopefully begin 25th March

Welsh 41/41 yorkist pretenders 6/34 or close to that result. I forgot to record it but I think this is pretty close. May be Burinius recorded it.

The final result for the contest is:

Burinus Agricolae WoTR York (10/34) defeats Supervark (44/41) at the end of turn 8
Points for BA 1+3+2=6
Points for SV 1+1 = 2

let me know if other inofs are needed.

thanks Super for the nice battle and friendly chat...
BA

As far as we know, the cheating works only in a way that you can handle the rolls of the units on the field in the order you like. It has a fixed seed, which means you will know in advance what numbers are rolled in the order they are. This in turn means that the slitherine server computer must have actually rolled the result for it to apply, and the player has to remember the order of the results to use them to his advantage. Suppose that it was MF Impact Foot that charged your pikes, Aristides. They are at 20/56 to win, and roughly half of those will cause a disrupt, so let's suppose it's a 10% chance to disrupt with each charge. 5 charges in a row, therefore, means that it's(10% * 10% = 1%, 1% * 10% = 0,1%, etc) a 0,001% chance for it to happen, or if you prefer, 1/100,000 chance of happening. Which means, it is probably never going to happen again in the history of FOG.

Not to mention it's possible that while your pikes were on open ground, your opponent actually charged from poor ground, and since both units engaged in the battle use the worse ground, it may have been that your pikes actually rolled 2 dice, hitting only on 6(since they lose their pike advantage POA if in poor ground, and get only 2 dice for being HF). Your opponent on the other hand rolls 3 dice(for being MF) and hits on 2 or more. This in turn makes it very likely for your pikes to be disrupted, and not that unlikely that they all get disrupted in a row.

If some of the MF charged from poor terrain, and some from open, it's a mix of this stuff, and while unlikely, it's certainly possible.

It's a real shame we cant replay finished games (an excellent learning tool) - the game was a while ago. The MF were with OffSp, I think. Yes, it's true that there was some broken ground in front of the hill. It's not the dice so much as when someone does something 'stupid/suicidal' and it pays off spectatcularly. Of course, perhaps they were being stupid or just felt like taking a gamble.
In fact, for me the main reason to make a thing cheat-proof is less to stop the (I think extremely rare) cheating but to allay our suspicians. Some players cry foul every time you thrown some good dice. And I myself sometimes play quite intuitively and like to take the odd gamble.

As for going through a whole turn, writing down all the rolls and then trying to come up with an order of attacks that suits them... i don't know which is sadder, that kind of obsession or the actual cheating. No, the cheating is sadder, because though they don't realise it, in the long run, aside from destroying people's enjoyment, it hurts the cheater far more than the cheatee(s).

I've been waiting on Mike for a couple of days.