Slitherine

Being a Roman Empire history buff (like so many other here, I guess), I have an idea for a second century AD Roman civil war tournament where 4 - 17 players battle each other with the Roman 24 BC – 196 AD army list and potential allies. It will be entirely and purely FoG2 battle oriented, with focus on conquering all provinces of the empire and eliminating other contenders for the imperial purple, until there's only one Augustus standing. YOU?

Tournament I
Players: DanZanzibar (Italia+Dalmatia), TomoeGozen (Syria et Arabia+Aegyptus), Warg1 (Cappadocia+Asia), random27 (Germania+Pannonia), Doyley50 (Tarraconensis+Lusitania et Baetica), XLegione (Dacia et Moesia+Graecia et Thracia), pompeytheflatulent (Britannia+Gallia), rs2excelsior (Mauretania+Africa), kronenblatt (Cyrenaica).
Status: Concluded.
Winner: Warg1!

Tournament II
Players: Aetius39 (II, VI, VII, XI), CaptainWalterSavage (IV, IX, X), olin0111 (V, XII, XIII, XVI), NikiforosFokas (XIV, XV, XVII), kronenblatt (I, III, VIII).
Status: Concluded.
Winner: CaptainWalterSavage!

... The Pannonian army was at this time commanded by Septimius Severus, a native of Africa, who, in the gradual ascent of private honours, had concealed his daring ambition, which was never diverted from its steady course by the allurements of pleasure, the apprehension of danger, or the feelings of humanity. On the first news of the murder of Pertinax, he assembled his troops, painted in the most lively colours the crime, the insolence, and the weakness of the Praetorian guards, and animated the legions to arms and to revenge. He concluded (and the peroration was thought extremely eloquent) with promising every soldier about four hundred pounds; an honourable donative, double in value to the infamous bribe with which Julian had purchased the empire. The acclamations of the army immediately saluted Severus with the names of Augustus, Pertinax, and Emperor...

... If his two competitors, reconciled by their common danger, had advanced upon him without delay, perhaps Severus would have sunk under their united effort. Had they even attacked him, at the same time, with separate views and separate armies, the contest might have been long and doubtful. But they fell, singly and successively, an easy prey to the arts as well as arms of their subtle enemy, lulled into security by the moderation of his professions, and overwhelmed by the rapidity of his action...

(From The Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon)

Context

• Relive a Roman civil war at the end of the second century AD, in a tournament for up to 17 players.

• Each player represents a Roman faction in being a contender for the purple, an Augustus, at start controlling one or several Roman provinces (depending on number of players).

• In addition, there are a number of non-Roman factions that can act as allies to the Romans or that players can play if choosing to launch foreign invasions into the Roman territory of other players.

• The winner of the tournament is the player who wins the final battle or controls all seventeen provinces of the map (since there can only be one Augustus).

• A player who doesn’t control any provinces has lost and is eliminated from the tournament.

Army lists

• All players use the Roman 24 BC – 196 AD army for their Roman factions.

• However, in the event of a foreign invasion, the attacker uses the applicable army of the invading non-Roman faction (see Foreign Invasions below).

Units

• The Praetorian Guard unit may only be deployed for battle by the player controlling Italia (I).
  • Furthermore, the Praetorian Guard unit may only be deployed in battles outside of Italia (I) if the player controlling Italia (I) is the attacker.
  • This means that a defender controlling Italia (I) can only deploy the Praetorian Guard unit if the battle takes place in Italia (I).
  • However, in the event of a foreign invasion not even the player controlling Italia (I) may deploy any Praetorian Guard units.

• Subject to the above, all units in the Roman 24 BC – 196 AD army list are freely available to deploy (other than the standard in-game limitations on numbers, etc.).

Allies

• Non-Roman allies may only be selected by players controlling certain provinces:
  • Only the controllers of Germania (VIII) or Pannonia (III) may choose Germanic Foot Tribes 105 BC – 259 AD as allies.
  • Only the controllers of Pannonia (III) or Dacia et Moesia (VI) may choose Sarmatian 25 – 375 AD as allies.
  • Only the controller of Syria et Arabia (XV) may choose Arab 312 BC – 299 AD as allies.
  • Only the controller of Cappadocia (XIV) may choose Armenian 331 BC – 252 AD as allies.
  • However, a defender can only choose the ally of a certain province it controls if the battle takes place in that province.
    • Example: a defender controlling Syria et Arabia (XV) can only choose Arab 312 BC – 299 AD as allies if the battle takes place in Syria et Arabia (XV).
  • In these cases, it is always up to the player whether non-Roman allies are in fact selected or not, and the player makes this decision for each individual battle.

• Notwithstanding the above, non-Roman allies can never be selected for a Roman faction in the event of a foreign invasion.

Rounds

• A round will represent one of the seasons of a year during which campaigning can be conducted: Spring, Summer, Autumn; thus, there are three rounds per year.

• Each round consists of the following three phases:
  1. Attack declarations: All players announce, one by one in the order as specified below, announce which attack that they will make.
  • Attacks in a round are announced in decreasing order of each player's FP adjustment in the previous round (i.e., the player with the highest FP adjustment announcing first, and so on).
  • However, If there are only two players' Roman factions remaining, no attack declaration is needed since one final battle will be fought in order to determine the winner and special rules then apply (see The Final Battle below).
  2. Battle resolutions: All battles will be simultaneously played and completed in FoG2 during a period of three weeks.
  3. Province control changes: The victors (if any) of the battles take control over the loser's provinces-at-stake.

Attacks

• As mentioned above, each round requires a player (the "attacker") to announce an attack on another neighbouring player (the "defender").
  • The attack announcement will be made in a post in the tournament's thread on the forum.

• The attacker will specify from which of his/her provinces that the attack takes place and which neighbouring province controlled by the defender that is attacked (the "attacked province").
  • Neither the attacked province nor the province attacked from must be already included as a province-at-stake in another player's attack this round.
  • In addition, the province attacked from must not already be the target of a foreign invasion this round.

• These two provinces are included as "provinces-at-stake".

• Depending on the higher of the number of attacker's or defender's controlled provinces, more provinces are added to the provinces-at-stake for the battle:
  • 1-3 controlled provinces: 0 additional provinces-at-stake.
  • 4-5 controlled provinces: 1 additional province-at-stake from each of attacker and defender (i.e., 2 provinces-at-stake for each player, and 4 in total).
  • 6-7 controlled provinces: 2 additional provinces-at-stake from each of attacker and defender (i.e., 3 provinces-at-stake for each player, and 6 in total).
  • 8 controlled provinces: 3 additional provinces-at-stake from each of attacker and defender (i.e., 4 provinces-at-stake for each player, and 8 in total).
  • 9 controlled provinces: 4 additional provinces-at-stake from each of attacker and defender (i.e., 5 provinces-at-stake for each player, and 10 in total).
  • 10 controlled provinces: 5 additional provinces-at-stake from each of attacker and defender (i.e., 6 provinces-at-stake for each player, and 12 in total).
  • 11 controlled provinces: 6 additional provinces-at-stake from each of attacker and defender (i.e., 7 provinces-at-stake for each player, and 14 in total).
  • 12 controlled provinces: 7 additional provinces-at-stake from each of attacker and defender (i.e., 8 provinces-at-stake for each player, and 16 in total).
  • 13+ controlled provinces: 8 additional provinces-at-stake from each of attacker and defender (i.e., 9 provinces-at-stake for each player, and 18 in total).

• The attacker selects which additional provinces (from attacker's as well as defender's side) to be added to the provinces-at-stake, provided that a province is only available for selection if it:
  • neighbours an already selected province-at-stake for this attack (in order for all provinces-at-stake for a attack to form one connected area), and
  • is not already included as a province-at-stake in another player's attack this round.
  • All these specified provinces (defender's as well as attacker's) are the "provinces-at-stake" for the battle in question.

• Definition of "neighbouring provinces"
  • Every province with a land border to another province is considered a “neighbouring province” to that other province.
  • In addition, some provinces are considered neighbouring provinces to each other through sharing a sea border (as specified in the specifications of provinces).

• Example on how to express an attack announcement
  • kronenblatt attacks rs2excelsior's Africa (V) from Cyrenaica (XVI), with Arab 312 BC – 299 AD allies. Additional provinces-at-stake are Mauretania (XIII) and Aegyptus (XVII).

Battles

• The attack takes the form of a Custom Battle as Remove the Head with Large (1600 FP) force size (adjusted by the players' current FP adjustments for their Roman factions), Wide map size, and map type depending on the attacked province.
  • Players with allies available (i.e., controlling Germania, Pannonia, Dacia et Moesia, Syria et Arabia, and/or Cappadocia) first decide for each battle whether to use allies (and then which allies).
  • The defender thereafter decides the map type from among the alternatives for the attacked province in question (as specified in the specifications of provinces).
  • No map re-rolls will be made.
  • The defender is the one creating the challenge in the FoG2 Multiplayer Lobby (always password: TYME) and always with defender as Side B (in order for the other player to immediately be able to deploy and make first round when accepting the challenge).
  • Battle outcome, once resolved, is posted by the defender in a post of the tournament thread.

Effects of battle outcome

• The victor of the battle takes control over the loser's provinces-at-stake.

• The player routing the enemy or killing the enemy's C-in-C is considered the victor. If neither player routs the enemy or kills the enemy's C-in-C, it is considered a draw and both players retain their provinces-at-stake.

• However, if an Augustus (as represented by the C-in-C) is killed during battle against another Augustus, the battle ends immediately (and automatically since played as Remove the Head scenario) with the killed Augustus as the loser and all the provinces (not lost in other battles that round) controlled by the killed Augustus being conquered and taken over by the victor of the battle at the end of the round.

Force Point (FP) Adjustment

• Each player's FP adjustment is calculated as follows:
  • 20 minus the maximum incurred casualties of the player's Roman faction this round.

• If the player's Roman faction has fought more than one battle in a round, the maximum (i.e., worst) value is applied.

• The incurred casualties of non-Roman factions that the player may have played as are not taken into consideration in any way.

• FP adjustments are not in any way calculated for or applied upon non-Roman factions.

• The FP adjustment is used in the next round to determine the number of force points (FP) available to the player's Roman faction in battles as well as the order in which players' attack declarations are made.

Foreign Invasions

• A player may instead of an attack announce an invasion by a non-Roman faction into an eligible province controlled by another player's Roman faction (the "defender").
  • The foreign invasion announcement will be made in a post in the tournament's thread on the forum, just like an attack announcement.

• Only the following provinces are "eligible" for a foreign invasion:
  • Syria et Arabia (XV): by Arab 312 BC - 299 AD or Parthian 250 BC - 225 AD.
  • Cappadocia (XIV): by Parthian 250 BC - 225 AD.
  • Dacia et Moesia (VI): by Sarmatian 25 – 375 AD.
  • Pannonia (III): Germanic Foot Tribes 105 BC – 259 AD or Sarmatian 25 – 375 AD.
  • Germania (VIII): by Germanic Foot Tribes 105 BC – 259 AD.
  • Britannia (X): by Caledonian 50 -225 AD or Scots-Irish 50 BC - 476 AD.

• The player announcing the foreign invasion does not have to neighbour the invaded province or its controlling player (e.g., the controller of Britannia (X) can announce a foreign invasion into Syria et Arabia (XV) of Arabs or Parthians, at the announcing player's free choice).

• The player announcing the foreign invasion will decide which army list that the foreign invading force will use and will then also play the non-Roman invading force as attacker during the Battle Resolution phase against the defender.
  • Standard battle settings as set out above will apply (Remove the Head with Large (1600 FP) force size (adjusted for the Roman faction by the player's current FP adjustment), Wide map size, and map type depending on the province-at-stake of the defender).
  • Note however that for foreign invasions the following applies:
  • The attacker (and not the defender) decides the map type from among the alternatives for the invaded province in question.
  • In addition, the attacker (as side B) creates the challenge in the FoG2 Multiplayer Lobby.
  • The defender may not use allies when fighting a foreign invasion, nor may the Praetorian Guard be deployed in the battle.
  • Win criteria are the same as set out above, i.e., the player routing the enemy or killing the enemy's C-in-C is considered the victor. If neither player routs the enemy or kills the enemy's C-in-C, it is considered a draw and no player is neither victor nor loser.
  • The victor of a foreign invasion battle will in the next round get to make 1 additional announcement to attack (normally 2 instead of the standard 1).
    • That additional attack announcement opportunity next round can be used freely, like (and with the same possibilities and limitations as) a normal attack announcement.
  • The loser will in the next round get to make 1 announcement less, and if that leads to 0 announcements will have to stay inactive next round (unless one of his/her controlled provinces are attacked of course).
  • Should a player have been involved in more than one battle related to a foreign invasion during one and the same round, the victor and loser adjustments to the number of announcements are netted (e.g., 1 victory and 1 loss results in zero adjustment, whereas 2 victories result in 2 additional announcements to attack (3 in total then) in the next round).
  • If the Augustus (as represented by the C-in-C of the defending Roman faction) is killed during battle against an invading force, the battle ends immediately (and automatically since played as Remove the Head scenario) with the killed Augustus as the loser and all the provinces (not lost in other battles that round) controlled by the killed Augustus being taken over by the neighbouring player with the fewest controlled provinces (as calculated before any new such provinces as gained) at the end of the round.

The Final Battle

• Once there are only two remaining players' Roman factions left, they will fight one final battle in order to determine the winner of the tournament and who is the rightful Augustus.

• The player with highest number of controlled provinces is considered the attacker.

• Standard battle settings as set out above will apply, i.e., Remove the Head with Large (1600 FP) force size (adjusted by the players' current FP adjustments), and Wide map size.

• Note however that for foreign invasions the following applies:

• The attacker (and not the defender) decides in which province that final battle takes place and which map type to use from among the alternatives for that province.

• Both players may use the allies that are available to them due to controlling certain province (see Allies above).

• The player controlling Italia (I) may deploy Praetorian Guard units, independent of whether attacker or defender and in which province the battle takes place.

• The attacker (as side B) creates the challenge in the FoG2 Multiplayer Lobby.

• Win criteria are the same as set out above, i.e., the player routing the enemy or killing the enemy's C-in-C is considered the victor. If neither player routs the enemy or kills the enemy's C-in-C during the 24 turns, another "final" battle is played until there is a victor.

Italia (I)
sea border connections: Africa (V), Graecia et Thracia (VII)
units: Praetorian Guard
map types: Mediterranean Agricultural, Mediterranean Hilly

Dalmatia (II)
map types: Mediterranean Mountains, Mediterranean Hilly

Pannonia (III)
allies: Germanic Foot Tribes 105 BC – 259 AD
foreign invasions: Germanic Foot Tribes 105 BC – 259 AD, Sarmatian 25 – 375 AD
map types: North European Wooded, North European Hilly

Gallia (IV)
sea border connections: Britannia (X)
map types: Mediterranean Agricultural, North European Agricultural

Africa (V)
sea borderconnections: Italia (I)
map types: Mediterranean Agricultural, Mediterranean Hilly, Desert

Dacia et Moesia (VI)
allies: Sarmatian 25 – 375 AD
foreign invasions: Sarmatian 25 – 375 AD
map types: Steppe, North European Wooded, North European Marshy, North European Hilly, North European Mountains

Graecia et Thracia (VII)
sea border connections: Italia (I), Asia (XI)
map types: Mediterranean Agricultural, Mediterranean Hilly, Mediterranean Wooded, Mediterranean Mountains

Germania (VIII)
sea border connections: Britannia (X)
allies: Germanic Foot Tribes 105 BC – 259 AD, Sarmatian 25 – 375 AD
foreign invasions: Germanic Foot Tribes 105 BC – 259 AD
map types: North European Wooded, North European Marshy

Tarraconensis (IX)
map types: Mediterranean Agricultural, Mediterranean Mountains

Britannia (X)
sea border connections: Gallia (IV), Germania (VIII)
foreign invasions: Caledonian 50 -225 AD, Scots-Irish 50 BC - 476 AD
map types: North European Hilly, North European Agricultural

Asia (XI)
sea border connections: Graecia et Thracia (VII)
map types: Mediterranean Agricultural, Mediterranean Hilly

Lusitania et Baetica (XII)
sea border connections: Mauretania (XIII)
map types: Mediterranean Agricultural

Mauretania (XIII)
sea border connections: Lusitania et Baetica (XII)
map types: Mediterranean Agricultural, Mediterranean Hilly, Desert

Cappadocia (XIV)
allies: Armenian 331 BC – 252 AD
foreign invasions: Parthian 250 BC - 225 AD
map types: Mediterranean Mountains, Mediterranean Hilly

Syria et Arabia (XV)
allies: Arab 312 BC – 299 AD
foreign invasions: Arab 312 BC - 299 AD, Parthian 250 BC - 225 AD
map types: Mediterranean Agricultural, Mediterranean Hilly, Desert

Cyrenaica (XVI)
map types: Mediterranean Hilly, Desert

Aegyptus (XVII)
map types: Mediterranean Agricultural, Desert

Sure Andreas count me in! I was thinking of doing something like this anyway but it's so much easier when someone else does the work. (just kidding - I'll give whatever help you need)

So if drawing becomes a victory condition for the defender I would suggest a point advantage to the attacker. Mike C and I played a battle with this idea - medium sized and 50 point advantage - and the defender still won. I would suggest maybe a 75 or even 100 point advantage at large size. It may slightly favour the attacker but I would think that would be reasonable given you would rather ere on the side of moving the game forward as opposed to stagnating. You can construct a logic for it as well as the attacker mobilized for the invasion and may have a numbers advantage because of it...

And one other idea I had for this type of campaign: giving the player who controls more territory a point advantage as well. Perhaps something like...

1500 points base
+15 points per territory controlled
+75 points to the attacker

Could help resolve the game once it gets far enough along.

Just ideas to see if you like 'em!

DanZanzibar wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:05 pm ...Sure Andreas count me in!...

Great! DanZanzibar Augustus: you're in. Any province you'd fancy to control at start?

DanZanzibar wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:05 pm ... So if drawing becomes a victory condition for the defender I would suggest a point advantage to the attacker. Mike C and I played a battle with this idea - medium sized and 50 point advantage - and the defender still won...

How did you define a draw: no player routing the other? Or exactly the same percentage of incurred casualties at end of battle?

kronenblatt wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:53 pm

DanZanzibar wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:05 pm ...Sure Andreas count me in!...

Great! DanZanzibar Augustus: you're in. Any province you'd fancy to control at start?

DanZanzibar wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:05 pm ... So if drawing becomes a victory condition for the defender I would suggest a point advantage to the attacker. Mike C and I played a battle with this idea - medium sized and 50 point advantage - and the defender still won...

How did you define a draw: no player routing the other? Or exactly the same percentage of incurred casualties at end of battle?

We just used the game engine for that - so no one routed or both players hitting 60 on the same turn.

DanZanzibar wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 4:28 pm

kronenblatt wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:53 pm

DanZanzibar wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:05 pm ...Sure Andreas count me in!...

Great! DanZanzibar Augustus: you're in. Any province you'd fancy to control at start?

DanZanzibar wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 3:05 pm ... So if drawing becomes a victory condition for the defender I would suggest a point advantage to the attacker. Mike C and I played a battle with this idea - medium sized and 50 point advantage - and the defender still won...

How did you define a draw: no player routing the other? Or exactly the same percentage of incurred casualties at end of battle?

We just used the game engine for that - so no one routed or both players hitting 60 on the same turn.

Ah ok: I see. Here it's the simple comparison in casualties incurred (whether enemy routed or not) that would determine the winner. Routing the enemy should yield some benefit though: maybe conquering the province in question plus another neighbouring province of the loser (if attacker routs defender), or conquering the province from where the attack took place (if defender routs attacker).

Hi Andreas,

Count me in too please , sounds fun

If I remember correctly , in the old warhammer books(may have been warhammer ancients) there was a kind of campaign system where the 'attacker' and 'defender' both put up a territory as a 'stake' for the game. The winner took the loser's territory. I guess it could be rationalised as that if the defender had routed the attacker he then pursued the fleeing remnants in to the enemy's territory. If a draw occured then the status quo persisted.

Using something like that I'm not sure why the attacker would need extra points. The draw isn't really a defender's victory condition. Essentially you gain a victory by gaining a territory whether you were the 'attacker' or 'defender'.

I'm not sure what system you would use to ascertain the pairs of 'attackers'/'defenders' each turn. Random for the first turn then based on some sort of 'initiative' derived from the scale of the previous turn's victory?

Just thinking aloud ,and rambling on a bit...

Dave.

TomoeGozen wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 8:20 pm Hi Andreas,

Count me in too please , sounds fun

Great, you're welcome TomoeGozen Augustus! Any particular province in which you'd like to hold court at start (first-come-first-serve; Zan is first though)? (Depending on the number of players participating, each player will at start control one or several of the seventeen provinces.)

TomoeGozen wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 8:20 pm If I remember correctly , in the old warhammer books(may have been warhammer ancients) there was a kind of campaign system where the 'attacker' and 'defender' both put up a territory as a 'stake' for the game. The winner took the loser's territory. I guess it could be rationalised as that if the defender had routed the attacker he then pursued the fleeing remnants in to the enemy's territory. If a draw occured then the status quo persisted. Using something like that I'm not sure why the attacker would need extra points. The draw isn't really a defender's victory condition. Essentially you gain a victory by gaining a territory whether you were the 'attacker' or 'defender'.

Excellent idea: that would sort out the whole problem, I think! So attacker declares which neighbouring province that is being attacked, and from which province. Win is achieved through routing the enemy army; everything else is a draw. Winner takes loser's province. If a draw, then the status quo persists and attacker and defender both retain their provinces-at-stake.

I'm in if there is space

Warg1 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 9:17 pm I'm in if there is space

Always for you, Warg Augustus! Welcome.

Yeah I like Dave’s idea - simpler/easier. I think attack declarations should be done by PM to the tourney organizers maybe... What do you guys think?

Let’s see if I manage to drive kronenblatt krazy with my oversupply of how to run his tournament!

I’m envisioning how long the game could go on once you’re down to 2 or 3 big factions. What about larger factions being able to stake more territory and gain more? Say once you hit 4 territories you can stake 2 connected territories and potentially gain 2? At 6 you can stake 3, at 8 you can stake 4...

Thought?

Sorry - I was supposed to pick. How about Italia so I can feel like I’m the rightful emperor?

DanZanzibar wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 11:23 pm Let’s see if I manage to drive kronenblatt krazy with my oversupply of how to run his tournament!

Ha ha: I'm already auto-reporting your posts...! No probs, my friend, I appreciate ideas so that I set up a tournament that makes sense. Already now I've received several excellent suggestions that I hadn't thought of myself.

DanZanzibar wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 11:23 pm I’m envisioning how long the game could go on once you’re down to 2 or 3 big factions. What about larger factions being able to stake more territory and gain more? Say once you hit 4 territories you can stake 2 connected territories and potentially gain 2? At 6 you can stake 3, at 8 you can stake 4...

Thought?

Good idea because otherwise it risks going on forever, and Roman civil wars were mostly swift affairs!

It would then be based on the one of the attacker and defender with the lowest number of provinces. So if two players control 8 provinces each, 4 provinces would be at stake in a battle. But if one player controls 8 provinces and the other only 4, then 2 provinces would be at stake. (Writing this, I'm thinking about maybe having it based on the one of the attacker and defender with the largest number of provinces...? That would really increase the stakes and make for a dramatic tournament with ever-increasing stakes.)

DanZanzibar wrote: ↑Sat Aug 29, 2020 12:19 am Sorry - I was supposed to pick. How about Italia so I can feel like I’m the rightful emperor?

Italia is yours, Zan. Depending on the number of participating players, it may then be supplemented by more provinces. So to you other guys (Tomoe and Warg), select provinces at least two provinces away from the ones already selected.

DanZanzibar wrote: ↑Fri Aug 28, 2020 10:45 pm ... declarations should be done by PM to the tourney organizers maybe...

I'd say posting openly on the tournament thread on a first-come-first-serve basis (for an individual turn) is preferable since it will speed things up, and then the attack can also be resolved without having to wait for everyone else. Plus keep tourney organizers less overwhelmed with administration, and also prevent them (if they participate as players, which I intend to do) from getting information that other players aren't in possession of. It of course requires a gentleman's agreement to not amend posts.

I'll take Syria please.No idea why...

I like Dan's idea concerning multiple provinces staked once empires get large.

An example
Kronenblatt controls the red provinces, 6 in total, and in his turn attacks neighbouring Graecia et Thracia (VII) (darkest green), one of Danzanzibar's 4 green provinces, from Dalmatia (II) (darkest red) (since it neighbours Dacia et Moesia (VI), the province being attacked).
These two provinces will be included as provinces-as-stake for the battle.
Furthermore, since kronenblatt controls 6 provinces and danzanzibar 4, the highest of which is 6, there will be 2 additional province-at-stakes from each of the attacker and the defender, i.e, 6 provinces-at-stake in total.
Kronenblatt (as attacker) chooses these additional provinces-at-stake (both attacker's and defender's) and first has to select among the provinces along the border between the attacker and defender, and thereafter among the provinces neighbouring an already included province-at-stake.
Dacia et Moesia (VI) is first selected as the attacker's additional province-at-stake since it borders the defender and is the only alternative among the attacker's provinces. Pannonia (III) constitutes the attacker's second additional province-at-stake, as it neighbours an already included province-at-stake (Dalmatia (II) and Dacia et Moesia (VI)). (Italia (I) would also had been an eligible choice, neighbouring Dalmatia (II).)
Asia (XI) is first selected as the defender's additional province-at-stake, because no province bordering the attacker is available and since it neighbours Graecia et Thracia (VII) (an already included province-at-stake). Cappadocia (XIV) (bordering the already included Asia (XI)) is thereafter selected as the defender's second additional province-at-stake.
In total, the 6 provinces-at-stake for the battle are Dalmatia (II), Dacia et Moesia (VI), and Pannonia (III) from Kronenblatt (the attacker's) side, and Graecia et Thracia (VII), Asia (XI), and Cappadocia (XIV) from DanZanzibar (the defender's) side.

Kronenblatt controls Germania (VIII), Pannonia (III), and Dacia et Moesia (VI), and he therefore has the option to bring Germanic Foot Tribes 105 BC – 259 AD or Sarmatian 25 – 375 AD allies to the battle (if he chooses to), and because he also controls Italia (I) he can decide to deploy Praetorian Guard units in the battle.
Danzanzibar controls Syria et Arabia (XV) Cappadocia (XIV) and he therefore has the option to bring Arab 312 BC – 299 AD or Armenian 331 BC – 252 AD allies to the battle (if he chooses to).

The battle will take place in Graecia et Thracia (VII), the attacked province, which has Mediterranean Agricultural, Mediterranean Hilly, Mediterranean Wooded, Mediterranean Mountains as available map types.
Danzanzibar (as defender) chooses the map type for the battle.

Then the battle is played as usual, as a 1600FP Wide Custom Battle.
If Kronenblatt routs the army of Danzanzibar, Kronenblatt will take control over Graecia et Thracia (VII), Asia (XI), and Cappadocia (XIV) from DanZanzibar.
If DanZanzibar routs the army of Kronenblatt, DanZanzibar will instead take control over Dalmatia (II), Dacia et Moesia (VI), and Pannonia (III) from Kronenblatt.
If neither army has been routed after the full 24 turns, status quo remains and no control of provinces-at-stake is changed.

I think that sounds pretty reasonable and will play out well (i.e. not take a year!).

My last suggestions:

1. This is I think obviously follows the game rules so far or else it could get very complicated. Any provinces that are currently staked and battle is ongoing for them cannot be included in any further attack declarations. This may make for a situation where a 3rd party to the battle may wish to wait to declare an attack and see what happens first. Could make for somewhat interesting strategic considerations for which provinces you stake as well as choosing certain ones may limit what your opponents can potentially claim at the same time. The one complication I see is that there is an advantage to getting to declare your attacks first. I’m guessing we are only allowed to have one ongoing attack at a time (makes sense but please confirm kronenblatt)? Perhaps for the very first round of attack declarations (since subsequent ones will come up naturally as battles end) we should have a randomly generated order for the players and give them a timeframe of 1 day to declare? Something like player 1 (Sept. 15), player 2 (Sept 16), ..., and so on.

2. Once it is down to 2 players remaining I would suggest 1 last battle - winner takes all. Maybe a point adjustment should be made only for this final battle based on territory controlled? What if 1 player has 16 regions and the other only 1? I think an advantage would be in order. Perhaps 10 points per difference in number of territories?

I think these are my last suggestions anyway

DanZanzibar wrote: ↑Sat Aug 29, 2020 7:51 pm 0. I think that sounds pretty reasonable and will play out well (i.e. not take a year!).

My last suggestions:

1. This is I think obviously follows the game rules so far or else it could get very complicated. Any provinces that are currently staked and battle is ongoing for them cannot be included in any further attack declarations. This may make for a situation where a 3rd party to the battle may wish to wait to declare an attack and see what happens first. Could make for somewhat interesting strategic considerations for which provinces you stake as well as choosing certain ones may limit what your opponents can potentially claim at the same time. The one complication I see is that there is an advantage to getting to declare your attacks first. I’m guessing we are only allowed to have one ongoing attack at a time (makes sense but please confirm kronenblatt)? Perhaps for the very first round of attack declarations (since subsequent ones will come up naturally as battles end) we should have a randomly generated order for the players and give them a timeframe of 1 day to declare? Something like player 1 (Sept. 15), player 2 (Sept 16), ..., and so on.

2. Once it is down to 2 players remaining I would suggest 1 last battle - winner takes all. Maybe a point adjustment should be made only for this final battle based on territory controlled? What if 1 player has 16 regions and the other only 1? I think an advantage would be in order. Perhaps 10 points per difference in number of territories?

3. I think these are my last suggestions anyway

0. Excellent, we're getting there. Will kick off a tournament shortly (would just be great with a couple of more players; 6-7-8-9 is ideal, I think).
1. Agree: the provinces that are already staked that turn cannot be staked by someone else in the same turn. When it comes to being an advantage to being first to declare attacks that could simply be part of the rules, and one way to get the incentives right there is to rank players in attack order, depending on their respective incurred casualty percentages in the previous turn, with the player having the highest number in an individual battle being the first to declare attacks, second highest declaring second, and so on (so for example, if you've had two battles in the preceding turn; 25% and 38% respectively in incurred casualties, and I've had one at 27%, and TomoeGozen had 35%, you (38%) declare attacks first, TomoeGozen (35%) second, and I last (27%). But as you say, still give a time frame of 1 day (per player and turn) to declare to keep the initiative going. And yes, I confirm: maximum one ongoing attack at a time (but a player can still be attacked more than once in a turn, and thus play more than one battle that turn.) The attack order in the first turn of the tournament is tricky, but it could be based on the order in which people sign up to the tournament, thus the first-come-first-serve principle that promotes activity and involvement. So I think it could work out well.
2. I'd like to keep the same structure even when there's only two players left, i.e., the number of provinces-at-stake depending on the highest number of controlled provinces of the two players, so probably it will be just a few battles left anyway, because with two players left, the highest number of controlled provinces must be at least 9. But we'll see how it turns out. I understand that you really like this point adjustment? I'm not too fond of it myself, my view instead being that the two players bring their skills to the battle; skills that have made them conquer provinces and that will in itself give an advantage in the remaining battle(s).
3. Ha ha, keep 'em coming. I'll incorporate what I like and reject what I don't like anyway, so no probs.

This first tournament should now be ready to run, and let's do it on an Agile basis: testing and trying the concept, then evaluate afterwards, and improve along the way for the next tournament.

But as mentioned, it would be great with a couple of more players. Takers?