Ever-Green League has now kicked off!

[kronenblatt]

I'm always looking for opportunities to play FoG2 casually and socially, yet in an organised way. The competitive part comes naturally, from the victory conditions.

So here's an idea for a "constant" ("ever"-lasting) league, based on challenging each other along a table; fighting battles and switching positions (depending on battle results) as well as always switching army lists with each other (yes, always, after battle, independent of battle results) to create variety over time.

The idea is not at all to commit indefinitely (however, while being in the league to commit to the "Player undertakings and commitments" for the sake of respect to other players' time) but to be able to enter and exit the league at your own desire, and then if you want to re-enter to be free to do that at a later stage too (at the lowest position in the league of course). Hopefully the league will over time consist of a number of active players, which is basically all that is needed in order to get some nice MP and chatting out of it.

There will also be separate tables that include only army lists covering a certain year; one league for 300 BC, one for 500 AD, and one for 900 AD. Then at least time period wise (if not geographically) the games are historically plausible (yes, my disturbed sense of "good order" ).

The league has now kicked off, in three separate threads: for 300 BC, 500 AD, and 900 AD.

So if you want to join, please post in the relevant thread and PM me.

[Karvon]

1. I'm not sure how you can define/enforce the social aspect you're angling for. Not everyone is a native English speaker, which may inhibit or discourage some from playing.

2. In my experience, it's easier to have rerolls set up as unilateral. On more than one occasion, when the terrain has been really bad for my list, my opponent in DL has simply refused forcing me to play a game of cat and mouse, hardly an enjoyable experience, usually resulting in a draw.

[kronenblatt]

1. I'm not sure how you can define/enforce the social aspect you're angling for. Not everyone is a native English speaker, which may inhibit or discourage some from playing.

That's true and I don't want to exclude anyone, but at the same time my idea and vision with this league is to serve also a social purpose, not only a competitive, getting to play friendlies in a structured format. That's why it's not targeting silent or GL-HF-GG-only players.

[kronenblatt]

In order to avoid misunderstanding, "conversation requirement" unfortunately came out wrong from me, I think, and is therefore deleted in the opening post. Apologies to anyone feeling offended.

It's not at all about having a strict conversation each turn on the chat. Just the type of chat that I've been having in my games with most of you guys (no names) and have come to enjoy so much (and is part of why I play FoG2): light, friendly, on- and off-topic (FoG2 as well as real life stuff), when we have something to say. Not really commenting every turn with at least 256 letters... But what I do want to avoid is the 100% competitive oriented approach, where the chat starts with "GL HF" and ends with "GG" and nothing in between, if you understand what I mean.

[TomoeGozen]

ok , you've convinced me
put me down for the league

gl + hf...

[kronenblatt]

ok , you've convinced me
put me down for the league

gl + hf...

ty

[Aetius39]

I'm in too!

[kronenblatt]

Excellent!

So far we're:
kronenblatt
deeter
schmolywar
rbodleyscott
TomoeGozen (300BC and 500 AD)
Badger73
Aetius39
Wellsonian
Karvon (300 BC and 500 AD)
Doyley50 (500 AD)
Captainwaltersavage

So if you're interested and also agree with the idea and vision of this league, then sign up.

[kronenblatt]

Also, here are the available army lists from which in due course to make the initial pick to start with for each of the years; 300BC, 300AD, and 900AD (each year forming a separate table):



Please note that allies will not (need to) be specified when picking which army list to start with, since the player making the challenge can for his game decide whether his army list uses any ally (from the standard list of allies for that army list), while the player being challenged plays without any allies.

[TomoeGozen]

How is it decided who challenges first , second etc ? Is it just first come first served ?
Same question as to how the armies are picked? (I assume we all have to have a different army?)

[kronenblatt]

1. How is it decided who challenges first , second etc ? Is it just first come first served ?
2. Same question as to how the armies are picked? (I assume we all have to have a different army?)

1. First come, first serve. Then people can decide themselves whether to be active with making challenges, and how often.
2. First come, first serve. All need to select different army lists (from the lists above), but it doesn't matter much in practice, since you play with that army list in your first game and then it gets switched and "traded away from you", maybe coming back to you from time to time, maybe not... So probably more about selecting an army list that is fun to play with and against.

[Karvon]

Is this in effect, three leagues, one for each time period? I'm not particularly interested in playing in three myself. And, if that is the case, you may not get a balanced distribution of players to leagues.


Karvon

[kronenblatt]

1. Is this in effect, three leagues, one for each time period? I'm not particularly interested in playing in three myself. And, if that is the case, you may not get a balanced distribution of players to leagues.

2. I think it would be better to simply set a time frame for each division and let players pick an army they like from that period. Some of the ones you selected are real dogs IMHO, and I'm sure there are others I'd much rather play that are not on the list in place of such.

Karvon

Thanks for thoughts, Karvon.

1. Yes, in effect three separate leagues. Players can decide to play in one, two, or all of them, and later join, leave, or re-join whichever league they fancy. So it will not be balanced at all over time, but hopefully all players are willing to try out all years at start at least so we have a sufficient number in all three.
2. I haven't selected the armies: I've just taken the army lists that cover each of the three years. So as I wrote above, I believe it's for players all about selecting an army list that they feel is fun to play with and against. And thus not select the "dogs".

[Karvon]

I had posted before checking the availability so didn't initially realize you'd included all the armies available at said dates - which is why I edited and deleted my second comment

The 300 AD list is particularly limited; you might consider a slightly broader date range, like 300-500 AD?

Due to the lack of options, and a lot of lists I don't like, I'll be only playing in the 300 BC league myself.

[Doyley50]

I'm certainly interested.

[kronenblatt]

I'm certainly interested.

Great: I put your name down, Doyley, also as per your PM.

[Aetius39]

Hi, I'll join all the leagues. Also I think Karvon has a point; 300 division could use a slight expansion for greater choice of armies perhaps.

[kronenblatt]

Hi, I'll join all the leagues. Also I think Karvon has a point; 300 division could use a slight expansion for greater choice of armies perhaps.

Excellent!

I'd like to keep the concept of an individual year and not a time period. But I could maybe switch to 500 AD (instead of 300 AD), bringing it up to 25 armies (compared to 300 AD's 18), although it's also how fun the armies are to play with and against. The only issue with 500 AD is that it will to a large extent be used in the The West is No More (476 AD) tournament.

Code: Select all

500AD
 Alan 25-650 AD
 Anglo-Saxon 449-599 AD
 Arab (Bedouin) 300-636 AD
 Arab (City) 300-633 AD
 Armenian 477-627 AD
 Breton 411-579 AD
 Byzantine 493-550 AD
 Frankish 496-599 AD
 Gepid 493-567 AD
 Germanic Foot Tribes 260-599 AD
 Hephthalite 350-570 AD
 Hunnic (Sabir) 463-558 AD
 Hunnic (Western) 455-559 AD
 Indian 320-545 AD
 Lombard 493-567 AD
 Moorish 350-698 AD
 Ostrogothic 493-561 AD
 Pictish 477-850 AD
 Romano-British 407-599 AD
 Sassanid Persian 477-590 AD
 Scots-Irish 477-899
 Slav 500-832 AD
 Vandal 500-534 AD
 Visigothic 419-621 AD
 Welsh 477-599 AD

[Captainwaltersavage]

I am interested. Might have to drop in and out depending on work commitments. That said - I like this approach more than the short hand communications so I might drop something else to do this.

[kronenblatt]

I am interested. Might have to drop in and out depending on work commitments. That said - I like this approach more than the short hand communications so I might drop something else to do this.

Super, thanks, Captain! Added you to the list.