Slitherine

Hey All,

What is the way doubles comps have been done in the past?

Do you use one army list and have two players?
Do you use two army lists and have two players on each team?

I'm thinking of trying to get something like a 1066AP (I love it - ever since Gary Plachetta mentioned it) Dark Ages comp going. The idea being the team has 1066 points to spend and can be with any combinations you want. One player using 1066 points by themselves. One player using 800 points and having 466 points of ally drawn from the complete or the ally list etc etc.

Any thoughts?

This is very rough (just off the top of my head) sort of thinking at the moment.

Ian

In the UK all the FoG doubles to date has been two players with one shared army.

In the past there have been comps (for other rules) where each player brings one of a pair of allied armies so you could have a pair with for example one using a late Roman army and the other using Hunnic

hammy wrote:
In the past there have been comps (for other rules) where each player brings one of a pair of allied armies so you could have a pair with for example one using a late Roman army and the other using Hunnic

Yup, I'm thinking something like that:

Did you just divide points equally?

Ian

DaiSho wrote:

hammy wrote:
In the past there have been comps (for other rules) where each player brings one of a pair of allied armies so you could have a pair with for example one using a late Roman army and the other using Hunnic

Yup, I'm thinking something like that:

Did you just divide points equally?

Ian

If I was running with pairs of armies I would allow a little flexibility, perhaps one contingent 450-600 points and the other 300-450 with the larger one being the one that is considered the CinCs.

hammy wrote:

DaiSho wrote:

hammy wrote:
In the past there have been comps (for other rules) where each player brings one of a pair of allied armies so you could have a pair with for example one using a late Roman army and the other using Hunnic

Yup, I'm thinking something like that:

Did you just divide points equally?

Ian

If I was running with pairs of armies I would allow a little flexibility, perhaps one contingent 450-600 points and the other 300-450 with the larger one being the one that is considered the CinCs.

Yes, I like the idea of spans. YOu can have 1066 points, with 50-70% of the points being used for the C-in-C's command. That means if you have JUST not quite enough points to make a BG 8 bases in size, you can rob your buddy at least a little bit .

So, lets say this goes past the pie in the sky stage. Lets say it actually happens. How would you work out points?

I'm thining something along the lines of this:

standard points as per the way they are worked now (0-20 points + 5 for a broken army). A bonus of + 3 if only the C-in-C in broken +2 if only Ally is broken.

So, you could get some situations where it's a very very close fight (10:10 (perhaps)) with the C-in-C breaking in one army and the Ally general breaking in the other (13:12), or maybe the C-in-C breaking in one army and the Ally breaking in both (15:12).

You see any big problems with this?

Ian

I hadn't thought about scoring.

You could either use your idea and have each contingent an army in its own right or just combine the two and use the normal score as is. The dissadvantage of separate contingents is that one player may finish well before the rest although I suppose that would give you someone to get the drinks

hammy wrote:I suppose that would give you someone to get the drinks

There seems to be a constant theme with you Hammy... and it's NOT wargaming

Ian

DaiSho wrote:

hammy wrote:I suppose that would give you someone to get the drinks

There seems to be a constant theme with you Hammy... and it's NOT wargaming

Ian

OK, it's a fair cop guv....

I always thought that one of my better achievments at Britcon was when the girl behind the bar asked me if I wanted the usual when I bought my start of the first round beer What made things worse is that I had actually managed at least five pints at estabishments other than the venue that afternoon and still managed enough in the gaming hall to be recognised.

DaiSho wrote:

hammy wrote:I suppose that would give you someone to get the drinks

There seems to be a constant theme with you Hammy... and it's NOT wargaming

Ian

Says You!!!!

John

hammy wrote: OK, it's a fair cop guv....

I always thought that one of my better achievments at Britcon was when the girl behind the bar asked me if I wanted the usual ...........

I thought your usual from bar maids was a slap in the face Hammy

hammy wrote:In the UK all the FoG doubles to date has been two players with one shared army.

same in US