ITC Lisbon 2010

A forum to post news about tournaments around the world. Please post any such messages here!

Moderators: hammy, philqw78, terrys, Ghaznavid, Slitherine Core, Field of Glory Design, Field of Glory Moderators

Post Reply
nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

ITC Lisbon 2010

Post by nikgaukroger »

From Mike Bennett - posted at http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/BHG ... ssage/1343
Apologies for cross posting (and even worse posting on FFJH in English), but I
am just starting to think about ITC for next year, and unfortunately the rules
situation looks no nearer resolving (indeed maybe it is time to give up hoping
for that, and just accept that ancients is now splintered). Considering rules
to be offered, and with a minimum of 6 teams required to make a set viable:
a.. FoG may be the most secure period now, with 6 teams entered last year,
assuming all return next year.
b.. DBM was 8, but may be doubtful, 2 teams transferred from DBMM and
indicated that they may not do so in a later year, and UK struggled in the end
to get a team, and is now struggling to hold tournaments
c.. DBMM we only got real interest from Denmark and Ireland, with a possible
from Germany
If there is anyone out there that would be seriously interested in DBM or DBMM
for Lisbon ITC 2010 please let me know. Clearly this type of format is very
vulnerable when numbers are low, and the risk is we get stuck, with no one
committing until they know if others will, and by then finding travel is
prohibitively expensive or everyone has left it too late.

Mike, Martin, Nik ands the guys from Lisbon

I suggest that those countries interested in sending a team in 2010 contact Mike as soon as possible.
Last edited by nikgaukroger on Tue Sep 14, 2010 6:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
babyshark
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 6:59 pm
Location: Government; and I'm here to help.

Post by babyshark »

Well I know that Team USA will be there to represent.

8)

Marc
nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Post by nikgaukroger »

Quoted from the IWF announcement:
MatteoPasi wrote:A correction: at least 8 players from Italy :)

So will there be an Italian team at the ITC in Lisbon as well?
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
peterrjohnston
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 1506
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 11:51 am

Post by peterrjohnston »

nikgaukroger wrote: So will there be an Italian team at the ITC in Lisbon as well?
Very possibly for FoG; I've already emailed Mike about it.

For DBMM I have no idea.
nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Post by nikgaukroger »

peterrjohnston wrote:
nikgaukroger wrote: So will there be an Italian team at the ITC in Lisbon as well?
Very possibly for FoG; I've already emailed Mike about it.
Cool :D

For DBMM I have no idea.
Not an issue for this forum :lol:
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
Martin0112
Slitherine
Slitherine
Posts: 202
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 8:36 am
Location: Germany

Post by Martin0112 »

Different topic, but it fits somehow here.
Does anybody has the complete FOG results from last year's FOG-competition?
We would like to add these to the FOG-Hall of Honour
peterrjohnston
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 1506
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2007 11:51 am

Post by peterrjohnston »

nikgaukroger wrote:
peterrjohnston wrote:
nikgaukroger wrote: So will there be an Italian team at the ITC in Lisbon as well?
Very possibly for FoG; I've already emailed Mike about it.
Cool :D
From what I'm told it's a 75% probability at the moment, if you follow... early days though, so...
ethan
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1284
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:40 pm

Post by ethan »

Any word on periods for this?
nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Post by nikgaukroger »

Nope. I'm waiting to get confirmation it is running before thinking about that - so the sooner we have 6 teams committed the sooner I start thinking.

Feel free to float ideas - however, the decision is entirely mine (as long as Mike is happy with it) and I like to be contrary :lol:
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
Ghaznavid
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 800
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 1:44 am
Location: Germany

Post by Ghaznavid »

Wrong way Nik. I'm not going to consider the ITC, much less work on trying to get a team together, before I know there will be a "period" that interests me.
Karsten


~ We are not surrounded, we are merely in a target rich environment. ~
nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Post by nikgaukroger »

Thats life I'm afraid.

Whatever I decide you can bank on 4 fairly broad pools - 'cos that is what Mike wants for any ITC comp - but whether those are book based as last year or, say, date based will depend on what I decide.

That said if you use last year's pools as a guide it probably won't be too different in approach - and they were sort of similar to the traditional DBM list book dates that has been used at the ITC.

The remit is for 4 pools that are broad enough that any country that enters a team will be able to field an army in each pool (this recognises that some countries have small player bases and also that in some countries players may not be able to afford a large number of armies).

So it'll be 4 broad pools and not 4 tight themes.
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
Ghaznavid
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 800
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 1:44 am
Location: Germany

Post by Ghaznavid »

Sounds ok, although personally I wouldn't like Azteks in a medieval theme. (It's rare enough I get to play in a theme as is.)
Karsten


~ We are not surrounded, we are merely in a target rich environment. ~
philqw78
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Chief of Staff - Elite Maus
Posts: 8836
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 11:31 am
Location: Manchester

Post by philqw78 »

Ghaznavid wrote:Sounds ok, although personally I wouldn't like Azteks in a medieval theme. (It's rare enough I get to play in a theme as is.)
I don't think the Aztecs would either
phil
putting the arg into argumentative, except for the lists I check where there is no argument!
babyshark
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 6:59 pm
Location: Government; and I'm here to help.

Post by babyshark »

nikgaukroger wrote:So it'll be 4 broad pools and not 4 tight themes.
I am glad to hear it, Nik. Broad periods are better, IMHO. I am all in favor of doing it just like the DBM periods; that is to say, based on a date range. Giving all army lists the chance to play improves the odds of a team being able to enter something in each period, and provides the potential for greater variety in opponents for the players.

If desired, perhaps the Aztecs, et al. could be moved to the "Book 1" period just to keep them with their closest technological relatives. <shrug>

I will also note that the sooner the periods are announced the better. In addition to the planning advantages, it is fun to speculate about army designs and strategies.

Marc
nikgaukroger
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10287
Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:30 am
Location: LarryWorld

Post by nikgaukroger »

babyshark wrote:
If desired, perhaps the Aztecs, et al. could be moved to the "Book 1" period just to keep them with their closest technological relatives. <shrug>
Given the way Mr Briggs' Aztecs have been dicking over medieval armies lately I'm not sure they need it ...
Nik Gaukroger

"Never ask a man if he comes from Yorkshire. If he does, he will tell you.
If he does not, why humiliate him?" - Canon Sydney Smith

nikgaukroger@blueyonder.co.uk
hazelbark
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4957
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Capital of the World !!

Post by hazelbark »

babyshark wrote:
If desired, perhaps the Aztecs, et al. could be moved to the "Book 1" period just to keep them with their closest technological relatives. <shrug>

Marc
I am not sure aztecs in period 1 is healthy.
ethan
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Panther D
Posts: 1284
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 9:40 pm

Post by ethan »

hazelbark wrote:
babyshark wrote:
If desired, perhaps the Aztecs, et al. could be moved to the "Book 1" period just to keep them with their closest technological relatives. <shrug>

Marc
I am not sure aztecs in period 1 is healthy.
I think this would be very bad for most biblical armies
babyshark
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 6:59 pm
Location: Government; and I'm here to help.

Post by babyshark »

ethan wrote:
hazelbark wrote:
babyshark wrote:
If desired, perhaps the Aztecs, et al. could be moved to the "Book 1" period just to keep them with their closest technological relatives. <shrug>

Marc
I am not sure aztecs in period 1 is healthy.
I think this would be very bad for most biblical armies
Perhaps, then, it is not desired. <shrug>

As an aside, would you leave them in Period 4? Move them somewhere else?

Marc
Ghaznavid
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 800
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2007 1:44 am
Location: Germany

Post by Ghaznavid »

Personally I would say either make a B&G theme (admittedly probably to special and therefore unlikely to happen) or not include them at all. These armies simply don't fit in with any others not from the Americas.
Karsten


~ We are not surrounded, we are merely in a target rich environment. ~
hazelbark
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4957
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Capital of the World !!

Post by hazelbark »

Ghaznavid wrote:Personally I would say either make a B&G theme (admittedly probably to special and therefore unlikely to happen) or not include them at all. These armies simply don't fit in with any others not from the Americas.
yea. i think letting them in increases the fantasy nature that themes hope to avoid.
Post Reply

Return to “Tournaments”