Slitherine

I'm kinda new to P&S, and was wondering if there are any other tournaments other than the Italian Wars one?
Cheers
Alex

I think that we could run one.I offered to do that with Senjoku Godai, the Eastern version of P&S, but so far there are no takers.

I'd consider Sengoku Jidai one if it gets off the ground. Might do a Pike and Shot one depending on the period and rules.

Anyways, Alex if you want a P&S battle feel free to throw a challenge up and PM me or if you want me to just let me know.

Also specify if you are using the campaigns version or the original one.

Pixel wrote:I'd consider Sengoku Jidai one if it gets off the ground. Might do a Pike and Shot one depending on the period and rules.

Anyways, Alex if you want a P&S battle feel free to throw a challenge up and PM me or if you want me to just let me know.

Also specify if you are using the campaigns version or the original one.

Thanks for the offer Pixel. I'm a complete newb. I am using the campaign version. And yes I'd love to send you a challenge. Is it a similar challenge system like FOG2?
Cheers
Alex

Yeah the challenge system works exactly like in Field of Glory II. The manual has a section that explains how to setup or accept a MP challenge but if you've done it in FoGII you should have a idea of how it works.

If you'd like I can setup one for us (any period or army pairing that interests you) or if you want to issue a challenge for me that is fine too. Let me know.

I'm hoping that Will will start another Italian Wars campaign soon. The current one has had a couple of players eliminated, has 3 players who realistically have no chance of winning unless something really dramatic happens, and 3 big players who are competing for top spot.
I find campaigns most exciting in the early stages when the states are smaller and more equal, everyone is using diplomacy and skullduggery and everyone has at least a chance of winning.
A new campaign without moneylenders would be great fun, but it depends on Will being happy to run it simultaneously with the current one.

What I would consider running is an actual tournament where each person fights a series of battles and scores are kept to determine an actual champion. There were a couple of very successful tournaments a few years ago. I like the idea of paired battles (so you both use each of two historical opponents) and each round using a different historical period. So round 1 could be Italian wars Italian against Italian Wars French, round 2 thirty years war protestant Germans against catholic Germans and so on.

If people are interested in that please let me know, or post on here, and I'll do some serious thinking about setting it up.

Andre

awesum4 wrote:I'm hoping that Will will start another Italian Wars campaign soon. The current one has had a couple of players eliminated, has 3 players who realistically have no chance of winning unless something really dramatic happens, and 3 big players who are competing for top spot.
I find campaigns most exciting in the early stages when the states are smaller and more equal, everyone is using diplomacy and skullduggery and everyone has at least a chance of winning.
A new campaign without moneylenders would be great fun, but it depends on Will being happy to run it simultaneously with the current one.

What I would consider running is an actual tournament where each person fights a series of battles and scores are kept to determine an actual champion. There were a couple of very successful tournaments a few years ago. I like the idea of paired battles (so you both use each of two historical opponents) and each round using a different historical period. So round 1 could be Italian wars Italian against Italian Wars French, round 2 thirty years war protestant Germans against catholic Germans and so on.

If people are interested in that please let me know, or post on here, and I'll do some serious thinking about setting it up.

Andre

I hate to say it but the purpose of playing is the battles but the battles are what is slowing the long term "strategy" down. In the board game, all that is resolved in a couple D6 rolls! I would imagine if battles were more decisive ie the losing army is either eliminated or pushed back and cannot support or move the next turn as it recovers its " moral" or whatever, there might be some quicker strategic results

Speaking of support, supporting another players army should cost $$ hehe.


I beleive I am likley one of those players that has no hope, surrounded as I am by scheming emperors and republican types. Didnt help France and Genoa players bailed and there was no ability to either A get destroyed earlier or have a counter poise to my enemies. I am enjoying though and would certaibly play again!

ahuyton wrote:I think that we could run one.I offered to do that with Senjoku Godai, the Eastern version of P&S, but so far there are no takers.

Yes there is one, ME ............

Just picked up your challenge Alex. Your Scots are pretty fearsome. Interesting matchup. The Elizabethan English don’t get played too often either as I think most folks like the later ECW, TYW, and Louis XIV era modules a bit more since there are more gunpowder units. Also the Age of Machiavelli English and Scots don’t have access to large amounts of heavier pike blocks (Landsknechts, Swiss, etc.) that some of the continental powers do. The Spanish also have very powerful infantry in the Italian Wars lists. Therefore, the Elizabethan English and Scots can be tricky to use against the European major power army lists the game has in the same period. That said the Early English have nice longbows and the Scot highlanders though small in unit size have a fabulous impact charge as well as some flexibility at range because they also carry bows.

KiwiWarlord wrote:

ahuyton wrote:I think that we could run one.I offered to do that with Senjoku Godai, the Eastern version of P&S, but so far there are no takers.

Yes there is one, ME ............

Thanks, that makes three of us with Pixel...

TheGrayMouser wrote:

awesum4 wrote:I'm hoping that Will will start another Italian Wars campaign soon. The current one has had a couple of players eliminated, has 3 players who realistically have no chance of winning unless something really dramatic happens, and 3 big players who are competing for top spot.
I find campaigns most exciting in the early stages when the states are smaller and more equal, everyone is using diplomacy and skullduggery and everyone has at least a chance of winning.
A new campaign without moneylenders would be great fun, but it depends on Will being happy to run it simultaneously with the current one.

What I would consider running is an actual tournament where each person fights a series of battles and scores are kept to determine an actual champion. There were a couple of very successful tournaments a few years ago. I like the idea of paired battles (so you both use each of two historical opponents) and each round using a different historical period. So round 1 could be Italian wars Italian against Italian Wars French, round 2 thirty years war protestant Germans against catholic Germans and so on.

If people are interested in that please let me know, or post on here, and I'll do some serious thinking about setting it up.

Andre

I hate to say it but the purpose of playing is the battles but the battles are what is slowing the long term "strategy" down. In the board game, all that is resolved in a couple D6 rolls! I would imagine if battles were more decisive ie the losing army is either eliminated or pushed back and cannot support or move the next turn as it recovers its " moral" or whatever, there might be some quicker strategic results

Speaking of support, supporting another players army should cost $$ hehe.


I beleive I am likley one of those players that has no hope, surrounded as I am by scheming emperors and republican types. Didnt help France and Genoa players bailed and there was no ability to either A get destroyed earlier or have a counter poise to my enemies. I am enjoying though and would certaibly play again!

I'll review the feedback from the Machiavelli campaign when it is complete. I've always thought that that Money Lenders rule was overpowered, but we all agreed to play the rules as written. I also appreciate that in campaigns the same two players battle each other interminably. With input from the players we can make this right.

Pike & Shot is a great game and I hope to fine tune the campaign system. It might even work for other periods.