Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules

joncleaves · Moderator Joined: 29 Mar 2006 Posts: 16447

Interesting scoring system. The old 'throw away my army to get 800 points'
deal. Wish I could be there.

I'd add that you have the society scoring system completely misrepresented here,
but I think Scott will probably handle that for me.

joncleaves · Moderator Joined: 29 Mar 2006 Posts: 16447

Greg
I don't hink you have Scott's program. Beating less experienced guys doesn't
get you anywhere as their overall scores are part of yours.
All I have seen since Scott automated the system has been good. If it didn't
work we'd change it.

However, if you are using the UNADJUSTED society scoring system , then I can
see the problem you describe showing up in some places.

Also, if your scoring system is raw and not difference, how do you
differentiate between a guy winning 900-800 and one winning 900-0?

Jon

Chris Bump · Legate Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 1625

Greg,

Jon seems to have a point here, in that it appears your scoring system
rewards a "what do I care how many of my troops you kill as long as I kill
more of yours". I think Pyrrhus proved the futility of this type of
approach. Is this designed to inspire more offensive action? Not
complaining, just curious.

Chris

Greg Regets · Imperator Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 2988

The San Antonio Chapter of the NASAMW-Southwest Region is proud to announce;

RIVER CITY RUMBLE VI

Rules: The most current set of Warrior will be used at this tournament. If
you do not have a current set, contact Harlan Garrett by replying to this
posting.

Scale: 15mm

Date: June 16th and 17th, 2001

Place:
Ramada Inn I-35
10811 IH 35 N.
San Antonio, TX 78233
(210)590-4646

Army Lists:
If you pre-register, you will get two lists of 1600 points each. The list
must be in the same period, and in cases where lists use different options
(such as city, etc ... ), you will need to have the same option on both
lists. You must have stands to represent a baggage camp.

Registration: The pre-registration cost is $20. Send your check along with
your army lists to;
Greg Regets
7600 Callaghan #116
San Antonio, TX, 78229

You must have your letter postmarked by June 7th 2001 in order to be
considered as pre-registered. I will check each list very carefully. My two
lists will be given to Harlan, our NASAMW-SW Region Coordinator this
Saturday, May 19th. In addition, my lists will be posted at the tournament
for all to see.

Registration At The Door: The cost at the door will be $25 and you will get
one 1600 point list. You should be there 30 minutes in advance to facilitate
the checking of lists.

The following list sources may be used.
WRG 6th Edition Lists
NASAMW Lists
Hutchby & Clark Lists

Schedule:
Saturday June 16th
8:30am to 12:00pm - Game One
1:00pm to 4::30pm - Game Two
5:30pm to 9:00pm = Game Three

Sunday June 17th
8:30am to 12:00pm - Semi-Finals
1:00pm to 4:30pm - Finals
There will also be many tables open Sunday for open gaming.

Pairing: The first round will be random draw, avoiding players from the same
city. The second round will be a winners play winners draw, again avoiding
players from the same city. The third round will be straight winners play
winners. The four players with the highest point totals after the three
Saturday games will be seeded 1vs.4 and 2vs.3 in the semi-final round. The
winners of those two games will play for the championship.

Scoring System:
Any points - 1
100 - 199 - 2
200 - 299 - 3
300 - 399 - 4
400 - 499 - 5
500 - 599 - 6
600 - 699 -7
700 - 800+ - 8
Baggage Camp Win - 2
Winning The Game - 10

This is a new scoring system we will try for this tournament. Hopefully it
will address something that has been happening far too often lately since we
went to the NASAMW scoring system, that is, a player with three wins against
tough opponents missing the playoffs, while players with tough game and two
easy draws make it at 2 wins and a loss.What this should do is ensure that
the point system decide who will advance between players with the same
record, rather than who piles up points running up the score against new
players.

NASAMW Membership Drive:
All who attend that are not current NASAMW members, will be able to purchase
a membership at this tournament and grab $25 worth of nice unpainted lead
from a grab bag. This is not a bunch of old crummy figures that nobody would
want, but nice figures from top manufacturers.

Prizes: There will be plaques for first and second place, as well as a
sportsmanship award and best painted army award. Armies that have previously
won the best painted army award will not be eligible.

If you have any question, please email me at;

greg@...

Thank you ... and hope to see you soon!

Greg Regets · Imperator Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 2988

To quote you Jon ... "so says you"!

I actually think our lack of success with the NASAMW scoring system comes
from the number of very new players we have. Right now, if you get a tough
draw in the first round, you are better off losing the game. It's easier to
get in the playoffs by narrowly dropping your first game, so that you can
then play less experienced players in round two and three and rack up a ton
of points.

Three tournaments ago, I had the "pleasure" of being the only player at a
tournament that won all three of his games, only to sit and watch all three
guys that I beat playing in the four player playoff on Sunday. The very next
tournament, the same thing happened to John Green.

I actually emailed Scott on this ages ago. Like I said, I think this is a
regional problem. As the body of our membership improves, the NASAMW scoring
system will probably work fine.

G

Greg Regets · Imperator Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 2988

Jon is quite correct, we do not have Scott's adjusted system. Perhaps Scott
can post the adjusted system so we can use it at the tournament.

As far as Chris' comments go, we used a differential, seven point system for
years here in the old Lone Star Historical Society. I think it went
something like;

7-0 = margin greater than 500
6-1 = margin 250 to 499
5-2 = margin 100 to 249
4-3 = 1 to 99
3-4 = -1 to -99
2-5 = -100 to -249
1-6 = -250 to -500
0-7 = > -500
Tie Breakers were on raw troop point margin for the three Saturday games.
*****************************

I think we used that system from about 1980, right up until probably 1997.
At that time it was decided that play was too slanted towards the defensive
player. The group at that time voted to go to a total kill system. I was
actually the only one that voted against it, so there was a pretty big
concensus.

I'm all for Scott's system or any other system, just as long as players that
had a tough draw and won the games, make the playoffs. I have heard some
strong negative opinions about scoring in NICT from some people I
communicate with offline, but having never used it myself have no persoanl
opinion on it.

Perhaps this is not the place to get into this, as this is the Warrior
egroup. Chris, talk to the guys up in Dallas/FW. You are the largest chapter
in the SW Region. Whatever you prefer is fine with your little brothers here
in San Antonio. Let me know on the NASAMW-SW egroup.

Greg

scott holder · Posted: Wed May 16, 2001 3:15 pm Post subject: Re: RE: River City Rumble

I'm all for Scott's system or any other system, just as long as players that
had a tough draw and won the games,

>Define win? All too often, I hear someone who "won" by, oh let's say one LI
unit (point difference" say "I won". Since I don't know the specifics of
Greg's games, I cannot comment on them. But in my mind, the person who wins
by the margin of one LI unit has not "won" anything. That's why the NASAMW
5-0 system works so well. It rewards aggressive play. If you go out and kill
801 points and lose 400 each of your 3 preliminary games, I can guarantee you
you make the playoffs. If you fight to 3-3 ties against "tough" players, the
weighted system will take that into account.

make the playoffs. I have heard some
strong negative opinions about scoring in NICT from some people I
communicate with offline, but having never used it myself have no persoanl
opinion on it.

>The "regular" NICT attendees have no problems with it. Yes, one or two
occasional NICTers *still* seem to think they can poke holes in it
mathematically but I have 7 years of experience with it and none of the
*alledged* problems have *ever* cropped up.

Scott "no one knows point systems like me" Holder
List Ho

scott holder · Posted: Wed May 16, 2001 3:15 pm Post subject: Re: River City Rumble

The NASAMW system duplicates the old 600/600 system used at Derby oh so many
years ago. Of course I weight the system with a spreadsheet program which is
available for download at www.nasamw.org (that might be the DBM version, I can
send the Warrior version if asked). Works like a charm. Best Warrior point
system I've seen and man oh man have I seen and playtested a lot.

Scott

>>> JonCleaves@... 05/15/01 15:16 PM >>>
Interesting scoring system. The old 'throw away my army to get 800 points'
deal. Wish I could be there.

I'd add that you have the society scoring system completely misrepresented
here, but I think Scott will probably handle that for me.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.com

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

scott holder · Posted: Wed May 16, 2001 3:15 pm Post subject: Re: River City Rumble

Perhaps it's time to go over the base NASAMW Warrior scoring system.

You get full the unit value for opponents broken, destroyed, routed. You get
half the unit value for units off table (in good order), or shaken. Add up
those points and here's what happens:

Points are awarded as follows:
1 point if you get 1-200 points
2 points if you get 201-400 points
3 points if you get 401+ points

You get 1 point if you kill twice as many points as your opponent and at least
300.
You get 1 point if the margin of difference between your two scores is 150
points.

I'll say that in just about any tourney 10 people or under, you don't need the
weighted system. You must make sure winners play winners after the first
round.

Yes, it's possible for two players to fight to a 3-3 draw. But in a small
event, chances are they "still" get a chance to play someone else who might
have a better score than they do after, oh 2 rounds. Again, "winning" means
different things to different people. I spent my formative ancients years in
5th and 6th edition watching "big victory" be defined as being able to simply
score a difference of 151 points between what you lost and what you killed.
Two years of that in 7th drove people away in droves, hence the two year
project to fix the system. Two years of using that and we moved onto a year
of playtesting the weighted system. And that's been in place ever since.

The weighted system is easy. You get a % of your opponents 0-5 point score
based on how many points you scored in the 0-5 point scale of his, 10% for
each point. Therefore, 50% of your score is your "base" score, 50% is your
percentage of your opponents "base" score. In fact, it's nothing more than
integrating astandard tie breaking procedure into the actual scoring system.

Scott
Scoring Ho

Tim Brown · Legionary Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 326

Greg,
Just for my own perverse curiosity, and since this situation has been burned into your memory, could you by any chance repeat the scores of either tournament? It's not that I don't believe you - I'd just like to see them and work the numbers a bit myself. It seems incredible that the math could work itself that way. Perhaps your umpire secretly handicapped your score? <g> "Let's see...Greg...bastard won all his games...hmmm...a little minus 4 to his score should do it...yeah...that'll teach the SOB to win all his games!"

-----Original Message-----From: Greg Regets [mailto:greg@parkerwood.com]Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 4:31 PMTo: 'WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com'Subject: RE: [WarriorRules] River City RumbleTo quote you Jon ... "so says you"!I actually think our lack of success with the NASAMW scoring system comesfrom the number of very new players we have. Right now, if you get a toughdraw in the first round, you are better off losing the game. It's easier toget in the playoffs by narrowly dropping your first game, so that you canthen play less experienced players in round two and three and rack up a tonof points. Three tournaments ago, I had the "pleasure" of being the only player at atournament that won all three of his games, only to sit and watch all threeguys that I beat playing in the four player playoff on Sunday. The very nexttournament, the same thing happened to John Green.I actually emailed Scott on this ages ago. Like I said, I think this is aregional problem. As the body of our membership improves, the NASAMW scoringsystem will probably work fine.GTo unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.comYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Greg Regets · Imperator Joined: 12 Apr 2006 Posts: 2988

Hiya Tim ...

I don't readily have the scoring available to me, as this happened over a year ago, but I sort of remember how it went. I played John Green in the first game and beat him something like 2-1. He had a pike army and I had Comnenan Byzantine before the lance and a half rule, so there wasn't much we could do to each other. That put him against a losers bracket player and I got a winners bracket player. John I think got two 5's after that and ended up with 11 total. There was this guy named Darrin from Killeen that I beat 4-1 in the second round. His other two scores were both 5's so he also had 11. I'm not sure on the player for the last game, I think it was Chris Bump that posts on this board, but I'm not sure. Anyway, he came in with two 5's and I won that game 4-1, so he had 11 also. The fourth spot went to a guy I didn't play. I'n not completely sure, but I think he actually scored 3 points in two games he lost, and got a 5 in another game, so he had 11 also. All four playoff guys had 11 points and I had 10. I had wins against three of the four playoff guys and the last playoff guy had a 1-2 record.

I don't want to give the wrong impression here ... this is NOT me crying about what happened in a specific tournament. Actually, the very next tournament we had, I got in the playoffs at 1-1-1 while John Green was 3-0 and didn't make it. My loss was to him. I ended up winning that tournament, with a total record of 3-1-1.

I can already see how the adjustment system would have changed the outcome, I think. I'm not 100 percent sure that the big difference is the experience level of our players (which is changing VERY quickly) compared to other regions. Up until very recently, there was a very small group of experienced players mixed in with basically tons of new guys. If you were a solid player that drew another solid player in round one, the worst thing you could do was win. That would put you up against another solid player, while the loser would get an easy draw. (THIS IS NOT GOING TO MAKE ME POPULAR AT ALL, HAHA).

Anyway ... the guys down here are playing so much, I expect to see an all new core of solid players both in June and in the future.

G

-----Original Message-----From: Brown,Tim [mailto:Tim.Brown@trenwick.com]Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 10:42 AMTo: 'WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com'Subject: RE: [WarriorRules] River City Rumble

Greg,
Just for my own perverse curiosity, and since this situation has been burned into your memory, could you by any chance repeat the scores of either tournament? It's not that I don't believe you - I'd just like to see them and work the numbers a bit myself. It seems incredible that the math could work itself that way. Perhaps your umpire secretly handicapped your score? <g> "Let's see...Greg...bastard won all his games...hmmm...a little minus 4 to his score should do it...yeah...that'll teach the SOB to win all his games!"

-----Original Message-----From: Greg Regets [mailto:greg@parkerwood.com]Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 4:31 PMTo: 'WarriorRules@yahoogroups.com'Subject: RE: [WarriorRules] River City RumbleTo quote you Jon ... "so says you"!I actually think our lack of success with the NASAMW scoring system comesfrom the number of very new players we have. Right now, if you get a toughdraw in the first round, you are better off losing the game. It's easier toget in the playoffs by narrowly dropping your first game, so that you canthen play less experienced players in round two and three and rack up a tonof points. Three tournaments ago, I had the "pleasure" of being the only player at atournament that won all three of his games, only to sit and watch all threeguys that I beat playing in the four player playoff on Sunday. The very nexttournament, the same thing happened to John Green.I actually emailed Scott on this ages ago. Like I said, I think this is aregional problem. As the body of our membership improves, the NASAMW scoringsystem will probably work fine.GTo unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.comYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:WarriorRules-unsubscribe@egroups.comYour use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.