Warrior Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules
A Four Horsemen Enterprises Rules Set
 
  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups AlbumAlbum   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Historicon 2015 Results and AAR
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules Forum Index -> Events
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
scott holder
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 6032
Location: Bonnots Mill, MO

PostPosted: Mon Jul 20, 2015 3:27 pm    Post subject: Historicon 2015 Results and AAR

NICT

1) Ewan McNay, Sassanid Persian, 55.9
2) Bill Low, Tepanec, 41.8
3) Frank Gilson, Nikephorian Byzantine, 36
4) Greg Hauser, Yuan Chinese, 34.3
5) Dan Woyke, Prussian, 30.6
6) Todd Kaeser, Abyssinian, 30.5
7) Matt Kollmer, Alexandrian Imperial, 30.3
8) Scott McDonald, Moldavian, 30.2
9) Phil Gardocki, 28.9
10) Rich Novak/Scott Holder, Sassanid Persian/Early Byzantine, 26.4
11) Terry Dix, Mongol, 25.3
12) Rich Kroupa, Hunnic, 24.1
13) Mark Stone, Early Polish, 19.6
14) Jake Kovel, Early Polish, 13.1


Alexander and the Successors Theme

1) Ewan McNay, Bosporan
2) Marc Cribbs, Mountain Indian
3) Scott McDonald, Early Armenian, 11 (28)
4) Bill Low, Ptolemeic, 11 (21)
5) Dan Woyke, Bythianian, 10 (28)
6) Frank Gilson, Bosporan, 10 (12)
7) Don Carter, Early Armenian, 8
8) Mike Kelly, Early Armenian, 7 (27)
Greg Hauser, Asiatic Early Successor, 7 (27)
10) Rich Novak, Pyrrhic, 7
11) Rich Kroupa, Early Armenian, 6 (33)
12) Terry Dix, Skythian, 6 (23)
13) Scott Holder, Galatian, 6 (21)
14) Jim Bisigani, Macedonian Early Successor, 6 (20)
15) Todd Kaeser, Asiatic Early Successor, 4
16) Phil Gardocki, Thracian, 2

Best Camp: Todd Kaeser (Abyssinian)
Sportsman: Matt Kollmer

Sponsor: Greg Hauser and NASAMW

After tournament "hang" in the Hampton Inn lobby:
IMG_1888

_________________
These Rules Suck, Let's Paint!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   Visit poster's website
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2769
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Mon Jul 20, 2015 8:46 pm    Post subject:

Thanks, as always to Scott for organising. And also to several others who were critical to the events: Rich Kroupa with terrain, Mark Stone for umpiring the Theme (a rules Q from which I will post in a second), Scott McD for wrangling the helmet. And then more personally, Bill Low for providing me with both a ride from the airport and lead for *both* armies (!), as well as the entire gang for the cameraderie.

Very brief recap: everyone has seen the Sassanids by now (and I think they are retiring on a high), but I got lucky in not having to face any close foot armies. Bill's Tepanecs, Saturday morning on a table with 5 or 6 maximum-size woods, were a real nightmare opponent; Greg Hauser's Yuan* caused I think the most interesting challenge - six 6-crew stone-throwers is a heck of an incoming barrage! [*Scott H had me listed as Ewan-Yuan for the NICT, to amusement.] And in the final game, Scott McD set up an attack plan that probably had a 50% chance of exploding the core of my army on bound 2, only to roll -3 with *both* of his SHK units charging my MI spearmen; so fate was smiling on me. And not just then - my first game put me against a Scythian who just failed to double my scouting and had to face me on a narrow frontage between secure terrain flanks without a single foot figure in their army.

Bosporans worked the way I hoped, and again basically I got lucky. I didn't fight any pike-elephant armies; my first two opponents were both early Armenian who had the misfortune to face me on terrain-rich tables where my peltasts could dominate, and in both cases I was able to fight EHC or SHC on rough ground, a pretty one-sided matchup. The final game was against Dan Woyke's Bithynian, which was an interesting match but the close foot pike/Galatians had no real targets, I could once again use the terrain with impunity, and I managed to arrange to catch a LC evader early on which caused two of the big foot blocks to shake.

A bunch of us now have kids who are old enough to start playing seriously; I really hope that turns into the next generation - but in the mean time, it's still a great bunch of folks and a great time. I am thinking something like Viking for my next list, maybe... ever since I saw Chris Damour's Conanesque figures, I've wanted to run them, and it's time for a change..


Last edited by Ewan McNay on Tue Jul 21, 2015 11:48 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Mark Stone
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2102
Location: Buckley, WA

PostPosted: Mon Jul 20, 2015 9:24 pm    Post subject:

Thanks, Ewan. I'm happy to have given Scott a well-deserved break from umping so he could play the Theme in a period he truly enjoys. I'll have a detailed AAR of my experience (short version: the most disastrous competitive experience I've ever had playing miniatures) soon.

If you're interested in Vikings. you might also consider any of several Biblical Warrior lists for the Nationals (other than Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian). Or perhaps Feudal English. These are all lists that have been unfairly and tragically overlooked, and the rest of us look forward to seeing a rendition of them in your capable hands. Indeed, I could provide you with a list of seldom-seen armies that should keep you busy for years to come. Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   MSN Messenger
Ed Kollmer
Centurion
Centurion


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1018

PostPosted: Tue Jul 21, 2015 1:34 am    Post subject:

Thanks for the pic. and the report.
We of the lower caste LOVE it.
Ed the Lower Caste
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Terry D
Recruit
Recruit


Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 77

PostPosted: Tue Jul 21, 2015 6:20 pm    Post subject: Thanks for a fun time

I also want to thank Scott and Mark for umpiring. I had a fun time and felt I played as well as can be expected considering I hadn't played since last Historicon. The theme was fun for me, but it was clear I wasn't alone in not wanting to take an Alexandrian army.

In the NCIT I drew Ewan straight out of the gate and his army was the only army that I ran into that I couldn't remove terrain features. That and not throwing enough units on to my flank march was disastrous.

I drew Jake in the second round put a few more points in my flank march and was able to be more aggressive when it arrived. the game was looking to be a draw until I looted his camp, and broke one unit and he started failing waivers.

Third round was against Phil and I was an idiot and didn't realize his HI didn't have shields so I didn't try and push them. Luckily my flank march swept up his left flank.

Fourth round was against Matt. This was by far the most leisurely competition game I have ever played. He turtled up I threw the bulk of my army on the one side and shot his anchor unit. I never got the up role I needed to disorder his pike and forgot to run the numbers on my charging him if he was tired and down hill (a win which disorders him routing him the following turn with a fresh charge) as it was I charged one of his LI they failed giving me points.

Fifth Round was against Mark I screwed up and split my flank marches because he could have anchored on either flank. I miss handled how I arrieved and made a charge that didn't matter that ultimately cost me catching a unit and breaking it on the table rather than having evade off board.

By the end of the weekend I felt much better about my set up and over all tactical choices so that was a success.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2769
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Tue Jul 21, 2015 11:50 pm    Post subject:

I had forgotten the first-game flank-march score: it seemed pretty likely to me that a Scythian would be planning to flank march. So I sent a whole command. So did Terry, but my SHC general is a lot more expensive than his Smile.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2769
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2015 4:11 pm    Post subject:

Matt and Terry's Alexander vs Scythians was on the table adjacent to Dan and I: I think it would have made an excellent intellectual exercise on both sides Smile.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
scott holder
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 6032
Location: Bonnots Mill, MO

PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2015 5:14 pm    Post subject:

Attendance was identical to last year. The people who didn't come up for a variety of lame reasons have been dutifully shamed on social media for their messed up life's priorities.

Like last year, I took Tue off of work, left at 10am Central and made it to my fleabag motel in Charleston WV (note to travelers, if you can help it, don't stay at either the Motel 6 or Budget Host Inn there) in time to grab pizza and watch the All Star game. The rain I drove thu in eastern KY to get there was dangerous. Cars were skidding onto the median as I crawled past them. Took me at least an hour to get thru the mess.

Total Wine in the big shopping area surrounding the Convention Center was a bust in that they've stopped carrying Yuengling Porter by the case, only a few six packs. But the Mecca that is the area, Wegmans, while also not having it by the case, had tons of sixes. I came home with Porter and their Summer Wheat, 5 cases all told. One part of a successful trip to Hcon!

Turnout was static like it's been 3 years running: 14 in the NICT, 16 in the Theme. I contacted a few of the 15mm players in advance but none were coming so I didn't knock myself out making sure they had something to do when they got here. Nonetheless, I packed my Ancient Spanish in 15mm just in case.

As noted above, Mark Stone umped the Theme and was willing to be the odd player. Fortunately for us, Rich Novak came this year. Rich played 7th back in the day but eventually gravitated to DBM. He knew there was no DBM this year so brought Sassanids in both scales. Bill provided him with Pyrrhic in 25mm for the Theme and Ewan hastily put together a NICT list for him for Saturday.

For me, I played a lot of games: 6. Terry and I had a 1500 vs 1200 Galatian vs Skythian game Wed night. We repeated the army matchup in the Theme. Because we had an odd number onf Thu, I played 2 rounds in the NICT. I brought the theme list for my Early Byzantines, meaning I hadn't touched it in 3 years. As mentioned, Rich Novak then played "for me" Saturday in the NICT. My two NICT opponents were Matt Kollmer, who I probably last played when he was a teenager (he just turned 40) and Todd Kaeser who I played in 2006 or 2007 (a Feudal theme). I had a great time with both.

Testudo, testudo, my kingdom for that ability. Wait, what? You mean my Skutatoi can do that? I moved my Skuts up in the face of Todd's massive Abbyssinian bow blocks and he shot me to a halt in both cases because, duh, I forgot the Skuts could go into testudo.
It's impossible to say how that changed things...no it's not. I would have slammed into those two bow blocks, aka LOTS OF POINTS. Sigh, I need to play more.

My Theme goals are always the same: 1) Have a good time...check, 2) Win at least one game...oops, and 3) Place in the top half...oops. What was great is that I played people I either hadn't played in forever or played at all. I played Terry, Rich Novak and Don Carter, the latter was a regular Northern VA Warrior player back when I lived there which was also the last time we played.

Galatians at 1920pts was neat in that I felt I had a complete army. In my game with Rich we had a 1 in 30,000 occurence occur, at least those were the quick odds according to Ewan. I have two of my big blocks of Galatian foot facing the expected pike/El combo. Rich, also pretty rusty at this, led with his El and charged a 2E EL unit into each of the two big blocks. I was just fine with that knowing he'd have a tough time doing a CPF to me and my goal is to simply last long enough to roll up big.

He rolls El #1 unit first...down 3! I'm licking my chops, roll the dice...down 3! We then proceed to the next melee, identical to the first. Guess what? The die rolls were identical to the first. I could have been a contendah! All those uneasy C-class pike blocks testing for routing elephants. Instead Rich ground me around and I lost 5-2.

The Theme was a return to "what if we have a Theme and the named army in the theme doesn't show up?" Cutting 10% from some of the armies meant that the usual risk-adverse player base stayed away from them. Instead we got the usual army picks that unbalanced everything. That's why you see 5 Armenians, 2 Bosporan (which were essentially cav armies, never should have gotten +5%) and Skythians. And, while the Successors showed up, clearly Alexander stayed home (wherever that might be for him at any given moment). Don't get me wrong, letting Alex Imperial and Seleucids into this thing at 1600pts would have probably resulted in those lists being run and rolling. It's clear that weighting won't always produce a home run in terms of army balance, presence and isn't that easy to "get right".

Admitedly, the upward weighting produced the desired results, I mean look at Marc Cribbs's showing with Mountain Indian. And I would run Galatians again at 1920pts.

Nobody will ever see Todd's Abyssinian camp again because he just doesn't have the personality for the army. Wink

I dealt with more friggin gap questions this year than in the past. I always find gap questions amusing, then irritating because players love to ignore gaps...until they want to prevent their opponent from doing something. Frank and I had a spirited discussion on the definititon of "any". I'm right and apparently at least half a dozen of you are doing something wrong when it comes to gaps (we can talk about this later and in another thread).

Shopping still stunk (except non-hobby consumption shopping at Wegmans), the place is still noisy and somewhat sticky in the main room. Nonetheless, we have tons of room and what's becomming a tradition, the after-day "hang" over in the lobby of the Hampton Inn, isn't to be missed.

12:45 on the road on Sunday and I was home (930 miles). I always come home exhausted but jazzed about the experience. We've got Feudal Warrior errata in the final stages, are busily ironing out details on the Roman Civil War Theme and, drum roll please, will be issuing the first set of "clarifications" to the basic rules since 2008. All will happen between now and the end of the year.

scott

_________________
These Rules Suck, Let's Paint!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   Visit poster's website
Terry D
Recruit
Recruit


Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 77

PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2015 5:22 pm    Post subject:

The last 7 turns were basically intellectual exercises Cool The whole game after the second turn when I had completed my moves to set up my fire on his end pike unit was basically a solitare game of me shooting then evading his charge me reforming on the firing line and repeating the process. Laughing I was running Mongols in the NICT which made it a 2 turn process rather than a 3 turn process Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Mark Stone
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2102
Location: Buckley, WA

PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2015 5:45 pm    Post subject:

Here's my AAR -

Summary: You know you're having a tough tournament when the only opponent you can beat with your Early Polish is... Early Polish.

The List: Early Polish, late period.

List Composition:

6x 2 elements of Irr B SHK/EHK L,Sh (1 w/CinC, 1 w/Sub)
2x 4 elements of Irr B LC L,JLS,Sh
2x 6 elements of Irr C LC JLS,B/B
2x 6 elements of Irr C LI B,Sh/B
1x 4 elements of Irr C LI S,Sh
1x 9 elements of Irr C LHI (3 elements) / LMI (6 elements) JLS,Sh
1x 8 elements of Irr C MI LTS,B,Sh

15 units, 2 commands, 68 scouting points.

The "line" is pure light troops - 3 units of LI and 4 units of LC. The loose order foot unit is big enough to benefit from barbarian foot rules, meaning that pikes and elephants have to give it at least some respect. It's also the anchor unit for bad terrain. The MI LTS,B unit must be deployed with care. It is very potent against certain troop types (cav, elephants) but very vulnerable to others (pikes, Varangians). This is about as many SHK units as you can get on 1600 points, which is the main reason to play the list. Note that these units also dismount as SHI 2HCW/EHI JLS,Sh making them excellent pike killers.

The games:

Game 1 - vs. Frank Gilson, Nikephoran Byzantine. This is a very tough matchup both ways. Frank has more units, lots of regulars, and very solid light troops. I can't push too hard without exposing a flank or some such somewhere. On his side, none of his cavalry wants to fight my knights, and his Varangians have to stay well away from any potential knight threats.

We have a big hill in the center of the table, and the fight centers around that. He sends Kontaratoi to it, which my SHK don't want to tangle with, and I opt to use dismounted knights to take the hill, figuring -- correctly -- that he doesn't want to risk his EHC charging into SHI that are halted higher.

I end up taking the hill, at some cost to my left flank where Frank is pushing hard, but putting a lot of pressure on him from my right flank as the payoff. I try a low odds attack on my left, using knights and the MI impetuously to try and get an up roll and disorder a kontaratoi unit, to no avail. I nab a couple of small units on my right, but his regulars dance away from any major threat.

Result: 1-1

Game 2 - vs. Rich Kroupa, Huns.

I fought Rich at Cold Wars a couple of years ago with his all mounted version of the Huns, which proved too one dimensional. He's modified the list to include a couple of scummy MI HTW,Sh units (a mix of Irr C and Irr D). This is a good choice on his part as it gives him some options against close order foot armies, but those units are extremely vulnerable to knights. He puts them front and center, and then pushes aggressively with his cav through a brush on my left. My loose order foot holds a woods on my right, stalling any action on that front.

I kill the HTW guys after several bounds. It's then time to pivot my attack to my left and rescue my beleaguered flank. My MI LTS,B unit is perfectly positioned as the hinge in this maneuver, so I face it 90 degrees in a long column with the intent of expanding out and pouring shooting into Rich's cav next bound. In a classic "I'm rusty and don't play enough" blunder, I don't realize he has an HC unit that can move up enough to hit my MI column on the flank. A slight wheel on my part would have taken care of the problem, but I overlook it, the MI gets charged, routed, and some associated waver tests are failed.

Result: 2-2

Game 3 - vs. Jake Kovel, Early Polish

One thing you can always count on with Jake is that it will not be a low scoring game. Jake has his Poles configured a little different from mine: his knights are all EHK, his foot is all loose order, and he's using 2HCT instead of LTS. Overall, very similar armies.

On bound one Jake charges two of my light cav units, I evade, he rolls long on both, catching and routing them. One of these is in the center, where I pass all my wavers; the other is on my right flank, where my loose order foot fails it's waver and shakes. My right flank is now being held by a routing LC unit, a shaken loose order foot unit, and a lone knight unit.

I take a bit of a personal morale check at this point, and pass. Pulling myself together, I focus on routing his pursuing LC in the middle, and aggressively going after his foot. I rout his LC back at him, he fails some wavers, and his foot is just too vulnerable to my SHK. He tries to peel off some of my SHK with his EHK, but I get the needed up roll and rout him. On my right flank his victorious LC charges my shaken loose order foot unit in the brush, but I pass my waver. He fails to do a CPF, and next bound, with my overlapping troops counting in the fight I win, pushing him back and thus reverting from shaken to disordered. Jake's casualties in the center put a command in retirement.

He has definitely drawn blood; I lost over 300 points. But I tallied over 700 points against him.

Result: 5-2

Game 4 - vs. Scott McDonald, Wallachian

Scott is playing what is probably my favorite knight army, and while configuring it differently than I would, he's playing it well. I find that despite my 68 scouting points I am feeling way over-matched in light troops. He has almost double my scouting, and all his cav fights rank and a half, whereas only my Lithuanians do.

I opt for a defensive, counter-punching position, and try to anchor on terrain that cuts down the frontage. There's a hill with a steep slope in the middle of my side of the table, and that becomes the hinge in my line, but even after setup I'm feeling that I'm stretched.

The only place where I can really be aggressive is in front of my LTS,B unit, which lays waste to any of his LC unlucky enough to be in front of it. So I'm pushing hard in the middle-left of my line with this unit, trying to make something happen. My outnumbered LI and LC are gamely hanging on over on my right, and on my left I've got my loose order foot sitting atop another steep hill in a fairly secure position.

As my MI pushes forward, it's left flank is starting to come unhinged from the LHI/LMI protecting that left flank. I take a chance moving the LHI/LMI off the hill, knowing his cav can beat me but are unlikely to do 3 CPF at contact, giving my knights an opportunity for some counter-play. Alas, he charges, I fail the waver for charged by mounted in the open, he recoils me, I fail the waver, and the Irr B knight unit and Irr B LC unit next to it also fail there wavers. Elsewhere on the right flank he finally catches an evading LC unit, routs it, and I fail the two associated waver tests, putting one of my commands in retirement.

Yes, I rolled 6 consecutive 1s on waver tests. You don't win many games that way.

Result: 1-5

Game 5 - vs. Terry Dix, Mongols

If Wallachians was bad, Mongols is a nightmare. Terry has double my scouting points, and an abundance of regulars, meaning that (a) I feel even more pinned back, and (b) it's even harder to chase him down when I push.

I make a couple of adjustments based on my Wallachian experience. First, I pack myself into an even tighter defensive space. Second, I interleave a couple of knight units in with my LC to keep Terry from just charging off my LC. This will require me to expend some knight charges just for the sake of blowing back his LC, but I figure the fatigue expended is worth the positional advantage.

The game quickly evolves into a waiting game for Terry's two flank marches. On my left flank I have a small cav contingent outside of a woods. I figure if it's a small flank march I can handle it, and if it's a large flank march Terry won't get past the woods into the rest of my army. On my right I have a hill where I've deployed my Lithuanians -- dismounted. So I have two 8 figure units of MI LTS,JLS,Sh holding my right flank.

Things start out okay. Once again, my MI LTS,B unit does a good job of driving back his lights, as do my interleaved knights. His light cav can't do anything against my dismounted Lithuanians, so I'm holding my own and pushing back a bit.

Then both flank marches show up, and both are full commands rather than single units. On my right, it takes Terry a bit to get there. He has to march onto the table, march across, and then approach. On my left, there is a flurry of charges as he tries to get on table, and then another flurry of charges next bound as I try to push him back off. The net of all this is that I kill more points than he does, but not by a lot. Then on my right things start to come undone. I lose an LI unit at the hinge between my right and center, and my two little Lithuanian units are not enough to stand up to the bowfire of an entire command. I send a knight unit over to help them out, but I send it a bound too late. I could have mounted up the Lithuanians and evaded away, but I realize this too late. My right flank collapses, taking some of my center with it.

Result: 1-5

Conclusions: 15 units is not very many. You really need more to match up effectively, particularly when 6 of them (the knights) would prefer to start behind the line. Also, having an army entirely of irregulars really limits the army's responsiveness, meaning those 15 units have to be positioned just right. This is exacerbated by the Lithuanians being armed only with JLS as a missile weapon, meaning they cannot move back in a counter while skirmishing.

Against armies with an equal or lesser number of scouting points, Early Polish should do well. You use the force projection of your knights and/or the advantage in light troops to compensate for fewer units. But against armies with more scouting/light troops, this is a very difficult army to play.

Against pike and elephant armies Early Polish should do extremely well. It has great pike killers in the form of dismounted knights, and enough anti-elephant troops to be effective. It will also have more light troops than most pike and elephant armies, giving the Poles good chances to dictate matchups. Given this year's Alexandrian Theme, I thought the odds of a number of pike and elephant armies were quite good, and thus the benefits of Early Poles outweighed the negatives. In fact there was only one Alexandrian army in the NICT, and I never faced it.

The current deployment rules have been in effect long enough now that people are beginning to evolve their tactics and army list selection accordingly. We see more light cav now, because having a scouting advantage is important in setup. We see less LI now because everything can deploy forward without the 2 CPF force march penalty. We see more artillery now, because it can be deployed forward and shoot as early as bound 2.

Of all these I think the shift towards more LC has the biggest impact on army list selection. Had I really recognized this trend and thought it through, I would not have taken Early Poles. I would have been better off with an army like 10 Independent States. That would have probably been a 5-1 loss to Frank's Nikephorans, but I would have matched up very favorably against everyone else I faced.

Lots to think about for a future Historicon.

As I final note I'd like to credit my opponents with strong play. Those who have remained active in the hobby have, by and large, steadily improved in the quality of their play. In particularly, I'd like to compliment Scott McDonald, who has transformed from someone I used to think of as an easy win into someone who is a tough opponent indeed. Combined with my own lack of playing time, meaning that my quality of play has slipped, I find myself in the middle of the pack, and deservedly so. You all are a great bunch of gaming colleagues and a strong competitive challenge. Well done one and all. I'll be back, with something different. I just have to figure out what.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   MSN Messenger
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2769
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Wed Jul 22, 2015 5:59 pm    Post subject:

Mark Stone wrote:
As a final note I'd like to credit my opponents with strong play. Those who have remained active in the hobby have, by and large, steadily improved in the quality of their play.


I thought this several times also. There were no easy opponents - that was not the case even a few years back. And as Mark notes, some of the previously mid-list players are now threats to win a given tournament, with noticeably improved play and army selection.

Dominance of LC was a shift for me. My Sassanids are used to out-lighting enemies; that rarely happened, and the Reg D LC B are now routinely at risk of being routed early on by superior enemy LC. 1.5-rank LC can rout LI at contact, which really changes that dynamic, and are not completely useless as combat troops. Interesting stuff.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
Ed Kollmer
Centurion
Centurion


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 1018

PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 1:46 am    Post subject:

Thanks guys
I really love the reports.
Keep them coming. Anyone else
reporting.

ED the ............
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
scott holder
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 6032
Location: Bonnots Mill, MO

PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 1:06 pm    Post subject:

I did something in response to the evolving army composition as it pertains to the deployment system. Terrain.

Unless Eric Turner comes back to lay down preset terrain, that fun task falls to me. For the NICT, where we play 5 rounds, with or without a cut, this means two days with different table setups. I've decided on an approach deliberately meant to cause problems for people bringing hordes of mounted all because of the deployment system with little regard for the terrain they'll fight in. I did this as a trial run.

There will always be a desert table. It'll always have dunes (probably more next year) and an oasis. If you have camels in your army, you tell me and I'll put you on that desert table the first round.

On Thursday for the two rounds, the boards will not be "open" but terrain will trend that way. To be honest, it's the way I've inadvertently done this for several years now. I seem to be a bit gun shy when it comes to laying down terrain the first day. With that in mind, Thursday will have the usual assortment of hills, woods and brush. I now have stuff to make marshes and bogs (bogs are brush basically) so will have one table featuring those terrain types but again, not overdone. One table will have a major water feature. Rich now has some really nice gullies so one table will have a gully.

Saturday will be a different story. This year I placed every hill Rich had. I placed every gully Rich had. He also modeled a single ridge which looked really cool, that got placed. He had 3 knolls, they were placed. I setup two boards with major water features. One board had a somewhat meandering minor water feature. We had villages (in this case one temple and one amphitheater) on two boards. I had lots of wooded hills, tables with rocky areas and one table with a hedged road running right down the middle from one rear edge to the opposing rear edge.

In other words, I attempted to clutter the crap out of almost all the tables and the one that I didn't still had significant features.

So, expect that going forward and plan accordingly. Twisted Evil

scott

_________________
These Rules Suck, Let's Paint!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   Visit poster's website
Ewan McNay
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 12 Apr 2006
Posts: 2769
Location: Albany, NY, US

PostPosted: Thu Jul 23, 2015 2:05 pm    Post subject:

Yeah: this definitely had an effect, although (as is probably-to-certainly sensible) there was still a big variation between tables on Sat. My first game against Bill Low's Tepanecs, fighting on a table with 6 large woods... urk Smile. Not quite as bad as when my Sassanids faced him using Carthaginians on a table that was basically solid woods, thankfully.

Then I fought on the minor water feature table. Definitely a factor that will affect army choice: for insight, the Theme showed how important it was to be able to dominate terrain even if there's a large part of the army that's LC.

I suspect that it may also make points on Thursday a bit more valuable: winning a game through terrain can be slow even when your army dominates the terrain - some regular LI JLS, Sh can hold up a woods flank for basically the whole game in many cases. So getting big wins on Sat may be harder.

One thing I very much liked was the increased *variety* of terrain. Vineyards, plowed fields, hedged roads, villages - all cool stuff.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message  
scott holder
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 6032
Location: Bonnots Mill, MO

PostPosted: Fri Jul 24, 2015 11:33 am    Post subject:

Another fun thing to relate.

14 players playing in 5 rounds of the NICT means that anybody outside the top 4 don't adhere strictly to a swiss pairing approach. My goal is to ensure nobody plays the same player twice.

After the 4th round, Todd approached me and asked if it were possible with that in mind if he could play Matt in the final round and could Matt switch from his Alex Imperial to Picts. Picts? Apparently Matt's been working on the army for years and brought it in the hopes of getting in a game with it. It would be a nice opposing army to Todd's Abbysinnians so I made sure it would happen.

Then I spent most of that final round sitting tableside with the two of them joking around while watching Todd howl at the vicissitudes of dice...and his poor memory. He had a setup advantage in that he could direct his lance-armed cav anywhere he wanted. So Matt deploys and specifically states and marks which Pict unit is armed with what. Todd theoretically sets up and moves his cav for optimal attacks...except that he forgets and gets the targets all mixed up. Matt very graciously allowed a lot of takesy-backsies and for a good 2.5 hours, even that didn't help Todd.

But then things swung the other direction but not enough so that in the end Matt ground out a very bloody 4-3 win. But the real win was in the fun of the game with the peanut gallery (me) providing running commentary and distractions.

scott

_________________
These Rules Suck, Let's Paint!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message   Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Warrior Ancient and Medieval Rules Forum Index -> Events All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group