Scourge of War Boards

LOL I hate you! :laugh:

Several of us had thrown around the idea for a tourney about two months ago, but it faded away. I was just thinking about it at work today and I wanted to fire up the conversation again. So, you went and beat me to the punch!

For what it is worth, I was thinking of a 3-game series to determine the winner of each round. The first two games would have uneven OOBs with each side having an advantage and playing the part of the attacker, the last game would be an even meeting-engagement battle. Whoever had the most points at the conclusion of the three games would be declared the winner. You would only need to make one balanced OOB and use the in-game handicap modifier to give the attackers the advantage for the first two games.

However, I was thinking of setting the tourney up for teams of two, but I suppose it could easily work for 1v1.

Just about everyone in the tournament has been playing with 250 yard muskets for all of the infantry. It certainly has reduced the amount of canister fired (and I think that's a good thing).

200 yard muskets would be ideal, but as that's not a choice (yet, I hope), I agree with Neal and would prefer 250 yard muskets for the tournament.

I take that back. Everyone who is in the tournament has been playing or has played with the 250 yard muskets.

I would suggest the SC post a set of suggested rules for everyone to follow.

Pretty much everyone in the tournament is from the organized MP community, and while we had disputes over many things, in-game rules wasn't one of them. It should be easy for everyone to accept and follow an in-game ruleset.

Kg_Soldier, I would propose you post something to that effect (a ruleset).

N

I would suggest the SC post a set of suggested rules for everyone to follow.

Pretty much everyone in the tournament is from the organized MP community, and while we had disputes over many things, in-game rules wasn't one of them. It should be easy for everyone to accept and follow an in-game ruleset.

Kg_Soldier, I would propose you post something to that effect (a ruleset).

N

I still like the idea of "if it's possible to do without cheats, then it's legal". If you guys are all familiar with your own rule set, you're more than welcome to go by it.. sort of like a set of ethics. But as far as "official battlefield rules" there are none at this time.

The weapons are all US 1861 Springfields at this time.

Mr. Neal. I have no problem playing by the "rule-set" (or lack thereof) Mr. Little Powell has already given us. In fact, I have no desire to "propose" anything regarding rules. I made a suggestion about which guns I'd like to play with, nothing about rules. I'm confident if one of us proposed a rule-set, we'd end up with 20 pages of argument and no tournament. And I kind of like the no rules but that which your conscience will not allow concept.

So I'm just going to play and hope for a win or two, and not complain when I lose.


regards

Now that I've seen the OOB, it is not balanced.

1. The yanks have two more rifled guns than the confederates, the confederates have howitzers as their counterpart.
2. The yanks have _USA guns, while the rebs have _CSA guns, which means the reb guns are much worse at shrapnel and shell, only solid shot and canister are equal.
3. The rebs have fewer but larger regiments. Some regiments around 600 men. These can take on a lot of 300 man regiments and win each melee. I think this is by far the most significant imbalance.

Now to remedy this for the next round, some tips:

The guns should be exactly the same on each side.
The regiment sizes should be exactly the same on each side.
But the regiment sizes don't ALL need to be the same, you can have variance, but have them matched with an identical regiment on the opposing side.

(This is all if balance is a concern)

Now that I've seen the OOB, it is not balanced.

1. The yanks have two more rifled guns than the confederates, the confederates have howitzers as their counterpart.
2. The yanks have _USA guns, while the rebs have _CSA guns, which means the reb guns are much worse at shrapnel and shell, only solid shot and canister are equal.
3. The rebs have fewer but larger regiments. Some regiments around 600 men. These can take on a lot of 300 man regiments and win each melee. I think this is by far the most significant imbalance.

Now to remedy this for the next round, some tips:

The guns should be exactly the same on each side.
The regiment sizes should be exactly the same on each side.
But the regiment sizes don't ALL need to be the same, you can have variance, but have them matched with an identical regiment on the opposing side.

(This is all if balance is a concern)

Thank you Garnier. I will look into the changes. That's why this first round is beta.

I think the better yankee guns make up for the regiment size imbalances, but I'll still make everything 100% balanced like you suggested. And make all the guns US.

Thanks again.

It made it interesting in a sense but it's only interesting that way once. The yanks can win an arty duel which forces the rebs to attack, but the rebs can win if they just do a massed column charge due to the massive regiments.

So what did you guys think of the first week? You guys enjoying the tourney? Comments? Suggestions?

My only issue so far is not everyone that wanted to play was able to after the 8 player bracket was filled. Now if we had a bunch more people signing up, then we could have had the 16 player bracket.. Or maybe two separate brackets. I just hate that the players that didn't sign up in time (and people that lost) have to wait 3 more weeks to play again.

Idea: What if I went ahead a posted a second bracket so new players as well as players that lost on the first round could sign up.

So the current tournament with 4 remaining players would be Tournament 1 - Week 2

The new tournament would be Tournament 2 - Week 1.

What do you guys think?