Larger armies right across the FOG2 Digital League?

[Macedonczyk]

I don't know if it's too much for Pete, but I've got a crazy idea for the big map fans:
New league section: Unlimited - very large armies from any period (any army possible in other sections).

[Swuul]

I don't know if it's too much for Pete, but I've got a crazy idea for the big map fans:
New league section: Unlimited - very large armies from any period (any army possible in other sections).

I am pretty sure Pete has mentioned it won't happen, so we need a volunteer to set up such a league outside DL

[MikeC_81]

@Pete

Any chance we could get a rotation which divisions we get the 1200 pt format in?

[stockwellpete]

@Pete

Any chance we could get a rotation which divisions we get the 1200 pt format in?

No, there is not going to be a rotation as it will cause confusion among those players who do not read the instructions properly. Because I am dealing with a large number of players I have to use systems that are straightforward and easy to understand. There clearly is quite a bit of support for larger 1600pt armies to be used more widely (the voting was 34-27) and there also seems to be a strong sentiment that, for historical reasons, Classical Antiquity battles should have access to the larger format.

So what I am going to do next season is trial pantherboy's idea in Classical Antiquity rather than Biblical (my original idea). At the recruitment stage players will be required to state their preference for either 1200pt or 1600pt armies and where both players indicate 1600pt armies then they will be able to play a larger battle.*** The default size of the battles will be 1200pts so players wishing to stay at medium will do so. I do not feel the poll result was quite strong enough to make 1600pts the default size of battles, although I will listen to arguments that suggest that it should be during the course of next season. If the trial goes successfully next season then the idea will be introduced right across the FOG2DL in Season 10 giving players the opportunity to play at least some larger battles in all sections of the tournament.

So for next season we will have . . .
Classical Antiquity - 1200/1600pt trial
Late Antiquity - 1200pt
Early Middle Ages - 1600pt
Biblical - 1600pt
Themed Event - 1200pt

*** Of course, I know that a number of players, when offered this choice, will put something like "I don't mind" rather than clearly choosing one option or the other. These players will be put in the 1600pt category in order to increase the proportion of larger battles available to players. Larger battles did win the poll 34-27.

[kronenblatt]

Sounds great. Two questions:

1. When is next DL season scheduled to start?
2. Has anyone observed any noticeable tendency for different results in Large vs Medium, such as more/fewer 4p, 3p, ties, draws, etc.? (No, it will not affect my preferences and choices... It's just out of curiosity.)

[stockwellpete]

Sounds great. Two questions:

1. When is next DL season scheduled to start?

October 1st.

2. Has anyone observed any noticeable tendency for different results in Large vs Medium, such as more/fewer 4p, 3p, ties, draws, etc.? (No, it will not affect my preferences and choices... It's just out of curiosity.)

No, no-one has mentioned it.

[nyczar]

@Pete

Any chance we could get a rotation which divisions we get the 1200 pt format in?

No, there is not going to be a rotation as it will cause confusion among those players who do not read the instructions properly. Because I am dealing with a large number of players I have to use systems that are straightforward and easy to understand. There clearly is quite a bit of support for larger 1600pt armies to be used more widely (the voting was 34-27) and there also seems to be a strong sentiment that, for historical reasons, Classical Antiquity battles should have access to the larger format.

So what I am going to do next season is trial pantherboy's idea in Classical Antiquity rather than Biblical (my original idea). At the recruitment stage players will be required to state their preference for either 1200pt or 1600pt armies and where both players indicate 1600pt armies then they will be able to play a larger battle.*** The default size of the battles will be 1200pts so players wishing to stay at medium will do so. I do not feel the poll result was quite strong enough to make 1600pts the default size of battles, although I will listen to arguments that suggest that it should be during the course of next season. If the trial goes successfully next season then the idea will be introduced right across the FOG2DL in Season 10 giving players the opportunity to play at least some larger battles in all sections of the tournament.

So for next season we will have . . .
Classical Antiquity - 1200/1600pt trial
Late Antiquity - 1200pt
Early Middle Ages - 1600pt
Biblical - 1600pt
Themed Event - 1200pt

*** Of course, I know that a number of players, when offered this choice, will put something like "I don't mind" rather than clearly choosing one option or the other. These players will be put in the 1600pt category in order to increase the proportion of larger battles available to players. Larger battles did win the poll 34-27.

Great plan. Sound basis. I think I will like the variety and the flexibility. It adds another layer of depth as well. I'm in.

[nyczar]

Sounds great. Two questions:

1. When is next DL season scheduled to start?
2. Has anyone observed any noticeable tendency for different results in Large vs Medium, such as more/fewer 4p, 3p, ties, draws, etc.? (No, it will not affect my preferences and choices... It's just out of curiosity.)

There is bit of a history here. Lots of community debate. Plenty to find. I'll add what I have taken from the debate, maybe others want to add their voices...maybe not...

More list points mitigates the medium infantry swarm risk faced by high quality (heavy) lists due to inferior unit numbers
More list points mitigates the impact of adverse battle results, whether due to luck or incompetence


Those are the two that are meaningful to me....I am sure there are others but I cant recall them as others might.

[SLancaster]

More list points mitigates the likelihood of enjoyment.

I just want to say that people enjoy the Digital League but the slight majority who want all games to be 1600 points are likely to get their wish in the end. But, they are going to have less players to play. There is nothing wrong I think with the current set-up. Two whole sections are already at 1600 points.

To move towards all sections at 1600 points which I can see happening is a big shift.

[Karvon]

I'm fine with allowing 1600 pt battles between consenting adults. I, for one, will be sticking to 1200 pt games.

[nyczar]

More list points mitigates the likelihood of enjoyment.

I just want to say that people enjoy the Digital League but the slight majority who want all games to be 1600 points are likely to get their wish in the end. But, they are going to have less players to play. There is nothing wrong I think with the current set-up. Two whole sections are already at 1600 points.

To move towards all sections at 1600 points which I can see happening is a big shift.

As I understand it, if you want a 1200 point battle, you will 100% get one. Your enjoyment is the same.

[stockwellpete]

As I understand it, if you want a 1200 point battle, you will 100% get one. Your enjoyment is the same.

Yes, if the trial in Classical Antiquity goes to plan next season then for Season 10, and after, the default size for all battles in the FOG2DL will be set at 1200pts, with players having to indicate a preference for 1600pts size battles. Only if both players in a match want to play at 1600pts will this be allowed. So players will no longer be guaranteed 1600pt battles in Early Middle Ages and Biblical, but they will have a chance to play at 1600pts in the other sections of the tournament.

During the course of the trial I will listen to arguments that say the default size of the battles should be 1600pts (because larger sized battles won the poll) and that both players should have to opt for 1200pt armies to be able to play a medium sized battle. I do think it is incumbent on me to listen to player's views on the trial as it is taking place. But I will not listen to arguments that say all battles should be 1600pts in future. The poll result did not come to that conclusion and I will not be running any further polls on this subject.

[stockwellpete]

More list points mitigates the likelihood of enjoyment.

I just want to say that people enjoy the Digital League but the slight majority who want all games to be 1600 points are likely to get their wish in the end. But, they are going to have less players to play. There is nothing wrong I think with the current set-up. Two whole sections are already at 1600 points.

To move towards all sections at 1600 points which I can see happening is a big shift.

We are not moving to a situation where all sections have 1600pts as the compulsory size of battles. That is explicitly ruled out, in fact.

[harveylh]

During the course of the trial I will listen to arguments that say the default size of the battles should be 1600pts (because larger sized battles won the poll) and that both players should have to opt for 1200pt armies to be able to play a medium sized battle. I do think it is incumbent on me to listen to player's views on the trial as it is taking place. But I will not listen to arguments that say all battles should be 1600pts in future. The poll result did not come to that conclusion and I will not be running any further polls on this subject.

Seems very reasonable to me and I voted for 1600 points after being persuaded by Cunningcairn.

Harvey

[GDod]

nyczar » 10 Jul 2020 10:28

More list points mitigates the medium infantry swarm risk faced by high quality (heavy) lists due to inferior unit numbers

In all likelihood, the player using a "medium infantry swarm" will be very reluctant to agree to a large battle. Hence, the argument for larger battles seems redundant if it is to be by agreement.

I think one has to hark back to the reason for increasing army size. If it is to provide relief for armies who rely on expensive troop types or to reduce the effectiveness of swarm armies it may be desirable to drop the "agreement" condition. Alternatively, it may be more desirable to identify 'the problem army lists' and decree battles involving these lists should be 1600 points.

I only present this discussion as possible solutions to "tweeking" others concerns about an already perfectly good simple system. I personally love my 'expensive troop types' who regularly get swamped by cheaper troop types...hussar!

Moreover, there is definitely a point of difference between the Digi-league and the Slitherine tournaments. Attributes of the Slitherine tournament genre include historical opponents, going large and mirror games, which gives their competition a flavour all of it's own. In contrast, I think what attracts me more to the Digi-league is the handicap system and the variety (i.e. themed, defined periods, some 1200pts, some 1600pts) So, lets celebrate that enlightened choice of list and combination of troop types, or that stunning charge, or continue to be awed and stunned by that unexpected collapse, and continue to enjoy the game regardless of the points!

[devoncop]

Hmm .........interesting.

So the result of a poll showing support for all 1600 point Divisions next season is to eliminate any wholly 1600 point Divisions next season....... ?

If ever there was a case of the law of unintended consequences this may be it............I was very happy when the poll was run. It seems that (not for the first time) I have not understood what was going on............

[stockwellpete]

Hmm .........interesting.

So the result of a poll showing support for all 1600 point Divisions next season is to eliminate any wholly 1600 point Divisions next season....... ?

If ever there was a case of the law of unintended consequences this may be it............I was very happy when the poll was run. It seems that (not for the first time) I have not understood what was going on............

Even those players who do read the instructions sometimes seem to have trouble understanding them. As I have already written . . .

So for next season we will have . . .
Classical Antiquity - 1200/1600pt trial
Late Antiquity - 1200pt
Early Middle Ages - 1600pt
Biblical - 1600pt
Themed Event - 1200pt

[devoncop]

Hmm .........interesting.

So the result of a poll showing support for all 1600 point Divisions next season is to eliminate any wholly 1600 point Divisions next season....... ?

If ever there was a case of the law of unintended consequences this may be it............I was very happy when the poll was run. It seems that (not for the first time) I have not understood what was going on............

Even those players who do read the instructions sometimes seem to have trouble understanding them. As I have already written . . .

So for next season we will have . . .
Classical Antiquity - 1200/1600pt trial
Late Antiquity - 1200pt
Early Middle Ages - 1600pt
Biblical - 1600pt
Themed Event - 1200pt

Hi Pete.

Thanks for the reply.

Yes I get that is the position for NEXT season.

Judging from your reply from 7.10am on 10th July though, as of season 10 there will be no guaranteed 1600 points matches in any Divisions.....or am I being dense ?

Cheers

Ian

[stockwellpete]

Hi Pete.

Thanks for the reply.

Yes I get that is the position for NEXT season.

Judging from your reply from 7.10am on 10th July though, as of season 10 there will be no guaranteed 1600 points matches in any Divisions.....or am I being dense ?

Cheers

Ian

In that particular post I am indicating that I will be looking carefully at the proportion of matches in the trial played at 1200pts and 1600pts. I will actually be able to work that out from the very beginning of the season once players have indicated preferences for "medium" or "large". This will also give me a reasonably accurate prediction for the ratio of "medium" and "large" matches that are likely to take place right across the tournament from Season 10, if we do decide to switch to the new system.

In my estimation we have roughly 60% of all players who would like to play at just 1600pts and 40% who would not. So, to be fair to everyone, I think we need to move to a system where roughly 60% of all matches are played at the larger size. If that happens in the trial with the default size of the battles set at 1200pts then all well and good, but if we find that larger battles are only going to account for, say, 30% of all battles, then I will switch the default size to 1600pts from Season 10 onwards. It is my expectation that there will quite a bit of a debate about this but it should be remembered that the preference for larger battles did win the poll 34-27 so any final decision that I need to make will reflect the outcome of that poll.

[devoncop]

That makes complete sense.

Sorry for being slow.

(My speed of picking this proposal up does however explain my record of solidly consistent mediocrity season after season