Caracole II -- Phase 2

Byzantine Productions Pike and Shot is a deep strategy game set during the bloody conflict of the Thirty Years War.

Moderators: rbodleyscott, Slitherine Core, Gothic Labs

Post Reply
flatsix518
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
Posts: 753
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:43 pm
Location: Texas

Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by flatsix518 » Wed Apr 01, 2015 2:35 pm

Special Instructions for Caracole II, Phase 2

See Pod assignments, next. Everyone is to play a double round-robin as during Phase 1. Note that a couple of players have been inactive, I do not know if they will return to play, or not.

Play will be scored from April 1 through May 31.

Scoring will be as follows:
A loss will be scored 1 point.
A win will be scored 3 points.

This scoring method has been necessitated because of players dropping out of the tournament and not completing all games. It is a compromise to reward both participation and doing well.

Final overall Caracole II position will be determined by ordering scores of players from Pod A, then Pod B, and finally Pod C. So, for example, the best finishing position a Pod B player can obtain is 9th.

Challenging will be done as for Phase 1. Note the addition of the Tercio to Salvo module.

Challenge construction: A player chooses two historical opponents (Filter Army List is “On”) and proposes a challenge to another player in the pod. The challenged opponent replies by choosing which army to play and creating the challenge on the MP server. Again, every player will challenge every other pod opponent once and will be challenged by every opponent within the same pod.

RIGHT OF INITIAL REFUSAL: If the proposal includes "Tercio to Salvo" armies or any terrain election other than "Pot Luck" the challenged player may refuse and ask for another period and "Pot Luck" terrain.

Change Campaign… Select any of Thirty Years War, English Civil War or Italian Wars, Tercio to Salvo
Scenario Type: Open Battle
Force Size: Medium
Map Size: Medium ⇐= Note change from Caracole II, Phase 1 -- this is a 32 square wide field, now.
Terrain Type: <Any>
First Player Side: <Any>
Army List (xxx): <Any>
Army List (xxx): <Any>
Filter Army List: On <== Note: To to allow Swedish-Russian and Ottoman-Russian challenges set this to "Off"
Force Selection: Player

Note – Filter Selection setting must be “On”!
Note – Advance settings must be left on default!
Note – Include a password
Note – It can be helpful to include a comment like “Challenge for PlayerA”

Best regards,

John
aka flatsix518
Last edited by flatsix518 on Sat Apr 25, 2015 5:19 pm, edited 4 times in total.

flatsix518
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
Posts: 753
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:43 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by flatsix518 » Wed Apr 01, 2015 2:35 pm

All,

Here are the finishing positions for Caracole II. Final scores are below.

1st: Pantherboy
2nd: cavehobbit, rbodleyscott
4th: Aryaman
5th: batesmotel
6th: moncholee, Tiopepe
8th: Dortmund

9th: Thegraymouser
10th: flatsix518
11th: iandavidsmith, shawkhan2
13th: rumguff
14th: Hutze
15th: Vadim84
16th: guillaume

17th: deadtorius
18th: susji
19th: Hrothgar, kmaher
21st: Ulysisgrunt
22nd: egos, ggarynorman, Triarius





===== FINAL SCORES FOLLOW =====

Phase 2 Pod Assignments are below. Scores will be maintained, here, too.

A record of wins and losses will be maintained for each player. A player will receive 1 point for each loss and 3 points for each win.

Pod A:
Aryaman: (15) - rbodleyscott(LL), cavehobbit(LL), pantherboy(LL), Tiopepe(W), batesmotel(W), moncholee(W)
batesmotel: (11) - cavehobbit(LW), rbodleyscott(WL), pantherboy(LL), Aryaman(L)
cavehobbit: (25) - batesmotel(WL), Aryaman(WW), rbodleyscott(WL), pantherboy(LL), moncholee(WW), Tiopepe(W)
Dortmund: (0)
moncholee: (7) - cavehobbit(LL), rbodleyscott(LL), pantherboy(LL), Aryaman(L)
pantherboy: (34) - rbodleyscott(WW), Tiopepe(LW), cavehobbit(WW), batesmotel(WW), Aryaman(WW), moncholee(WW)
rbodleyscott: (25) - Aryaman(WW), cavehobbit(LW), pantherboy(LL), batesmotel(LW), moncholee(WW), Tiopepe(W)
Tiopepe: (7) - pantherboy(WL), Aryaman(L), rbodleyscott(L), cavehobbit(L)

Pod B:
flatsix518: (15) - rumguff(WL), Thegraymouser(LL), shawkhan2(LW), Hutze(L), iandavidsmith(W), Vadim84(L)
guillaume: -- note, has been inactive and not participating
Hutze: (8) - iandavidsmith(LL), rumguff(W), flatsix518(W)
iandavidsmith: (14) - Hutze(WW), rumguff(W), flatsix518(L), Thegraymouser(LL), shawkhan2(LL)
rumguff: (10) - flatsix518(LW), Thegraymouser(LW), Hutze(L), iandavidsmith(L)
shawkhan2: (14) - flatsix518(WL), Thegraymouser(WL), iandavidsmith(WW)
Thegraymouser: (21) - flatsix518(WW), rumguff(WL), Vadim84(L), iandavidsmith(WW), shawkhan2(LW)
Vadim84: (6) - Thegraymouser(W), flatsix518(W)

Pod C:
deadtorius: (20) - Hrothgar(WW), Ulysisgrunt(WW), susji(LW), kmaher(LW)
egos: (0)
ggarynorman: (0)
Hrothgar: (12) - Ulysisgrunt(LW), deadtorius(LL), kmaher(WL), susji(LL)
kmaher: (12) - Hrothgar(LW), deadtorius(WL), susji(LW)
susji: (18) - deadtorius(WL), Ulysisgrunt(LW), Hrothgar(WW), kmaher(WL)
Triarius: -- note, has been inactive and not participating
Ulysisgrunt: (10) - Hrothgar(WL), deadtorius(LL), susji(WL)
Last edited by flatsix518 on Mon Jun 01, 2015 2:24 pm, edited 33 times in total.

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 22242
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by rbodleyscott » Wed Apr 01, 2015 3:48 pm

Wot, no Tercio to Salvo?

The expansion will be out very very soon. I am not allowed to say exactly when, but it will be very soon.

Can I suggest that it be included in this round? Obviously, there would be no obligation for anyone to buy it, so players would need to check with their opponent that they have the expansion - otherwise they would have to pick one of the other settings.

Likewise the other changes in the update will go live whether or not the player has purchased the expansion. Once the update goes live, everyone will get the update.
1) Medium Width maps will be the same as the current Very Wide maps. (Very Wide maps will be huge).
2) There are options for Agricultural (similar to the present maps), Hilly, Wooded or Mountainous maps. This terrain type is the terrain of the "province" - the actual battle map may turn out not to be particularly that way inclined (e.g. In a "Mountains" map, the mountains may only be on the very edge of the map, or may be a major feature). There is also a Pot Luck terrain option which produces mostly Agricultural maps but with a chance of one of the others. Perhaps the challenger could choose between Agricultural or Pot Luck therefore? (In a future round, perhaps all challenges could be Pot Luck for terrain).
Richard Bodley Scott

Image

flatsix518
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
Posts: 753
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:43 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by flatsix518 » Wed Apr 01, 2015 5:45 pm

Thanks Richard for your input and advice.

We'll play with all available options and releases. I think that is one of the points of tournament play -- to really wring out a game system with high-level play.

If some players cannot afford an upgrade, just make that know to their opponents and they can be excused from playing those features.

Best,

John

flatsix518
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
Posts: 753
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:43 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2 -- Scoring fix.

Post by flatsix518 » Wed Apr 01, 2015 5:59 pm

All,

I have been struggling with the chronic problem of players not completing all their games. This has unfortunate impacts on any reasonable tournament system.

For awhile I wanted to use reserve players and some of that was done in Caracole I. But it just isn't practical and maybe not even fair, depending upon who the "dropouts" are and their relative ability vs the reserve players.

As a stop gap, for scoring Caracole I, Phase 1, I decided to use a combination of wins plus winning %. My intent was to reward players who were trying to complete all their games, but were facing dropout/derelict/slow-play opponents. I felt it worked OK as a mechanic and seemed fair for deciding those pod assignments.

But that formula, is flawed. As TheGrayMouser has pointed out, a player could sit on a small number of victories with a strong winning percentage and have a good score. It's actually even worse than that...players could deliberately avoid playing strong players to keep their score strong.

I realized this deficiency in that mechanism -- but since it had not been announced -- no one really had a chance to "game it" to their advantage during Caracole II, Phase 1. But it can't be used going forward since it can be exploited.

So I've been working on a good general scoring mechanism that encourages players to play all their games, rewards success, and limits the damage that can be done by dropout players.

Right now I am looking at the following as a solution. Players will be scored on a system of points. Players will get 1 point for each game they win and a 1/2 point for each game they play (win or lose). So a player playing one game and winning would get 1.5 points. Someone winning 5 out of 7 games would have 8.5 points.

I *think* this will work. One thing I like is that it encourages participation. So a player who plays all of say 14 games in their pod would have at least 7 points, even if they lost all games. In some tournaments, that could be sufficient to get one into Pod B (but unlikely). But someone even winning just 3 of 14 games would have 10 points. The max possible score would be 21 in 8 player pods (14 wins, 1/2 points for 14 games).

The other good thing about it is that there is no good reason to duck a game. Even getting your head ripped off by a top-rate player will get you at least 1/2 point.

Anyway, while I think it will work -- I'm open to discussion on this.

Best regards,

John

moncholee
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 2:01 pm

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by moncholee » Wed Apr 01, 2015 8:18 pm

Hi John, I think that this system that you have just proposed is great.

Regards,

Javier.

TheGrayMouser
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4641
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by TheGrayMouser » Wed Apr 01, 2015 10:20 pm

"Change Campaign… Select any of Thirty Years War, English Civil War or Italian Wars, 1st Newbury, First Campaign, Cropredy Bridge, Roundway Down"

Hello, confused about the above. You appear to have added some user made scenarios? Why just these and not the others (those that shipped w the game)?
Might be tough to go back and forth between the standard victory conditions of the skirmish mode to designed scenarios that could be unbalanced as they are historical..Balancing victory conditions in those scenarios seems more of an art than a science.
BTW I'm not against it per se, likely wont issue any challenges with historical scen. though...

I think the expansion should be released any moment :) (at least the website says 4/2 )

flatsix518
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
Posts: 753
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:43 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by flatsix518 » Wed Apr 01, 2015 10:53 pm

I'll leave it up to Richard to determine if these campaigns have the same quality/rigor of the original and should be included.

I can't really judge.

Best regards,

John

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 22242
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by rbodleyscott » Thu Apr 02, 2015 8:04 am

flatsix518 wrote:I'll leave it up to Richard to determine if these campaigns have the same quality/rigor of the original and should be included.
Not sure what "First Campaign" is as I don't have it on my machine, and it isn't on the official FTP, but the others are only available in skirmishes because the author did not know he should, and I forgot, to put NOSKIRMISH in the Campaign.txt files. They are only single scenario "campaigns" and as far as I am aware use the standard rules for that campaign. (Although there is no guarantee of that).

I have not replaced them because I did not want to mess up any MP games that people might play of them.

I suggest that for now only the three original "campaigns" and Tercio to Salvo be available for the tournament.

I will be resurrecting the reduced range and distance mods after the update - they work correctly with the updated program - however, I don't think anyone should be forced to play a tournament game using them if they don't want to.

There are some upcoming mods that use the normal rules (or minor variants thereof) and new armies and lists, and hopefully they can be included once they are developed enough to be put on the "official" FTP.
Richard Bodley Scott

Image

flatsix518
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
Posts: 753
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:43 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by flatsix518 » Thu Apr 02, 2015 1:36 pm

Ok, now I better understand.

I've amended the instructions to exclude all campaigns except the original ones. (Thirty Years War, English Civil War or Italian Wars.)

Once "Tercio to Salvo" becomes available -- I will open it up as an option for players who have purchased that module. But no players will be forced to buy or play it.

Best regards,

John

TheGrayMouser
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4641
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by TheGrayMouser » Thu Apr 02, 2015 1:52 pm

flatsix518 wrote:Ok, now I better understand.

I've amended the instructions to exclude all campaigns except the original ones. (Thirty Years War, English Civil War or Italian Wars.)

Once "Tercio to Salvo" becomes available -- I will open it up as an option for players who have purchased that module. But no players will be forced to buy or play it.

Best regards,

John
Perhaps players should indicate if they purchase T&S and you could note next to their pod assigmenments? I will certaily snag it, although looks like no release today, bummer.

flatsix518
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
Posts: 753
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:43 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by flatsix518 » Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:30 pm

TGM,

Good idea.

When Tercio to Salvo is released -- I'll open it as an optional campaign and invite players to let me know if they want to play it.

As I'm notified I'll indicate on the Pod assignment page.

Thanks,

John

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 22242
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by rbodleyscott » Tue Apr 07, 2015 2:00 pm

Challenge proposal for Dortmund:

Russian 1598-1620 vs Polish 1576-1610 Terrain: Agricultural

And for Aryaman:

French Huguenot 1600-1610 vs Spanish 1600-1609 Terrain: Pot Luck

Both Tercio to Salvo, of course. If you don't want to play that, let me know and I will make alternative proposals.
Richard Bodley Scott

Image

TheGrayMouser
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4641
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by TheGrayMouser » Tue Apr 07, 2015 3:22 pm

Hello, has it been determined what "terrain options" are to be used? ie default or challenger choice?

flatsix518
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
Posts: 753
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:43 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by flatsix518 » Tue Apr 07, 2015 4:06 pm

Let's allow terrain options -- but not make them mandatory.

They must be in the proposal -- let's not allow players to "surprise" in the actual challenge (on the server).

Then they can be negotiated, if necessary.

John

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 22242
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by rbodleyscott » Tue Apr 07, 2015 4:13 pm

Note that (if John agrees) people should now select "Medium" width maps and not "Very Wide".

(The new "Medium" is the same as the old "Very Wide").
Richard Bodley Scott

Image

flatsix518
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
Posts: 753
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2010 10:43 pm
Location: Texas

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by flatsix518 » Tue Apr 07, 2015 4:18 pm

I'll try to update the challenge instructions to cover all this.

I may have a few questions to PM to you, Richard.

Today is not a good day for me to focus on this.

John

TheGrayMouser
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4641
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 2:42 pm

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by TheGrayMouser » Tue Apr 07, 2015 4:30 pm

flatsix518 wrote:Let's allow terrain options -- but not make them mandatory.

They must be in the proposal -- let's not allow players to "surprise" in the actual challenge (on the server).

Then they can be negotiated, if necessary.

John
Makes sense. Of course if the proposed challenge is early an tercio army vs (insert army that would do very well in the woods) to be fought in the woods, the acceptee would have a very easy choice to make ;)

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 22242
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by rbodleyscott » Tue Apr 07, 2015 4:44 pm

TheGrayMouser wrote:
flatsix518 wrote:Let's allow terrain options -- but not make them mandatory.

They must be in the proposal -- let's not allow players to "surprise" in the actual challenge (on the server).

Then they can be negotiated, if necessary.

John
Makes sense. Of course if the proposed challenge is early an tercio army vs (insert army that would do very well in the woods) to be fought in the woods, the acceptee would have a very easy choice to make ;)
Fangs for the tip ;)
Richard Bodley Scott

Image

Aryaman
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
Posts: 833
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:12 pm

Re: Caracole II -- Phase 2

Post by Aryaman » Tue Apr 07, 2015 4:51 pm

rbodleyscott wrote:Challenge proposal
Aryaman:

French Huguenot 1600-1610 vs Spanish 1600-1609 Terrain: Pot Luck

Both Tercio to Salvo, of course. If you don't want to play that, let me know and I will make alternative proposals.
I take the Spanish, password tercio

Post Reply

Return to “Pike & Shot”