The Rally Point (discussion and questions)

Moderator: Field of Glory 2 Tournaments Managers

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 24191
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by rbodleyscott » Mon Jul 20, 2020 5:29 pm

GeneralKostas wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 3:28 pm
klayeckles wrote:
Fri Jul 17, 2020 2:47 am
SnuggleBunnies wrote:
Fri Jul 17, 2020 1:43 am
I think it depends on the matchup of both players and factions. I tend to play rather defensively against people who usually beat me; not that it saved me against Nosy_Rat or Ludendorf or pantherboy! But I think I did better than I would have with an offensive strategy. I even went so far as to camp and refuse to move from a strong position against Nosy_Rat in Early Medieval, for a 0-0 draw. Yet considering how he and I each did in the rest of the matchups (him very well, me 2 wins 3 draws 4 losses) I think camping for the draw was the right call. There were also some matches where I attacked and frankly I should have invited a draw rather than play to my opponent's strategy.

It's true that you have to attack to have a chance of scoring against a defensive opponent. But I think against opponents who camp 'unreasonably' you have to choices - just call them on it and draw, or try to find a way to attack. Both are valid.

Still, there's no sense getting that irritated about it. If you win all your matches except those in which your opponent camped too hard and went, say, 6 wins and 3 draws - you're very likely to promote a division. A player who always camps will not do so well, and is unlikely to promote. Even if they do promote, it's behavior that works better against less experienced players who aren't as versed in strategies like weighted flanks etc. as in higher divisions.
i have to say snuggles hits it on the head...camping is perfectly legit. why would someone get frustrated by that? if i'm a general leading an army of 50,000 troops and i find myself with a battlefield that greatly favors the enemy if i move...wouldn't i be foolish to move? endangering the lives of all my soldiers? live to fight another day is one of the oldest adages of combat. some armies are just plain not cut out to fight certain armies on certain map types.

and horse armies are perfectly legit. I can't say i like playing them, and i don't particularly like fighting them...but adapting to the enemy's army build of all horse or all inf. or all skirmishers etc... is what makes being a general in this game such a challenge. if we start cutting out some army types we reduce the range of challenges, and what make this game so great. to avoid these types of encounters choose the appropriate era or special and also an army that can adapt to differnt army types (ALWAYS a good idea).
Since the terrain is Pot Luck, both players should accept it and try the best. According to the terrain, every player should pick the appropriate units for the battle. It sounds immature to re-roll the terrain. Personally, i will never accept that and i suggest to delete this option from the Digital League rules.
I tend to agree.
Richard Bodley Scott

Image

MikeC_81
Captain - Heavy Cruiser
Captain - Heavy Cruiser
Posts: 935
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:28 am

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by MikeC_81 » Mon Jul 20, 2020 5:33 pm

harveylh wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 5:00 pm
stockwellpete wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 4:40 pm
harveylh wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 2:46 pm


I was the player that ended up being the sacrificial lamb. MikeC_81 is correct in I made the forlorn hope assault because of the threat of the 0-0 draw. My logic was since it did not appear that desertedfox was a threat to win the division, I was better off trying to get a point or two than accepting zero. If desertedfox had been a division contender then I would have accepted the 0-0 draw not wanting to help a contender to win the division. The bad luck with the crazy good defensive position (great description by desertedfox) will probably cost me a chance to win the division but those are the breaks. I think our current system is not perfect, but I cannot think of a better one.

Harvey
It sounds to me like you are making choices here, Harvey. Did you not suggest a re-set? Rule 4 states, "Players may agree to re-start a match within the first three turns if they believe the terrain is likely to produce a sterile match or a draw. The maximum number of re-starts permitted for a single match is two."
Pete,
I think you missed this part of desertedfox's post,
In one game this tourney I had crazy good defensive positions, my opponent suggested I come out of it to fight in the open, where I pointed out to him I would be slaughtered.


I asked for a map reset and desertedfox said no. Don't both players have to agree to a map reset? That is my understanding. So as I said before I could accept a 0-0 draw or try if I was very lucky to get a point or two attacking a very strong defensive position. What other choice did I have?

Harvey
The fundamental problem is that the you and Desertfox were essentially playing two different games. You were playing a game in which you sought to maximize points on the standings. He was playing a game in which the priority was to deny points.
Stratford Scramble Tournament

http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=494&t=99766&p=861093#p861093

FoG 2 Post Game Analysis Series on Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKmEROEwX2fgjoQLlQULhPg/

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 11898
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by stockwellpete » Mon Jul 20, 2020 5:34 pm

harveylh wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 5:00 pm

Pete,
I think you missed this part of desertedfox's post,
In one game this tourney I had crazy good defensive positions, my opponent suggested I come out of it to fight in the open, where I pointed out to him I would be slaughtered.


I asked for a map reset and desertedfox said no. Don't both players have to agree to a map reset? That is my understanding. So as I said before I could accept a 0-0 draw or try if I was very lucky to get a point or two attacking a very strong defensive position. What other choice did I have?

Harvey
Yes, I understood that bit. It wasn't clear to me from what you had written whether you had suggested a re-start or not. As he said "no" then your options were reduced to . . .

1) accepting a 0-0 draw
2) making an all-out attack and hoping for the best
3) making a limited attack to try and get to 25% (a limited attack is sometimes possible if you can get onto a flank, it depends on the terrain)
4) initially deliberately sacrificing a few units so that desertedfox felt more inclined to come out and fight you in the open

desertedfox
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 1:07 pm

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by desertedfox » Mon Jul 20, 2020 7:09 pm

MikeC_81 wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 5:33 pm
harveylh wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 5:00 pm
stockwellpete wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 4:40 pm


It sounds to me like you are making choices here, Harvey. Did you not suggest a re-set? Rule 4 states, "Players may agree to re-start a match within the first three turns if they believe the terrain is likely to produce a sterile match or a draw. The maximum number of re-starts permitted for a single match is two."
Pete,
I think you missed this part of desertedfox's post,
In one game this tourney I had crazy good defensive positions, my opponent suggested I come out of it to fight in the open, where I pointed out to him I would be slaughtered.


I asked for a map reset and desertedfox said no. Don't both players have to agree to a map reset? That is my understanding. So as I said before I could accept a 0-0 draw or try if I was very lucky to get a point or two attacking a very strong defensive position. What other choice did I have?

Harvey
The fundamental problem is that the you and Desertfox were essentially playing two different games. You were playing a game in which you sought to maximize points on the standings. He was playing a game in which the priority was to deny points.
I had a defensive army facing one that would easily beat me in the open. So it's my bad for making the most of the terrain that benefits my army.

Had the terrain been very open and I asked for a reroll, would harvey have agreed? I think not, in fact as harvey is not an idiot, I can say with certainty he would not have agreed. It's not in dispute had the terrain been open I would have lost.

Yet I am being villified by MikeC for playing to my army's strength.

Yes Mike I should have run into the open and lost and been not only happy about it but been gracious as well.

desertedfox
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 1:07 pm

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by desertedfox » Mon Jul 20, 2020 7:18 pm

Seeing as you are attacking "my charatcer" Mike, please tell us all here with your self-proclaimed, profound wisdom what you would have done in my situation?

harveylh
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Posts: 439
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2015 11:32 pm

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by harveylh » Mon Jul 20, 2020 8:03 pm

desertedfox wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 7:18 pm
Seeing as you are attacking "my charatcer" Mike, please tell us all here with your self-proclaimed, profound wisdom what you would have done in my situation?
If I had been in desertedfox's shoes, I would have made the same choice. He was facing a slightly better player who had a much better army in open terrain. As I said in an earlier post our current terrain system is not perfect, but I cannot think of a better one.

Harvey

devoncop
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Colonel - Fallschirmjäger
Posts: 1403
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 8:46 am

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by devoncop » Mon Jul 20, 2020 8:39 pm

harveylh wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 8:03 pm
desertedfox wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 7:18 pm
Seeing as you are attacking "my charatcer" Mike, please tell us all here with your self-proclaimed, profound wisdom what you would have done in my situation?
If I had been in desertedfox's shoes, I would have made the same choice. He was facing a slightly better player who had a much better army in open terrain. As I said in an earlier post our current terrain system is not perfect, but I cannot think of a better one.

Harvey
Agreed 100%.

MikeC_81
Captain - Heavy Cruiser
Captain - Heavy Cruiser
Posts: 935
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:28 am

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by MikeC_81 » Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:24 pm

desertedfox wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 7:09 pm
desertedfox wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 7:18 pm
Seeing as you are attacking "my charatcer" Mike, please tell us all here with your self-proclaimed, profound wisdom what you would have done in my situation?
I had a defensive army facing one that would easily beat me in the open. So it's my bad for making the most of the terrain that benefits my army.

Had the terrain been very open and I asked for a reroll, would harvey have agreed? I think not, in fact as harvey is not an idiot, I can say with certainty he would not have agreed. It's not in dispute had the terrain been open I would have lost.

Yet I am being villified by MikeC for playing to my army's strength.

Yes Mike I should have run into the open and lost and been not only happy about it but been gracious as well.
desertedfox wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 7:18 pm
Seeing as you are attacking "my charatcer" Mike, please tell us all here with your self-proclaimed, profound wisdom what you would have done in my situation?
I stated the inverse of what you posted yourself using the same language you used and I'll say it again: You left Harveylh no choice but to attack what you yourself described was an excellent position after refusing to reroll the map or come off that position. In effect, you gave him the dilemma of either being the "sacrificial lamb" or accepting 0 points. Then I stated that this situation could come to pass is what is wrong imo about the DL. The league actively incentivizes these situations. That you would take this statement of fact as "vilifying" and attacking your "character" says more about the fact that negative play is indeed perceived in general as less than desirable and generally something to be avoided more than anything else.

If you are able to untangle the emotions here let's think about what is going on here. We have a situation where you actively offered a draw without combat or a map reroll to accept a guaranteed zero points in the standings. Surely even the most unequal mismatched armies and players facing off against will have a better-expected value than ZERO POINTS. Which was why Harvey went ahead and attacked anyways because the chance to earn points wasn't zero in a situation where he needed them. Furthermore, why would you want to earn zero points when you could try? Was it because you were out of contention and you weren't going to get relegated anyway? Due to this situation, you now got awarded 4 points for a game that if Harvey never needed points, he would have just taken the draw and you would have gotten zero. If you are going to get zero anyway, why not play the game you signed up to play? Do you not see how weird this entire situation is?

To me is something inherently wrong with a system that allows a player to leverage metagame considerations over an opponent to induce them something that logically unsound. The league should offer every incentive to make the 0-0 draw as unattractive as possible regardless of the metagame considerations so that you and Harvey could have worked out some arrangement, any arrangement, rather than a situation where you cared so little about receiving zero points that you would rather not play the game and simultaneously, he was desperate enough to try and scrape for even 1 point that he would attack.
Stratford Scramble Tournament

http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=494&t=99766&p=861093#p861093

FoG 2 Post Game Analysis Series on Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKmEROEwX2fgjoQLlQULhPg/

harveylh
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Posts: 439
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2015 11:32 pm

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by harveylh » Tue Jul 21, 2020 12:22 am

MikeC_81 wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:24 pm

To me is something inherently wrong with a system that allows a player to leverage metagame considerations over an opponent to induce them something that logically unsound. The league should offer every incentive to make the 0-0 draw as unattractive as possible regardless of the metagame considerations so that you and Harvey could have worked out some arrangement, any arrangement, rather than a situation where you cared so little about receiving zero points that you would rather not play the game and simultaneously, he was desperate enough to try and scrape for even 1 point that he would attack.
Mike, I agree with the points you made above, but unless we can come up with a simple and better alternative, we are stuck with what we have. If you have any ideas, I'd love to hear them.

Harvey

NikiforosFokas
Sergeant Major - SdKfz 234/2 8Rad
Sergeant Major - SdKfz 234/2 8Rad
Posts: 609
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2016 4:59 pm
Location: Greece

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by NikiforosFokas » Tue Jul 21, 2020 12:55 am

Imho the problem with the draws lies with the armies selection and no rule can fix that. I had made this mistake many times choosing a wrong army (like the Armenian list). When you have an army like this, it is just idiot to go to fight Romans in the open. Usually, I went but there were cases that I played defensively. Not because I did not want the X or Y player to win the points of the match...This season in my game against one player he put his whole army to the forests. But really I can not blame him. He had a medium-based army against spears and elephants...It was the logic that dictated him to act like this. There two possible solutions (i do not like both of them, but I can not see any other): 1) the players will choose a flat map, or 2) the players will fight with the same armies. But any of these two will change the experience of DL for the worst... So we will have to accept that nothing can happen about this.
ps: Did you remember this problem in FoG1?? And if not, why? Maybe the maps were more ideal for mp games?
For Byzantium!!

MikeC_81
Captain - Heavy Cruiser
Captain - Heavy Cruiser
Posts: 935
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:28 am

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by MikeC_81 » Tue Jul 21, 2020 1:07 am

harveylh wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 12:22 am
MikeC_81 wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 10:24 pm

To me is something inherently wrong with a system that allows a player to leverage metagame considerations over an opponent to induce them something that logically unsound. The league should offer every incentive to make the 0-0 draw as unattractive as possible regardless of the metagame considerations so that you and Harvey could have worked out some arrangement, any arrangement, rather than a situation where you cared so little about receiving zero points that you would rather not play the game and simultaneously, he was desperate enough to try and scrape for even 1 point that he would attack.
Mike, I agree with the points you made above, but unless we can come up with a simple and better alternative, we are stuck with what we have. If you have any ideas, I'd love to hear them.

Harvey
A free map reroll per player per game would go a long way to alleviating the worst of these encounters. How often does potluck produce such positions? They might still get advantageous terrain on the reroll but rarely does potluck produce impregnable defensive terrain twice in a row. Making it a nonmutual choice relieves the other player of the need to try and balance "fair play" concerns with competitive ones. They simply have no say in the matter. At the same time, having only one reroll incentivizes players to work with what they have if possible since rerolling a minor to moderate map disadvantage might result in them getting a worse map.

Revised scoring and/or with incentives for finishing as high in the standings as possible for rewards next season would also work to induce players to avoid 0-0 draws. Right now the DL rewards non-performance by giving players a higher chance to get their preferred army since army selection is done in reverse player rating order per division. This is the same disease that infects North American sports leagues where teams actively try to tank their season if they are out of contention to try and get better amateur draft picks. Instead, offer the first choice of army selection to the highest-ranked player. 0-0 draws at worth negative point ratings in this scheme so players always have an incentive to grind every point possible for a better shot at army selection next season. I doubt anyone is actively tanking but it is clear that just the psychological blow to their ego when losing is enough for them to take up negative gameplay and accept a 0-0 draw when it isn't going to hurt them.
Stratford Scramble Tournament

http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=494&t=99766&p=861093#p861093

FoG 2 Post Game Analysis Series on Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKmEROEwX2fgjoQLlQULhPg/

harveylh
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Elite Panzer IIIL
Posts: 439
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2015 11:32 pm

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by harveylh » Tue Jul 21, 2020 2:12 am

MikeC_81 wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 1:07 am

A free map reroll per player per game would go a long way to alleviating the worst of these encounters. How often does potluck produce such positions? They might still get advantageous terrain on the reroll but rarely does potluck produce impregnable defensive terrain twice in a row. Making it a nonmutual choice relieves the other player of the need to try and balance "fair play" concerns with competitive ones. They simply have no say in the matter. At the same time, having only one reroll incentivizes players to work with what they have if possible since rerolling a minor to moderate map disadvantage might result in them getting a worse map.

Revised scoring and/or with incentives for finishing as high in the standings as possible for rewards next season would also work to induce players to avoid 0-0 draws. Right now the DL rewards non-performance by giving players a higher chance to get their preferred army since army selection is done in reverse player rating order per division. This is the same disease that infects North American sports leagues where teams actively try to tank their season if they are out of contention to try and get better amateur draft picks. Instead, offer the first choice of army selection to the highest-ranked player. 0-0 draws at worth negative point ratings in this scheme so players always have an incentive to grind every point possible for a better shot at army selection next season. I doubt anyone is actively tanking but it is clear that just the psychological blow to their ego when losing is enough for them to take up negative gameplay and accept a 0-0 draw when it isn't going to hurt them.
Mike, I like the idea of one free map reroll per player per game. That might be a better alternative to our current system. If there is enough league support, perhaps it could be tried in one section on a trial basis next season.

However I don't like the idea of the first choice of army selection to the highest-ranked player. I think that would make league play more one-sided. And the goal of league games in my opinion is for people to have fun even while competing.

Harvey

desertedfox
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
Posts: 306
Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 1:07 pm

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by desertedfox » Tue Jul 21, 2020 2:15 am

I doubt anyone is actively tanking but it is clear that just the psychological blow to their ego when losing is enough for them to take up negative gameplay and accept a 0-0 draw when it isn't going to hurt them.
This is a ridiculous statement. My decision was not based on my ego but rather why should I hand another player a gift 4 points?

Speaking of "ego" there is certainly one inflated one floating around in this discussion.

melm
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 682
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 9:07 pm

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by melm » Tue Jul 21, 2020 2:23 am

rbodleyscott wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 5:29 pm
GeneralKostas wrote:
Mon Jul 20, 2020 3:28 pm

Since the terrain is Pot Luck, both players should accept it and try the best. According to the terrain, every player should pick the appropriate units for the battle. It sounds immature to re-roll the terrain. Personally, i will never accept that and i suggest to delete this option from the Digital League rules.
I tend to agree.
However, according to the tournament rule, people may not pick the army with enough "appropriate units". Some armies may even not have any "appropriate units" for certain terrain. Let alone there's another restriction that only three armies can be used for the same nation in one division, which further narrows the availabe armies with "appropriate units".

If there's no suitable units available, it's obvious that what tactics will be chosen.

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 11898
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by stockwellpete » Tue Jul 21, 2020 6:13 am

stockwellpete wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 7:37 pm
Just a quick stat from Classical Antiquity. So far this season there have been 234 results posted and only 3 of them have been 0-0 draws, which represents less than 1.5% of the total. I agree that 0-0 draws are hardly an issue as it is scored now as if both players have lost the match.
I am a bit puzzled why the debate is raging about the issue of 0-0 draws. The stats for Late Antiquity so far this season are similar to those of Classical Antiquity that I posted earlier - three 0-0 draws out of a total of 212 results posted.

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 11898
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by stockwellpete » Tue Jul 21, 2020 6:38 am

harveylh wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 2:12 am
Mike, I like the idea of one free map reroll per player per game. That might be a better alternative to our current system. If there is enough league support, perhaps it could be tried in one section on a trial basis next season.
Next season we have got the 1200pt/1600pt trial in Classical Antiquity (following the "larger armies" poll) so there will not be another trial running at the same time. Apart from the fact that I don't believe 0-0 draws are much of an issue in the FOG2DL (about 3 games in every 200 played), I think offering a free map re-roll to each player every game will be unpopular with some players who will get frustrated with the resulting increased likelihood of having to go through the process of selecting and placing an army on the map only for their opponent to say they want a free map roll. While some players will not avail themselves of a free map roll in any circumstances, there will be a significant minority of players who will gamble on optimising the map whenever they are even mildly disadvantaged by the first set-up. So the amount of re-setting in the tournament will almost certainly increase.

I know that some players (see GeneralKostas's recent post) think that the original map should be used in all circumstances as we use the "Pot Luck" setting to select them. Basically, I think that view is a reasonable one and the concession made in the tournament rules now to those that don't like that rule is that both players must agree before there is a re-roll. So the current rule represents a compromise between two basic positions. What is being suggested here in recent days about free rolls for each player would destroy that compromise and would likely alienate those players who do not think maps should be re-set at all.
However I don't like the idea of the first choice of army selection to the highest-ranked player. I think that would make league play more one-sided. And the goal of league games in my opinion is for people to have fun even while competing.
I wouldn't worry. This is not going to happen for the reason that you have given. :wink:

MikeC_81
Captain - Heavy Cruiser
Captain - Heavy Cruiser
Posts: 935
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:28 am

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by MikeC_81 » Tue Jul 21, 2020 6:51 am

stockwellpete wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 6:13 am
stockwellpete wrote:
Sun Jul 19, 2020 7:37 pm
Just a quick stat from Classical Antiquity. So far this season there have been 234 results posted and only 3 of them have been 0-0 draws, which represents less than 1.5% of the total. I agree that 0-0 draws are hardly an issue as it is scored now as if both players have lost the match.
I am a bit puzzled why the debate is raging about the issue of 0-0 draws. The stats for Late Antiquity so far this season are similar to those of Classical Antiquity that I posted earlier - three 0-0 draws out of a total of 212 results posted.
For exactly the reason that Harveylh posted. For the same reason, DanZandibar posted which originally rekindled this topic. For the exact reason that I got annoyed with chasing players into their spawn in the DL. 0-0 draws rarely happens because 90% of the time the player who is actually needing points in the standing will essentially cave and be forced to play on the "camper's terms of high-risk assault when threatened with a 0-0- draw. But I am sure you know this already.
Stratford Scramble Tournament

http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=494&t=99766&p=861093#p861093

FoG 2 Post Game Analysis Series on Youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKmEROEwX2fgjoQLlQULhPg/

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 11898
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by stockwellpete » Tue Jul 21, 2020 7:04 am

MikeC_81 wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 6:51 am
For exactly the reason that Harveylh posted. For the same reason, DanZandibar posted which originally rekindled this topic. For the exact reason that I got annoyed with chasing players into their spawn in the DL. 0-0 draws rarely happens because 90% of the time the player who is actually needing points in the standing will essentially cave and be forced to play on the "camper's terms of high-risk assault when threatened with a 0-0- draw. But I am sure you know this already.
And I refer you to the earlier contributions from Snugglebunnies and klayeckles . . .

Snugglebunnies - "Still, there's no sense getting that irritated about it. If you win all your matches except those in which your opponent camped too hard and went, say, 6 wins and 3 draws - you're very likely to promote a division. A player who always camps will not do so well, and is unlikely to promote. Even if they do promote, it's behavior that works better against less experienced players who aren't as versed in strategies like weighted flanks etc. as in higher divisions."

klayeckles - "i have to say snuggles hits it on the head...camping is perfectly legit. why would someone get frustrated by that? if i'm a general leading an army of 50,000 troops and i find myself with a battlefield that greatly favors the enemy if i move...wouldn't i be foolish to move? endangering the lives of all my soldiers? live to fight another day is one of the oldest adages of combat. some armies are just plain not cut out to fight certain armies on certain map types."

TomoeGozen
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 244
Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2019 9:37 pm

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by TomoeGozen » Tue Jul 21, 2020 8:58 am

I realise I'm pretty new to this so please ignore me if you feel it appropriate but I have a couple of observations...
a) if someone is 'camping' can't you take an army that works against an 'encamped' army? Eg: one that has lots of shooting that can just whittle them down or one with quality mediums that can go toe to toe with them in terrain? Picking an army to use in the tourny with plenty of options is surely part of the process. If you take an army that only has cavalry or pike then you've probably got it coming 😁
b) winkling a 'camper' out is just one of the many challenges you can face, chasing horse archers about the battlefield can be just as challenging!
c) some people are getting pretty wound up about a bit of fun...
Cheers,
Dave

MikeMarchant
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
Posts: 787
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 2:46 pm

Re: The Rally Point (discussion, questions and some highbrow philosophising)

Post by MikeMarchant » Tue Jul 21, 2020 9:02 am

stockwellpete wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 7:04 am
MikeC_81 wrote:
Tue Jul 21, 2020 6:51 am
For exactly the reason that Harveylh posted. For the same reason, DanZandibar posted which originally rekindled this topic. For the exact reason that I got annoyed with chasing players into their spawn in the DL. 0-0 draws rarely happens because 90% of the time the player who is actually needing points in the standing will essentially cave and be forced to play on the "camper's terms of high-risk assault when threatened with a 0-0- draw. But I am sure you know this already.
And I refer you to the earlier contributions from Snugglebunnies and klayeckles . . .

Snugglebunnies - "Still, there's no sense getting that irritated about it. If you win all your matches except those in which your opponent camped too hard and went, say, 6 wins and 3 draws - you're very likely to promote a division. A player who always camps will not do so well, and is unlikely to promote. Even if they do promote, it's behavior that works better against less experienced players who aren't as versed in strategies like weighted flanks etc. as in higher divisions."

klayeckles - "i have to say snuggles hits it on the head...camping is perfectly legit. why would someone get frustrated by that? if i'm a general leading an army of 50,000 troops and i find myself with a battlefield that greatly favors the enemy if i move...wouldn't i be foolish to move? endangering the lives of all my soldiers? live to fight another day is one of the oldest adages of combat. some armies are just plain not cut out to fight certain armies on certain map types."
I can't say I have ever played for a draw. If I come across a camping opponenet I try to assault his position. I can't help it. I might decidet to be sensible, but then my impetuousity will get the better of me and I'll try to figure out a way to defeat him. I am never angry, upset or frustrated by such defeats. The only games that irritate me are those (win or lose) that are decided not by the play of the game, but by RNG.

To comment on klayeckles point: This is to look at only half the story. There's something rather important missing from this question. If I was a real general, leading 50,000 real men in the field, and I met an army camping in a position highly favoruable to my enemy I wuld break off a highly mobile scouting/blocking force and then take my army off to ravage his countryside, sack his towns and cities, march on his capital. He's welcome to maintain the sovereignty of his hill. If he wants to stop me destroying/conquering his county he can march down off his hill, and while he trails off across the country after me my blocking force can harrass him, alert me, and I can find ground favourable to me to meet him on. If he's on the offenseive, on my territory, he's doing me no harm sitting on his hill. That buys me time to recruit and train more troops, to find ways to cut his supply lines (if he has any) and to construct such fortification, siege engines, etc that can help me overcome his position.

One of the failings of FoG, is the lack of flexibility afforded to troops, especially in those armies famed for their felxibility. For example, while a Roman army might deploy by legion and by cohort (or maniple) on the field of battle in the conventional sense, this was the exception rather than the rule. The majority of miliatry engagements were small affairs, not pitched battles. A real cohort of Roman legionaries, facing light foot on a difficult hill would not form up shoulder to shoulder, shields locked and attempt to march up the hill the way they would across a field agains a formed up Carthaginian or Macedonian army, they would break up into loose formations and fight more like medium foot. Any real centurion who didn't do this would be very quickly broken back down into the ranks. FoG doesn't allow this and so Roman legionaries are practically helpless in situations where historically they would simply adapt to overcome the enemy.

This lack of felxibility proably hurts the Romans more than most other armies and perhaps particualry against pike armies. After the Punic wars, there were two superpowers in the ancient world (you could maybe include Rome as a third, up and coming, super power) Macedon and Seleucia. Both of these were highyl successful pike army empires. The Romans defeated both, across many wars, largely because the Roman legion is a highly mobile and highly flexible military machine and the pike army is not. In FoG the Roman legionaries get no advantage for this mobility and felxibility, and so it is very difficult for a Roman army to defeat a pike army on eqaul terms. If they fail to get a result on impact, it's pretty much all over. Hitory tells a different story.


Best Wishes

Mike

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory II Digital League”