The Dustbin

Moderator: Field of Glory 2 Tournaments Managers

markwatson360
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Posts: 199
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:04 am

Re: Poll on trialling the use of larger armies.

Post by markwatson360 » Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:52 am

This Poll is totally biased towards increasing army size because you can submit 2 votes and there are 2 options for increasing army size yet there is only one option to keep army size the same, so if you're happy with the medium size battles the only place to put your 2nd vote is to leave and you might not want to do that. You should have allowed just one vote per player. Despite this fundamental flaw most votes have been cast to keep medium size armies.

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Poll on trialling the use of larger armies.

Post by stockwellpete » Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:16 am

markwatson360 wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:52 am
This Poll is totally biased towards increasing army size because you can submit 2 votes and there are 2 options for increasing army size yet there is only one option to keep army size the same, so if you're happy with the medium size battles the only place to put your 2nd vote is to leave and you might not want to do that. You should have allowed just one vote per player. Despite this fundamental flaw most votes have been cast to keep medium size armies.
I don't regard the poll as flawed. I made it in this way to cover all the possible options and to give me an idea how players generally felt about things. And if you read my post on 17/3 you will see what is likely to happen now. There will be a trial in Season 5 in just one section with 1600 pt armies. If that goes OK then from Season 6 one section each season, rotating through the different time periods, will offer 1600 pt armies. So there will still be 4 out of 5 sections using medium-sized armies (5 out of 6 when the later medieval DLC's start to appear). I think this is a fair reflection of what the poll is telling us. Around half of those polled like the idea of using larger armies.

markwatson360
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Posts: 199
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:04 am

Re: Poll on trialling the use of larger armies.

Post by markwatson360 » Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:21 am

stockwellpete wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:16 am
markwatson360 wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:52 am
This Poll is totally biased towards increasing army size because you can submit 2 votes and there are 2 options for increasing army size yet there is only one option to keep army size the same, so if you're happy with the medium size battles the only place to put your 2nd vote is to leave and you might not want to do that. You should have allowed just one vote per player. Despite this fundamental flaw most votes have been cast to keep medium size armies.
I don't regard the poll as flawed. I made it in this way to cover all the possible options and to give me an idea how players generally felt about things. And if you read my post on 17/3 you will see what is likely to happen now. There will be a trial in Season 5 in just one section with 1600 pt armies. If that goes OK then from Season 6 one section each season, rotating through the different time periods, will offer 1600 pt armies. So there will still be 4 out of 5 sections using medium-sized armies (5 out of 6 when the later medieval DLC's start to appear). I think this is a fair reflection of what the poll is telling us.
Yes, I understand that, but the fact remains if you had allowed just one vote per person the number of votes for 1200 pt battles would be the same and the votes for an increase would be almost halved because most of these players will have voted in the 1600 and 2000 categories

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 23019
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Poll on trialling the use of larger armies.

Post by rbodleyscott » Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:38 am

markwatson360 wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:21 am
stockwellpete wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:16 am
markwatson360 wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:52 am
This Poll is totally biased towards increasing army size because you can submit 2 votes and there are 2 options for increasing army size yet there is only one option to keep army size the same, so if you're happy with the medium size battles the only place to put your 2nd vote is to leave and you might not want to do that. You should have allowed just one vote per player. Despite this fundamental flaw most votes have been cast to keep medium size armies.
I don't regard the poll as flawed. I made it in this way to cover all the possible options and to give me an idea how players generally felt about things. And if you read my post on 17/3 you will see what is likely to happen now. There will be a trial in Season 5 in just one section with 1600 pt armies. If that goes OK then from Season 6 one section each season, rotating through the different time periods, will offer 1600 pt armies. So there will still be 4 out of 5 sections using medium-sized armies (5 out of 6 when the later medieval DLC's start to appear). I think this is a fair reflection of what the poll is telling us.
Yes, I understand that, but the fact remains if you had allowed just one vote per person the number of votes for 1200 pt battles would be the same and the votes for an increase would be almost halved because most of these players will have voted in the 1600 and 2000 categories
+1

Technically, the poll is flawed, because of this. This isn't a matter of opinion.

However, it does not really matter if you will only introduce the trial in one division.
Richard Bodley Scott

Image

zakblood
Most Active User 2017
Most Active User 2017
Posts: 15852
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2014 6:44 pm

Re: Poll on trialling the use of larger armies.

Post by zakblood » Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:43 am

i don't play online, but as a whole i'd like larger armies in all battles as an option and the unlocking of a set amount of given units as a choice

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Poll on trialling the use of larger armies.

Post by stockwellpete » Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:51 am

markwatson360 wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:21 am
Yes, I understand that, but the fact remains if you had allowed just one vote per person the number of votes for 1200 pt battles would be the same and the votes for an increase would be almost halved because most of these players will have voted in the 1600 and 2000 categories
No, it wouldn't be halved. You have 22 against a trial and at least 20 definitely in favour of one. And not everyone in favour of larger armies would have used both votes either, so roughly the poll is probably showing a small majority in favour of a trial. Even if those in favour of a trial had scored just 40% then I would still have sanctioned one for next season. 40% of the 70+ players we have now is around 30 players, which is enough for a viable section of 3 divisions. I am trying to cater for all preferences as much as I can and the idea for larger armies is quite popular.

However, I also now know that 6 out of 22 would stop playing in the FOG2DL if an increase in army size was introduced across the board. This represents around 15% of those polled, which would mean we could lose around 10 players out of the 70+ that entered this season. That is too high for me, as I spend lots of time pre-season trying to recruit new players, so there will not be a roll-out of larger armies right across the tournament. And I also know now that that those in favour of 1600 pt armies outnumber those who want 2000 pt armies by nearly 2 to 1, so that means 2000 pt armies will not be used in the FOG2DL. I wouldn't have got this information without giving 2 votes.

In the final analysis. I think introducing larger armies in just one part of the tournament is a fair reflection of what the poll is saying. Players who do not like larger armies will still have plenty of other options to join in the tournament.

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Poll on trialling the use of larger armies.

Post by stockwellpete » Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:55 am

rbodleyscott wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:38 am

+1

Technically, the poll is flawed, because of this. This isn't a matter of opinion.

However, it does not really matter if you will only introduce the trial in one division.
My polls are always indicative and I try to interpret them fairly. I have got the information I wanted from this poll, The key finding for me was for question 4. How many players would we lose if larger armies were introduced across the board. The trial was always going to be introduced into just one division.

markwatson360
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Posts: 199
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:04 am

Re: Poll on trialling the use of larger armies.

Post by markwatson360 » Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:00 am

Well, don't say things like "Whoosh! The swing-ometer has gone right over towards those favouring a trial now 32-20." then, when as you've just said, the actual number of people favouring a trial might be as low as 20.

stockwellpete
Field of Glory Moderator
Field of Glory Moderator
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Oct 01, 2010 2:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Poll on trialling the use of larger armies.

Post by stockwellpete » Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:11 am

markwatson360 wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:00 am
Well, don't say things like "Whoosh! The swing-ometer has gone right over towards those favouring a trial now 32-20." then, when as you've just said, the actual number of people favouring a trial might be as low as 20.


"Whoosh!" was an off the cuff and unscientific reaction to a sudden influx of votes for the 1600 pt and 2000 pt options. I do beg your pardon and I shall endeavour to moderate my "whooshing" in future.

hidde
Sr. Colonel - Wirbelwind
Sr. Colonel - Wirbelwind
Posts: 1720
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 6:31 am

Re: Themed Event: winners post your results here . . .

Post by hidde » Fri Mar 22, 2019 1:06 pm

hidde(Burgundian) beat IMC(Frankish) 41-14

hidde(Frankish) beat IMC(Burgundian) 48-8

dkalenda
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 224
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2012 4:49 pm

Re: Classical Antiquity: winners post your results here . . .

Post by dkalenda » Fri Mar 22, 2019 2:01 pm

Division A

dkalenda (Seleucids) beats pantherboy (Achaemenid Persians) 41-14

markwatson360
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Sergeant - Panzer IIC
Posts: 199
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 9:04 am

Re: Poll on trialling the use of larger armies.

Post by markwatson360 » Fri Mar 22, 2019 3:40 pm

stockwellpete wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:11 am
markwatson360 wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 11:00 am
Well, don't say things like "Whoosh! The swing-ometer has gone right over towards those favouring a trial now 32-20." then, when as you've just said, the actual number of people favouring a trial might be as low as 20.


"Whoosh!" was an off the cuff and unscientific reaction to a sudden influx of votes for the 1600 pt and 2000 pt options. I do beg your pardon and I shall endeavour to moderate my "whooshing" in future.
The Whooosh is fine , it's the rest of it where the problem lies.

MikeC_81
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
Posts: 770
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:28 am

Re: Poll on trialling the use of larger armies.

Post by MikeC_81 » Fri Mar 22, 2019 4:44 pm

Omg why are we arguing over a poll. If Pete wants to run a big battle section then leave it be. You ate not obligated to play in it
FoG 2 Post Game Analysis Series on Youtube:

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

rbodleyscott
Field of Glory 2
Field of Glory 2
Posts: 23019
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:25 pm

Re: Poll on trialling the use of larger armies.

Post by rbodleyscott » Fri Mar 22, 2019 4:52 pm

MikeC_81 wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 4:44 pm
Omg why are we arguing over a poll.
We are practicing for the 2nd Brexit referendum.
Richard Bodley Scott

Image

Tresantes
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Senior Corporal - Ju 87G
Posts: 94
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 1:16 pm

Re: Classical Antiquity: winners post your results here . . .

Post by Tresantes » Fri Mar 22, 2019 8:53 pm

Division C

Tresantes (Persians) defeats Barrold713 (Pontic) 68-53

A long, hard battle that could have gone either way

(3-1)

devoncop
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Lieutenant Colonel - Elite Panther D
Posts: 1301
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 8:46 am

Re: Poll on trialling the use of larger armies.

Post by devoncop » Fri Mar 22, 2019 9:52 pm

rbodleyscott wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 4:52 pm
MikeC_81 wrote:
Fri Mar 22, 2019 4:44 pm
Omg why are we arguing over a poll.
We are practicing for the 2nd Brexit referendum.

:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock:

Not even a little bit funny !!

Karvon
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 223
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2012 12:36 pm
Location: Osaka, Japan

Re: Classical Antiquity: winners post your results here . . .

Post by Karvon » Sat Mar 23, 2019 12:05 am

Div D

Karvon - Graeco-Bactrians 250-130 BC defeated phoyle3290 - Macedonians 320-261 BC 40-14

4-0

MikeC_81
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
1st Lieutenant - Grenadier
Posts: 770
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 2:28 am

Re: Late Antiquity: arrange your matches here . . .

Post by MikeC_81 » Sat Mar 23, 2019 3:03 am

Division A

Final two games for me.

nyczar - Kingdom of Soissons 461-486 AD
ruskicanuk - Ptolemaic 55-30 BC

password = Arab

PM Sent
FoG 2 Post Game Analysis Series on Youtube:

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

Jagger2002
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 281
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:31 pm

Re: Biblical: winners post your results here . . .

Post by Jagger2002 » Sat Mar 23, 2019 3:44 am

Division B

Jagger2002 (Carthaginians) defeats SpeedyCM (Medes) 65-46

Tough, tough battle against the Medes lead by the wily SpeedyCM. With plenty of open ground, the Medes went with masses of cavalry, plenty of Sparabara bows and trusty spears. The Sparabara bows interspersed with spears opened the battle by closing on my trailing left wing. The Carthaginian army left faced and the mediums, chariots and cavalry charged while the heavies became the right flank shield. Then it was a question of whether they could win before the Medes spears could flank my right. It was a wild battle with Mede cavalry swarming around all over the place. Fortunately, the Carthaginians right managed to hold while the rest of the army rolled up the Mede right. Quite a battle of Titans and well played by SpeedyCM.
Attachments
Mede Cavalry swarming behind the lines!.jpg
Mede Cavalry swarming behind the lines!.jpg (675.52 KiB) Viewed 1100 times

Jagger2002
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Staff Sergeant - StuG IIIF
Posts: 281
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2014 7:31 pm

Re: Biblical: arrange your matches here . . .

Post by Jagger2002 » Sat Mar 23, 2019 3:59 am

Division B

Jagger2002 (Carthaginians challenges GDod (Syracusians) PW: GDod PM sent shortly

Saved the hardest for last!

Post Reply

Return to “Field of Glory II Digital League”