The Dustbin

[LuciusSulla]

Pool A
LuciusSulla challenges Triarii

Byzantine 493-550 AD v Ostrogoth 493-561 AD (Gothic War 535-554 AD)

Password: 2021
PM Sent

[stockwellpete]

I have finished doing the second Time Control check now. If you remember, three players failed the first Time Control check. Two of those players have subsequently been removed from the tournament for slow play, the third player has picked up speed and he passed the second Time Control check quite comfortably.

With this second Time Control check, four players have failed it. Two of these four players are just one match short of their targets and have multiple matches in progress, so I am allowing them to continue without comment from me. Both are experienced, reliable FOG2DL players. The other two players have failed the test badly. One has new work commitments that have disrupted his computer access, but he has multiple matches in progress so he will be allowed to continue this season as he has entered only one section. I will talk to him before the start of next season if he signs up, but he will face restrictions on the number and type of sections he can enter. The other player I still need to talk to. I am not sure if there will be a change or not at the moment. This player is also an experienced FOG2DL player, but he always starts the tournament very, very slowly - and this is no longer acceptable to me.

Apart from this one remaining player, everyone else may continue. Generally, the pace of play is a bit better than last season and where slow play is occurring it seems to be concentrated mostly in the A divisions. This suggests to me that part of the problem may be that one or two players are getting a bit too comfortable after having played in the tournament for a number of seasons.

Please remember when you look at the league tables that you will see a number of players who have still completed none, one or two matches. Some of these players are late reserves (e.g. dim30, Rosedelio, MorkinTheFree) who have recently replaced slow players; others will be players who have played unevenly across the sections they have entered, but they have actually passed their Time Control check*; and others will be those 4 players who have failed the check.

Thanks very much to everyone who has responded to my enquiries around the two Time Control checks this season. Sorry that I have not been able to reply to everything, but the number of PM's I get in a 100+ player tournament is huge.

* just to explain this again about uneven play. The requirement for the second check is three matches completed in each section that you have entered. Because I know that it is not always possible for a player to play exactly evenly across three or four sections, I do also have a secondary aggregate scoring method that also allows players to pass a Time Control check. For example, a player entering three sections will need to complete a minimum of nine matches to pass (ideally three x three matches), but they will still pass if the have completed five matches in one section and two matches each in the other two sections because their completed match total is nine.

Here is a real example from this second Time Control check . . .

Primary test
Late Antiquity - 1 (FAIL)
Early Middle Ages - 3 (PASS)
Biblical - 6 (PASS)

Secondary test
1+3+6 = 10 (equal to, or greater than, 9 = PASS)

[kraff]

Division B

kraff (Arab (Conquest) 638-684 AD) beat Karvon (Dailami 928-1055 AD): 61-37.

[Nosy_Rat]

Division A
Nosy_Rat - Viking (Ireland) 900-1049 AD (1200) challenges

Aetius39 - Arab Conquest 638-684 AD (1600)
harveylh - Irish 900-1049 AD (1200)
Triarii - Arab (North Africa) 789-999 AD with Andalusian 756-1049 AD allies (1600)

Challenges posted, pm's sent.

[random27]

Division C

random27 - Navarrese 778-899 AD with Andalusian defeated Morat - Frankish 751-857 AD 61-48

Thanks for a closed game.

[olddog52]

Division E

olddog52 Chinese [Jin?] victory vs gamercb (Beidi) 62-42

Wow, Ups and downs. A mobile battle on one flank (Mostly Cav vs Cav with some Inf/bow support) and an assault (His Cataphracts) on a prepared position (Mine) on the other. A hell of a show. gamercb Thank you!

In a series of hard-fought battles, this was yet another. As I said to gamercb ''I may win but you have not let me feel anything but doubt'' and that goes as well for everyone I have played in this Div. Thank you all.

[GraftMalt]

Division E

GraftMalt German 933-1049 AD with Polish 966-1057 AD allies defeats phlewis Bulgar (Danube) 680-851 AD 50-23

Good Games - first time I had the honour to battle the Bulgars in FOG 2

[snooky51]

Division B

snooky 51 (parthians w/ kushan) defeats najanaja (romans w/ german foot) --- 47-22

Romans took strong ground and formed an L shaped perimeter. Despite his best attempts the shortage of missiles and horse prevented the romans from getting picked off by the arrow shower of the persians, once holes opened up the Persian horse ran wild

[General Shapur]

Division C

General Shapur - Anglo-Danish 1017-1041AD (1200) defeats snooky51 - Anglo-Saxon 950-1016 AD (1600) 62:35

My vikings finally found their form, alas this is my final game though - so hopefully its enough to keep me in the division.

Cheers for the game

[IMC]

Division B

IMC - Jewish Revolt 66-135 AD beat snooky51 - Sassanid Persian 224-349 AD with Kushan 130 BC-476 AD allies 46-17

Thanks for the game.

Ian

[Lynx57]

Division E

Lynx57 (Dailami with Khorasanian allies) beat Doyley50 - Lombard 776-1094 AD V 59-3

[LunarFoxx]

Division F

LunarFoxx - Graeco-Bactrian 250-130 BC beats opoli51 - Roman 105-25 BC with Galatian 63-25 BC allies 62-59

(3-1)

[Zawzgrzyt]

Division E

Zawzgrzyt - Viking (Ireland) defeats LunarFoxx - Khorasanian 53-9

Thanks for good game and the chat.

[olddog52]

Thank you!
Dirty Mark, gamercb, gort7078, General Kostas ,mh5064 and stockwellpete, Giacofa93, devoncop, Badger73, LindsayCole, ray552, markleslie, Quivis, and all you who have taught me how to play FoG online, in and out of the Digital League.So many 1st class opponents.Thank you my Brothers.

[Giacofa93]

Thanks Pete for the work and the updates. One question though: if you are now checking the total number of matches instead of the number of matches in each section, does it mean that effectively the rule for the time control check is changed from "at least X matches in each section played" to "at least X total matches times the number of sections played" ?

[Challenge1]

Division B

Challenge1 - Andalusian 756-1049 AD drew with Nijis - Armenian 885-1045 AD with Byzantine 963-987 AD allies 44-41

A really chaotic but tight match throughout. Thanks for the match!

(2-2)

[stockwellpete]

Thanks Pete for the work and the updates. One question though: if you are now checking the total number of matches instead of the number of matches in each section, does it mean that effectively the rule for the time control check is changed from "at least X matches in each section played" to "at least X total matches times the number of sections played" ?

I have always checked both figures. The 3 per section headline requirement is straightforward to understand and all players should be able to achieve it in 5 weeks, barring serious "real life issues". In future, players who fail a Time Control check will have the benefit of the secondary calculation (the back-up test if you like) removed. I will add something more to the Rules and Players' Guide for Season 13. At the moment we are transition from a completely informal time control system to one that is a bit more structured. I do not want anything draconian, and anything I do use must be targeted at just those players who are continually slow, so that the vast majority of players can enjoy the tournament without any interference from me. But continual slow play and poor communication with opponents is no longer acceptable in the FOG2DL.

I do need a certain flexibility in the rules to cover all possible eventualities. I do encourage players to play evenly across the sections they have entered, but in the absence of a formalised fixture list (which would be entirely unsuitable for the FOG2DL outside of the later stages of the Themed Event), I do not enforce this rigidly.

If, for example, a player entered 3 sections and completed 7 matches in one of them, 2 in another and 0 in the last one - on the first occasion they would pass the test having completed 9 matches. But they would be told to play more evenly across the tournament in future. If, in the next season, they then did exactly the same again then I would take one of the sections where they had not completed 3 matches away from them.

[stockwellpete]

The other player I still need to talk to. I am not sure if there will be a change or not at the moment. This player is also an experienced FOG2DL player, but he always starts the tournament very, very slowly - and this is no longer acceptable to me.

I have spoken to this player now and he has multiple matches in progress. So I am allowing him to continue. There will be no more changes to divisions this season.

[edb1815]

Division D

edb1815 (Samnites w/ Gallic ally) defeats DocVanNostrand (Thracian w/ Dacian ally) 70-43

A crazy back and forth warband battle in a mountain pass with a Thracian cavalry ambush coming out of a forest. Fun game!

[BobGanoush]

Division C

BobGanoush(Bithynian with Galatian allies) defeats Najanaja(Roman with Greek allies) 61-47