leagueofancients.org.au Forum Index leagueofancients.org.au
League of Ancients
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Victorian Renaissance Title 2016
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    leagueofancients.org.au Forum Index -> Renaissance
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Richard Gordon



Joined: 15 Oct 2011
Posts: 581

PostPosted: Sun Jan 17, 2016 4:44 am    Post subject: Victorian Renaissance Title 2016 Reply with quote

After various off line discussions with a lot of players, we have decided this year's tournament will be run in the following format.

FOG R Rules
800 points
Armies between 1500 and 1565 (from anywhere in the world)
No scenarios

We'll confirm closer to the time who army lists need to be sent to.

As always, a number of members have expressed a willingness to lend armies to anyone who doesn't have one for the period.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
von Lucky



Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 767
Location: Docklands

PostPosted: Tue Jan 19, 2016 12:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

While I was hoping on an Asian theme, I'll suck it up. Will request a poll (on the day and here on the forum) is conducted for next year.

It will also mean I'll play a more refined version of my 2015 Imperial Austrian list. I'm not taking Tupi again (yet!).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tyler
Site Admin


Joined: 06 Jul 2009
Posts: 638

PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2016 12:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It's geographically open, so Asian armies are perfectly welcome.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richard Gordon



Joined: 15 Oct 2011
Posts: 581

PostPosted: Wed Jan 20, 2016 12:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

What periods/options would people like to see included in a poll?

Probably need to keep it to 5 or 6 max to avoid too much fragmentation and each option getting 2 votes.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
von Lucky



Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 767
Location: Docklands

PostPosted: Sun Jan 24, 2016 4:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

For the years we've been playing FoG:R, the themes have been:

2011 - any list 1600 - 1650
2012 - any list 1500 - 1590
2013 - any list 1575 - 1650
2014 - any list 1500 - 1565
2015 - any list 1610 - 1660
2016 - any list 1500 - 1565

Seems we're switching between two periods. Which I understand, as most of us will probably only have one or two armies that fits into these time periods.

If we do want to shake it up, then I would like to see something different, but it definitely needs a vote. I would recommend a "3", "2" and "1" (or just "2" and "1") vote for each person to get a better idea of what people would like to see.

Some recommendations for what periods/options would suitable to be included in a poll include:

1. Age of Reformation
Any list 1500 - 1565

2. Wars of Religion
Any list 1610 - 1660

3. Duty and Glory
Any list 1660 - 1700

4. Colonies and Conquest
Any list in 'Colonies and Conquest'

5. Cities of Gold
Lists as per p130 of 'Cities of Gold'

6. Terra Incognita
Combining the options in 4. & 5.

I have excluded an open (1500 - 1700) theme, as it'll probably just be a Wars of Religion theme. I'm also not sure if we need a 1565 - 1610 theme to fill that gap. The time period restrictions I've kept from the last few years. I think they work, but I'm not too fussed where they start and end.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richard



Joined: 12 Oct 2006
Posts: 1074
Location: Elsternwick

PostPosted: Wed Jan 27, 2016 1:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah I'm not sure of that logic .

The idea is to get a larger tournament . The early period allows those with Med armies to more easily take part . The gap is the difference in weapons that make the earlier armies more difficult , the start and end is important for that reason

An open tournament is not just 30 yrs war, lots of armies from many periods are competitive , however I think an in period tournament is preferable

I'm not sure of the use of suggesting periods that would require most folk to get a new army

I presume scenarios will be reviewed after this coming tournament ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richard Gordon



Joined: 15 Oct 2011
Posts: 581

PostPosted: Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are no scenarios this year. We'll have a forum discussion after the tournament to see how it went and whether people want to see them again for 2017.

If we do bring them back, we'll probably have to give them all a refresh. I know from the FOG N scenarios, after a couple of years they do benefit from a revamp.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
LyleD



Joined: 25 Sep 2006
Posts: 572
Location: East Brunswick

PostPosted: Wed Jan 27, 2016 6:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The not so mighty Ming will be making another appearance, as tribute gifts from the European nations have not been provided.

Lyle
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
von Lucky



Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 767
Location: Docklands

PostPosted: Wed Jan 27, 2016 8:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richard S - I understand that the idea with the early time period is to allow those with medieval armies to more easily take part. But a lot of people also may have Asian/Middle Eastern/African armies for FoG:AM that could be morphed into a theme as recommended above. And on that argument we'd only run early or open periods for the FoG:R tournament.

I have no idea who has (or wants to game) a non-european Italian Wars or TYW/ECW army. Hence the reason for a poll.

I understand that the time period end/start dates is because of the difference in weaponry, was talking more about 1570 (instead of 1565) as an end date because of pistols, etc.

Richard G - I like scenarios as a) time is saved from not having to go through the set up steps and b) they offer a fresh prospective on playing the game. The difficult thing is getting them balanced. Only playtesting (and your suggested discussion) will hopefully assist in the revised versions of them.

Lyle - Looking forward to seeing the Ming.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richard



Joined: 12 Oct 2006
Posts: 1074
Location: Elsternwick

PostPosted: Wed Jan 27, 2016 10:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yeah , agreed

I think we are all saying more or less the same thing .

We can have a chat after the tournament and get a sense of which way it should go , it would be great if people set themselves to get an army ready for the tournament , but not everyone paints

Having said that I strongly feel we should support the choice for 2017 with articles in the Argus and threads on the forum to maximise interest in the chosen period/armies
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cawdorthane



Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 963

PostPosted: Wed Jan 27, 2016 11:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whichever way we go, an open and transparent, inclusive consultative process would be ideal.

Plainly scenarios do need play testing to ensure that they work and are balanced. But there is a lot of knowledge and talent in the club that could easily be galvanised to devise and work on scenarios so that it becomes fun rather than a chore if there is a genuine will to do so. Indeed, maybe having a mini competition within the club to come up with the best 6 or 8 scenarios would be a good way forward. We need to be wary of the temptation of inertia and playing the same old tired tournament style when scenarios can provide a rich and deep alternative.

It is interesting to note that this year the only truly "healthy" historical gaming tournament at Cancon in terms of continuing numbers was FoW, which of course uses scenarios and often has very high quality terrain as a result. Naturally that is only one of many factors in the success of FoW but we can ignore it at our peril...

cheers
Mark
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
m.gray



Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 46

PostPosted: Wed Jan 27, 2016 11:12 pm    Post subject: scenarios Reply with quote

Scenarios can be interesting but I have only just played my second open FOGR tournament and have never played a themed non scenario tournament.

maybe just give this one a try
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Cawdorthane



Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 963

PostPosted: Thu Jan 28, 2016 1:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As I understand it, the FoGR tournament arrangements for 2016 are set in stone and we are talking about what happens in 2017.

cheers
Mark
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
von Lucky



Joined: 28 Feb 2008
Posts: 767
Location: Docklands

PostPosted: Thu Jan 28, 2016 11:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richard wrote:
Yeah , agreed

I think we are all saying more or less the same thing .

We can have a chat after the tournament and get a sense of which way it should go , it would be great if people set themselves to get an army ready for the tournament , but not everyone paints

Having said that I strongly feel we should support the choice for 2017 with articles in the Argus and threads on the forum to maximise interest in the chosen period/armies


Yeah, I think we're on the same page. As Mark says, being open and with plenty of warning is the way to go.

And another question on the post-tournament voting slip/online poll should be whether or not to have scenarios.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Steve Green



Joined: 22 May 2012
Posts: 201
Location: Woodend

PostPosted: Thu Jan 28, 2016 12:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

As far as scenarios vs normal set-up is concerned, maybe consider tables with set terrain if you are concerned about maximising game time.
This seems to be used for several events overseas (by which I mean UK) and appears to work ok. A (very!!) long time ago I played in a few Warhammer tournaments where this was used and it certainly meant you got into the game a lot more quickly, and that extra few minutes at the end of a cliff-hanger battle can be golden.
_________________
The Dead Cost Nothing!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    leagueofancients.org.au Forum Index -> Renaissance All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 1 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group