Quotations, quotations, quotations... I like this. Makes us look all scholarly and sh** :P
Firstly, Phalanx300... great idea with the 0.2 density. This way, members without BI don't need the shieldwall.
Hey, we all do our part. I made a collection of all the opinions expressed before me and added my own.
You may have a point there, but I say we leave this to each general according to his style. After all, we should create opportunities.
- I don't think the KH players shouldn't even want to use Phalangites, they wanted to fight with Spartans etc. otherwise they should Macedonia or Seleuceia. No Phalangites imo.
I'd like to hear some more thoughts on this. Perhaps from my fellow members of the jury.
- This is just an idea, tell me what you think about it: We could allow the use of Elephants (at least for some factions) but only if you notify your enemy of it prior to the battle. This way he can prepare for it and we can expect some interesting battles when one players is trying to massacre the enemy's infantry while the other one is trying to pincushion his elephants before he can do so.
I just can't imagine Hannibal or Pyrrhos giving due notice: "Scipio, my boy, I'm bringing some elephants so make sure your skirmishers are ready!"
Again, it's a matter of versatility. If there are technical issues, set unit scale to Large or even Normal in extreme cases. But the checkerboard and even Greek tactical formations would work better if you're playing with a full deck, do you know what I mean?
- I liked the idea of having only 14 units per army - it makes the battles less messy - but I don't mind 20 units either. (Though I think this point should be reconsidered if it turns out the way that most battles are going to be "large".)
Besides, abuse of elite units falls under the monetary issue.
Now, this is a matter of realism... no points systems in 272 BC, after all.
- Perhaps we can use a point system rather then a knock out system? Each player has a designated number of battles e.g. one time against each member of the other team or against half of the team etc. (depending on how many participants there are and how many battles they are willing to play), and the team with the most victories wins?
Like I said... the elimination process would take care of that problem.
- Having one player more in one team then in the other isn't much of a problem, I'm participating as a substitute, if the numbers are equal I will remain as a mere spectator (or as a judge if needed) if they aren't I will fight for the smaller team.
Prizes, you mean? What I had in mind would be something along the lines of "best cavalry commander", "best use of artillery and/or archers", for a few examples.
- I don't know about special "prices" (What did you have in mind?) but I like the idea of the tournament being one or two weeks long. Most of us have RL issues that can prevent them from playing and we probably life in different time zones, making it even more difficult to find a time when both are free.
I see. I think we'll need to do some research on this.
- About the money: 100,000 is far to much, I have a hard time using up even the 50,000 with the Romans and (though less extreme) with the KH. 40000 seams more appropriate, even if we want to use only elite units.
EDIT: Less money for Polybian/Camillian battles, otherwise the romans will have no way to use it up.
And as for limiting the use of any unit within the formation, I disagree.
If, for example, a Greek general spawns Rhodian slingers like a lunatic, a successful cavalry charge will scatter them likes leaves, leaving the Greek with maybe a few isolated hoplites here and there, nearly defenseless.
Each General will play to their strengths, obviously. Some are more flexible than others, that's the whole point of leadership on a battlefield... you can go with tried and true or you can be creative.
Therefore, I do not agree with limitations on a general's combat style.
Now, then... unless there are more issues, we'll round all suggestions up and as soon as we get our fifth and last member of the jury we'll vote on them and then the "rulebook" will be posted presently.
D'oh... blimey, I'm rude.
Please allow me to introduce the members of the jury.
A round of applause for:
Maion Maroneios
HunGeneral
Tiberius Claudius Marcellus
And myself
A very able team of historians and EB fans.
Again, I thank them all for their contribution and support. You can already see the results.
Bookmarks