OT2017 Round 5
Scenario: 407 Medway (43 AD)
|Player 1||Game 1||Game 2||POINTS||Player 2||Game 1||Game 2||POINTS|
11 Roman wins, 8 Briton wins
Where there are ties for Cumulative Victory Points, the tie is determined by Ranking based upon the strength of the opponents played.
So the final Ranking score is the cumulative score of the final VPs scored by your opponent in each round.
So for example, playing Carthage in any round was worth 12 Ranking points, playing Mantra was worth 8 Ranking points.
On that basis, one of the top 9 scores (9VPs or higher) has to be left behind, and on the narrowest of differences, BrentS squeezed into 8th over mk20336 (Michal)
when I started OT2017 I was assuming tie-breaking procedure dependent on strength of opponents you played with. Just like it was in 2016 and 2015. I was aware this is different from Mini-Tournament and accepted this.
That said, as per rules I was aware of, I am 9th and Brent & Tomek advances to quarter-final. Full stop. I hope that will close discussion as who advances to quarter-final in OT2017.
However, the other discussion started by Giulio - what tie-breaking procedure should be - is a different topic and I think we all can share our POV. From my perspective, block count actually is not perfect here as you play with completely different opponents and actually can win more banners with less experienced ones (comparison by Mark above is a good example). Approximation which is given by "relative strength of opponents" is I think quite satisfactory, because it shows that although tied players reach the same level, the path for some of them was more difficult and that ones should be rewarded with won tie-break.
I have 2 issues with using the banners scored tie break;
1. The player that plays a tougher set of opponents will tend to score fewer banners.
2. Each round has a different number of banners, Round 1 was 10, round 4 was 14, and rounds 2,3 &5 were 12.
Banners won R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 TOTAL
Tomek 8 12 12 8 8 48
BrentS 7 12 12 9 11 51
mk20336 9 5 10 14 12 50
so the result of banners won tends towards the inverse of opponent strength,
I'm happy to take advice on this if anyone has any.
I'm sorry there's been confusion as I didn't publish the tournament rules.....this is how the min-tournaments are run and it's probably an unfortunate cut and paste. There's actually merit in using banner and block counts to tie break as you suggest, Giulio, but it's not how this or other Open tournaments have been ranked for the past several years, and to revert to another method now would actually be breaking the integrity of the system as it's been used in this tournament so far. Maybe the tournament rules can be reviewed and if it's what people want, a different system could be used next year.
Having said all that, i feel awkward being the number cruncher and being in a position where it has an important impact on my ranking, as it does here, and particularly as there's a discrepancy between how the tournament has been run and the published rules. Michal's a great player and very deserving of progressing, and if he's keen to keep playing, I'd be very happy to cede the spot to him.
Edit 1: I did the math and something in fact changes.
Edit 2: I have to amend what I wrote: after looking at it more carefully, I don't like the tie procedure you suggest. I prefer the official one. It is simple and it gives straight incentives: even if you are losing, try to capture all medals you can and even if you are winning try to lose the least units (which is by and large quite realistic too!) The suggested procedure is instead rather brainy, opaque and not conducive to any operationalizable strategy, as it is decided "ex-post" based on what the others do. I can see its merits in a handicap based system, but not here.
Game 2: Britons (Stormwalker) vs Romans (craniumgroup): 6-4
A tie score for the match. Pretty intense battles in both of them.
File Attachment:File Name: CCARound5Game1.vlog
File Size:37 COM_KUNENA_USER_ATTACHMENT_FILE_WEIGHT
File Attachment:File Name: CCARound5Game2.vlog
File Size:33 COM_KUNENA_USER_ATTACHMENT_FILE_WEIGHT
- Game saved with version 1.0 of extension 'CCA_C3iScenarios', you are running version 3.3. Please upgrade to the latest version of this extension.
- Game saved with version 2.2 of extension 'CCA_Expansion2', you are running version 3.3. Please upgrade to the latest version of this extension.
- Game saved with version 2.0 of extension 'CCA_Expansion3', you are running version 3.3. Please upgrade to the latest version of this extension.
- Game saved with version 1.2 of extension 'CCA_Expansion4', you are running version 3.3. Please upgrade to the latest version of this extension.
- Game saved with version 1.0 of extension 'CCA_Expansion6', you are running version 3.3. Please upgrade to the latest version of this extension
Cavie (Roman) - 6
Paul (Britons) - 2
Britons used their chariots early on to attack the Roman right. Most of the chariots were lost and the Romans survived most of the attack. Battle switched to the opposite side of the field where the Romans pressed and got some good strikes (including a first strike) to win the battle.
MichalK (Britons) 6 banners won
GregO (Rome) 3 banners won
As Britons I had perfect cards whole game to move my chariots - and I played to have possibility always to move them. Not surprising, they scored 5 banners. Of course MC in first turn for Britons is a no-brainier (I had it), but then couple of other cards allowed me to continue the push - despite steady advance of MI and HI. One miracle occurred (HI attacking my lonely leader and not scoring a hit) and game was finished by 3 Warriors ganging up on some Roman figures. To some extend I had more luck then wisdom (see leader situation).
Player 1 (Rome) 6 banners won
Player 2 (Britons) 3 banners won
Again decent cards for my side - MFM allowed to to quickly reform and avoid majority of chariots. steady downpour of HI and Mi was checked at one moment by colossal build-up of Britons they had really taunting two-units-deep line, move by Line Command. And here my dumb luck again woke-up - Greg rolled on Spartacus only one unit, which inflicted 1 hit taking 3 in battle back. Successive Double Time should finish game, but was not so effective - that allowed Greg to grab couple of precious points. Last turn was just finishing some 1 blocks for final 6--3 victory.
I do not remember when I had so much luck (well, maybe yesterday - Mark can say something about our TGW game finished after 4 cards). Anyhow, thanks to Greg for both games, high spirits despite my lucky dice and time well spent.
File Attachment:File Name: OT2017_R5_G2.vlog
File Size:35 COM_KUNENA_USER_ATTACHMENT_FILE_WEIGHT
File Attachment:File Name: OT2017_R5_G1.vlog
File Size:29 COM_KUNENA_USER_ATTACHMENT_FILE_WEIGHT
Carthage Romans 6 to Stonewall Britons 3
The Briton chariots hit the Roman auxilia and severely damaged 1, but did not eliminate any. The Roman missile fire rolled 2 flags on a chariot and killed it by retreat.
The Briton Warriors Doubled Timed into the left flank of the Roman heavy and medium infantry line, eliminated a medium, a heavy, and Vespasian. The Roman line hit back with a Double Time card, eliminating 2 Warriors and Togomundus, making the score 4-3 in favor of the Romans.
A Briton attack against the medium and heavy infantry using 2 wounded warriors severely damaged a medium, but failed to kill any, and 1 Warrior was lost. A Briton attack with a Warrior and 2 chariots against 2 auxilia severely damaged one, but failed to kill any. The Roman attack eliminated a chariot for the win, 6-3.
Caspar (Carthage) was a great opponent and a great player, winning both games. I filled out the report and posted it, because he lost connection to the server at one point.
Carthage Britons 6 to Stonewall Romans 3
The Briton chariots hit the Roman light troops on the right side of the board with a Mounted Charge card that eliminated 3 auxilia. The next turn the Briton Warriors on the left side of the board hit the Roman heavy and medium line with a Double Time card that eliminated a heavy and killed the leader Vespasian (significantly altering history by killing a future Emperor). The score was now 5-0.
The Roman line was able to hit back with a Line Command card that resulted in 3 Warriors being eliminated, but Togodumnos survived. The next turn the Briton chariots, with an Inspired Left Leader card, surrounded a medium infantry and eliminated it for the win, 6-3.
The Brits got initiative and their chariots pounced without mercy. romans did a fighting withdrawal there, mostly withdrawal, losing a couple of units but taking a couple of chariots with them. A Roman Darken the skies went particulary well. A nucleus of 6 Roman inf and 2 leaders then took the center and with their movement dodged the warriors and killed chariots, 5 chariots died in this game.
Mark McG as Romans 6 banners, Gonzo as Brits 4 banners.
Mark again go t initiative and The Roman legionairies flooded across the river and set up a strong line over whole front. Chariots sat on their as with no orders. As the Romans line advanced and missed with missiles, the Brit barbarians charged and killed nothing. As the Romans cleaned up the next turn, he was not able to protect 2 damaged legions from a wandering chariot. Finally the chariots entered the game and got the 4th banner to cinch the match.
Thanks to Mark for an exciting match.