PDA

View Full Version : SoA competition in 2012


David Constable
06-01-2011, 05:09 PM
I was reading the post by Scott Russell about the points for next years Midland Open in the UK, and had a thought.

I assume that it will make no difference in competitions if they are run in version 2.2 or 3.0, army list will be different but it should not make that much difference, or will it?

Since in the Midland Open we exclude Section 4 (four) because of dismounting knights (Kn//Bd), what if 3.0 creates a troop type that gives obvious advantages across several sections, in the Midland Open will we need to ban it?

And if we need to, will other competitions as well. Triples at Sheffield (U.K.) is safe because that is fixed armies chosen by the organizers.

Just a thought, but the next years competition starts sooner than we think, and the rules will soon be out?

David Constable

Martyn
06-01-2011, 05:29 PM
I was reading the post by Scott Russell about the points for next years Midland Open in the UK, and had a thought.

I assume that it will make no difference in competitions if they are run in version 2.2 or 3.0, army list will be different but it should not make that much difference, or will it?

Since in the Midland Open we exclude Section 3 (three) because of dismounting knights (Kn//Bd), what if 3.0 creates a troop type that gives obvious advantages across several sections, in the Midland Open will we need to ban it?

And if we need to, will other competitions as well. Triples at Sheffield (U.K.) is safe because that is fixed armies chosen by the organizers.

Just a thought, but the next years competition starts sooner than we think, and the rules will soon be out?

David Constable

Assuming v3 will be out by then. ;)

If the Midland ban Book 3 lists because of dismounting knights what about Book 4, aren't there more dismounting Knights in those armies than Book 3?

David Constable
06-01-2011, 05:37 PM
Assuming v3 will be out by then. ;)

If the Midland ban Book 3 lists because of dismounting knights what about Book 4, aren't there more dismounting Knights in those armies than Book 3?

Correct, it should say four, will amend.
I am assuming by Xmas 2011.

David Constable

Martyn
06-01-2011, 05:47 PM
Correct, it should say four, will amend

I thought it looked odd

I am assuming by Xmas 2011.

David Constable

So, it will all be over by Christmas, haven't we heard that before somewhere :silly

David Constable
06-01-2011, 05:51 PM
PART CUT

So, it will all be over by Christmas, haven't we heard that before somewhere :silly

2011 is not necessarily this year, depends on the calendar, so I am safe in my lifetime.

David Constable

Doug
06-10-2011, 03:58 AM
2011 is not necessarily this year, depends on the calendar, so I am safe in my lifetime.

David Constable

My belief is that Phil is pretty close to declaring development complete. I would be surprised if it isn't out by September.

David Constable
06-10-2011, 04:27 AM
My belief is that Phil is pretty close to declaring development complete. I would be surprised if it isn't out by September.

I heard August, but that was a few months ago. So soon is on, by Christmas seems safe, then the fun starts.

David Constable

Martin Smith
06-11-2011, 07:15 AM
I was reading the post by Scott Russell about the points for next years Midland Open in the UK, and had a thought.

Since in the Midland Open we exclude Section 4 (four) because of dismounting knights (Kn//Bd), what if 3.0 creates a troop type that gives obvious advantages across several sections, in the Midland Open will we need to ban it?

David Constable

"Obvious advantages" will be a tough one to define, David, as DBA has a knack of producing different results when the army / troop type is handled by different players. Even the dismounting knights option can be a two-edged sword (...how many times have you seen knights hoping for a dismount vs Bw, then throw a 1 for PIPs, remain mounted and die in a hail of arrows in the subsequent bound? I've been on both the giving and receiving end of that scenario). It'll take a fair while for any 'super troop type' to become established, I would think.
Martin

David Constable
06-11-2011, 09:43 AM
"Obvious advantages" will be a tough one to define, David, as DBA has a knack of producing different results when the army / troop type is handled by different players. Even the dismounting knights option can be a two-edged sword (...how many times have you seen knights hoping for a dismount vs Bw, then throw a 1 for PIPs, remain mounted and die in a hail of arrows in the subsequent bound? I've been on both the giving and receiving end of that scenario). It'll take a fair while for any 'super troop type' to become established, I would think.
Martin

Agree. But Kn//Bd is an obvious one, and easy to fix, no Section four.

Will have to see about DBA3 (rules and super troops early next year).

David Constable

michael guth
06-12-2011, 03:57 PM
Played it that way at USA HMGS east conventions for years, works great. But then, you might already know that....

David Constable
06-12-2011, 04:58 PM
Played it that way at USA HMGS east conventions for years, works great. But then, you might already know that....

Hello Michael

A number of options where considered, including versions on dismounting, but in the end the simplest was to say no Section Four, we have done it the same way for the four years it has run, queries why, but no real problems.

David Constable

Doug
06-13-2011, 09:24 AM
I heard August, but that was a few months ago. So soon is on, by Christmas seems safe, then the fun starts.

David Constable

Last couple of communciations from Phil suggest he is pretty happy with the shape it is in, except he has just introduced some new weirdnesses which various playtesters (myself included) have said.. 'you need to look at this'

I reckon September at the latest. My best guess is late July, August.

cheers

Doug
06-13-2011, 09:26 AM
Agree. But Kn//Bd is an obvious one, and easy to fix, no Section four.

Will have to see about DBA3 (rules and super troops early next year).

David Constable

Dismount on the first bound.. and the second.. and the third if necessary. Anyone assuming they can get the PIPs to dismount when they get close is a numpty....

guthroth
06-20-2011, 01:54 PM
More importantly, the other thread on this now says V3 will be available at the end of October. On that basis the SOA needs to decide whether 2.2 or 3 will be used at the first competition of the 2012 season which is only 5 weeks after they are available.

Pete

pawsBill
06-20-2011, 02:46 PM
More importantly, the other thread on this now says V3 will be available at the end of October. On that basis the SOA needs to decide whether 2.2 or 3 will be used at the first competition of the 2012 season which is only 5 weeks after they are available.

Pete

Why does the SOA need to decide? They aren't running the tournament.

guthroth
06-20-2011, 03:02 PM
I assumed having their name on it would mean they had some input, my apologies if that isn't the case.

Obviously all the remaining 2011 comps will use 2.2 but V3 army lists have some significant changes, and I just wondered what would happen for December.

No worries :up

David Constable
06-20-2011, 04:58 PM
I assumed having their name on it would mean they had some input, my apologies if that isn't the case.

Obviously all the remaining 2011 comps will use 2.2 but V3 army lists have some significant changes, and I just wondered what would happen for December.

No worries :up

As far as I know (and PawsBill will know better) the rules are DBA, but the format etc are up to the organizers to decide, not the SoA. This allows a lot of variations.

My mother was upset this year that Bath did not run, she does not play DBA, however it is usually the weekend of my birthday, so gets a box of chocolats for me not being there.

David Constable

pawsBill
06-20-2011, 05:15 PM
I assumed having their name on it would mean they had some input, my apologies if that isn't the case.

SOA are sponsors of the UK DBA League but not the individual tournaments. Organisation of the tournaments is up to the individual tournament organisers.

The SOA's aim is to encourage tournaments, not to dictate to them.

Obviously all the remaining 2011 comps will use 2.2 but V3 army lists have some significant changes, and I just wondered what would happen for December.

No worries :up

I can't say about the others but the PAWS Autumn DBA will use V2.2.

The English DBA Open will probably use V2.2 (as it is unlikely that everyone will have obtained and been able to try V3.0 by then).

Whether the PAWS Winter DBA will use V2.2 or V3.0 will depend on when I (and everyone else) can actually buy the published V3.0. If that is not before the Autumn DBA, then we will probably stay with V2.2 as the theme has to be selected soon after.

David Constable
06-21-2011, 03:39 AM
Hello Bill

Sorry but this question at the moment is difficult to answer.

If you decide to go to DBA3 rules are you likely to allow DBA2.2 armies as well as DBA3 armies, both for the English Open as well as the four themed competitions?

Might you run seperate DBA2.2 and DBA3 competitions?

Just thoughts.

David Constable

Bobgnar
06-21-2011, 11:43 AM
Again, a useful suggestion from Mike.

Also why throw out the proverbial baby with the bath water. Tossing whole books out is extreme. Why not just ban armies with dismounting elements. Or accept them, but do not allow dismounting. Pick one or the other to deploy, or deploy as mounted and do as Mike suggests.

Or just play the game as written :) There will be a number of things some people will dislike, many things many people will dislike in 3. By the time you Ban all of those, what is left. Just stick to 2.2, or even better as the recent review in Battlegames suggests, just play 1.1.