The Dustbin

[ruskicanuk]

Division A

ruskicanuk - Ptolemaic 55-30 BC defeats Breogan - Spanish (Sertorius) 80-70 BC, 44 - 6, nice to see people trying unique strategies (in this case half of the Spanish army was lights)

[stockwellpete]

This poll will close on Sunday after I have completed the tables and charts.

[ahuyton]

Division B

ahuyton - Breton 411-579 AD won against Ulysisgrunt - Indian 546-599 AD, 53-28

My troops pathetically cowered in a big wood in the centre of the field while Danny's elephants, lancers and bowmen surged forward bravely. My ambushes and numbers won the game but credit is due to my pleasant opponent for his active play. The end of a difficult season with the Bretonese peasants.

[markwatson360]

This Poll is totally biased towards increasing army size because you can submit 2 votes and there are 2 options for increasing army size yet there is only one option to keep army size the same, so if you're happy with the medium size battles the only place to put your 2nd vote is to leave and you might not want to do that. You should have allowed just one vote per player. Despite this fundamental flaw most votes have been cast to keep medium size armies.

[stockwellpete]

This Poll is totally biased towards increasing army size because you can submit 2 votes and there are 2 options for increasing army size yet there is only one option to keep army size the same, so if you're happy with the medium size battles the only place to put your 2nd vote is to leave and you might not want to do that. You should have allowed just one vote per player. Despite this fundamental flaw most votes have been cast to keep medium size armies.

I don't regard the poll as flawed. I made it in this way to cover all the possible options and to give me an idea how players generally felt about things. And if you read my post on 17/3 you will see what is likely to happen now. There will be a trial in Season 5 in just one section with 1600 pt armies. If that goes OK then from Season 6 one section each season, rotating through the different time periods, will offer 1600 pt armies. So there will still be 4 out of 5 sections using medium-sized armies (5 out of 6 when the later medieval DLC's start to appear). I think this is a fair reflection of what the poll is telling us. Around half of those polled like the idea of using larger armies.

[markwatson360]

This Poll is totally biased towards increasing army size because you can submit 2 votes and there are 2 options for increasing army size yet there is only one option to keep army size the same, so if you're happy with the medium size battles the only place to put your 2nd vote is to leave and you might not want to do that. You should have allowed just one vote per player. Despite this fundamental flaw most votes have been cast to keep medium size armies.

I don't regard the poll as flawed. I made it in this way to cover all the possible options and to give me an idea how players generally felt about things. And if you read my post on 17/3 you will see what is likely to happen now. There will be a trial in Season 5 in just one section with 1600 pt armies. If that goes OK then from Season 6 one section each season, rotating through the different time periods, will offer 1600 pt armies. So there will still be 4 out of 5 sections using medium-sized armies (5 out of 6 when the later medieval DLC's start to appear). I think this is a fair reflection of what the poll is telling us.

Yes, I understand that, but the fact remains if you had allowed just one vote per person the number of votes for 1200 pt battles would be the same and the votes for an increase would be almost halved because most of these players will have voted in the 1600 and 2000 categories

[rbodleyscott]

This Poll is totally biased towards increasing army size because you can submit 2 votes and there are 2 options for increasing army size yet there is only one option to keep army size the same, so if you're happy with the medium size battles the only place to put your 2nd vote is to leave and you might not want to do that. You should have allowed just one vote per player. Despite this fundamental flaw most votes have been cast to keep medium size armies.

I don't regard the poll as flawed. I made it in this way to cover all the possible options and to give me an idea how players generally felt about things. And if you read my post on 17/3 you will see what is likely to happen now. There will be a trial in Season 5 in just one section with 1600 pt armies. If that goes OK then from Season 6 one section each season, rotating through the different time periods, will offer 1600 pt armies. So there will still be 4 out of 5 sections using medium-sized armies (5 out of 6 when the later medieval DLC's start to appear). I think this is a fair reflection of what the poll is telling us.

Yes, I understand that, but the fact remains if you had allowed just one vote per person the number of votes for 1200 pt battles would be the same and the votes for an increase would be almost halved because most of these players will have voted in the 1600 and 2000 categories

+1

Technically, the poll is flawed, because of this. This isn't a matter of opinion.

However, it does not really matter if you will only introduce the trial in one division.

[zakblood]

i don't play online, but as a whole i'd like larger armies in all battles as an option and the unlocking of a set amount of given units as a choice

[stockwellpete]

Yes, I understand that, but the fact remains if you had allowed just one vote per person the number of votes for 1200 pt battles would be the same and the votes for an increase would be almost halved because most of these players will have voted in the 1600 and 2000 categories

No, it wouldn't be halved. You have 22 against a trial and at least 20 definitely in favour of one. And not everyone in favour of larger armies would have used both votes either, so roughly the poll is probably showing a small majority in favour of a trial. Even if those in favour of a trial had scored just 40% then I would still have sanctioned one for next season. 40% of the 70+ players we have now is around 30 players, which is enough for a viable section of 3 divisions. I am trying to cater for all preferences as much as I can and the idea for larger armies is quite popular.

However, I also now know that 6 out of 22 would stop playing in the FOG2DL if an increase in army size was introduced across the board. This represents around 15% of those polled, which would mean we could lose around 10 players out of the 70+ that entered this season. That is too high for me, as I spend lots of time pre-season trying to recruit new players, so there will not be a roll-out of larger armies right across the tournament. And I also know now that that those in favour of 1600 pt armies outnumber those who want 2000 pt armies by nearly 2 to 1, so that means 2000 pt armies will not be used in the FOG2DL. I wouldn't have got this information without giving 2 votes.

In the final analysis. I think introducing larger armies in just one part of the tournament is a fair reflection of what the poll is saying. Players who do not like larger armies will still have plenty of other options to join in the tournament.

[stockwellpete]

+1

Technically, the poll is flawed, because of this. This isn't a matter of opinion.

However, it does not really matter if you will only introduce the trial in one division.

My polls are always indicative and I try to interpret them fairly. I have got the information I wanted from this poll, The key finding for me was for question 4. How many players would we lose if larger armies were introduced across the board. The trial was always going to be introduced into just one division.

[markwatson360]

Well, don't say things like "Whoosh! The swing-ometer has gone right over towards those favouring a trial now 32-20." then, when as you've just said, the actual number of people favouring a trial might be as low as 20.

[stockwellpete]

Well, don't say things like "Whoosh! The swing-ometer has gone right over towards those favouring a trial now 32-20." then, when as you've just said, the actual number of people favouring a trial might be as low as 20.

"Whoosh!" was an off the cuff and unscientific reaction to a sudden influx of votes for the 1600 pt and 2000 pt options. I do beg your pardon and I shall endeavour to moderate my "whooshing" in future.

[hidde]

hidde(Burgundian) beat IMC(Frankish) 41-14

hidde(Frankish) beat IMC(Burgundian) 48-8

[dkalenda]

Division A

dkalenda (Seleucids) beats pantherboy (Achaemenid Persians) 41-14

[markwatson360]

Well, don't say things like "Whoosh! The swing-ometer has gone right over towards those favouring a trial now 32-20." then, when as you've just said, the actual number of people favouring a trial might be as low as 20.

"Whoosh!" was an off the cuff and unscientific reaction to a sudden influx of votes for the 1600 pt and 2000 pt options. I do beg your pardon and I shall endeavour to moderate my "whooshing" in future.

The Whooosh is fine , it's the rest of it where the problem lies.

[MikeC_81]

Omg why are we arguing over a poll. If Pete wants to run a big battle section then leave it be. You ate not obligated to play in it

[rbodleyscott]

Omg why are we arguing over a poll.

We are practicing for the 2nd Brexit referendum.

[Tresantes]

Division C

Tresantes (Persians) defeats Barrold713 (Pontic) 68-53

A long, hard battle that could have gone either way

(3-1)

[devoncop]

Omg why are we arguing over a poll.

We are practicing for the 2nd Brexit referendum.

Not even a little bit funny !!

[Karvon]

Div D

Karvon - Graeco-Bactrians 250-130 BC defeated phoyle3290 - Macedonians 320-261 BC 40-14

4-0