Page 1 of 1

Sides are never "even"

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 8:44 pm
by Gaston de Vieuxchamps
All this discussion about even sides has got me making my own proposal to throw on the stack of count before each battle, draw lots, ban payments, etc, etc...

When I'm in charge of melees in kingdom I pretty much always do it the same. start the sides out divided roughly by households and "likes to fight withs". After the first melee the loser gets to pick one fighter from the opposing side (one fighter doesn't count? what if he's the commander of the biggest house on the other side? do they have a backup commander? does someone need to practice stepping up to the plate?) repeat after each melee. eventually (usually much sooner than yoy might think) you reach equilibrium where one side can't win more than 2 in a row and the same 1-3 fighters keep switching sides. You obviously can't do that at Pennsic so why am I droning on? It makes two points, first quite often it's who you have, not how many. Second the system of giving the loser a bonus for next battle seems fun for all/

So here's my idea. Don't fight the system. People have a lot invested in this little game of politics and won't readily abandon it. Don't try to make people fight fair out of the goodness of their own hearts. Even with the best intentions someone on one side or the other will fudge or under-represent their strength in some way and we'll be back to the same whining (and it probably won't even be the kings). Even if you balance numbers sides will conspire to have a quality advantage.

Instead let the first battle play out. for the next battle the loser gets some kind of bonus for the scenario (a closer resurrection point, the high ground, whatever). Continue through each scenario (helps if we have more scenarios :twisted: ) and make the bonusses cumulative. Soon you will have a competitive fight. Unfortunately since certain units swell at certain times in the way (I can't believe I just said that) you might have the winning side suddenly more disadvantaged than expected but no system is perfect.

If the battles are set up wisely then it should be easy to quickly reach enough equilibrium so everyone is in the fight in ernest.

I think all SCA wars should work this way. Each day you win it gets harder to win tomorrow until you lose and it gets a bit easier. Lot's of opportunities for heroics.

I'd be more than happy to help flesh out the nuts and bolts of such a system.

G

Re: Sides are never "even"

Posted: Tue Aug 12, 2008 11:12 pm
by Richard Blackmoore
I suppose you could institute a draft at the end of each battle. It works so well for the NFL and NBA.

The East, having gotten its butt kicked, moves up to a first round pick and a third round conditional to be named later...

Posted: Wed Aug 13, 2008 2:54 pm
by Gaston de Vieuxchamps
I was thinking something written into the scenario that didn't necessarily involve anyone switching sides. Things like bonus resurrections, better starting positions, etc. But if you want to use troop changes....

After each battle the king of the losing side personally choses 4 nobles loyal to the other side to join their side for the rest of the war (unless later chosen by the opposing king to switch back). Said nobles are on their honor to do the best they can for their new army and will each choose 5 of their comrades/house members/etc as a personal retinue to go over with them. 20 fighters might not sound like much but the RIGHT 20 fighters can make a huge difference plus the effect is cumulative. Let's say the winner loses the next fight, do they just ask for the same troops back or pick someone else? (I'd say take 'em back to prevent hard feelings and possible loss of those guys next year, persides, they seem to have made a difference. Publish a list of who was "drafted" at the end of each day. People might work hard to get on that list, or off. Instead of trying to dismantle the present system you just put mechanics in place to prevent the current system from creating a one-sided war. A crown that wins the first three battles in a row can be very proud but you can be sure they worked hard for the 3rd. And likely the fourth was pretty balanced.

This might also mitigate the "broken army phenomenon" where the side that's losing seems to get a little smaller each day from fighters who give up or are injured as the other side remains stable or swells with new arrivals.