ChariCon post mortem: positive feedback, some tweaks, more please! Posted by Neil Williamson, 20 Febraury 2023

Charicon post mortem

The small armies won 8 games

The large armies won 4 games

The small armies gained 220 points

185 from wins and 35 from losses.

The large armies gained 80 points

65 from wins and 15 from losses.

The small armies invaded 6 times and defended 7 times

The large armies invaded 6 times and defended 5 times

Interestingly, the small armies had 1st turn 9 times but only 3 for the large armies.

The 4 wins of the large armies were in bound 6 and 3 in bound 7. A large army also ended the game in bound 9 (but then loses on points).

2 players played the small armies for 3 games and came 1st and 2nd. 2 players played the large army for 3 games and came 4th and 6th(last).

The clear conclusion from this is that the victory points table needs moving in the large army's favour. This was also the feeling of the players at the end of the tournament.

I am already working on this, substituting different point allocation alternatives into the 12 games to see a more balanced outcome.

In addition, the number of games a player plays with the small and large army should ideally be equal. This will also help remove any bias in the victory point table. This is easy with predetermined rounds but with Swiss requires an adjuster.

2 armies had inert generals. Whether this swung games or not there is not enough data for. It appeared to favour the small army who tended to play a more static game.

Fortifications played a large part for the small armies but were largely irrelevant for large armies. They were a major reason for some of the small armies success. However, it wasn't the only way a small army gained the upper hand.

The feedback I received was very positive for the concept. Some tweaks are needed though.

So I'm tweaking the points table and the probability of running the same size army multiple times. Further adjustments with other rules, for example, fortifications, I will leave alone. Players will naturally adjust their army selection and choices to counter what they expect to encounter and try out different tactics. It's all part of the fun of it. So I'll leave that to the players.

I will definitely run another tournament of asymmetric warfare sometime, and recommend it to players to give it a go. 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/824840264342234/posts/2296642730495306/

• Vincent Cholewa

  Admin

  Group expert

  Many thanks for the results and analysis. Great to know that you are developing the rules and will be running more asymmetric competitions 

  • Like
  • Reply
  • Share
  • 14m