Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC)

I was always puzzled with fact that player that played one huge scenario (let say 50 turns) will be awarded with same amount of points as player that played few smaller scenarios (let say 5 scenarios with 10 turns duration) although he dedicated significantly more hours to the game by thinking on strategic level and moving thousands of troops.

Don't you guys think our time should be rewarded in some way?

I speculate on modifier that we could introduce to reflect this. Once game is completed we could multiply completed turns with ScenarioDuration/10 factor. That way player that played one huge scenario with 80% completeness (40 turns completed out of 50) will be awarded with 40 x (50/10) = 200 points, while one that played five smaller scenarios (8 turns completed out of 10) will be awarded with 5 x 8 x (10/10) = 40 points.

We could migrate already won points for each player by multiplying them with (25/10) factor (having in mind that average scenario duration is 25 turns). Rank table should also be updated in same manner. This could cause slight mismatch between already given ranks and new rank table, but ranks that are higher-then-expected are not to be taken from the player, while lesser ones should be upgraded to reflect new rules.

So... what do you guys think?


<font color="limegreen"><i>
Colonel [url="nihad.rizvanovic@zg.htnet.hr"]Nihad Rizvanovic[/url]
L'Armée du Rhin
VII Saxon Corps

<font color="beige"><i>The only true conquests, and those which awaken no regrets,
are the conquests obtained over ignorance</i></font id="beige">

http://free-zg.t-com.hr/nixon/

</i></font id="limegreen">

This plan only addresses half the issue. Scenario length isn't nearly as big a deal as scenario size. For instance, doing 5 turns of a game with 80,000 troops on my side will take longer than doing 20 turns of a game when I have 12000. However, under this scheme, the greatest reward would go to longer, but smaller scenarios.



FZM Freiherr Gary McClellan
Generalissimus Imperial Austrian Army
Portner Grenadier Battallion
Allied Coalition C-in-C

Well, I give you that Garry.

However, I'm not really concentrated on calculation details as much as I speculate on that we have to change it. Perhaps you're right - we probably should take number of troops into consideration rather then scenario length. But, once we decide that some kind of reform is necessary we could discuss a calculation method. Definitely, we should go for some simple one.



<font color="limegreen"><i>
Colonel [url="nihad.rizvanovic@zg.htnet.hr"]Nihad Rizvanovic[/url]
L'Armée du Rhin
VII Saxon Corps

<font color="beige"><i>The only true conquests, and those which awaken no regrets,
are the conquests obtained over ignorance</i></font id="beige">

http://free-zg.t-com.hr/nixon/

</i></font id="limegreen">

Endless trouble ...

You'd need a list of *all* scenarios. Including the myriads of add-ons.

<center>
D.S. "Green Horse" Walter, Maréchal d'Empire
Duc des Pyramides, Comte de Normandie
Commandant la [url="http://home.arcor.de/dierk_Walter/NWC/3_VI_AdR_Home.htm"]3e Division Bavaroise[/url], L'Armée du Rhin
Commandant [url="http://home.arcor.de/dierk_Walter/NWC/EdM_start.htm"]L'Ecole de Mars[/url], L'Armée du Rhin
Commandant la Brigade de Grenadiers de la Moyenne Garde
</center>

Well, I don't think that we need some huge list. Player can submit figures for scenario length once game is completed. Even now we do not have a system to check if player stated some unreasonable figures for "turns completed".

From the beginning of the club we relied on fairness so I don't see why we should not continue good practice.





<font color="limegreen"><i>
Colonel [url="nihad.rizvanovic@zg.htnet.hr"]Nihad Rizvanovic[/url]
L'Armée du Rhin
VII Saxon Corps

<font color="beige"><i>The only true conquests, and those which awaken no regrets,
are the conquests obtained over ignorance</i></font id="beige">

http://free-zg.t-com.hr/nixon/

</i></font id="limegreen">

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by rizvanon</i>
<br />Well, I don't think that we need some huge list.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

No, that was for Gary. Making size count instead of length. Size needs to be researched. The Blitz does that and has a list for all scenarios. The NCC does, too (or did).

Making length count in a more complicated way doesn't appear useful to me. It already does, directly, by the number of turns completed. Easy and fair. It's the size, as Gary points out, that makes the difference between Shevardino and Borodino.



<center>
D.S. "Green Horse" Walter, Maréchal d'Empire
Duc des Pyramides, Comte de Normandie
Commandant la [url="http://home.arcor.de/dierk_Walter/NWC/3_VI_AdR_Home.htm"]3e Division Bavaroise[/url], L'Armée du Rhin
Commandant [url="http://home.arcor.de/dierk_Walter/NWC/EdM_start.htm"]L'Ecole de Mars[/url], L'Armée du Rhin
Commandant la Brigade de Grenadiers de la Moyenne Garde
</center>

So, it's scenario size then. The main issue is that five turns at Borodino take significantly more player's time then five turns at Shevardino, and that time needs to be rewarded.




<font color="limegreen"><i>
Colonel [url="nihad.rizvanovic@zg.htnet.hr"]Nihad Rizvanovic[/url]
L'Armée du Rhin
VII Saxon Corps

<font color="beige"><i>The only true conquests, and those which awaken no regrets,
are the conquests obtained over ignorance</i></font id="beige">

http://free-zg.t-com.hr/nixon/

</i></font id="limegreen">

Marshal Walter and I are both very familiar with using a system that would accomplish what you're looking at (since he designed it, and I helped administer it), and he's right about the levels of complication. What's worse is the demand that we'd have to go back and look at every last game that's been played in the history of the club and rescore it by the scenario size. Even more problematic since a number of the games are from the campaigns where the old forms don't have a true reference to what scenario exactly was being played.

I see the basis of your idea, and if we were starting the club from scratch, I think there would be more than a bit of merit to it. That said though, I don't see it as being realistic to go back into the old records and redo everything from moment one.

The ability to play a succession of short, quick scenarios to advance quickly is an ongoing feature of the scoring systems in all the wargame.ch clubs to my knowledge. It's not ideal, but it's there. On this point, I'm inclined to say that we should just grind our teeth and go on.

Edited to Add: This is my opinion as a member of the club. Do not that this as a formal statement from the other members of the Cabinet, or from the Cabinet as a whole.


FZM Freiherr Gary McClellan
Generalissimus Imperial Austrian Army
Portner Grenadier Battallion
Allied Coalition C-in-C

Not really an issue on my plate, but a question. I suspect there are downsides to such an approach as well -- for example, I think you can spend a lot of turns in some large scenarions just marching the troops.

However, would the "size" of the .scn file in Kb be a reasonable measure of this or can details of the design process distort this?

I also agree that if any change were sdopted it should only apply to future games. Let's not burden those who keep the records with more work.





Brigadier Sir Bob Breen KT

1st (The King's) Dragoon Guards
Commanding 71st Highlanders
Commandant, RMA

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by bobbreen</i>
However, would the "size" of the .scn file in Kb be a reasonable measure of this ...?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

An approximation. If you don't aim for 10 scenario classes, but maybe for 3 (tiny, medium, huge), it should work.

<center>
D.S. "Green Horse" Walter, Maréchal d'Empire
Duc des Pyramides, Comte de Normandie
Commandant la [url="http://home.arcor.de/dierk_Walter/NWC/3_VI_AdR_Home.htm"]3e Division Bavaroise[/url], L'Armée du Rhin
Commandant [url="http://home.arcor.de/dierk_Walter/NWC/EdM_start.htm"]L'Ecole de Mars[/url], L'Armée du Rhin
Commandant la Brigade de Grenadiers de la Moyenne Garde
</center>

How about points for casualties inflicted? This would be one way of distinguishing between the smaller and larger scenarios. Otherwise, in the lengthy scenarios, players will get points just for marching lots of troops turn after turn, even if they don't make contact with the enemy for 20+ turns!

Why should club points get awarded just for wearing out boots?


Capt Rich White
4th Cavalry Brigade
Cavalry Corps
Anglo-Allied Army

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Richard</i>
Why should club points get awarded just for wearing out boots?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Because it takes time?

The way I play, sometimes, there is not much difference between marching and fighting. [xx(]

<center>
D.S. "Green Horse" Walter, Maréchal d'Empire
Duc des Pyramides, Comte de Normandie
Commandant la [url="http://home.arcor.de/dierk_Walter/NWC/3_VI_AdR_Home.htm"]3e Division Bavaroise[/url], L'Armée du Rhin
Commandant [url="http://home.arcor.de/dierk_Walter/NWC/EdM_start.htm"]L'Ecole de Mars[/url], L'Armée du Rhin
Commandant la Brigade de Grenadiers de la Moyenne Garde
</center>

a couple more observations about this.

By my earlier comment I did not mean to imply that "marching" was less valuable then "fighting". I have seen cases where it is and I have seen cases where the "marching" was a more decisive achievement then the fighting. Just pointing out that there could be two sides to this topic.

As to why playing 5, 10 turn scenarios is better then playing one 50 turn. In the former case you may be interacting with 5 different club members which could be more desirable then interacting with one.

Brigadier Sir Bob Breen KT

1st (The King's) Dragoon Guards
Commanding 71st Highlanders
Commandant, RMA

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="3" face="book antiqua" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by bobbreen</i>
In the former case you may be interacting with 5 different club members which could be more desirable then interacting with one.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

That depends on the five and the one ... [:I]

<center>
D.S. "Green Horse" Walter, Maréchal d'Empire
Duc des Pyramides, Comte de Normandie
Commandant la [url="http://home.arcor.de/dierk_Walter/NWC/3_VI_AdR_Home.htm"]3e Division Bavaroise[/url], L'Armée du Rhin
Commandant [url="http://home.arcor.de/dierk_Walter/NWC/EdM_start.htm"]L'Ecole de Mars[/url], L'Armée du Rhin
Commandant la Brigade de Grenadiers de la Moyenne Garde
</center>

Another point to consider would be the nature of campaigns. The way your proposal is written, it would penalize someone for playing a campaign, since the number of turns would be chopped up between different "games" within the campaign. Is playing a campaign that runs you through both Aspern Essling and Wagram worth less than a single scenario that runs the same number of turns (more or less?)

FZM Freiherr Gary McClellan
Generalissimus Imperial Austrian Army
Portner Grenadier Battallion
Allied Coalition C-in-C