Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
17 Posts

Commands & Colors: Napoleonics» Forums » General

Subject: Do you record your battles? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Guillaume Gleize
France
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Hello guys!

I just played my 379th CCN battle recently and I recorded them all on an excel file. I just did it only to remember who I played in witch scenario. The main goal is to try to always play a different battle with different players (or exchanging sides).

Even if I noticed who won or lost, the different results with the same player are so dispatched on the board that you can't have a quick sight of it! It's great because my goal is absolutely not to record the stats of victory & losses with each player. I think this would be quite unpolite and going away from the spirit of this game: Pleasure!

So my board is only to be sure to play different scenarios and to check the stats of the scenario themselves: their balance! About the stats: Thanks also to the great website ccn.net!

Are you recording your battles too? And how? TY





4 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Cavaliere
United States
Littleton
Colorado
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
That's really cool Guillaume!

I don't play enough CCN but I do play Ancients, BL, etc and have recorded those - mostly here on BGG. I just log a play each time I do it. Not as informative of a log as yours - that's awesome!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Keith Anderson
United States
Tulsa
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
I bought CCN recently but haven't played it yet. I'm gaming tomorrow so hopefully then.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Drog
United States
Ponte Vedra Beach
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Impressive. I'm getting the 3rd printing soon. I would love to play online sometime.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Guillaume Gleize
France
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
TYVM for those answers

mdrog ---> I check on Vassal CCN sometime to time mostly in the middle of the week (less during the WE) and around 22H00 here so it may be 16H00 Florida or 13H00 California ...

This planet is round ... shake
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls

Minot
North Dakota
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I record every battle on www.commandsandcolors.net , though of course only recently have the added the ability to record personal stats (and even then, only which side one, not which player).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Pain
United Kingdom
Blandford
Dorset
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Against my regular opponent I record which side wins and which player wins (by logging on the Geek) It's nowhere near as thorough as that shown above but it does help me decide which scenarios are more balanced and also who is the more successful player of the national characteristics.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark McG
Australia
Penshurst
NSW
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
some little while ago I made a collection of several hundred results I could source from various CCN Mini Tournaments and several players you had recorded results for their scenario playings. Since then I have tried to record my plays on a Excel log.

At the time I was looking for some incite into how to balance scenarios that were showing as unbalanced, but I didn't really find any reliable answer.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Guillaume Gleize
France
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Minedog3 wrote:
At the time I was looking for some incite into how to balance scenarios that were showing as unbalanced, but I didn't really find any reliable answer.


Exactly my friend!

I would dream some day to propose a list of "fixed scenarios":

To take all the official scenarios that are too much unbalanced (for example all the 80% and more unbalanced) and to propose for each of them a SIMPLE modification (for example in the special rules or VP conditions) to make them more playable! Those modifications should be not only simple but using ALREADY EXISTING mecanisms.

But 1) I need more records on the last expansion scenarios to be sure of their balance and 2) Some very unbalanced scenarios may be useful to play with newcomers!

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark McG
Australia
Penshurst
NSW
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I still think bidding for sides is the way to provide batter balance to scenarios, partly because it also factors in player expertise.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Stuart Holttum
United Kingdom
Southend on Sea
Essex
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Maybe I've missed something, but I know that in Memoir the norm is to play each scenarios twice, once on each side, then aggregate the results, to eliminate any issues about scenario balance?

Personally, I like playing unbalanced scenarios as much as balanced ones - the challenges of overcoming a poor position, weaker forces, etc are often more interesting than a game where you both have two HC, both have ten Line, both have three Leaders, etc.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Guillaume Gleize
France
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
---> Mark ... Yes mathematically you are right and after exchanging side you can say who won. Sadly as you know (and that a reason I can't decide myself to play tournaments) I'm not very fan of exchanging sides because it create a strange strategy were I saw some guys on the underdog side charging with they troops like kamikaze for to get some opponent blocks before losing so they have a great goal average for the final result ... Don't you think so? Also when I play the Russians (for example) I try to be in the "Russian spirit" (lol) and I prefer redo the same battle in the same side or do another one with same sides (like a campaign) imagining the troops moving and history better than counting points. In other words I may be a player too much "romantic" that don't want this game to become a chess-like victory points race ... But I respect your pleasure for sure!

---> Stuart ... I agree with you about the funny challenge to manage the underdog side! Really! It's funny (in my humble opinion) up to around 75% unbalanced. But I was more thinking about some heavily unbalanced ones like the 80% 90% and some are even 100% unbalanced until today! Don't you think a (little) change in their rules may add fun? But frankly I'm not sure myself and I agree that those "unbalanced monsters" may be useful to the learning curve of newcomers! So I may not lose my time creating this "fixed unbalanced scenario list" if the players and even myself aren't sure that it would be useful lol!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michal K
Poland
Otwock
Mazowieckie
flag msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
I definitely replay all my games - have special excel (see version for CCA: https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/114500/cca-all-official-s...)

It helps me to keep track which scenarios and how many times I have played. But as stated above, I do not see some very clear patterns in my results...


1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Read the rulebook, plan for all contingencies, and…read the rulebook again.
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Folks might try the "Cut Cake/Choose Piece" method for playing games: One player picks the scenario to be played. Their opponent chooses the side they will play after reviewing it.

The advantage here is to the player that knows the scenario best. But at least the opponent has the opportunity to review the situation, set-up, and special rules before committing to a side.

For a light evening, each player could pick a scenario of their choice and their opponent gets their choice of sides when it is played. Two different games in a short amount of time and each gets the opportunity pick a scenario and pick a side.

For tournaments, you could have it so that the organizer announces the pool of scenarios players can choose from—only those from expansions X & Y that play to 9 banners, for example. Each player brings the one they want to play—as evenly matched or as lop-sided as they like—and just enough game material to set it up and play it out.

For the first round, randomly set up opponents and flip a coin to see which scenario between the two they brought gets played. Their opponent then picks the side they want to pay and start setting up. Afterwards, the winner advances with their scenario and the process repeats. (This part is admittedly fuzzy. But I'm sure it could be worked out.)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grant Linneberg
Canada
Calgary
Alberta
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Minedog3 wrote:
I still think bidding for sides is the way to provide batter balance to scenarios, partly because it also factors in player expertise.



I totally agree and have been working on a bidding schedule just for this purpose. But I have found some resistance to the idea. Some players don't like messing with the printed scens. Others think it will mean deviating from the historical OOB (which I find bewildering as the OOBs aren't exact in any case and CCA, etc. use such a flexible scale that any claims for a printed scen being an exact OOB are silly). Anyway, mostly I play the same scen twice, switching sides, but my bidding project continues. Glad to see someone else might think it worthwhile.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark McG
Australia
Penshurst
NSW
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The bidding method is pretty simple and involves no changes to the OOB.

All it takes is players making numerical bids to play a (favoured) side. For example, bidding 1 to play the French, his opponent bids 2 and wins. If both sides bid the same, determine the victor by die roll.

There is a short and a longer version.
Short: The unflavoured side starts with the number of victor banners equal to the bid (e.g. Spanish start with 2 banners)
Longer: The favoured side must score an extra number of banners equal to the bid to win. (e.g French must score 8 banners, the Spanish only 6 to win).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Grant Linneberg
Canada
Calgary
Alberta
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Minedog3 wrote:
The bidding method is pretty simple and involves no changes to the OOB.

All it takes is players making numerical bids to play a (favoured) side. For example, bidding 1 to play the French, his opponent bids 2 and wins. If both sides bid the same, determine the victor by die roll.

There is a short and a longer version.
Short: The unflavoured side starts with the number of victor banners equal to the bid (e.g. Spanish start with 2 banners)
Longer: The favoured side must score an extra number of banners equal to the bid to win. (e.g French must score 8 banners, the Spanish only 6 to win).


That looks great, I'll propose that for some really unbalanced dogs. My system does involve changes to the OOB. Rather than the bids being for banners, you bid on what extra unit(s) you'd need to take a side (and you can only bid for units that are already in the OOB). If you bid a Light and I bid a Medium to take the same side, I end up with that side with one extra Light unit. If we'd both nothing to take the favoured side, we both risk getting the unfavoured side if you simply dice for sides in a tie. Or the rule could be that if the bids tie, you bid again.

The part that I'm fiddling with is ranking the units. I.e. Light INF vs. Light Bow vs. Aux vs. Light Cav, etc. (I'm working on CCA obviously). A numerical value for each unit would be useful for really unbalanced scens where a player may feel he needs multiple units to balance. If all the units had a numerical value, a bid of 3 MED vs a bid of 2 HC could be easily scored.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.