Intersite Battle - Ogres Turn 1

Is there no interest in continuing this then?


If not, why not? I'd like to arrange other Intersite battles in the future, so if people could say why they're not interested then I can do something to remedy this for the future...

I've already put forward my plan for this turn, theres not much more I can do at this point 

We need a new Commander...

I don't have the time or experience

Beithir, with all due respect. I try to give some constructive feedback:

1) great idea.

2) the rules are not very transparent. I didn't really know what to do and tried my best.

3) as game master please be more forgiving. It takes a while for the players to absorb the rules. Untill then it is like being blind in the dark 

4) at the present state it is way too much work for the commanders (and the game master) whereas for the other players it is more like watching than playing. It should become more point and click. E.g. there is one player responsible for each unit (like in a real army) and has to submit moves until deadline. The commander just issues 'orders', default moves and coordinates the whole communication aso.

5) Reliability and communication is very important for a game master. It just didn't work out this time.

6) If invited I would definitely sign up for another game.

I hope this post is ok in form and content.

Is WC officially out?

If so all we need is someone willing to take the responsibility of being commander. Someone experienced with this or similar list and used to fighting Wood elf would be a preferance. What we'll do for the first turn is pretty much settled I believe. We've gone to far with this to waste it all I think, and also we owe it to the Wood elf players. I don't think Speedkills suggestion in 4) is a good idea but otherwise I pretty much agree on his points. Lack of transparency and weak information coupled with a rather, frankly, arrogant tone is what led this - perhaps - down the drain.

Can I ask what you all mean by "transparency"?


Speedkills; thank you. That is all valuable advice and feedback. To try and explain/reason a couple of things; the rules were not made by me - I am simply "copying" them from Asrai.org's game against Druchii.net. From my perspective during that game, there were no issues with how the game worked - neither side had any issues with how it was being played, nor were there any glaring holes and as such I saw no reason to change them. The experiences of this game have proven that that was more than slightly naive of me 

As for being more forgiving; I will try. I appreciate that I may not have been the easiest person to work with, and I apologise for that. Again, it is partly as a result of the previous game; neither side required much explanation and so I conveyed the same information to you in this game. It appears that was a mistake, as it has just caused more confusion so in future I shall endeavour to explain everything fully before proceedings get under way. Saying that, I really didn't appreciate the reception I got from a few members and that really didn't encourage me to have the best outlook on people here. For me to come here and organise this, I think I deserved a bit more respect than I got from some people. I've have not posted any differently here than I do on every other board I am on, but for some reason people on this board seem to have taken offence. I'm not trying to be arrogant or superior; I am trying to be brief and "factual". No one else has ever had a problem with my "tone" anywhere. Quite honestly, I have found some members here to be amongst the rudest people I have ever met.



To be really honest, I appreciate that you've taken the time to entertain this idea and some of you have stuck with this despite my shortcomings, but I really don't feel able to continue with this. I am prepared to rework the rules and how the system operates for the future, and I would very much like to have a chance to run another game against you, but I feel that if we continue this now it is going to be simply overshadowed by the problems of the past. There's really no enjoyment for me in continuing and I think it would be best to call the  idea off until we can make a fresh start with a clean slate.


Thank you again to those people who have taken the time and effort to stick with the idea. Hopefully, it will not be too long before we can start over and arrange a fresh start.

Saying that, I really didn't appreciate the reception I got from a few members and that really didn't encourage me to have the best outlook on people here. For me to come here and organise this, I think I deserved a bit more respect than I got from some people. I've have not posted any differently here than I do on every other board I am on, but for some reason people on this board seem to have taken offence. I'm not trying to be arrogant or superior; I am trying to be brief and "factual". No one else has ever had a problem with my "tone" anywhere. Quite honestly, I have found some members here to be amongst the rudest people I have ever met.

Yes, I personally have no problem with how you exspress yourself. I was a little ashamed to be assosiated with the rather pointless and unsustantiated veiws of some of our members.

I would love to have another go at this

OK then, thank you for that Scroth.


If I were to rework the rules, what sort of things need changing and how? What did you, as players, feel are the biggest issues and what would you suggest doing about them?

I think the biggest issue was switching from the local system to the intersite system. I don't think very many people realized the implications of playing on a turn by turn basis rather than step by step, that the whole turn would have to be set up before hand and hope we got it right instead of being able to supervise every charge reaction and dispel opportunity. This led to some confusion, which led to some speculation, which led to some disgruntled posts, and here we are. Perhaps it could have been avoided with a clearer explanation, maybe an example turn to demonstrate the basic mechanics of the game. Perhaps said example would not have made a difference at all, and we would still be trying to pick up the broken pieces of our first intersite battle.

The second issue was a lack of visible results. I think it came up as a request for more transparency or something along those lines, but basically it was a lack of feedback about the game. Perhaps leaving the dice results out makes for a cleaner post, but I personally like to see the numbers being rolled, if for no other reason then to see how the dice are behaving. I think it would be best to include a log of the turn's events as well, including one time rolls and successfully passed psychology tests, just so everyone can follow what is happening. Potentially offensive answers like "I would have told you if (insert event) had/had not happened" are precluded by reporting the event/non event in the log. Your internet troubles just made the problem worse because there was no answer to our queries for an extended time.

What to do about it? Well I would like to see a short log of each turn's events. I wouldn't necessarily want to see the result of each individual dice, but I would like to see things like the total of leadership rolls, how many wounds/saves are done, whether or not an item of unit's special rules trigger, anything that might potentially have an effect on the either side I want to know about. I would also try to devise a way for more interactive gameplay. Much of warhammer strategy is about reacting to your opponent's moves, and guessing an entire turn at once and settling on responses to possibly non-existent events is inefficient at best. Best case scenario is that I am able to react to each event as it happens, but that's impractical over the net due to time, availability, etc. I don't know how to resolve this, except by taking smaller steps more often.

Instead of one week to plan four phases and try to guess your opponent's moves, maybe split the phases into movement, magic, and shooting/combat. For the movement and magic phases you could have maybe two or three days to make your moves, then the other side gets an equivalent time to react if needed. Some turns won't require any input from one side and things can progress without them actively participating. The GM can then resolve shooting and combat since they usually don't require much more than dice rolling. This would result in about a two week period to complete a turn, but each side would be able to handle game situations as they arise, instead of setting your preferences at the beginning of the battle and hoping you got it right.

It's a starting point anyways, I'm sure someone will find holes in my scheme. Hopefully this will get the ball rolling and we can devise a way to successfully conduct an intersite battle.

...  I think it would be best to call the  idea off until we can make a fresh start with a clean slate.

Thank you again to those people who have taken the time and effort to stick with the idea. Hopefully, it will not be too long before we can start over and arrange a fresh start.

I can't speak for the others, but I want to thank you for the time you put into the project. It was not the success we ALL wanted it to be and the reason might well be more a 'clash of cultures' and external circumstances rather than willingness of the participants.

You are right, we should let some time pass by and think about it ...

... and then return, this time better prepared and used to each other. Then, I am sure, we can make THIS THING happen  It has the potential to be huge.

First of all, I haven't participated in any of these battles, but I have read the entire Asrai-Druchii intersite battle from both sides in real-time, finding it to be very entertaining and insightfull.

To be fair to Beithir Seun, that battle there ran smoothly with similar information. In fact, the Druchii site doesn't even have a WFO forum, so were less familiar with the concept. If you want an example of how these battles go, I'd suggest you visit druchii.net. They planned their turns very throughout, including entirely written out magic phases. (Cast spell A on x dice, if it gets through, go on to spell B with x dice, if failed to cast, go on with spell B with y dice etc.) They worked with maps with lines, circles of charge radius, calculated odds, made back-up plans, etc. , really gave a good insight on the tactics used.

No real problems with the system occured there, I think Beithir simply assumpted something like that was possible on this site, with a bigger WFO tradition as well. You might prefer to play it some other way, perhaps more similar to what you are used to, but I can assure you it won't be a waste, really one of the best tactics threads I've ever read.
So, I'd suggest you all surf to druchii.net and asrai.net and read the intersite battles there.

Thanks for all the feedback. I've been discussing things with people on Asrai.org as well and they've come up with similar suggestions.


Including a log of the turn events would not be too difficult to implement and would only require a little extra time to put in place, so that is one very easy change to make for the future.


I am, however, reluctant at this point to split the turn up. As it's not been done before, I have no concrete evidence to back up my opinion obviously, but I am of the opinion that splitting the turn up will simply drag the turns out too much which leaves the opposing side sitting there doing nothing for even longer (they have to wait two or more weeks to get their turn rather than just one). In addition, it requires a lot more effort and commitment on the part of the GM and whoever it is from each side making the decisions, which may or may not work depending on who those people are. It may not be possible for people to check back every couple of days whereas a week deadline might be more manageable. Still, I definitely think more interactivity would be a good thing so I can try and work something out that is manageable both ways.



And what Confused Counselor has said pretty much sums up my thinking when I came into this. The Asrai-Druchii battle was a great experience and flew by without a problem whatsoever and I assumed, given that everyone here was already familiar with the concept of WFO, that it would be even easier for this site to take on the concept of an intersite battle. I think what happened instead is that people here assumed that it would instead be more similar to "real" WFO and so brought their own preconceptions which further confused things. Still, we know better for next time now

Hopefully, I can get the system sorted soon and you'll be hearing from me again. Thanks once again for all the constructive feedback, I appreciate it