Treeburst155

It's been about a week and a half since the game files went out. On June 20th, two full weeks into the Invasion, I will begin relieving people of command if they don't send at least a quick email to their opponents. Thanks for keeping me informed of possible problems, guys. Keep it up! I'm working on Beckman's replacement. Treeburst155 out.

Franko's August Bank Holiday has always been a favorite of mine. I decided to make a few changes to it so it would be more manageable. I've done away with the German reinforcements. All German units start at the beginning. They are all VERY organized for quicker setup. The Brits have a bigger setup zone with no locked units. The Brit units are also VERY organized for easy setup. I have made several other changes, but I don't think I've changed the "flavor" of the battle. I'm sure I changed the balance, but it's hard to say which way. I think I helped the Germans a bit overall. If anybody would like to PBEM this well organized monster I'd love to hear from you. I'll play either side. You'll never run into a less tedious scenario of this size. I've really taken the pain out of manipulating all those units. Oh, I'm never in a hurry with PBEM. With a big scenario like this I'm good for five files per week. Drop me a line or two if you're interested. Thanks!! Treeburst155 out.

If you like the big ones, this one's for you. There's lots of good stuff here. It gets very tense and exciting. Good job, Terry!! Treeburst155 out.

Both sides' arty percentages are individually adjustable for this tourney. There's nothing saying the Germans have to have the same arty percentage as the Allies. I'm not worried about balance since players don't know which side they will play. This fact will make the battles fairly even I'm sure. The scoring system can handle any slight imbalance. Treeburst155 out.

Low member numbers are the fingerprint of the infamous "Refresh Monkeys". All member numbers less than 2,500 should be put at the end of the list for their crimes. Priority for processing should go to those who can prove a CMBO pre-order BEFORE the demo came out. IOW, 99% of you should be behind me. The other 1% are surely Refresh Monkeys anyway, so I should be first in line. Treeburst155 out.

Swamp and Major Taktiks' battles are approved. That's four of eight and none have gone "unlimited". Keep in mind that the Special Exclusions can place limits on the "unlimited" ruleset very easily. Scipio's arty rules could be spelled out here for example. Now for my King Tiger anecdote. I bought two KT's so I could roll right over the enemy. One teeny weenie gamey little Bofors caused gun damage to both KTs. Never again will I buy KTs. Big arty's a different story. I would rule it out of my scenario if I were playing. It appears everyone has done that so far. 4 more to go! I'll send the forms out to catch the last few, who probably aren't even reading the thread. Treeburst155 out.

TOURNEY I, Section 4!! We have our first mid-tourney casualty. Beckman has had to withdraw because of Real Life, or should I say, Real Wife. LOL!! If you want to take Beckman's place, email me! Be forewarned. You will have to play the games that are already in progress unless BOTH of you agree to a restart. None of the games have progressed beyond the first few turns. I'd push for a restart at this point if I was a replacement. Treeburst155 out.

Member numbers aren't any more important than numbering your turns. Treeburst155 out.

Very Nice!! Thanks guys, for going through it all again. I think we're ready to roll here. Broken and Deathdealer, your scenarios are approved. . I will be sending out the form to all participants as soon as I get a chance (within 24 hours). Today is honey-do day. You guys can do like Broken and Deathdealer, and post your scenario parameters here if you don't want to wait. Make sure you cover everything on the form. The latest version is three posts up. Treeburst155 out.

Hehe....the waiting is easy right now. When everyone starts talking about how great CMBB is, and you see dozens of posts like, "I Got It!!!!!!!"; that's when the waiting gets tough. Some will get it in a week, and some will get it in 6 weeks, pre-ordered or not. Some may say I'm a pessimist; but think of the crunch they're going to have to deal with. Lots of people will pre-order. Somebody has to be on the bottom of the stack. It WILL be you (and me). Treeburst155 out. Treeburst155 out.

It WILL be slower going than that in most sections. You must be in a fast section, Mikeydz. Treeburst155 out.

I can't resist showing off my new Battle Parameters Form. Besides, it needs to be beta-tested anyway. Go ahead, try to find some holes in this one. Create a battle with it if you can spare the time. Who knows, this just might be the final version so we can use the battle you create here. EDIT: There are no global rules!! Everything must go on the form, even Flaktrucks. If it's not on the form it is unrestricted! ________________________________________________ BATTLE PARAMETERS FORM ____________________________________________________________________ Attack/defend or meeting? ____________________________________________________________________ MEETING ONLY Number of flags: Flag value(all flags must have the same value): 100 or 300 Flag spacing on centerline: Force Points: ____________________________________________________________________ ATTACK/DEFEND ONLY Number of flags: Flag value(all flags must have the same value): 100 or 300 Flag spacing parallel to frontline: Flag distance from defender's map edge: Depth of defender's setup zone in meters: Depth of attacker's setup zone in meters: NOTE: All zones will originate from the map edges leaving a no- man's land between. Customized zones are allowed if dimensions and locations are specifically defined by you. Defender's Force Points (attacker will get 1.5 times this): Defending side: Axis or Allies ____________________________________________________________________ Map Dimensions, frontline: depth: Month: Time Of Day: Weather: Ground Conditions: Game Length: Map Type (Farm, Rural, etc.): Tree coverage: Hilliness(flat, gentle, small, modest, large): ____________________________________________________________________ Established Force Purchase Ruleset (can be none): Allied FORCE (Brits, American Airborne, unlimited, etc.): German FORCE (Heer, Gebirgsjaeger, unlimited, etc.): NOTE: Choose one, you can modify later and "unlimited" is a choice. FORCE known to enemy? FORCE TYPE (Combined Arms, Mechanized, etc.) will be determined by filling in the maximum percentage of total force points that can be spent in a category. For "unlimited" you would simply put in 100% for all categories. Note: Players can fudge on these percentages up to 25 points. This is the absolute maximum fudging allowed unless addressed in the next section! Allied Infantry % : Support % : Armor % : Artillery % : Fortifications % : Axis Infantry % : Support % : Armor % : Artillery % : Fortifications % : ***Make sure FORCE and FORCE TYPE percentages are compatible!!***** ___________________________________________________________________ FORCE PURCHASE EXCLUSIONS, LIMITATIONS, SPECIAL RULES Here is where you modify and customize everything in the section above, along with anything else you think of. Below is a fairly comprehensive checklist of things you might want to address in this section. You are NOT limited to these items. 1) guns and vehicles to tow them 2) mixing of forces (Brit Airborne with American, etc.) 3) flaktrucks 4) SMGs 5) HMCs 6) The Fortifications category 7) FORCE TYPE fudge limit 8) anti-CHEEEEZ rules 9) force editing limitations 10) troop quality restrictions ___________________________________________________________________ Congratulations! The scenario will bear your name, and this form will be in the general briefing. The community can refight this Titan's battle as it was originally fought. [ June 13, 2002, 05:49 PM: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]

Broken, OK,I misunderstood about the Allied attacker thing. I reacted to Fionn's question relating to it without double-checking what you had specified there. Another thing that threw me was that there was no choice for attacking force on the form. I see no reason why players shouldn't have control over which side does the attacking since balance can be affected by that decision. I'd rather you guys make balance affecting decisions than me. The more decisions you guys make the better off I am. This is no problem and will go on the form, just so it is clear that you cannot choose your side or attack/defend duties when it comes to the matches. TROOP QUALITY Being able to mix and match troop quality is one of the benefits of purchasing forces in the editor. It also costs points. I think it adds a little more dimension to the game if players are given complete freedom in the quality department. More decisions regarding purchases, more uncertainty for the enemy. NO VLs FOR ATTACK DEFEND SCENARIOS Broken has an excellent point here. We will have VLs for attack/defend scenarios. This means location from the defenders edge will have to be specified. Deathdealer, Regarding TRP's in attacker's setup area. These are exactly the kind of things you guys need to watch out for when filling out the form. It can get real tricky as we're finding out. What I'm going to do now is a total revision of the Parameters Form based on all we've learned from these false starts. I'm then going to send it to you all for you to fill out. Take your time putting together your battle so you don't miss something like Deathdealer's 20 TRPs in the attacker's setup area. This can be a very good tournament I think if you guys can hang in there awhile longer. We're creating an entirely different tourney format here that is quite involved. I think it will be worth the effort. The key is the Parameters Form. I'm working on it now. Treeburst155 out.

OK, Deathdealer, you seem to have covered everything. Your's is approved! I like the idea of no flags in an attack/defend. It doesn't work in a Meeting engagement cuz one guy can just hunker down and wait, but in attack/defend it sounds excellent! I will send all players the rules for each scenario as I complete the scenario. Five more to go!! Treeburst155 out.

Major Tactik's and Swamp's latest will work for me. Why? They are specific about flag placement and size, and setup zones for MEs are not an issue. Major Tactik even supplies that. Major Tactik's and Swamp's battles are approved! For the rest, if you want an attack/defend scenario you need to specify: 1)frontline and depth (map dimensions) 2)setup zones as portion of map (1/2 defender, 1/4 attacker, etc) 3)number of flags, their values, and depth of placement in the defender's zone. Broken, you may want to do yours again since so much has changed since then. We've two down and six to go. The Form has been revised again. Treeburst155 out. [ June 13, 2002, 01:17 PM: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]

If I auto-generate maps with dimensions specified by the players I would need guidance on setup zone dimensions for the attack/defend battles. For example: 1/2 the map for the defender, 1/4 no-mans land, 1/4 for attacker. This should be a uniform standard for all the attack/defend maps I think. Also, rather than width and heighth, map dimensions should be specified as "frontline" and "depth" for clarity. Flag placement is another issue. I could get an idea of point value and number of flags from a comparable QB, but what about placement? That could be very important. Treeburst155 out.

The real good news is that you are playing again. I'm sure your team mates are glad to have your face back in the game. It's such a good defensive tool, and you use it so well. Treeburst155 out.

Map dimensions and number and value of VLs will have to remain QB standard based on the map size parameter (small, medium, and large) and the force size. I will take this info from a QB along with setup zone dimensions. To do otherwise means I am actually designing maps. Any imbalance would be blamed on me. I don't want to stick my neck out that far. I've created almost symmetrical maps and had complaints of imbalance in the past. I WILL clean up the maps so they're nice, and adjust the location of VLs where I think they need adjusting. I may even run some battles north/south instead of east/west, but the "frontline" will always be the same standard QB length with the standard depth. I will just switch the dimensions if I decide to run north/south. Arty in a north/south game is kinda hairy sometimes, eh? Treeburst155 out.

Stoffel, Your major victory was a fluke you know. Strange things happen in war, even when you're the best, like me. TheBest155 out.

The Sportsmanship Award of the infamous Invitational Tourney goes to Michael Dorosh by an apparently unanimous vote! Congratulations, Michael! You have just won $50 US! Send me your snail mail address please. When I get that we will discuss via email the best way to pull off this international transfer of funds. Are you married? I hope so, because you can now tell your wife you need to play CM more because there's money in it. You will soon be able to prove that fact! Treeburst155 out.

Hold everything!!! You guys cannot decide whether you are the attacker or defender. The scheduling program can not handle this many parameters. It does not work out. Whether you attack or defend, and which side you play is out of your control. You design the scenario. That's all. The Nabla scheduling program will determine your side and therefore your attack/defend duties. You have only two choices in this area. The scenario can be either a) attack/defend, or b)meeting. I will decide which side attacks when I build the scenario, and the program will decide which side you play. _________________________________________________ Fionn thinks special rules are unbalancing. The idea of the Special Rules is so players can exclude units that aren't modelled well like Flaktrucks and SMGs. Special rules may very well affect balance, so it would behoove players to be very careful here since they do not know what side they will play, or even which side will be attacking. You're all pros. You know how to keep things balanced. Keep in mind NO FLAKTRUCKS is a universal rule all can agree on. So, this was a false start due to more ambiguity. Also, you do not have control over experience levels. Experience costs points and is left up to the purchasers. If the choice is not on the form, it is not available to you. Another ambiguity comes to mind. Special Rules should be called Special Exclusions. All you can do here is exclude specific unit types and prevent mixing of types (FJ, Gebirgers, etc.)Specificity is required here! "No SMGs" is not specific enough. The towed guns/vehicles issue can also be addressed here. The Parameters Form has been updated. Let's try it again, and see how far we get before we run into more issues. Treeburst155 out. [ June 13, 2002, 01:09 AM: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]

Yes, we are using the main Nabla system since every scenario is being played 36 times. We will get an excellent median from that many scores. Treeburst155 out.

ooooh, Broken!, nice map. Now for a little bit of the human touch....I'm building your scenario now. Treeburst155 out.

Broken, There we go! That's what I want to see happening. You get one more choice I just added within the hour. Do you want your battle to be attack/defend or meeting? EDIT: Oh, I see, you made your choice by omitting Meeting points. ________________________________________________ Broken's choice of 25% arty shows that arty limits should be left up to the individual scenario designs. IOW, he thinks 30% is too much. I think what Fionn is driving at with his "honor system" is that he doesn't want players to find themselves a few points short of another arty purchase. This same situation applies to ALL the TYPE percentages where limits are set. We should come to an understanding on how "hard" all the TYPE percentages are. Should we allow, say a 10 point fudge, so players aren't prevented from a purchase for lack of a few points? If we do allow some fudging we need to put a hard limit on it to prevent creep. I need concrete purchase rules! 10 points max fudge on TYPE percentages. If you miss a purchase by more than that you simply don't have the points to make that set of purchases. Any objections? Treeburst155 out. [ June 12, 2002, 02:59 PM: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]

Flaktrucks- I don't think anyone has a problem with ruling out flaktrucks. Flaktrucks are out. Item B, towing vehicles for guns- we will run into disagreement here so this is best left to the special rules for "your" scenario. Arty- caliber is limited by the rulesets. As for limiting the number of points that can be spent on arty, we might be able to come to a unanimous agreement on this if we set a high enough limit. Arty is limited to 30% of total points. Unlimited TYPE- this is not unanimous so must be left to the individual scenario designs. If there are any objections to the rules in bold (Arty point limit and Flaktrucks)post here, and these things will also be left up to individual scenario design. There is no better way to deal with disagreements than to leave them up to the players' scenario designs. As I said earlier, this insures everyone is dissatisfied with 6/7ths of the tourney. We'll please all the people some of the time since that seems more equitable than pleasing some of the people all the time. BTW, players will be able to choose attack/defend or meeting for their scenarios since I haven't heard any dissent regardng that proposal. Treeburst155 out.