Treeburst155

Important! Your section schedules show a scenario called "Tiger Woods". Evidently, that was only a working title. The final title is "Another Day". So, the "Tiger Woods" schedule applies to "Another Day". Attention TOURNEY I, Section 4!! Wreck has been replaced by Diceman. You will receive an updated schedule/contact list soon. Attention TOURNEY III, Section 3!! You have no replacement at this time for Nemo. I'm giving backups time to respond before moving down the backup list. You will receive an updated schedule/contact list when we have a replacement. Files are going out now. The invasion has begun!! It is a slow tedious process however, requiring extreme care on my part. Be patient. The boats are crossing the channel now, but there are LOTS of boats! Treeburst155 out.

This is what I have from WineCape: RoW II: TITANS! consist of: (1) SWAMP (2) GHOST (3) DEATHDEALER (4) WRECK (5) SURLYBEN (6) MAJORTAKTIK (7) BROKEN! (depending on RD's nomination) (8) FIONN I know nuffink! Treeburst155 out.

The Nordic Wannabee Tourney- currently in the playoffs; but Redwolf knows that. Treeburst155 out.

Ok then, I only need to hear from Ghost regarding an email address. The Hotmail address I have for him may be very old. The next step is to work out the scoring details. I will be very busy kicking off the RoW II tournament for the next 72 hours. After that, I can concentrate on this tourney. I figure this tourney will get the RoW II scenarios in 7-10 days. We have to go over some things, and work out some details first. In the meantime, please read the second half of page one of the "RoW II: Boots & Tracks Brawl" thread. There are three consecutive posts by myself that explain things. Much of it will be applicable to this tourney. Ghost, send me a current email address please. I will return to this thread in earnest in a few days. In the meantime, I will keep up; but I won't have time for much posting. Welcome, Titans, to The Clash! Treeburst155 out.

Boris and Jazza, Boris is #3 on the backup list. Jazza is #4 on the list. There is going to be a small tourney run simultaneously with this one using the same scenarios. We are calling this little tourney, "Clash Of The Titans". It is a contest between the top ladder players. The Titans will not have anything to do with this tourney. They're just using the same scenarios. Wreck has chosen to give up his slot in RoW II in order to take up arms in the Titans' tourney. Nemo has also sent word that he must withdraw due to Real Life. Backup players one and two will be offered the slots within the hour. That would be Yankee Dog and Diceman of SuperTed's Newbie Tournament. I have received three of the scenarios from SuperTed. I'm expecting the remaining two sometime today. Files will begin going out tomorrow! Treeburst155 out.

If we follow the "Wreck plan" (option A) each player will play seven scenarios. As for the RoW II scenarios, they are top secret. The only info you will get will come from the briefings. The scenarios will be 100% secure unless you're a hacker of some sort. Treeburst155 out.

This is good news, John! Once again you're back in the fight. Thanks for the battle news. Treeburst155 out.

I agree Wreck's plan is a good compromise. The participants get two ladder style games and the RoW II scenarios. Fionn comments on there being too many games to play. We could easily do without a playoff IMO. Eight people, 7 scenarios, 1st place is "King of the Titans". Should the vote (or decision) go to Wreck's plan, we will need to make a final decision on scoring. There will be no median for the two "pick your own" scenarios. These two scenarios will only be played four times each. First things first, however. If you are a designated Titan you need to vote! Treeburst155 out.

This is all true. The only thing limiting us to multiples of six is because we have only five RoW II scenarios. We are limited to an even number of participants however. The scheduling program will not accept an odd number. This whole idea sounds good to me. I would be willing to manage a tourney like this as long as I had nothing to do with the design of the non-RoW scenarios. Wreck's 2-1-0 scoring would be the way to go here. Treeburst155 out.

A couple of things here.... 1) If the Titan's want to piggyback on the RoW II tourney the decision will have to be made fairly soon. The tourney will begin in 48 hours. I could hold Wreck's files back for a few days or so, but both he and I will need to know fairly soon. 2) How would QBs be scored in conjunction with RoW scenarios which MUST use the Nabla system? This is not really a big problem, but it is something that needs to be thought out. IMO: The easiest, fairest way for the Titan's to clash is simply for them to play an RoW tourney amongst themselves. You can't beat the RoW format and the Nabla Scoring System for fairness. With two sections of six players, each scenario would be played six times among the Titans. This would give us a fairly good median from the Titans' games alone; although I think it would be better to wait until RoW II results are in. I would expect the Titans' final tourney scores to be packed fairly tight around the median since the competition is so tough; but since they are not competing with the RoW II players their scores mean nothing in relation to them. The drawback to an RoW style Clash is that the Titans are taken out of their element (force purchasing, etc.). They may not wish to do this. They may prefer a showdown which allows them to utilize their ladder game skills. I'd really like to see how they do with double-blind, human designed, possibly unbalanced scenarios. Wreck has been very successful in the transition, much to my surprise. How about the rest of the Titans? I feel certain there are twelve people among the ladders who deserve to be called Titans. No player will have to play more than five scenarios (regular season) regardless of how many participate. If the decision is made to go with only six, that is fine too. In the case of six it might be best to use Wreck's 2-1-0 scoring method. The only alternative would be to wait for the medians from the RoW II tourney. Anyway, there's my pitch for a "Rumblings of War II: Clash of the Titans". I would be willing to manage a tourney like this. It's up to WineCape and the prospective Titans themselves to decide if they want to have such a tourney. Any other tourney format I am not willing to get involved in due to past experiences. I will follow such a tourney with great interest however. Treeburst155 out.

Beckman, Just read the three consecutive posts by myself located just past the halfway mark on page one. The first one of importance is entitled, "How It Works". These posts will explain everything you need to know. If you get wrecked by Wreck you won't be the first one. Treeburst155 out.

LOL Moriarty, Yeah, you guys could use the rules I played with Moriarty. 1) No flags 2) NO POINT LIMIT!! 3) NO force restrictions 4) Unlimited editing of ammo, morale, command bonuses, and units 5) Choose your own reinforcement times, places (anywhere on the map), and probability! It was probably the most interesting game I ever played. The gamey bastiche brought in reinforcements behind me; but luckily mine came in a few turns later in the same place and shot his guys in the back! Um...probably not a good idea for a competition, but it sure was fun! Treeburst155 out.

Wreck, Going defensive in an ME would only serve the purpose of securing a relatively minor loss against a suspected superior opponent. It only works if there are not many VL points in the game, and the "defender" is able to inflict some casualties from afar, say with arty on the VL. In order for the flag holder to get more than a minor victory he would have to inflict casualties on the defender and/or avoid taking casualties himself. Occupying a VL is not a good way to avoid casualties (defender's arty). An all out attack on the defender might not be too smart since it would be essentially a 1:1 attack/defend situation. As long as the "defender" can maintain a 1:1 kill ratio, he welcomes the attack, because as the casualties mount the VL becomes less and less significant. It's an underdog's way of minimizing his loss, and is the result of a flawed map and a flawed tourney scoring system. IOW, not enough VL points in relation to force points on the map; and the tourney scored by simply totalling points from game to game. The underdog opts for a sure 40 points rather than actually trying to win. Treeburst155 out. [ June 04, 2002, 12:41 AM: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]

Um.....Visom, I forgot all about it. AARs on the way. JonS, I think the rest of the Wild Bill's RoW scenarios are at Boots & Tracks, or soon will be. I'm almost positive I saw Kommerscheidt there. We have no home for the AARs at this time. I have a small homepage, but it would take me two solid days to relearn the basic HTML and get the AARs up. I haven't seriously messed with my page in almost a year now. Treeburst155 out.

I would really like to see a map that accomplishes these two goals. I haven't been able to come up with one. To force aggressive behavior you need lots of VL points in no-mans land. Once you do that, you have created prime flag rushing terrain. I'm not saying it can't be done. I'd just like to see an example of such a map. EDIT: I'm talking Meeting Engagements here. Treeburst155 out. [ June 03, 2002, 10:09 PM: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]

In defense of the Nabla System, extreme results are tempered rather nicely IMO. That is why we use the median instead of the average. Also, extreme victories are tempered by "the curve". There's not much difference in Nabla points between 30 over the median and 40 over, for example. The fewer the samples, the less accurate the median however. For this reason, Wreck's 2-1-0 method sounds good to me if the Titans don't want to wait on the RoW II results. In fact, the 2-1-0 idea may be better than the way we ran the RoW finals. Hmmm.... Treburst155 out.

Human maps would work as long as the games were mirrored. Then they wouldn't have to be perfectly balanced (symmetrical?). Treeburst155 out.

It seems to me QB Meeting Engagements are the way to go for several reasons: 1)They are the most even, especially if maps can be rejected a time or two. 2) The force picking phase demonstrates knowledge of the units (price/performance ratio, etc.), a significant part of CM. 3) It's the easiest way to do it. The players "create" the scenarios themselves. 4) Scenario imbalance cannot be blamed on human designers. The only good (fair) alternative to this I see, is a Rumblings Of War style tournament. The Titans could even form a section for the RoW II tourney that is about to kick off. The median for these scenarios will be decided by 36 games! Balance WILL be determined accurately. I would need six Titans to form a section. They would NOT be a part of the RoW II tourney, but they would play the same scenarios, and they would be scored with the Nabla system. The RoW II tourney would simply provide accurate scenario medians for the Titans' contest. I see two problems with an RoW style Clash Of The Titans: 1) Wreck would have to choose which he wanted to play in. 2) The outcome of the Titans' clash could not be decided until RoW II game results were all in. We need that median to determine scenario balance! Just another idea to throw in the pot. Treeburst155 out.

Beckman, The briefings will be mailed to players separately, outside the scenario file (.cmb). The .cmb file the German player gets to start the game will contain no briefings at all. The .cmb file will be a saved game. Nothing can be done with it by anyone, unless they possess the German password. Even with the password, all the German player can do is start the game at the German setup phase. He can go no further because the saved file will ask him for the proper Allied password, which he will not have. Only a hacker type could cheat. Treeburst155 out.

Thanks, Ricochet! Feel free to help out like this anytime you want. Treeburst155 out.

Mattias (Tourney I, Section Four) has had to withdraw due to real life. He has been replaced with the next officer on the waiting list, Beckman. Good luck with your new situation, Mattias. Have a great summer! Welcome to the tourney, Beckman! Treeburst155 out.

Why not go all out and play this for money? Heck, we're talking about the best of the best here. Let's go professional. Say 10 guys pay $20 US to play. The winner would get $200 US. The entrance fee should be somewhat high so that only the best would be interested in risking that much hard earned money. The entrance fee will naturally weed out all but the best. The battles, IMO, should be mirrored QBs with the players negotiating their own games. These are experienced guys. If they get screwed by tricky negotiation that's tough. These guys know what they're doing. The final agreements would be sent to the manager in case of disputes. These final agreements would have to be very carefully worded and detailed. No ambiguities or omissions. Off the top of my head, I think the chess system of one point for a win and 1/2 point for a draw would work. It would have to be a round robin deal I think. Depending on the number of players, TCP/IP might be a good OPTION if both players could agree to play that way. Just a thought. Treeburst155 out.

....and another bump from page 5. Treeburst155 out.

Hi Texas Toast! Yes, apparently John had a complete meltdown this time. He's getting a new computer according to Kingfish. Right now he's not even able to access the internet as I understand it. Treeburst155 out.

CombatGeneral, Your best bet if you really want to beat Fionn is to play a brand new, never before seen, human designed scenario. With any luck, the inevitable imbalance will favor you (true chesslike balance is impossible to achieve IMO). You must get him to agree to play the scenario double-blind. This will prevent him from formulating a brilliant plan of action based on perfect knowledge of your forces. Even though you would have the same perfect knowledge, to be safe, you should assume he can use the knowledge better than you can. Double-blind removes this dangerous possibility. The less control Fionn has over his situation the better for you. Once you make it to the setup phase in a double-blind scenario of human design you have maximized your chances. Then it just depends on the ever present luck element and on how good of a Combat General you are. Avoid QBs and custom maps with forces picked in the editor. Avoid the necessity to negotiate anything. You could very well lose before you even do your setup. You'll still lose, but the above plan will at least get you to the setup phase in good shape. P.S. I have never beaten Fionn. I'm 0-1. Treeburst155 out.