Treeburst155

We have ten games yet to complete. Can we make it by March 31st? Treeburst155 out.

There are currently twelve games yet to be completed. I think we have time for Juha to get his computer running again. How about March 31st for a deadline? Can we make it by then, guys? Treeburst155 out.

I've been processing AARs today. Listed below are the number of AARs I've received from each player. If your name is not on the list I have no AARs from you. Look the list over in case I've lost one or more of your AARs. Thanks! Juha Ahoniemi-1 Kingfish-5 Tom-3 W. Moore-2 CapitalistDog-6 T. Zalewski-7 (half credit) Enoch-7 Holien-7 J. Sowden-7 Jukka Pekka-7 J. Kettler-7 L. Dickens-7 W. Miron-7 G. Redeker-7 C. Rohde-7 P. Svensson-7 T. Travisano-7 Edit: I mistakenly gave Tabpub credit for 3 AARs that belonged to Tom in section II. The error has been corrected. [ March 21, 2002, 04:22 AM: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]

Combined Arms, I agree that the scenario should be fun for both sides. The catch is, what the designer thinks is fun may not be what all players think is fun. In general, a heavily lopsided scenario should be carefully considered by the designer from the underdog's perspective. Will the underdog enjoy the game? What I'm doing is trying to design balanced scenarios; but I'm not going to play-test them to death to determine balance. I'm also not going to use symmetrical, drawish maps. I'll let the Nabla scoring system take care of any imbalance. That's what I mean about freedom from the balance issue. Treeburst155 out.

Six turns, eighteen exchanges, six exchanges per week (3 files per player)equals 3 weeks. I can live with that. Especially since CMBB is at least 90 days away (probably 120-150). There is a good chance I may have to design the scenarios for the finals myself. Just in case, I spent all day Saturday doing just that. I completed one, and I'm rather pleased with it. It's not too difficult to come up with something interesting as long as one does not worry a great deal about balance and avoids historical scenarios because of the necessary research. In fact, being unfettered by the balance issue opens up a whole new world to designers. Historical battles can be truly historical without adjustments for balance. 90% of play-testing can be eliminated from any scenario too. I think the finalists will enjoy what I come up with should we need to use my creations. You just gotta love the Nabla scoring system. Tournaments are fair, and scenario possibilities for them are much greater. Thanks, Nabla! Treeburst155 out.

Excellent! Treeburst155 out.

How are we doing? No MIAs I hope? All officers accounted for? Treeburst155 out.

Excellent! Texas Toast comes through. We can't have Mr. Kettler sitting idle too long. It's best to keep him under the constant stress of battle. He writes more often under such conditions. BTW, TT, have you heard from that whacky physicist Claymore since he dropped out of this tourney? I know you guys used to do some PBEM way back when. Treeburst155 out.

Combined Arms has had this problem before. I will see if I can get through to him. Has anyone heard from Cooper lately? Treeburst155 out.

Did anyone take John up on this chance to dance? Treeburst155 out.

I'm talking to people right now about the scenarios we need, including myself. LOL! I'll have some fun stuff for the finalists one way or the other. You needn't worry yourselves. Da Manager will take care of everything. For one, I have what was going to be the grand finale scenario which I'm somewhat proud of. I also have a map I made that is quite interesting IMO. We'll see what develops while the last game is finishing up. I'd guess we will probably be starting the finals in 2-3 weeks. Treeburst155 out.

Happy Anniversary, TabPub! May you have many more! Holien, There is one problem with the round robin finals idea. I don't have any scenarios yet. :eek: I'm working on it. Treeburst155 out. [ February 26, 2002, 01:55 PM: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]

Bimmer (Andrej) has emailed me expressing concern over the fact he and TabPub (Rob) were unable to make progress this past weekend. He has not heard from TabPub since Friday. He has informed TabPub of the fact that theirs is the only game still not finished. Unfortunately, Andrej cannot finish the game by himself. We've come this far so we can wait awhile longer. In the meantime I'm really leaning toward the four player round robin (3 games for each player)for the finals. I'm fairly certain we could get this done before CMBB comes out. The scoring would be very competitive since there will not be enough games to obtain an accurate median. The schedule would look like this: # Scenario_1 PlayerA PlayerB PlayerC PlayerD # Scenario_2 PlayerC PlayerA PlayerB PlayerD # Scenario_3 PlayerA PlayerD PlayerB PlayerC Every player would play each scenario one time. Every player would play every other player one time, and have his performance compared to every other player one time (same side of same scenario). Here's an explanation of the scoring by Nabla, taken from the Nordic Championship thread: "I think we're going to use the nasty competitive version: one point for the player who gets a better CM score than the other guy who's playing the same side. That is, if we have players A-D, and they play a scenario with end results A 81 - B 19 C 80 - D 20 Then A and D get one point and B and C get zero points. Of course the example illustrates the extreme case when the difference between the scores on the same side is minimal. This is a very competitive scheme in the sense that it does not suffice to do pretty well. You really have to push it in order to get a better CM score, otherwise you'll end up with zero. I think it's ok in the final round. Here's a suggestion for handling ties. First use the result of the match between the players under consideration as a deciding factor. That is, if players A and B have a tie, then see how the battle in which A and B have played on the same side has ended. The player who has done better wins. This is still not a foolproof way because we might for example have a tie between three players A-C. The previous rule would not help if A has won B, B has won C and C has won A (in the sense that one has done better when playing on the same side of the same scenario). In such a case I suggest that we sum up the raw point differences of these games. That is, if for example the CM score differences are A-B +2, B-C +10, C-A +4, we get A -2, B +8, C -6, and B is the winner." Handling the finals like this means I don't need to use my ultra-balanced (possibly boring)scenario. You don't have to win the game to get a point. You just have to out-score the guy who plays that scenario from the same side you do. The pressure would be really on to maximize your score in each game. I like it. Treeburst155 out.

Oh, I forgot to mention the only game you cannot discuss at this point is "Crisis At Kommerscheidt". Treeburst155 out.

CM is so Windows friendly I frequently have three instances of the program running at once. I've never run into anything else with 3D graphics that was so Windows friendly. Treeburst155 out.

Thanks for the update, Bimmer! Treeburst155 out.

I recently received an auto-surrender induced game result where the "loser" did very well. It just goes to show that withdrawal can pay off if the situation is assessed as hopeless in a timely manner. It's good to see people withdrawing, and not surrendering troops who could have left the scene to fight again another day. Nabla, It's good to hear work is slowing down for you a bit. That means it's time to lock you up in your study again so we can harness your brain for CM related work. Go on now, in you go....and give me the key. Very good, I'll let you out in a few days. Treeburst155 out.

It will be awhile yet. There are many games yet to be completed, but we're making progress. Soon you guys will be able to discuss a couple of the scenarios as everyone will have played them. This will keep you busy until the rest finish. Treeburst155 out.

OK, mPisi and Pixelmaster are almost through. We need to hear from Andrej and/or TabPub on their battle for Kommerscheidt. I'll email them for a status report. If you still have some AARs you want to write it's time to get real serious about doing it. All AARs will be due 24 hours after the last game result comes in. I will post here when the 24 hour countdown begins. I could generate some bogus results now by throwing in average scores for the two unfinished games, but the race for the highest second place finish appears to be very close and could easily be affected by these last two games due to a change in the median. Remember, the highest second place finisher goes to the finals with the section winners. Treeburst155 out.

Only Pixelmaster, Scot Johnson, TabPub, and Andrej Gaspari can help with that question. Treeburst155 out.

Thanks for the updates, guys! Yes, group one has not turned in many results yet, but as far as I know they are all still active. I do have a few results that just came in recently. I update the results sheet about twice a week when I get five or six. Check the last page or two of the Nordic Champs thread for details on the finals. Basically there will be a three scenario round robin among the four section winners using a different scoring method. I assume Nabla is arranging for the scenarios or designing them himself. I will explain the scoring for the finals in detail once we get to that point. Treeburst155 out.

Isn't lining up and shooting offenders gamey? Shouldn't they be given at least 60 seconds to run for it before shooting them? Treeburst155 out.

OK, I understand the 3-way tie explanation. It took me awhile on that one. Anyway, that sounds real fair to me. I assume, Nabla, you are working on the three playoff scenarios? :eek: Treeburst155 out.

Ben Galanti & Ari Maenpaa, I have purchases from both of you now. I will get a file to the German player within 24 hours. Things are a little busy for me at the moment. Fight On! Treeburst155 out.

Just two games to go!! One "Sounds In The Night", and one "Crisis At Kommerscheidt". Fight On!! Treeburst155 out.