Treeburst155

OK, the Bald One has done his thing so here's the new thread. I didn't see it and started a new one. This is the one we'll use. Lots of game results have come in lately. We're making good progress overall. A few of you may want to pick up the pace however. It's hard to tell on my end exactly how people are progressing since I only know about completed games. Some may have several near completion so they look behind on paper, but really aren't. Nabla and I are discussing more minor changes to the scoring system, none of which will affect how you should play your games. We're just tweaking it to better assess players' actual skill. Remember, surrender is bad. Always withdraw your troops and let the program surrender for you when the morale threshhold is reached. Treeburst155 out.

Enjoy your vacation, Fuerte! We'll see ya in a couple weeks. Treeburt155 out.

Whoops!! WineCape already started another thread. I missed it. Please use that thread located here [ 12-19-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]</p>

Hmmm...I hope we aren't going to have a problem with Ghost Dog. What's his status? Post here if you have started a game with him. What turn are you on? When did you last hear from him? If you're in Section One let me hear from you on this, please. The rest of you don't have to worry about it. You can continue killing each other in peace. Treeburst155 out.

An assymetrical curve.....interesting. Let's analyze the "old" curves for a minute. Player A plays Player B in a scenario that ends up with a median of 50, a perfectly balanced scenario. Player B has rotten luck in the first 10 turns and surrenders rather than withdraw the still numerous units he has that could have escaped. Because of the surrender, player B loses the game 90-10. Let's assume the score could have been 80-20 had player B withdrawn and let the program surrender for him. This surrender places player B forty points below the median, and player A forty above. Using even the flattest curve, the one with (a=.055) in the first formula; how much would player B have gained in tourney points had he achieved the 80-20 outcome through withdrawal? What is the real reward for not surrendering in this case? At 90-10 both players' calculated tourney scores for the game would be |16.17|. At 80-20 the scores would be |14.69|. Is this 1.48 points significant when looking at the big picture from the perspective of either player? I think it might be because the tourney winner's final score will only be 14-15 tourney points. Maybe I'm just hyper-competitive, but I'd want the 1.48 extra points for that scenario. I'd also want to deny those 1.48 points to the guy who is beating me. This extra 1.48 points may not come out to a great deal in the end when averaged with the other games, but it would still be enough to motivate me to withdraw rather than surrender. Keep in mind that this is using the flat curve (.055) with the original formula. The new formula would make withdrawal over surrender even more preferable. The players may not see it this way because they probably haven't put in the time to understand the scoring formula and/or they aren't as competitive as I would be when faced with a lost game. To sum up, I think the new hyperbolic arcsine curve is fine. However, your assymetric curve may be even better. Let's move on to that idea. Here's an assymetrical proposal constructed of sloping line segments again. What if the "curve" was linear from -100 to +10 at a 2:1 ratio (2 CM points = 1 tourney point), then dropped to 3:1 from 11-20, 4:1 from 21-30, and 5:1 from 31-100? Unless a player is doing significantly better than the median he will always be on the steepest part of the curve. At the same time a big winner will never actually hit a flat spot on the curve. The whole curve is somewhat horizontal again, being 2:1 around the median instead of the 1:1 we have with the two previous formulae. Even simpler, what if the "curve" was linear all the way from -100 to 100 at a low slope, say 4:1? I will take my now substantial Wild Bill tourney results and plug them into these two curve ideas, just to get a better idea of the end effects of such curves. I think Redwolf is correct in that the players for the most part only look at individual games as opposed to the big picture. We can't really expect them to have the same enthusiasm for this elaborate scoring system that we do. They are just happy that it takes into account the unbalanced nature of virtually all scenarios. They trust us with the details. I think we have made it clear in both Nordic tournaments that surrender is not a good thing for their score. Some just aren't competitive enough to want to carry on in a losing game when all they will be doing is withdrawing. An assymetrical, withdrawal friendly curve may help with this but I think there would still be some surrenders. That's why it's probably best to have the curve fall off substantially for large victories. An assymetrical curve in favor of low scores is better, but getting the players to take advantage of it is another thing. I'm going to plug my Wild Bill scores into the assymetrical curves I described above and see what it looks like. Treeburst155 out. [ 12-19-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]</p>

Nabla, I don't have permission to access the machine where your programs are stashed. Somebody must have beefed up security on you. :eek: Treeburst155 out.

PreparationH

Cpl. Carrot, Since you are from New Zealand I will have no choice but to replace you if you are unavailable for three full days. There's just too much slacking off down there in NZ. Redwolf, Since you have only seen two movies, I think we can just continue your game with the new guy, if we do need a new guy. Do you have all the files you sent to Rother? If I could get the movie files that open with his password I could just pass them along to the new guy. He would be able to see all the movies that Rother has seen. Hopefully Rother will turn up. I will only wait about 48 more hours however. This is because he did not inform anyone he intended to be unavailable for such a long time. Treeburst155 out.

Woohoo! Hyperbolic arcsines!! I love it. What is it? No, don't tell me. I don't want to know. Really, I don't. I understand how to use the new program, and what it is capable of. That's all I need. I may have some questions after I play with it for awhile, but your explanation above seems clear enough. I'll be working with the new program as I get some time over the next few days. Hyperbolic arcsines....hehehe...it must be good. Treeburst155 out.

That sounds great, Nabla! If I understand correctly you say I will be able to use either curve (formula), and each one has a variable to adjust the flatness? That really is marvelous! I do foresee one problem however. I don't have Excel so I may not be able to generate graphs. This is not critical however. If I can get numbers I can plot my own on graph paper if I really want to. Just the numbers themselves is enough to visualize the graph, really. Thanks again for all your work on this project. Treeburst155 out.

Good Luck in Alaska, George! I'll be looking forward to seeing you online again this Spring. We are promoting your second in command who has already been sent his briefings. He is Major MickOZ!! So, your troops are in good hands and the fight will continue. You don't have to worry about the war. You can deal with Real Life and know you left no hard feelings behind. CDIC & John Kettler, Send your latest moves in your game with George to MickOZ. He is ready to go. Treeburst155 out.

Redwolf, What turn are you on with Rother? How many files have been exchanged? Let's hope Rother makes it back from behind enemy lines. I'm keeping my fingers crossed in hopes they haven't captured him. We can't wait too long, so post here if you hear from him. I just may have a good replacement for him already if necessary. Treeburst155 out.

I'm younger than Wild Bill! Unfortunately, I also remember when Tactics II came out. I was born on June 6, 1957 so I think I'm almost 29 now. Treeburst155 out.

Attention Section One! Have any of you guys heard from Rother in the last 10 days or so? If not, we have a commander missing in action or even AWOL. If this is the case we will have to promote his second in command. If you're in Section One please post any info you may have on our missing commander. Thanks!! Fight on! Treeburst155 out.

Yes, I think it is courteous to inform your opponents when you will not be sending turns for a few days. Otherwise, they wonder if their turns sent to you ever made it. This forum is a great way to inform people of problems on your end, be they Real Life or technical in nature. Stefan, Don't worry about the deadline. Obviously, you are doing your best and planning ahead. That's all I ask. I've yet to run a tournament where I didn't have to extend the deadline. I'm sure I will have to with this tourney too. It only takes one slow player to hold everyone back. We're shooting for February 14th. If we don't make it we'll just have to tack on a couple more weeks. Treeburst155 out.

Yeah, I like it a lot. Very good work, Sitzkrieg! I'm using all Scipio's stuff (which is great IMO) except for I've slipped your arty sounds in over the top. The game just keeps getting better. Thanks again! Treeburst155 out.

It's gonna be good!! Well, Henk, you think we'll be doing 4 hour sessions of TacOps again? IIRC, we spent at least 20 hours per week bouncing turns back and forth. I remember it fondly. Treeburst155 out.

Sitzkrieg, I'd like to check out your sound files if possible. I'm not much into the graphics mods, but I love slapping different sound files into the WAV folder. Please send your sounds to me when you get a chance. Thanks!! Treeburst155 out.

Once you have completed a game feel free to exchange passwords and files with your opponent. You can send in turns with your AARs if you would like, but watch the file size (say 2MB max). If you do, be sure to mention your password in the AAR since they will be distributed to Nabla and Wild Bill. Since they are ONLY the scenario designers, they aren't privy to the passwords. Treeburst155 out.

White4, you're being a bad boy now. You're talking about specific unit types and numbers. If enough information like this leaks out it might be possible for players to assemble an OOB for the scenarios. Just say something like, "My arty spotter is a real winner. He took out 1/3 of his own guys in one minute." Get the idea? EDIT: On second thought you can't even mention the arty spotter. See how easy it is to blow FOW. I even fell into it while admonishing you about it. Really be careful what you write to this thread. Treeburst155 out. [ 12-14-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]</p>

More thoughts.... Based on further analysis of final game scores I feel confident in saying that a CM Grandmaster will average between 30-35 (probably closer to 30)above the median over the course of a tournament. Using the segmented curve mentioned above the Grandmaster would finish the tourney with a score of 10.8 - 11.8 tourney points. A very strong player who averages 20-25 above the median would finish with 8.33-9.58 tourney points. The Grandmaster will win the tournament if his play is consistent. The margin of victory (in tourney points) does not matter. First place is first place and takes the prize. In cases where a merely competent player (10-20 above median) manages a victory at 35 over the median in one instance, I would have to be very suspicious of a surrender being involved, OR an unusually weak opponent. I think these two possibilities are more likely than our competent player simply having an unusually brilliant game. With the "curve" described above, this aberration will not pay off much for our competent player. Consistent, or at least frequent, large victories must be achieved in order for a player to reap the benefits of such game results. You can see I'm arguing wholeheartedly for minimal reward for overwhelming victories. I don't want an unusually lucky game, or one against an unusually poor opponent (a person who surrenders is in this group), to boost a player well above the others. To stick out above the rest a player must perform at a consistent high level. Looking at my tourney scores there are such players. They consistently score well above the median. Such players will pull away from the pack inspite of the diminishing returns for scores in the high range. Comments and arguments against are always welcome. Nothing is engraved in stone yet. Do remember, Nabla, your new curve in your last graph is fine with me. I have no problem with your scoring program being based on that new curve/formula. I think it is sufficiently tough on extreme scores to accomplish what I've laid out above. I just like contemplating all this. Geez, I'm a real geek; just like my wife has always said. :0 Treeburst155 out. [ 12-13-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ] [ 12-13-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]</p>

Just in case you are serious, you don't really get the flags, you just split the unclaimed victory points. The flags were both contested. The points for both will therefore be split between you. Treeburst155 out.

Only two more games of "We Can't Wait" still to be completed. Treeburst155 out.

Nabla, In a recent post you said: "Also note that if someone knows that he's losing Big Time (when compared with the median), in the current system the motivation for the loser and the winner becomes very low. This is because the motivation is practically equal to the flatness of the curve." Players will not know where they stand in relation to the median since the median cannot even be determined until the end of the tournament. Also, I will not divulge scores beforehand, thereby allowing them to get an idea of the median. BTW, I suspect that at least some of the extreme victories are the result of surrendering rather than withdrawing as many as possible and letting the program surrender when the threshhold is reached. Some just do not like to play out battles they can't win. In these cases especially, the extreme victories should not be given too much weight. Unfortunately, it is not easy for me to determine why a huge victory occurred. Treeburst155 out. [ 12-13-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]</p>

Combined Arms and Spanish Bombs, Yes, the scoring formula will give one flag to your opponent and one to you. For the reasoning behind all this see page 3 post by JPS here Treeburst155 out.