Treeburst155

A couple things here: You can write AARs in any format you want as long as I can read it using Windows ME. I do not have Microsoft Word, just the standard Wordpad that comes with the OS. This means that occasionally I cannot open .doc files. I think .doc files generated on recent versions of Microsoft Word are the only ones I have problems with, but I'm not sure. I just know that sometimes I can't get into .doc files. SECURITY!! Some of you are being a bit too descriptive in your posts. Don't comment on numbers or types of units destroyed, for example. You may be revealing valuable information on OOBs for that scenario. You really can't say much at all without revealing information. At the end all the AARs will be made available and you can discuss to your heart's content. Treeburst155 out.

Thank you, Redwolf, for explaining that. Don't Surrender!! for the reasons Redwolf mentioned above. Always try to withdraw as many guys as you can. The computer will surrender for you eventually. Withdrawal can be an interesting task in itself. Besides, would you surrender your men if you could slip away to fight another day? The scoring system does take into account, to a certain extent, huge victories and defeats most likely caused by surrenders. It does this by using the median score for each scenario rather than the average score. There can be quite a difference between the median and the average if there are extreme outlier scores, often achieved as a result of surrendering opponents. Also, their are diminishing returns on extreme scores due to the curve generated by the formula. Treeburst155 out. [ 12-13-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]</p>

Nabla, Looking over the Wild Bill Tourney results that are in (about 70%), the distance from the median for any side of any scenario only goes beyond +/- 40 in three cases of extreme outliers. The vast majority of scores are within 30 of the median. How about something like this: +/- 0 to 10 from median, 1 tourney point for 2 CM points (1:2) +/- 11 to 20 from median, 1:3 +/- 21 to 30 from median, 1:4 +/- 31 to 100 from median, 1:5 A score of 40 above median would yield 5 + 3.33 + 2.5 + 2 = 12.83 tourney points. The whole graph here tends toward the horizontal to help keep the competition tough. At the same time in never flattens out more than the 1:5 ratio. Only overwhelming outlier losses or victories will ever see the 1:5 ratio. This one may be a bit too horizontal, but it sure would make for a tough fight for the championship. I'm for keeping the losers in the running more than rewarding the overwhelming victories. I like the idea of making the curve shallow near the median too. All the curves we've looked at so far have been steep in that area. I'm still thinking about all this. Treeburst155 out. [ 12-12-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]</p>

Nabla, Lets think for a moment in terms of line segments of different slopes rather than a curve. For example: +1 to +20 of median, 1/1 ratio tourney points to game points +21 to +30 of median, 1/2 ratio tourney points to game points +31 up, 1/3 ratio tourney points to game points The same would apply to below median scores. Let's see how this would work. I'm thinking aloud here. Player A scores 36 points above the median. He gets 20 pts. for his first 20 over median. He gets 5 pts. for his next 10 over median, and 2 points for his last 6 over median. His CM score of +36 over median would net him 20 + 5 + 2 = 27 tourney points. This sloping segments approach could be broken up into smaller segments for further refinement of "just rewards" for different levels of achievement over (under) the median. Your smooth curves are like having an infinite amount of segments, each at a different slope. Suppose we came up with a segmented graph that we liked, using about 5 different slopes; could you come up with a formula for a curve that would closely match it? If not, what about a program that simply does the arithmetic involved in my example above. I guess the real question is the reward for extremely high scores. The curve I decided on earlier is a fairly flat one. Beyond +40 of the median there is not much benefit. Let me study the many game results that have come in for the various tournaments so far. I want to look at the difference from the median of the extreme examples and the number of such instances. This will help determine what the best curve is. Shandorf, Go back a page or two and read JPS's post for the reasons behind splitting unclaimed VPs. Be sure you are familiar with the scoring system too. Treeburst155 out. [ 12-12-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]</p>

Help!! What's "exsanguination"? Is it a new German rocket!? Treeburst155 out.

Hey, that's a REAL nice trophy! Congratulations, Pondscum; and Iron Duke too for the great trophy. Treeburst155 out.

Ah, JPS, so you are playing. Who are you to my records? Thanks again for the scoring suggestion. Treeburst155 out.

Yes, the AAR bonus applies to this Nordic Champioship Tournament. Most people send the AARs in the form of .doc or .txt files. Some just write it in an email. Anything is acceptable, as long as I can read it. BTW, no AARs have been sent in yet for this tournament. Treeburst155 out.

AARs need to be in by the tourney deadline which is February 14th. So far only Jack Trap has sent in AARs. He has two to his credit. Treeburst155 out.

Thanks for the further education, WineCape. There sure is a great deal to the subject of wines and winemaking. The standings page has been updated. Treeburst155 out.

Nabla and I have tweaked the scoring system a bit. The general idea is still the same, but the point values I am assigning to AARs have to be changed (currently 1/4 to 1/2 tourney point). What I will do is assign AARs a value at the end based on the average final tourney score of all 24 players. I think 3% for good AARs is about right. If you write 5 AARs your score will be increased by a number equal to 15% of the average tourney score(before AARs). Brief AARs will only score 1.5% of the tourney average per AAR. Basing AAR value on a percentage of the average score is much better than my trying to guesstimate what that average score will be and setting an appropriate fixed value to the AARs. ALSO, I'm not sure I mentioned the following to this group: An exploitable flaw in the scoring system was brought to my attention by JPS (not participating). Here's the new twist to fix the problem: For games that do not add up to 100 points the difference will be split between the players. For example: A final score of 60-30 will be recorded as 65-35. If you can figure out why I am doing this then you have a devious and gamey mind. Treeburst155 out.

Nabla and I have tweaked the scoring system a bit. The general idea is still the same, but the point values I am assigning to AARs may have to be changed (currently 1/4 to 1/2 tourney point). What I will do is assign AARs a value at the end based on the average final tourney score of all 24 players. I think 3% for good AARs is about right. If you write 5 AARs your score will be increased by a number equal to 15% of the average tourney score(before AARs). Brief AARs will only score 1.5% of the tourney average per AAR. Basing AAR value on a percentage of the average score is much better than my trying to guesstimate what that average score will be and setting an appropriate fixed value to the AARs. ALSO.....don't forget this: An exploitable flaw in the scoring system was brought to my attention by JPS (not participating). Here's the new twist to fix the problem: For games that do not add up to 100 points the difference will be split between the players. For example: A final score of 60-30 will be recorded as 65-35. If you can figure out why I am doing this then you have a devious and gamey mind. Treeburst155 out.

Nabla and I have tweaked the scoring system a bit. The general idea is still the same, but the point values I am assigning to AARs may have to be changed (currently 1/4 to 1/2 tourney point). What I will do is assign AARs a value at the end based on the average final tourney score of all 24 players. I think 3% for good AARs is about right. If you write 7 AARs your score will be increased by a number equal to 21% of the average tourney score(before AARs). Brief AARs will only score 1.5% of the tourney average. Only one person has sent me AARs that fall into this category. All others are sufficiently detailed to earn full credit. Many are way above and beyond the call of duty, and greatly appreciated. Basing AAR value on a percentage of the average score is much better than my trying to guesstimate what that average score will be and setting an appropriate fixed value to the AARs. ALSO..... An exploitable flaw in the scoring system was brought to my attention by JPS (not participating). Here's the new twist to fix the problem: For games that do not add up to 100 points the difference will be split between the players. For example: A final score of 60-30 will be recorded as 65-35. If you can figure out why I am doing this then you have a devious and gamey mind. Treeburst155 out.

Jarmo, Yes, I am waiting on Ben's purchases. I will get the game out to the German player promptly, once I receive the file from Ben. Treeburst155 out.

Hi Nabla! So we're back to the good old curve discussion again. I feel it is highly unlikely that many games will score over 40 points above the median making the curve after 40 inconsequential. Your proposed curve and mine are almost exactly the same in the range from 0-40 above the median. Of course, this is based on the curves' appearance which is affected some by the scale of the graph. One of the nice things about your system is that we can use any curve we want. I have no problem changing to a max 23 curve or thereabouts. I'm sure the players don't really care either. What exactly would you like to use for the value of "a" in the formula? BTW, don't forget I will be splitting any points not earned due to neutral flags between the players. If a final score is 60-30 it will be recorded as 65-35. As mentioned earlier in this thread, this fixes some "gamey" problems. Treeburst155 out.

Sorry there, Shandorf. The scotch was being provided by Claymore who dropped out months ago. I wonder whatever happened to good old Claymore? I liked him, and he played well too. The main prize, the wine, is still waiting for a winner to be determined. WineCape has already shipped 12 bottles to other tourney winners. His best wines are being put up for this tourney. Treeburst155 out.

More news from the front! Ari Maenpaa and MickOZ completed a very low-scoring game. Ari scored 35 to Mick's 29. This hurts both players' average and is just what Shandorf needs to come out on top. I'll update the standings soon. I'm very busy right now. My mailbox is packed. Treeburst155 out.

Sgt. Kelly, Your password for your Dogface21 game has been sent. Treeburst155 out.

If you have any un-started games in which you are the Germans you should seriously consider getting your setup done, so your opponent can get started. With nine weeks to go it's getting to the point where multiple exchanges per day will be necessary to meet the deadline. Treeburst155 out.

Oh my! I know who's a very busy man these days. It's lookin' good SuperTed. Once you get 'em going you'll be able to take a breather. I think you have a great bunch of newbies here. It will be fun to follow. I still think you should make a scenario called, "Nebelwerfers at Night". Treeburst155 out.

I'm in for TacOps 4!! The improvements/additions over 3 are easily worth it. Thanks for setting us up with a new TacOps, Major. Treeburst155 out.

Tero, I've noticed that some people prefer to concentrate on a small number of games at one time. When they finish one they start another, always maintaining a few games in progress. Hopefully this is the case with your slower opponents. If so, they will still finish on time. Not much can be done about those who don't make the deadline, except beg them to hurry up. I could penalize their scores, but there are two players involved in each case. I have to determine who is the cause of the slow play. Chances are I will have to extend the deadline for a few. I've yet to hold a tourney where I didn't have to do that. There's still 8-9 weeks to go. Your opponents may very well pick up the pace as the deadlines approaches. Treeburst155 ot.

You guys in Section Four who are the Germans against Dogface21 (Shadow)can go ahead and send him the first file. His briefings have been mailed. Here's his addy: zippo79@onebox.com Treeburst155 out.

OK, I think it's time to officially announce Dogface21's new status as a Nordic Wannabee commander. Welcome aboard, Dogface21!! Your files and section info are on the way as soon as I finish typing this. Thanks for taking up Shadow's slack. Treeburst155 out.

Time to bump this for the weekend. All is going well I assume? Treeburst155 out.