Treeburst155

The schedule may change if Nabla can improve the program. The sections will remain the same however. AARs will receive 1/2 "tourney point" for fairly detailed AARs. If you write two or three good pages you will get full credit. Brief AARs will receive only 1/4 point. With five scenarios it is possible to get 2.5 tourney points added to your final score for AARs. It is somewhat difficult to tell how significant 2.5 extra points will be at the end, but I think you will find that it is worth it to write at least a few. I determined AAR value by running some hypothetical tourneys. I want AARs to help out your score, but I don't want them to win the tournament for you unless you are in a close race. Treeburst155 out.

Jack Trap, I don't follow you. Warhammer, Doesn't your ISP provide some kind of email service? Treeburst155 out.

Below is a list of all participants, separated into the four sections, complete with email addresses. This is your Contact List. You might want to copy your section info for your convenience. You must take it upon yourselves to arrange games with those in your section. Once you have arranged to start a game one of you must email me. At that point I will pass out the game files for that match. The German player will always start the game. He will receive the .cmb file, the general briefing, and the German briefing in separate files. At the same time the Allied player will receive the general briefing and the Allied briefing. The briefings are separated from the .cmb so people can't peek at the other guy's info. When the German player starts the PBEM game with the .cmb file he will find himself in the setup phase and the game begins. All passwords will be pre-assigned by me. Your password for a game will always be at the end of your side-specific briefing. Here is your Contact List: SECTION ONE Juha Ahoniemi (Finland)- juha.ahoniemi@mail.htk.fi Ari Maenpaa (Finland)- ari.maenpaa@tietoenator.com Topi (Finland)- tmikkola@cc.hut.fi Heibis (Norway)- jens.heiberg@jbv.no vskalex (Sweden)- vskalex@hotmail.com Ghost Dog (Sweden)- ted.malmquist@telia.com SECTION TWO Tuomas (Finland)- tnummela@cc.hut.fi Jarmo (Finland)- jarmo.laakso@tintti.net Sesam (Finland)- matti_vesanen@hotmail.com Dr Alimantado (Sweden)- jeschko-edberg@home.se Patrik (Sweden)- patrik@kramgo.com Dragoon19 (Denmark)- tbrath@e-mail.dk SECTION THREE tero (Finland)- is tero.leppanen@pp2.inet.fi tss (Finland)- tommi.syrjanen@hut.fi Juha Keratar (Finland)- lunael@hotmail.com Stefan Fredrikson (Sweden)- stefan.fredrik@telia.com Von Heinrich (Sweden)- henrikohlin@hotmail.com Loke (Norway)- pgkeihl@chello.no SECTION FOUR PasiN (Finland)- Pasi_Nyman@hotmail.com Pixie (Finland)- vp.ehoniemi@hushmail.com AS (Ali)(Finland)- ali.salo@tietoenator.com Mattias (Sweden)- schuertzen@hotmail.com Romeoman (Sweden)- romeoman772000@yahoo.com Joseph Porta (Norway)- Hackett@online.no If you choose to write an AAR for a completed game you must send it to me. I will record your AAR points and forward the AAR to the scenario designers. Do not post AARs to this thread!! We must preserve FOW. Don't hesitate to ask any questions you may have. I'll be along to answer them. Treeburst155 out.

Thanks, Joseph. Stefan, The Nordic Championship will not have a web page because all game results are top secret until the very end. Only the scenario designers and WineCape will know the results as they come in. If you will notice, the Wild Bill tourney has no results posted. Only results from the older tournaments are posted as they come in. The Wild Bill page actually serves no purpose. I created it because I originally intended to use the old tournament scoring system. At the end of the "regular season" (before the playoff series) all game results, tourney points, and AAR points will be posted; and the AARs made public. At this point I will probably create a Nordic Championships Results page. It was asked how games will be passed out, etc.. I will post an explanation shortly. All will be perfectly clear.

Warhammer, My experience with Hotmail has been that you are limited to 500 KB attachments. Although it has been a year since I used the service, I had no other problems than that. If the scenarios are just a little too big, you've got a problem. Treeburst155 out.

Let me describe how the games will be passed out. Once you have arranged to start a game one of you must email me. At that point I will pass out the game files for that match. The German player will always start the game. He will receive the .cmb file, the general briefing, and the German briefing in separate files. At the same time the Allied player will receive the general briefing and the Allied briefing. The briefings are separated from the .cmb so people can't peak at the other guy's info. When the German player starts the PBEM game with the .cmb file he will find himself in the setup phase and the game begins. All passwords will be preassigned by me. Your password for a game will always be at the end of your side-specific briefing. I could flood the players with all the scenarios and briefings at one time except for the fact I don't have the time to do that. I have to make doubly sure the right files go to the right guys. There are numerous places in the file sending process where I could make a big mistake and ruin FOW for a game. So far it's only happened once. Since I have to be careful I can't just whip out 150 files in one sitting. What I do is send out a steady stream of games each day. I will no doubt be behind for a few days, especially since the Nordic Championship is kicking off at the same time, but within a few days I will get the original game requests delivered to you. I just thought I'd explain all that because I have a sneaking suspicion all of you are going to want all five scenarios at once. Have mercy on me! Treeburst155 out.

Man, you guys are really enthusiastic! That's great! You've got AT LEAST a few days however, so keep chatting and get to know each other. Talk about the gamey list, and I think you have a fun CM experience ahead that will probably last until CMBB is out. Treeburst155 out.

Jack Trap, You have it right. Nobody is restricted from using POTENTIALLY gamey tactics, but they should be upfront and honest about their intention to use the tactics. The main thing again is that both players KNOW how the other guy feels about certain tactics. This is the key to harmonious competition. Treeburst155 out. [ 11-05-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]</p>

Let me add that charges of gamey play have been very few and far between since I've begun encouraging players to discuss the issue a bit with each other. Gameyness is really no big deal if you know your opponent's views on the various questionable tactics. For example, If I were playing Sgt Kelly I would feel free to torch the map with my Wasps with complete abandon since area denial by fire does not bother him and may very well be used against me. We would have no problems concerning the tactic because we have discussed it and know how the other guy feels about it. See how it works? Treeburst155 out.

Guys, All the POTENTIALLY gamey tactics I listed are just that, POTENTIALLY gamey. It depends on the battlefield situation. For example, if a VL is located 60 meters from a map edge, would a mass advance along the map edge be wrong? No. Think of the list as talking points to discuss with your opponents. All these items have been declared gamey at one time or another over the months, but there is disagreement. The most important thing is to ask yourself the questions: would the order be given in real life? Would the order be obeyed? If carried out will the order have a realistic effect on the battle? Number #7 involves the fact that running units fire too often and derive too much benefit from cover that they shouldn't have since they are running, not hiding behind trees. IIRC this issue is being addressed in CMBB. In the meantime when you rush troops just don't target the enemy with the rushing troops. Let them acquire the targets themselves. They will do this when they reach their destination. I personally don't have trouble with #7, but some people don't like it. That's why it is on the list. It's just something to discuss with your opponents. The list is not a list of rules. It is just a list of things I think you should touch on with your opponents so you know where the other guy stands. Treeburst155 out.

The scheduling glitch is in the program. The goal of the program is to do the following: 1)no player sees any scenario more than once 2)every player plays every other player once 3)Allied/Axis duties are split evenly 4)Through the course of the five scenarios each player will find his scores compared to the others in his section two times each. We seem to have fallen short on #3 and #4. Nabla may be able to correct this. #3 is not that important, it just gives players variety. #4 is VERY important with SMALL tournaments, which this is not. It would just be better if you did not find your score compared with the same players in your section all the time. We would like to have it so each player in your section plays the same side of a scenario as you do two times. This may not be possible however. If there were only six people in the whole tournament this would be a definite problem. As it is with this tourney I can determine the median from 24 games if I include the Nordic Wannabee games. Being compared with the same players in your section several times is not nearly as significant when there are so many games to get the median from. Even 12 games is enough to minimize this. Treeburst155 out.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by tero: "Oh, goody. As I suspected there was a killer assets in that location and t creamed my assets the way I feared." ? <hr></blockquote> Not necessarily. Hehehe.... Your idea about variable flag value would be very difficult to deal with on my end. The tourney is far too big for me to deal with all the screenshots sent at various times, manual figuring of scores, etc. Treeburst155 out. [ 11-04-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]</p>

There are many instances of this problem. I'm working on it. Treeburst155 out.

Yikes!! That should not be! Let me investigate that problem. It's probably something I did, but it might be a bug in Nabla's program. I'll be working on this. Thanks, Juha!! Treeburst155 out.

Scheer has provided his email address. I updated the final player list on page two. Treeburst155 out.

Welcome aboard, Ali!! I've updated the final list on page 3 with your email address. I still need an address for Pixie. Jarmo, We know you were not kidding about making punch out of the wine. For this reason I will be removing 500 points of your units from all your scenarios. I had to do the same to Kiwi Joe in an earlier tournament for threatened desecration of the wine. Unfortunately, he still won!

John, perhaps it is time to unleash the **** on your foes. You know what I mean. Fire away!! Treeburst155 out.

I think the side-specific briefings are very important when setups are locked or highly restricted. The restrictions need to be justified and explained to the player. The stage must be set for the battle. What has been going on during the last day or two with your specific troops? Why are they positioned like they are? Why are the setup zones so restrictive? Why are they locked? If the scenario designer can satisfy the player concerning these questions then the player won't mind the fixed setup. Also, there are some limitations as to what types of situations can be simulated with CM. Nabla is working on a scenario idea now that is very difficult to implement with CM. Locked units will probably be a necessity although he is trying to come up with a way to avoid it. If he cannot then he must lock the units in good positions for the situation. These positions will be based on his best judgment, which may not be someone else's idea of what is best. In effect, the player will take over command of Nabla's forces on turn one. The deployment of your new command having been directed by your predecessor, Nabla. I think this is a good way to look at a locked setup. Look at it as a new command assignment you have just arrived at. In the setup phase you are taking a tour of your troops deployment and familiarizing yourself with your new situation. Treeburst155 out.

It sounds to my like you simply use good tactics, Redwolf. I don't think that will upset anybody. If it does, then that's tough. War is hell. As far as that other thread you linked to, that mainly involved pre-game negotiations over force picks which is not an issue with this tournament. I will never run a tournament without pre-made scenarios again. This is the way to go IMO. Other problems on that thread involved gamey tactics. Since then I came up with the guidelines and recommendations I posted above. As long as players discuss the issue of gamey tactics adequately, there will be few problems.

Here's how the scoring system works. This is taken from the Wild Bill Tourney thread. The only difference is that you guys are playing five games in four sections where they are playing seven games in three sections. Wild Bill's Rumblings of War Scoring System (complete explanation) First of all, the primary purpose of this rather elaborate scoring system is to make it possible to measure skill inspite of scenario imbalance, since balance in CM is VERY difficult to achieve and is also not very realistic. The other thing accounted for with this scoring system is inconsistent play that gives big victories to players simply because their opponent surrenders prematurely or tries very risky tactics just for the fun of it. A person might play like this when he no longer feels he has a chance to win the tourney. His play, in such a case, would not be up to his real capabilities. This scoring system limits to a certain degree the points awarded for huge victories while still giving a nice bonus to those who manage one. The result is that a couple huge victories will put you noticeably out in front, but you will not be able to run away with the tournament. You will still have to exhibit strong play in the rest of your games to win the tournament. A player exhibiting consistent strong performance with no huge victories will be nipping at your heels. By the same token, if you have an especially bad game you do not find yourself hopelessly out of the running. Strong play in your other games will overcome your lapse of command ability in that disastrous game. HOW IT WORKS Across the three sections each scenario will be played twelve times by the twenty four players. Your score in a scenario will be listed among the eleven others who played that scenario from the side you did. When all the results are in for that scenario the median score will be determined for each side of the scenario. The median of a list of numbers is the number that has an equal amount of numbers lower than it, and higher than it. For example the median of this group of scores is 7 {1 3 6 7 8 10 14}. If there is an even amount of numbers in the group the median is midway between the two numbers that split the center. The median of this group is 6 {1 2 5 7 8 9}. You can think of the median as the average, but with less weight being given to extreme outliers. The median will usually be fairly near the average except in the case of outliers. Once the median for a side in a scenario is determined by looking at the twelve scores for that side, your distance from the median comes into play. If the median score for a side of a scenario is twenty five and you score thirty five points then you scored ten points over the median. BTW, if the median is much less than fifty using twelve games to calculate it then you have an unbalanced scenario. This does not matter using this system. After we figure the difference (either +/-) between your score and the median we plug that figure into a formula Nabla came up with. You do not need to worry about this formula! Nabla is making a simple program so you can see how it works in various hypothetical situations of your own creation without the need of a fancy calculator or college level math skills. If you can figure out the median you can come up with final tourney scores. The formula translates your distance from the median (+/-) into a tourney score. This is your final score for that scenario. The sum of all your final scores for the eight scenarios is how the winner will be determined in your section. Keep in mind that although game scores will be compared with players across the three sections to determine the median, the final tally of your scores will only be compared with those in your section. The more games used to determine the median, the more accurate the median will be. Determining the median is, in effect, determining the balance of a scenario. The more samples the better. That's why we go outside your section to come up with the median. Scoring summarized: 1) Compare scores of all players playing the same side in the scenario and determine the median. 2) Determine each player's distance in points , either plus or minus, from the median. (CM score - median = distance from median) 3) Plug this number into Nabla's formula and out comes your tourney score for that scenario. 4) Total all eight tourney scores to arrive at players' final scores. 5) The highest final scores in each section win that section and move on to the playoff series. There ya have it. In case you are mathematically inclined here is the formula: (d) represents your distance from the median. (d) can be positive or negative. (sgn) This represents the sign of (d). In place of (sgn) you will put either a "+" or a "-" into the formula. a This is the variable that determines the shape of the curve. To use the formula you need to substitute .055 for "a". e This is an interesting number equal to approximately 2.718. Like "pi" it has interesting mathematical properties which is the only reason it is used, according to Nabla. Scientific calculators have an "e" key on them. Now the formula: (sgn)(1/a)*(1-e to the power of (-a*|d|)) Don't worry about it!! Nabla's got a program coming you can use that will do all this automatically for you. I'll also be posting hypotheticals from time to time to help you get a handle on this. The main thing to understand is that consistent strong play is what you should strive for without getting caught up in the desire for overwhelming victories. If you see a golden opportunity for a Major victory you might go for it; but don't take big risks to achieve it. Treeburst155 out. [ 11-04-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]</p>

The following was taken from the Nordic Championship thread. It states how I think you guys should handle the gamey question. Now it is time for my lecture on gamey play. There are no rules concerning such play because every situation is different. What might be gamey in one situation might be perfectly OK in another. There is also disagreement on what is or isn't gamey. There are however some tactics that are generally considered gamey. If you use such tactics you may detract from your opponents' enjoyment of the game. Below is a list of tactics generally accepted as gamey. Discuss this list with your opponents. You should know how he feels about the list. Gamey tactics aren't nearly as effective if you KNOW your opponent is going to use them. If you know he intends to use some of these tactics you can defend against the tactics or use them yourself. I cannot over-emphasize the importance of coming to an understanding with your opponents concerning this list. Be truthful with your opponents if you intend to use any of the tactics below. POTENTIALLY Gamey Tactics-Use at your own risk. Your opponent may not like it if he sees these things. 1) Setting fire to "squares" or buildings unoccupied by enemy troops, ESPECIALLY to deny a VL or covered access to one. 2) Advancing large formations along the map edge. 3) Scouting with AT teams, crews of knocked out vehicles or guns, MG teams, and anybody who is "low" on ammo. 4) Recon with light (cheap) vehicles well into enemy territory. 5) Exposing AT teams and FOs SOLEY for the purpose of drawing enemy fire. 6) Ordering vehicle and gun crews to participate in an attack or hunt down enemy teams or spotters. 7) Rushing infantry straight at a known enemy position (especially through cover) WHILE TARGETING THEM with the running units, and with no supporting/suppressive fire. 8) Rushing the flag(s) in the last turn or two when you would have no hope of surviving were the game to go another turn or two. Avoid these tactics and you are safe. Use them and you have stepped into the risky gray area of "Potentially Gamey Tactics". GOLDEN RULES: Protect your AT teams until they have a target. Use half squads and spare HQs for scouting/recon. Keep your vehicle/gun crews alive. Ask yourself the following questions while giving orders: 1) Would the order be given in real life? 2) Would the order be obeyed in real life? 3) Will the results of that order affect the battle in a realistic way or will you be exploiting imperfections of the game engine? _______________________________________________ Cooper, I will adjust the deadline if the scenarios are large. I have only seen two of them so far. Treeburst155 out

You are welcome, Redwolf. I enjoy doing it. All I ask from players is that they try their best to finish their games by the deadline. Here is the Wannabee schedule. The Allied player is always listed on the left. SECTION ONE Scenario_1 redwolf vs Rother Mare_Ichthys vs fytinghellfish SGT_Gold vs Cooper Scenario_2 Mare_Ichthys vs redwolf Rother vs SGT_Gold fytinghellfish vs Cooper Scenario_3 redwolf vs SGT_Gold Cooper vs Mare_Ichthys fytinghellfish vs Rother Scenario_4 Cooper vs redwolf SGT_Gold vs fytinghellfish Mare_Ichthys vs Rother Scenario_5 redwolf vs fytinghellfish Rother vs Cooper Mare_Ichthys vs SGT_Gold SECTION TWO Scenario_1 THumpre vs Ricochet Massattack vs Jack_Trap White4 vs a1steaks Scenario_2 Massattack vs THumpre Ricochet vs White4 Jack_Trap vs a1steaks Scenario_3 THumpre vs White4 a1steaks vs Massattack Jack_Trap vs Ricochet Scenario_4 a1steaks vs THumpre White4 vs Jack_Trap Massattack vs Ricochet Scenario_5 THumpre vs Jack_Trap Ricochet vs a1steaks Massattack vs White4 SECTION THREE Scenario_1 Cpl_Carrot vs The_Commissar Dogface21 vs Lopaka Warhammer vs Wreck Scenario_2 Dogface21 vs Cpl_Carrot The_Commissar vs Warhammer Lopaka vs Wreck Scenario_3 Cpl_Carrot vs Warhammer Wreck vs Dogface21 Lopaka vs The_Commissar Scenario_4 Wreck vs Cpl_Carrot Warhammer vs Lopaka Dogface21 vs The_Commissar Scenario_5 Cpl_Carrot vs Lopaka The_Commissar vs Wreck Dogface21 vs Warhammer SECTION FOUR Scenario_1 Mr_Johnson vs Shadow Scheer vs Strider Sgt_Kelly vs ciks Scenario_2 Scheer vs Mr_Johnson Shadow vs Sgt_Kelly Strider vs ciks Scenario_3 Mr_Johnson vs Sgt_Kelly ciks vs Scheer Strider vs Shadow Scenario_4 ciks vs Mr_Johnson Sgt_Kelly vs Strider Scheer vs Shadow Scenario_5 Mr_Johnson vs Strider Shadow vs ciks Scheer vs Sgt_Kelly Treeburst155 out.

Below are your section assignments. Please be sure I have the correct email address for you. Once the beginning of the tourney is officially announced you must contact the others in your section and arrange a game. Once an agreement to begin has been arranged, one of you must email me. I will then send out the scenarios and related briefing files. You will receive instructions with your files. All will be clear, and all is VERY easy. You may start as many or as few games as you want at one time, just so you make the deadline. Here are your section assignments. Your schedules will be posted sometime tonight. Section One redwolf- redwolf@cons.org Rother- ullr@gci.net Mare Ichthys- bass-a@home.com SGT_Gold- rspilot@nyc.rr.com Cooper- coopermichael1@qwest.net fytinghellfish- keenedder@aol.com Section Two THumpre- aewert@home.com Ricochet- tramos1@optonline.com Massattack- declankerney@aol.com White4- god_emperor_lerche@yahoo.com a1steaks- gpaull@pacbell.net Jack Trap- glowbox@pacbell.net Section Three Cpl Carrot- rjb109@i4free.co.nz The Commissar- commissar84128@icqmail.com Dogface21- zippo79@onebox.com Warhammer-kurtlindquist@hotmail.com Wreck- leonard@dc.net Lopaka- rwinant@fenwick.com Section Four Mr Johnson- Klevi@qwest.net Shadow- shadow@jagdtiger.de Scheer- soenke.nommensen@kielnet.net Sgt_Kelly- frederic.callewaert@skynet.be ciks- edgars@batesadm.lv Strider- Strider@bak.rr.com [ 11-04-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]</p>

The tentative start date for the Nordic Championship is November 11th, I believe. This tournament would start the same day. I will probably get swamped with scenario requests since I'm kicking off two tournaments at once. If this happens it may be another day or two before some receive their various briefings and/or game files. In short, you're looking at another week or two, I'd say. Treeburst155 out.

Commissar, You can do all the TCP/IP you want as long as your opponents agree to it. If they want PBEM though, you have to be willing to comply. Warhammer, You are in at #24. The tourney is now full. Redwolf, I will be assigning all passwords as a part of my security procedure. I will know every player's password for every game. No player will be able to look at his opponents briefings, units, or setup. It is completely secure. It is very easy on the players. You will see when you get your first game started. Treeburst155 out.