Nabla

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by redwolf hates artillery: 1) I think that people will mostly surrender when they have lost motivation because of this game, not their standing in the tournament. So I think that tuning the scoring does not prevent them from surrendering. If your twist does not prevent them from surrendering, your twist makes the surrender worse for the whole tournament score, although as you say not much. 2) I kinda like it that the "winner" can't gain much anymore and the "looser" can try something insane. That may open great game moments and maybe turn the game. The latter is especially important in possibly unbalanced scenarios, since even if you have been beaten badly you still don't know how much your enemy has left, especially ammunition.<hr></blockquote> Both of your points are logically correct - this is really just a question of what kind of gameplay is encouraged. If we want to give the loser a free ride to surrender, or encourage him to take big risks then we definitely should not use the kind of asymmetric system I've depicted in my previous post. Heck, I don't know. At least we have a lot of options. I think that at this point I have to wait for input from Da Tournament Man aka Treeburst155. But your point is correct in that now we have to identify the biggest problems with respect to reward and motivation. That is what has to be done next. Back to the drawing board for that exercise. [Edited cause this is still evolving.] [ 12-19-2001: Message edited by: Nabla ]</p>

I think I have a great idea. I even contemplated for a while on my own signature, and I still think the idea is great. Above I've mentioned several times that I'm worried about the motivation of the players when they reach the flat part of the (old) curve. As Treeburst155 wrote above, it is difficult to know whether you're in this part, since you don't know the median of the scenario. But sometimes you really do now. Let's say you've let the other guy kill (n+4) tanks with one AT gun, or you've been ambushed by some schreck times, or let your guys get stuck in arty fire in the open. We've already seen players surrender in the Nordic and Nordic Wannabee tournaments. So let us for now assume that the two players - call them A and B - both know that they are on the flat part of the curve. A is on the positive side, and B on the negative. With the old curve neither player really has a motivation to play, unless B has a major plan which can swing him over to the non-flat part of the curve (or A assumes that B has one). So A can play defensively and B can try something insane. But if B has no grand plan, as is usually the case if you've been beaten for a while, he might as well surrender. He loses nothing by doing so. And A might just as well stop playing, because he has nothing to accomplish. If someone gains a point it makes no change for the tournament. This is not a good thing. Now here's the new twist. Let's make the curve asymmetric. On the positive side we use the old, flat curve. On the negative side we use the new curve which is not quite as flat. Now A is still on a flat curve, but B is not. To see how this affects the motivation of the players let us now think about what happens if either of the players gains a point. Obviously, since the curve is not flat on B's side, if B gains a point his score will become better. B has a motivation to play. In particular, B has a clear motivation not to surrender. What about A? If A gains a point, his own score will not improve. But it will affect B's score. Therefore, by gaining a point A will improve his own chances of winning the tournament by reducing B's chances. Furthermore, and here's the real beauty, A will not gain an additional advantage with respect to other players in the tournament. B's score is so low with respect to the median that if B loses more it will not affect the median of B's side. A's score does not change, the median of A's side does not change, and the median of B's side does not change. Therefore, there is no change in the scores of A and the other players in the tournament. Only B's score changes. So we have the following properties. 1. B has a motivation to gain additional points. 2. B has a clear motivation not to surrender. 3. A has a motivation to gain additional points. 4. An overwhelming victory of A over B will not decide the whole tournament. But it will reduce B's chances of winning the tournament. I think this is what we want. Problem solved?

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Treeburst155: Nabla, I don't have permission to access the machine where your programs are stashed. Somebody must have beefed up security on you. :eek: <hr></blockquote> Try now.

Ok, I've compiled the new versions for DOS (there were some problems with win2k, but I could make the compiler stable for a while). New features: 1. The -o option for nabla-tournament-schedule. It tries to optimize the schedule over all possible side changes (see posts above for description of the criteria over which the optimization is done). This can be pretty slow if the number of players is bigger than six. For eight players it takes 7 minutes on my computer. 2. Even without the -o flag nabla-tournament-schedule now prints the value of the criteria measuring the goodness of the created schedule. 3. nabla-score-tournament now distributes neutral points (for example, points from neutral flags) evenly to both players. By default it does this silently, but with -d option you can see what it does. 4. nabla-score-tournament now requires as its first argument the form of the score function to be used (the nonlinearity). It is either exp, which is the old one, or asinh, which is sgn(d)1/a*asinh(a*|d|). Here asinh is the hyperbolic arc sine, which for low values of d behaves very much like the old function, but for larger values is not as flat. See posts above for a picture showing the difference. A reasonable parameter value for this curve is 0.14, which for low values of d follows closely the curve corresponding to the older curve with Treeburst155's parameter value 0.055. Get the new versions here. Treeburst155: I will make a program which will simply plot the d,score value pairs, so that you can view them with any program you want. PS. nabla-curve-parameter is practically obsolete by now, but its still there just in case. [ 12-18-2001: Message edited by: Nabla ]</p>

Hi Treeburst155! A status report. I've implemented both the neutral point distribution (evenly to both players) and the second scoring curve into the program. Now you can choose on command line which of the curves you want to use. Both curves have one parameter which determines the flatness of the curve. I've compiled and tested the current version under Linux, but I still have to compile it under win2k. I will try to do this today or tomorrow. In addition, I still have to write one small program and an Excel macro with which you can plot and see the different curves. I will also return to some of the points you've made above later on.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by jshandorf: Wait a second... There is absolutely nothing wrong with the way games are scored in CM. If in a game you are unable or unwilling to take a flag(s) and it is left neutral then TOO BAD. You lose those points but also so does your opponent. The REAL solution to this problem is then for every MAP played you have an equal amount of flag points available for EACH map. ... There is no need to modify someone's score, and thus elevate their average, because they were too inept to capture the flags but not inept enough to make them neutral. <hr></blockquote> Are you sure you've understood the problem? We're not saying that there is something wrong with the way CM handles neutral flags. However, the handling of neutral flags is not suitable for the purposes of the tournament scoring system under development. This is of course not the fault of CM because its scoring system was not designed for such unbalanced tournaments. About your signature: Current evolutionary theory emphasizes successful reproduction over survival. For example, there are a number of species in which the males let themselves be eaten after copulation because the chance that they get to copulate again is negligible, and the nourishment of the female increases the survival of the female and the offspring. Survival is important only as long as it increases reproductive success. Therefore, Evolution - Too Stupid To Reproduce. [ 12-13-2001: Message edited by: Nabla ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Treeburst155: Hi Nabla! <hr></blockquote> Hi Mike! <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Treeburst155: 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. <hr></blockquote> All of your observations are correct. (Actually, I designed the curve so that in the range 0-30 the curves would be identical.) However, we have to take a stand concerning very high scores. I mean, are they rewarded at all when compared with intermediate victories (and also, are big losses punished). The current choice is practically flat for victories which deviate more than 50 points from the median. This may be appropriate, since it is very effective in neutralizing very inconsistent play. But then again, if someone gets a very large victory even though the opponent tried to play seriously, he only gets an intermediate final score. This is the tradeoff in the current system. 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. The new curve tries to give some reward for large victories as well, and motivates both players to keep on trying even if one side gains the upper hand. But if the new curve is adopted the cost is reduced protection against inconsistent play. In my previous post I said that the new curve is my suggestion, but this is actually false. The truth is that I don't have enough experiense to say which one would be better. We can modify these in the future, but for the current tournaments we have to select one. Treeburst155: you're the judge, really. <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Treeburst155: 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? <hr></blockquote> I said I'd spare you from the details Its a different formula, I'll give you the details if you decide to choose that one. <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Treeburst155: 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. <hr></blockquote> No, I won't forget that. But don't you forget that I said that I'll implement that into the scoring program so that you can leave the original results untouched [There's always at least one typo.] [ 12-12-2001: Message edited by: Nabla ]</p>

Time to dig up this thread from the heap of dust. It's been quiet on this front for a while since first I had to take a break off CM after the Nordic Tournament had been started (way too much CM for a while). Then my win98 broke down and I was unable to play CM!! I had to install win2k from scratch, and now CM runs smoothly again Anyway, because of these breaks I have not yet written / compiled a new version of the schedule / scoring program. I'll do it pretty soon if the same compiler still works under win2k. The subject of this post, however, is the exact form of the scoring curve. I just think that the old curve was a bit too flat - some reward should be given even for the really big wins. I'll spare you (=Treeburst155) from the details for now, and I'll just let you choose between two different curves. These are depicted below. The green curve is just the "neutral" scoring curve plotted for comparison. The blue curve is the good old curve chosen by Treeburst155. The red curve is the new one I'm suggesting. So, Treeburst155, which one would you pick? [i changed the name of this thread to reflect my current feelings about the scoring system. Also edited a typo.] [ 12-11-2001: Message edited by: Nabla ]</p>

Yes, an excellent idea. Very useful for unbalanced scenarios. A big YES vote from me. But once again the implications of this w.r.t. the strategic AI may be complicated. Who knows... [ 12-03-2001: Message edited by: Nabla ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Treeburst155: I have several game results in now. As soon as I get the time I will record them and forward them to Nabla, Wild Bill, and WineCape. <hr></blockquote> Now that will be interesting I've already received some DARs (During Action Reports) from a few players (thank you ), and in those I've seen both desperation and joy. Just like it should be... Hope you guys are all having fun.

Thanks guys . I think I'll go with win 2000 and wwb's advice to install as admin and use as a power user.

Ok, my win98 finally did it and broke down so that CM won't start anymore. I had some driver in the past already so I though I might change over to win 2000. Since I've never used that one (I use Linux 98% of the time) I don't know what to expect. So I have a few questions: 1. Any specific problems to look forward to? 2. From what I've heard I've gathered that in win 2000 you have a dedicated administrator account. Should CM be installed as the administrator or can it be installed as a normal user? Thanks a lot in advance

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by The Commissar: Quite the laugh riot if you momentarily forget that this is what passes for a respected politician here. <hr></blockquote> I remember that this guy gave us quite a shiver here up north when he started to imply that Finland should be a part of Russia again. This was at a time when the political situation in Russia seemed quite unstable. Lately we've associated him with nude dancing and stuff like that. Still gives us a shiver, but for completely different reasons.

Had to bump this so that we won't get completely lost.

All rumours implying that the FBI has already caught me are highly exaggerated. I'm still in business (the card you mentioned is shown below). [ 12-02-2001: Message edited by: Nabla ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Joseph Porta: I just wondered - if I surrender a game; that will upset the balance of the scores, right ? I am in a situation - no, make that *two* situations where I would in other circumstances (and in real life) surrender or at least withdraw. Since I can't withdraw, should I just slug on ? There's still some 12 turns left, and I'm getting very bored indeed...<hr></blockquote> Just try to get the best possible CM score, whatever it takes. Remember that the scenarios are unbalanced, so others playing for the same side might be doing pretty badly as well.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by White4: So you aren't going to tell us how the reach the hidden level on Economy of Forces to get the BFG9000 and really put a hurtin' on our enemies? Does it have something to do with the zombies? <hr></blockquote> Since the cheat codes are not in the manual you are absolutely correct.

If you have any questions about the scenarios please email them directly to the scenario maker, that is, either Wild Bill Wilder or me. This way we can avoid information leaks on the board. You can find our email addresses in our profiles. Basically we're not going to tell you anything outside the scope of the CM manual. This is because everyone should have the same information at the same time in each scenario. Since the games are already on, this implies that we can not tell you anything scenario-specific. [Edited because this is a delicate issue.] [ 11-27-2001: Message edited by: Nabla ]</p>

If you have any questions about the scenarios please email them directly to the scenario maker, that is, either Wild Bill Wilder or me. This way we can avoid information leaks on the board. You can find our email addresses in our profiles. Basically we're not going to tell you anything outside the scope of the CM manual. This is because everyone should have the same information at the same time in each scenario. Since the games are already on, this implies that we can not tell you anything scenario-specific. [Edited because this is a delicate issue.] [ 11-27-2001: Message edited by: Nabla ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Jarmo: Jarmo had a good idea here. Impossible. Must be a case of mistaken identity... <hr></blockquote> That happens to be my real name too, but since it was already taken...

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Treeburst155: OK, I have an idea here. All you guys in Section 3 contact Cogust and let him know how far your game with Von Heinrich has progressed. Cogust can then decide whether he would prefer to start over completely or continue with the last file you sent to Von Heinrich. This will allow Cogust to start fresh if a game has not progressed very far. <hr></blockquote> Yes, an excellent idea. Problem solved.

Don't celebrate yet, guys. We will try to recruit a replacement. Judging by the original demand that should not be too hard. Players in von Heinrich's section: could you post a reply here stating whether you had already started your battle with von Heinrich, and if you have, on what round the battle is. Do not post any other details of the battle here. [Edited because my English skills are developing on the fly ] [ 11-22-2001: Message edited by: Nabla ]</p>

It looks like there's been some leaking here. Naughty you Just try to keep the steam inside for a couple of months [Edited a typo.] [ 11-20-2001: Message edited by: Nabla ]</p>

There are a couple of issues I have to emphasize here before the tournament starts. DO NOT SHARE INFORMATION ABOUT THE SCENARIOS WITH OTHER CM PLAYERS BEFORE THE END OF THIS TOURNAMENT!! Do not even tell your wife - she might be involved in the tournament with a strange username. Because the scenarios are (possibly) unbalanced, the value of extra information is even greater in this tournament than in ordinary tournaments. A seemingly harmless message like "Holy sh.., X just knocked out my only remaining AFV with his Tiger" in the Cesspool can spoil the fun - and the results - of other players. In the WBWRW tournament this limitation has led to messages like "Holy sh.., BEEP just BEEPED my BEEP BEEP with his BEEP" - this is one way to let out the steam Also, REMEMBER THAT THE SCENARIOS ARE (POSSIBLY) UNBALANCED You might get your a.. kicked royally, but still get a good final score at the end. Treeburst155: could you send a copy of this message to the players with email so that we can be sure that everyone knows this. We've tried to put together an action packed thriller for you. I hope that you will enjoy this tournament. Good luck to all players!

There are a couple of issues I have to emphasize here before the tournament starts. DO NOT SHARE INFORMATION ABOUT THE SCENARIOS WITH OTHER CM PLAYERS BEFORE THE END OF THIS TOURNAMENT!! Do not even tell your wife - she might be involved in the tournament with a strange username. Because the scenarios are (possibly) unbalanced, the value of extra information is even greater in this tournament than in ordinary tournaments. A seemingly harmless message like "Holy sh.., X just knocked out my only remaining AFV with his Tiger" in the Cesspool can spoil the fun - and the results - of other players. In the WBWRW tournament this limitation has led to messages like "Holy sh.., BEEP just BEEPED my BEEP BEEP with his BEEP" - this is one way to let out the steam Also, REMEMBER THAT THE SCENARIOS ARE (POSSIBLY) UNBALANCED You might get your a.. kicked royally, but still get a good final score at the end. Treeburst155: could you send a copy of this message to the players with email so that we can be sure that everyone knows this. We've tried to put together an action packed thriller for you. I hope that you will enjoy this tournament. Good luck to all players! [Edited to remove a typo.] [ 11-12-2001: Message edited by: Nabla ]</p>