slysniper

I did try to give each player a hopeful mix of strong side/ weak side, scenarios, the problem is 3 scenario played out different than play testing showed. As far as Norrey being the win for the Germans each time, note that the strongest victory was 90/10 Canadian and I will be more than happy to play the British side even after you know what the Battle is like and show you in play who I think should win this one, or at the least end in a very close battle. I know a couple of the Canadian players did not pay attention to their briefings and set up totally wrong for a chance to play this one well, so the scores reflect it. This is the part that makes the system work, does not matter who had the best side or how balenced it was. The comparision in results is what you are competing at.

Remember I asked you all to rate yourselves on your gameplay before we started, most of you did, a few I had to from comments you made. Anyway I put a win percentage down for each of you and this is how they compare to your final position, In General, in only two rounds the separation was already working, with more games of coarse the better it would work. Also this is not very accurate because it was created by only opinions of skill in the rating, but I think in shows how fast this system levels the playing field. Miles 13 points 50% Walker 12.5 points 70% Dinga 44 11.5 points 70% U8led 10 points 50% Melb_will 9.5 points 50% Bert 9 points 65% Fiaros 7 points 60% Gort 7 points 40% Mikado 5 point 33% Warhammer 3 points 50% Major Tum 3 points 50% Ozi 3 points 20% It would be nice if players had ratings that they would earn from tournaments in a standard format. I have a system for that also, but that is another story. [ January 10, 2006, 02:12 PM: Message edited by: slysniper ]

I just want to congratulate our champion K.A. Miles. Well deserved Victory. Though the point spread is so small between our leaders. I think their records show that final positions are deserved. This also shows the scoring system seems to work pretty well. K.A. Miles Best American Score The Last Road Out Best German Score The Bloody Stream 2nd Best German Score What Were We Thinking Best German Score Norrey 2nd Best German Score Ghost among the fog Out of 6 matches, 3 best scores and 5 strong showings – well done Walker 2nd Best American Score The Last Road Out 3rd Best German Score The Bloody Stream 2nd Best German Score Panzer’s in the Peel with a upset score vs Miles Best Canadian Score Norrey 3trd Best American Score Ghost Among the Fog Upsetting miles help him to move up the ranks, one best score and 5 showings. I like the fact he moved up for doing well against the leader. Dinga 44 Best German score What Were We Thinking Best American score Panzer’s in the peel Upset vs Gort 3rd best German Score Norrey Best American Score Ghost among the Fog Upset vs U8led Out of 6 matches, 3 best scores and 4 showings – Close to the leader but no question as to who did better U8led 2nd Best German The Last Road Out 2nd Best British The Bloody Stream 3rd Best American What were we Thinking Best German Score Panzer in the peel Upset vs fiaros and the only German to win this battle. Did well but it is easy to see why he is under these other 3 and deserves to be above the rest of the ranks just because he managed to win with the Germans in “Panzer in the Peel” Also note that 8 of the 12 possible best scores are among these 4

This method is a good way to test true skill against two opponants. If and only if both games are played together at the same time, if one follows the other it alters the second game because of knowledge gained from the first playing. The problem with this method is then you do have that perfect knowledge of the units in play for both sides. Thus in the name of fairness you have eliminated one of the most important things CM has managed to add. Uncertainty This factor takes away a aspect that I beleive you should not remove from competative play.

And the final match results are Match #6 Ghost among the fog Germans vs Americans 52/38 Melb_will vs Major Tum 45/50 K.A. Miles vs Ozi Digger 39/54 Bertblitzkrieg vs Warhammer 39/61 Fiaros vs Gort 37/56 Mikado vs Walker 34/66 U8led vs Dinga44 Germans Melb_will 3 points (1.5 points for weak side win) K.A. Miles 2 points Bertblitzkrieg 1 point Americans Dinga44 3 points (1 point upset) Gort 2 points (1 point upset) Walker 1 point

The final standings are Miles 13 points Walker 12.5 points Dinga 44 11.5 points U8led 10 points Melb_will 9.5 points Bert 9 points Fiaros 7 points Gort 7 points Mikado 5 point Warhammer 3 points Major Tum 3 points Ozi 3 points [ January 09, 2006, 05:44 AM: Message edited by: slysniper ]

Sorry Guys, you will have to wait until Monday, I have all my infomation for the outstanding match sitting at work. What started 5 months ago is now finially finishing. My goal was three months, now running one I would say it should have been 4 months, 2 months for each match, which you all did normally. Hope you have had fun, made new friends, enjoyed the challenge and are wanting some more. I like the scoring system concepts and think it seems better than other types of formats, but How could I not like them since they are my baby. One last note: if you do not hear from me for a while, it is because my dad might be dieing, it is not likely he will not make it through what he faces. So I will be with family if this happens. He has had a good life and is a good man, so no sorry's or anything needs to be said. I just want to let you know if I am not able to get to this in the next few days.

Walker has made a major push to sit in the lead at the moment, Dinga has moved up but still needs the last match in to slide up furture. This competition is still up in the air. Knowing the situation in the final battle, nothing is finalized yet. At the moment, the scoring for the final scenario should look something like this, highest to lowest as shown without knowing where KA Miles will fit in. Melb will Dinga 44 Gort Bert Fiaros Mikado Walker

Round two results for 2 of the three scenario's Match #4 Germans vs Americans 55/42 U8led vs fiaros 41/54 Walker vs K.A. Miles 40/58 melb_will vs Bertblitzkrieg 37/58 Warhammer vs Mikado 37/63 Ozi Digger vs Major Tum 22/78 Gort vs Dinga44 Germans U8led 3 points, (1.5 point weak side) (.5 point upset) Walker 2 points, (2.5 point upset) Melb will 1 point American Dinga44 3points (.5 point upset) Major Tum 2 points Mikado 1 points Match #5 Norrey Germans vs Canadians 71/29 K.A. Miles vs U8led 70/30 BertBlitzkrieg vs Gort 58/42 Fiaros vs melb_will 58/42 Dinga44 vs Warhammer 41/50 Major Tum vs Mikado 10/90 Ozi Digger vs Walker Germans K.A. Miles 3 points BertBlitzkrieg 2 points Fiaros 1 point Dinga44 1 point Canadians Walker 3 points (1 point weak side) Mikado 2 points (1 point weak side) Warhammer 1 point Melb will 1 point

Present standings are with one match still to finish Walker 11.5 points Miles 11 points U8led 10 points Bert 8 points Dinga 44 7.5 points Fiaros 7 points Melb_will 5 points Mikado 5 point Gort 4 points Warhammer 3 points Major Tum 3 points Ozi 3 points

I know that the Germans did well in most of the tournament battles, But I also know of the British victory that will be posted also. Anyway in my opinion at the moment, this battle can swing strong in either direction, depending of play or be a fight to the last turn for a win. Play Balence is still fine in my Book. Wire could be fun, but something else would have to go to make room for the impact in play.

I see 4 options for how the Germans could attack Norrey in this map. One option that I do not know if anyone used is to move some of the armor units all the way over to the infantry attacking from the south by the eastern back road over the bridge they control. This added support would normally really help this German attack on town. Another choice is for the Germans to move up on the North edge of the map along the tracks, I was surprised of how this option was normally a desaster for the germans. [ January 02, 2006, 06:10 PM: Message edited by: slysniper ]

For the British to be successful, they needed guns placed all along their defensive line, held in hiding until good killing shots were seen. Which always became available because of the type of attack the germans must preform. The infantry needed to be commited enough to guard against any activity to the south from the German infantry, Normally German armor shooting bldgs down was not impacting this much.

Thus the battle for the city was really normally being decided by the attack from the south and how that infantry did as to challenging for the heart of town and if the German armor could get up there also and support this effort. It also normally forced the Allied Shermans also to try to support the infantry in town. Most playtest were showing casualty points so high for the Germans that they did not have a chance unless they snatched and held the flags. Preventing them from moving freely through town would almost seal their doom.

During playtest of Norrey, I felt the British had the advantage. So adding wire is a interesting thought but at the time would not have crossed my mind. Playtesting was normally showing 3-4 panzers being lost to the allied guns. The shermans were normally getting 5-6 Panzers, thus leaving 2-3 German tanks by the end of the match. Normally against 2-3 remaining Shermans. The Halftrack german infantry normally was not much of a impact, other than normally dieing.

Walkers is done & Major Tums is only a turn away, I could have had this done if my Email problems would get solved with Miles, hopefully I can get the work email resolved on Tuesday.

Sending them to my work address through another provider is working, it is just one of them things that it would be nice to know what is happening. No clue as to what Zip program he was using when trying to attach.

I also won with my first blind play, but I do like to go back and try different tactics, excuse me if I believe that is a good way to develope my skills.

Your correct, Panther Commander. For me CM puts ASL to shame, I really am not saying otherwise. What I am trying to say is that ASL has many aspects that it still is the only game in town that approached them. Beach landings, calvary, motorcycles. Maps with buildings with more than 2 level. The Japs, the Chinese and the list can go on. Also if you as the players did not like the way the rules approached a topic, it was agreed apon and changed. Any rule could be adjusted. There is a aspect that CM will never give. I would love to be able to set my own point values for purchasing units in CM. If ASL was my favorite game I would not be selling it, You are most correct.

Oh, come on David, there is one, it is we just find it much more enjoyable to not have to know all the rules, move tolkens and can now see our battles play out in a little 3d world. ASL has been and still is a mark that has made this Hobby what it is, it was Miniature's brought to a easy playable level. This is the only computer game that is close in concept, but also the reason why this is the one game that true war buffs love, hopefully we will see the next level of this hobby soon with the forth coming releases. Oh, bye the way, I am in the process of selling my complete collection of ASL stuff, if anyone is interested, better deal now than if it goes on Ebay. [ December 31, 2005, 03:31 AM: Message edited by: slysniper ]

For this is how one learns, Armies have been playing wargames for a very long time. You play the same battle to correct mistakes, test different tactics and to see what the outcome of different options will do. This way when you get into the situation where it counts how you decide to approach it in first go around, your are able to draw on experience as to deciding what might be the best approach. No it is not the same trying to play a defender that has guarded the same terrian three times, he is not going to make very many mistakes. But if your battle plan is sound, it does not matter. How much can you learn if you do not go back and review what you might have done differently. I have not played many QB's but those players that I have played that find that type of play as their normal, so far have been the weaker players I have played. I normally am playing by their set ups and they normally have a better feel for what the map will look like and how to buy a good strong mix of units, but what I find is most are weak in knowing how to find, protect and destroy the enemy. It is sad if you have played people that are replaying scenarios and not letting you know up front. I like playing blind, but that is not alway possible. but I always let who I am playing know if I have played the scenario before, this way they can deside if we will play or how they will play. Choosing to play blind or not. I have to admit, if I send a scenario to a opponant and let them set up and pick sides, it is amazing how they somehow always pick the strong side, so i know your point is valid, even though there is all these comments of a honor system. Right, thus the only true blind vs blind set up at the moment that has good play is found in a few tournaments. [ December 30, 2005, 07:16 PM: Message edited by: slysniper ]

For me, the the perfect situation is a good Scenario design with a interesting mix of weapons, a battle that allows the players some options on how to play it so that it is not a gareentee as to what the opponant will be doing. And the last point, a game that neither man has seen or done so that both are making decisions for the first time, just like real life.

Very Good points Thus a reason for how I hosted "From out of the Dust" Tournament, the four Scenario's I have in the tournament were made for it, no one had seen them and no player could have any fore knowledge other than what the briefing would give. Thus giving you that QB quality but with mission goals that QB's lack. Another way to get a scenario with a QB quality that you know for sure that you are playing blind is to add a third player, each of you create a battle and select the forces, then let the other two play your battle. This works well, gives you much more variety and can still provide a true blind game match. For me I would say the same about QB's, though I agree with what you say QB's provide, to me the static of a QB is generally knowing what kind of forces I will be playing against. It is rare indeed to find someone that will select unusual or low quility troops or equipment. It becomes the same old very quickly, who cares that I do not know where the enemy stugs are at, I just know that they are stugs. Get the point. I think there is a best of both worlds that has not been implemented in the hobby very much. I like scenario's because they feel more real, during my time in the service I do not ever remember anyone giving me a option of which units were supporting me or how I could request anything. Nor was my missions normally clueless as to what I was up against or what terrain I would be working in. Every effort is made to get this info before hand. But like the QB, I would not have a clue normally as to the enemys exact location or for sure the tactics that they would use.

This might be a good topic that has not been discussed recently. JasonC started me thinking about it from another post. It started because of a discussion on weapon modeling. I would like to hear from others what they think of this concept, maybe some of you think this game is about the skill of knowing what to buy.

Against the AI defender, you should be able to win if you have skill in playing this game. Jason tactics are good and show a proper advance. I have also tried the tank through the alleys and had no problem coming out at the corner of the court yard. You might as well run the tanks up the road, found it works just as well. This is a good one to master as the British, once you start winning it without trying to avoid the AI you are using your troops well. I start by having infantry in the bldg that looks down the road to the plaza, then roll the tanks partway up the street on the sides to use the bldgs as flanking protection. If anything is straight ahead the combination of arms will normally pin it quickly. If needed the mortar can move to view from the alley next to the bldg the overwatch infantry is in. Next I move my infantry just as jason does to the bldgs left of the road I am advancing on. I do send one or two half squads right, more for securing my flank from any units trying to sneak up on my armour or to get flanking position on the plaza. Not a problem from the AI, but a human, it is a must. My goal is to smoke out the gun locations, normally once your infantry hits the bldgs adjacent to the plaza, they will take some heat. I focus on the guns when they open up, then move the motar in position from between whichever bldg is needed, then rush the tanks. Normally the guns are struggling with being pinned, if the motar does not get it the tanks will. What little effect the infantry has is minor, normally I can take one tank and one squad and prevent any infantry that is close from doing much. I will not claim such perfect low losses as Jason. If I remember well from the few plays I have done, Normally lost one tank to either the AT or infantry close assault or weapons. Also normally lost a few squads of men. Say half getting into position on the plaza, normally a few more taking the bldg if against anything other than the stupid AI. Good luck, Its a fun little Battle to enjoy. [ December 30, 2005, 06:07 AM: Message edited by: slysniper ]