WineCape's Wine Tourney

[Treeburst155]

Yes, this is a quiet bunch.

I really hate to do this but a question came up in tourney II that resulted in me actually adding another rule. I think it's an improvement to the CAL rules and makes them even more fair. This rule is now in effect for this tournament.

The Allied player may violate the "one force type" CAL rule SOLEY for the purpose of purchasing Allied Airborne Infantry Units. He may purchase a maximum of ONE company of these units. They can be paratroops or glider platoons. No other purchases in the Allied Airborne force types are allowed unless the player chooses to stick with the "one force type" rule, that force being Airborne of course.

This will allow the Allied player to pack some SMG power of his own into the battle while still giving him vehicle and armor support. Note that these Airborne platoons are not cheap however since mortars and MGs must be purchased with them.

Judge Treeburst155 out.

[ 06-17-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]

[Stalin's Organ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Treeburst155:

The Allied player may violate the "one force type" CAL rule SOLEY for the purpose of purchasing Allied Airborne Infantry Units. He may purchase a maximum of ONE company of these units.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Works for me - the Brit airborne are quite cheap tho'! But then they're only half-SMG - the hassle with using them alone is that yuo can't even get guns with them, 'cos they don't have the required trucks to tow them!!

However I quite like using them in non-CAL games - all Airborne except supporting vehicles and armour (and I tell my opponent so).

3" and 4.2" mortars are good enough for arty - they're dirt cheap and pack a punch!

BTW - does anyone know why US 4.2" mortars are so expensive?? It's 92 pts for UK ones, 164 for US ones (both regular), same ammo, 'bout the same reaction times......

[Ales Dvorak]

Originally posted by Treeburst155:

[QB]

Maximum game size is 1,500 pts.

General MAX?

[Ales Dvorak]

Maximum game size is 1,500 pts.

Provider ( snail or what )

Yes, I eat sneals a lot!

[Ales Dvorak]

[Treeburst155]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stalin's Organ:

Works for me - the Brit airborne are quite cheap tho'! But then they're only half-SMG - the hassle with using them alone is that yuo can't even get guns with them, 'cos they don't have the required trucks to tow them!!

However I quite like using them in non-CAL games - all Airborne except supporting vehicles and armour (and I tell my opponent so).

3" and 4.2" mortars are good enough for arty - they're dirt cheap and pack a punch!

BTW - does anyone know why US 4.2" mortars are so expensive?? It's 92 pts for UK ones, 164 for US ones (both regular), same ammo, 'bout the same reaction times......<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There was a thread on this not too long ago. It would probably be impossible to find with "search" the way it is but I know there are people out there who had some thoughts on this. If you're really curious just start another thread about it.

[Treeburst155]

TeAch and BradleyH have completed their secure version of the BadCo Endgame Randomizer. I highly recommend you guys use it for your games. I think it adds substantially to the fun of the game.

[Treeburst155]

Sajer has squeaked out a Minor Victory over KelsieD. The final score was 49-39.

Updated standings below. Congrats Sajer!!

Kiwi Joe 83

Sajer 49

KelsieD 39

Stalin's Organ 17

[Stalin's Organ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Treeburst155:

Stalin's Organ 17<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But not for long - Sock Monkey's taking a good thrashing, his Ami's having failed miserably to take the central objective - a large heavy building stocked with German infantry.

And poor old Scott's finding out the hard way that you usually need something a bit bigger than 20mm vs Stuarts.

against aka_Tom the game is evenly poised, although my 150m infantry gun on a hill overlooking the village seems to be causing him some grief - I'm sure there should be a different model when a Stuart gets hit by one of these - something like a small grey smudge for example!!

Otherwise we've each lost a few vehicles and some pixelated soldiers but he has all of the flags....so far!

[KiwiJoe]

Man we are a quiet bunch... theres only been 2 completed games in all this time???

I think some members better start playing fast, or quit.

[aka_tom_w]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KiwiJoe:

Man we are a quiet bunch... theres only been 2 completed games in all this time???

I think some members better start playing fast, or quit.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey Kiwi Joe...

Are we in the middle of a Game?

I thought we had one set up and ready to go, in fact we started did we not?

I thought I was waiting on you to return the last turn file?

Am I wrong?

I'm in the middle of 3 games, about to finish one my first match and about to set up two more new ones.

Any one else?

Progress report?

-tom w

[ 06-24-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[aka_tom_w]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KiwiJoe:

Man we are a quiet bunch... theres only been 2 completed games in all this time???

I think some members better start playing fast, or quit.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Quiet bunch is right....

Where are all the games and players in this tourney?

I'm in the middle of one with Mike (Stalin's organ) that is fairly even right now.

I'm getting smoked by Scott (ruhlir@home.com) in a game that could end any turn now.

ONe other game is still close, and I'm loosing ground fast in another game.

I'm about to start two more games this week.

-tom w

[Sajer]

I've finished one game, I'm almost done with another, I'm in the middle of a third, and I just started 3 more.

[Sock Monkey]

Hehe, I just realized that this thread exists! Woohoo!

Yes, it's true. Stalin is giving me quite a, umm... what's the polite way of putting it? He's spanking me like the monkey I am. I'm just holding on for points

Labappel is much better at massive human wave attacks than I am, just rushing what looks like a battalion of infantry through tank and machine gun fire to mow down the poor, confused (now very, very dead) platoon guarding the biggest flag on the map. Fortunately for me the random weather gave us thick fog, and a tank of mine caught two halftracks unlimbering a couple pieces of some sort of field artillery. So I'll take what I can get. He has at least a couple stuarts, though, which for my money are the best tank you can get in a thick fog short-75 rule game, so we'll see how things turn out.

Malcock is just plain unlucky. I had a panzer playing ping-pong with a sherman and managed to eek out that battle, only to have the panzer subsequently surprised by a daimler AC which put two successive 40mm rounds through the turret... to no effect. Can you believe it? It didn't get a chance to shoot a third... I imagine the crew was just sitting there slack-jawed wondering why God hates them so much.

And I just started playing a game with a Mr. Uhlir whose handle escapes me, but since he chose the Germans and I took the French I don't expect to do very well in that one. Never choose forces after a bottle of wine... it leads to odd choices!

[aka_tom_w]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Treeburst155:

Yes, this is a quiet bunch.

I really hate to do this but a question came up in tourney II that resulted in me actually adding another rule. I think it's an improvement to the CAL rules and makes them even more fair. This rule is now in effect for this tournament.

The Allied player may violate the "one force type" CAL rule SOLEY for the purpose of purchasing Allied Airborne Infantry Units. He may purchase a maximum of ONE company of these units. They can be paratroops or glider platoons. No other purchases in the Allied Airborne force types are allowed unless the player chooses to stick with the "one force type" rule, that force being Airborne of course.

This will allow the Allied player to pack some SMG power of his own into the battle while still giving him vehicle and armor support. Note that these Airborne platoons are not cheap however since mortars and MGs must be purchased with them.

Judge Treeburst155 out.

[ 06-17-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I really hate to be a whiner or complainer but this sort of seems like changes the rules half way through the game, and it will benefit those allied players most who are just now starting their set -ups

I know the rule has been made and it would be worse to go back to the way it was, BUT I don't understand why the rule was changed after the tournement had begun?

Again, I don't want to be a whiner or complainer but I don't understand what necesitated that Allied rules change?

I'm surprised no one else has commented on it?

-tom w

[Treeburst155]

Well Tom, you are right. This was a rule change in the middle of the game. I also agree that doing this sort of thing should be avoided in most circumstances.

This is why I did it:

1) It seemed like an excellent way to equalize the SMG problem which is still present in SMALLER battles like our tourney games. The limitation to 3 platoons of the troublesome SMGs isn't much of a limitation when it comes to small battles. This is even stated in the CAL rules at TH, I believe.

2) Since we were (and still are) in the early stages of the tournament I figured the added rule would not be a problem for people. Those most affected in a negative way would be those who had started a bunch of games as the Allies before I made the rule. I doubt anyone had more than three games as Allies started before I made the addition. To those who did have more than a game or two already started as Allies I apologize since you were not able to take advantage of the new rule in those games.

Inspite of this negative impact I felt the rule was a very good one and well worth it in the interest of keeping things even. Remember also that MANY players probably have an Allied game or two going that started before they could take advantage of the new rule. Most everybody is probably in the same boat.

Another thing to consider is that the CAL rules are actually fairly new. We are the first group, along with the CAL ladder, to use the rules. We are finding the "bugs"and ambiguities in the rules. For examples of this just read this thread and the one for WineCape's Tourney II. I believe the new rule is a definite improvement to the CAL rules when it comes to small battles.

I will not make changes or additions to the CAL rules on a whim. I doubt I will change them again during the tournament.

Treeburst155 out.

[aka_tom_w]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Treeburst155:

Well Tom, you are right. This was a rule change in the middle of the game. I also agree that doing this sort of thing should be avoided in most circumstances.

This is why I did it:

1) It seemed like an excellent way to equalize the SMG problem which is still present in SMALLER battles like our tourney games. The limitation to 3 platoons of the troublesome SMGs isn't much of a limitation when it comes to small battles. This is even stated in the CAL rules at TH, I believe.

2) Since we were (and still are) in the early stages of the tournament I figured the added rule would not be a problem for people. Those most affected in a negative way would be those who had started a bunch of games as the Allies before I made the rule. I doubt anyone had more than three games as Allies started before I made the addition. To those who did have more than a game or two already started as Allies I apologize since you were not able to take advantage of the new rule in those games.

Inspite of this negative impact I felt the rule was a very good one and well worth it in the interest of keeping things even. Remember also that MANY players probably have an Allied game or two going that started before they could take advantage of the new rule. Most everybody is probably in the same boat.

Another thing to consider is that the CAL rules are actually fairly new. We are the first group, along with the CAL ladder, to use the rules. We are finding the "bugs"and ambiguities in the rules. For examples of this just read this thread and the one for WineCape's Tourney II. I believe the new rule is a definite improvement to the CAL rules when it comes to small battles.

I will not make changes or additions to the CAL rules on a whim. I doubt I will change them again during the tournament.

Treeburst155 out.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OK

I don't dislike the rule,

but I have 4 games started as the Allies, 5 counting the the one Kiwi Joe waiting to approve the map on, so I was a little taken aback, when I first read about it.

I hope Kwiw Joe will let me start the game with him over again with the new rule in mind, the four other games with me as the Allies are anywhere between turn 9 and turn 22 so there is no going back now.

I'm not really complaining, it is a good rule. I'm just sort of a little disappointed Abbott did not adopt it in the first place for the CAL ladder rules.

(edit original post)

OK now I am going to complain a little.

I read some of the posts by MrSpkr regarding SturmKompanies in Recon Games. All four of my games in progress as the Allies are either Recon Rules or Mech rules and I am meeting plenty of Sturmkompanie squads and taking a real beating for it, SURE I would have liked to have a plattoon of Airbourne or Glider forces, you bet I would but I did ALL my Allied buying so far according to the strict CAL rules of "only one Force type" and I would say in my Recon Rules games I am paying for it. :confused:

Oh well

I guess its not a big deal really

lets move on

-tom w

[ 06-25-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[ 06-25-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[Treeburst155]

Tom,

Since your game with Kiwi Joe has not begun yet I think you should be allowed to restart that game so you can take advantage of the new rule if you so choose. It is my guess that Kiwi Joe will have no problem with this. If you haven't already done so you should write him.

Treeburst155 out.

[Treeburst155]

Tom W wrote:

"OK now I am going to complain a little.

I read some of the posts by MrSpkr regarding SturmKompanies in Recon Games. All four of my games in progress as the Allies are either Recon Rules or Mech rules and I am meeting plenty of Sturmkompanie squads and taking a real beating for it, SURE I would have liked to have a plattoon of Airbourne or Glider forces, you bet I would but I did ALL my Allied buying so far according to the strict CAL rules of "only one Force type" and I would say in my Recon Rules games I am paying for it.

Oh well

I guess its not a big deal really

lets move on

-tom w "

*********************************************

This is precisely why I added the new rule. Since you seem to play strictly Allies your last four games won't be as rough as your first four. You can get some SMGs now with vehicle support!!

It would have been great if Mr. Spkr had come up with this rule change idea BEFORE we started the tourney but it's hard to see these kinds of things in advance. Remember, we're actually beta testing these rules. As a result, your Allies are now better off. (at least in this tourney).

Treeburst155 out.

[KiwiJoe]

Hmmm if I let you have smgs Tom it will prolly take an extra turn to kill u. I only planned for a 7 turn game so Im goning to have to find some extra time in my busy schedule

[Treeburst155]

LOL!! Kiwi Joe, you're too much. I hope Tom W kicks your ass.

The Always Impartial, Treeburst155

[aka_tom_w]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Treeburst155:

LOL!! Kiwi Joe, you're too much. I hope Tom W kicks your ass.

The Always Impartial, Treeburst155<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I HOPE so too !!! (I guess thats the real juvenile smiley, thought I would try it out for psychological warfare purposes !

Joe and I will need to set up again

oh well

-tom w

[ 06-25-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[Stalin's Organ]

Come on guys - let's at least keep this on the first page or 2........

Updates:

aka Tom managed to kill off my 150 IG with a gunless Stuart, at het cost of eth Stuart. No crew killed, but that gun was sure dominating the battlefield!

Otherwise both left flanks have collapsed, there's no obvious winner in the middle, and we're only up to T14!

Scott's managed to Wirblewind a 2 story building to death taking most of a platoon with it and upsetting the delicate balance of my overwhelming victory in our Green vs Vet's game (I'm the Vet) . But otherwise things are progressing reasonably well - Stuart's Rampant.

Sock Monkey is hereby advised that he should get as many troops of the map as he can before they all get killed!!

I've just started another game - have yet to set up, so that leaves me 3 or 4 to get going....must do something about them this weekend.

[Sajer]

Treeburst, what is the rule about refusing a map? I know you are allowed to refuse a map if you don't like it, but is there a limit to the amount of times that you can refuse maps?

[aka_tom_w]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sajer:

Treeburst, what is the rule about refusing a map? I know you are allowed to refuse a map if you don't like it, but is there a limit to the amount of times that you can refuse maps?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't quote me but I understood it was ONE refuse each

as per

"Maps

Quick battles Upon entering the game during setup and seeing the map a player has the right to decline the setup and ask for another if he feels the map favors one player or the other."

Oops perhaps I am mistaken

I "thought" it was ONE decline per person and then the third map you had to play on.

Perhaps I am mistaken?

-tom w