KiwiJoe Posted July 10, 2001 Share Posted July 10, 2001 Ha! If u saw the 2 games Im playing now you wouldnt be saying that... lets just say I predict my average will be rising not falling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted July 10, 2001 Share Posted July 10, 2001 Unofficially of course here is an update Sajer squeaks a narrow victory with allied short 75 forces over aka_tom_w's Axis forces. A BRUTAL flag rush ending, the game dragged on until the 28th turn when both offered a cease fire as per the turn end randomizer. tom held the one major flag and Sajer took three minor ones. Sajer had the ONLY AFV left active, (A wounded (one man down) .50 cal toting M1A5 U.S. HT) It was a TOUGH Battle and Sajer got the better of it . Sajer 56 aka_tom_w 44 (this is the official result we both agree to it) -tom w <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Treeburst155: Here's the standings after the Stalin/KelsieD draw: KelsieD.............267.... 5..........53.4 GClement..........124.....2.........62 aka_tom_w.........142.....3.........48.3 Kiwi Joe..............83.....1........83 Sajer...................134.....3........44.6 Stalin's Organ......65.... 2........32.5 The_Capt............56.....2........28 Sock Monkey........0.....0.........0 Labappel...............0......0........0 KelsieD continues to maintain a strong average after 5 games. Nice work, KelsieD!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> [ 07-10-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalin's Organ Posted July 10, 2001 Share Posted July 10, 2001 When was the final date for results, and IIRC the placings will be on total score, not average won't they? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Ten players per tournament, each participant plays the other nine one time, victory points are accumulated from game to game, the highest total at the end wins. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> (from page 1) - yep, thought so! So if KJ doesn't get his a-into-g he may well have the highest average, and still come last! [ 07-10-2001: Message edited by: Stalin's Organ ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted July 11, 2001 Share Posted July 11, 2001 Just soughting out the rules for my 4th game, will be against aka tom. I'll finish dont u worry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted July 11, 2001 Author Share Posted July 11, 2001 Thanks for updating the standings, Tom. You're a little off on your average however. I've corrected it. KelsieD....267...5.....53.40 aka_tom_w..142...3.....47.33 Sajer......134...3.....44.67 GClement...124...2....62.00 Kiwi Joe...83....1....83.00 Stalin.....65....2....32.50 The_Capt...56....2....28.00 Sock Monkey.....0.....0 Labappel........0.....0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted July 11, 2001 Share Posted July 11, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KiwiJoe: Just soughting out the rules for my 4th game, will be against aka tom. I'll finish dont u worry <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> OK For those who are interested and just for the gratuitious BUMP in the thread..... KJ and I have agreed on short 75 rules (after much negotiation! :mad: ) and I will take the Allies and KJ will take the Axis. He will look at the map first as he did the set-up and some time today I imagine, if KJ accepts the map, I will get an opportunity to acccept it or decline it. We have both agreed to only decline one map each, (as per the tourney rules) so hopefuly we'll actually be into the battle in the next day or two. I'm looking forward to this one! Bring it ON Kiwi Joe! -tom w [ 07-11-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ] [ 07-11-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted July 12, 2001 Share Posted July 12, 2001 Treeburst. I wanna propose a rule change for CAL games. Currently you will never see Gegirgsjaeger units in CAL games. Why>? 1st they get NO amour, 2nd they get NO vechiles, 3rd because in CAL games you need something to tow your guns, they get NO guns. I propose Gebirgsjaeger units can buy 75mm IFGs and RCLs WITHOUT towing units. Gebirgsjaeger's used guns like these quite commonly and didnt need trucks etc. They dismantled them and carried them or used mules etc. This change will make Gebirgsjaegers a possability under some CAL games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalin's Organ Posted July 13, 2001 Share Posted July 13, 2001 I agree with KJ - we need more Gerbils in the games!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted July 13, 2001 Share Posted July 13, 2001 Yeah Id like to have the option of them under recon rules, but at the moment they just arnt worth the buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted July 13, 2001 Author Share Posted July 13, 2001 Judge Treeburst155 shall now rule on the question of Gebirgsjaegers and towed guns. The following addition (improvement) to the CAL Rules is now in effect for this tournament: Gebirgjaegers may buy towed guns that are available to them without providing transportation for said guns. Because this makes guns cheaper to acquire for the mountain troops they are only allowed to purchase TWO guns max for our 1,500 point tourney battles. The Honorable Judge Treeburst155 out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted July 13, 2001 Share Posted July 13, 2001 excellent! Prolly still will hardly eva see them, but at least the option is now somewhat realistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalin's Organ Posted July 13, 2001 Share Posted July 13, 2001 Given that they still don't get any armour I reckon 3 guns would still be an adequate limitation. The effectiveness of a force is much morethan just the sum of it's parts after all, and a well-handled mixed arms outfit should still have the Gerbils wrapped in masking tape even under the recon rules with 3 guns! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted July 13, 2001 Author Share Posted July 13, 2001 Stalin, I've got a proposition for you. I'll put 1,500 pts. of Gebirgsjaegers, without towed guns, up against any 1,500 point combined arms combo you can come up with according to these tourney rules (CAL+)and I will win as long as we fight at dawn in the fog (or worse). I will use the "combined arms" setting and Gebirgsjaegers only. You of course must use the "combined arms" setting too. Let me know and I'll send you a setup. BTW, the default moderate trees, small hills, and village will work for me. How about dry ground and any date you want? This will minimize the chances of your Super Pershings getting stuck and aid your Wasps in flaming me out. Never underestimate the power of CM Gebirgsjaegers!! [ 07-13-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted July 13, 2001 Share Posted July 13, 2001 Treeburst155... I'll take those odds in clear weather (which is what I always play)... and if I dont win at least 60-40 I'll count it as a lose and renounce my crown as king of CAL [ 07-13-2001: Message edited by: KiwiJoe ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted July 13, 2001 Share Posted July 13, 2001 Fog is a mute point as prety much every game is either in clear weather or random weather. You'd have to have balls the size of mine to select mountian troops in random weather hoping for fog Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted July 13, 2001 Share Posted July 13, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Treeburst155: Judge Treeburst155 shall now rule on the question of Gebirgsjaegers and towed guns. The following addition (improvement) to the CAL Rules is now in effect for this tournament: Gebirgjaegers may buy towed guns that are available to them without providing transportation for said guns. Because this makes guns cheaper to acquire for the mountain troops they are only allowed to purchase TWO guns max for our 1,500 point tourney battles. The Honorable Judge Treeburst155 out.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Umm..... Again I would like to point out that there is wine and MONEY involved here and that changing the RULES, Again, half way thruogh the tourney, is in my opinion, "questionable". I say this because of the potential effect of this new rule on the Allied opponent. Will the Opponent know that he is about to face German Mountain Troops? What Cal Rule would this battle be fought under? Why not say that these German Mountian troops can only be used on the CAL optional rule that allows for "infantry only" game? If Kiwi Joe Asked be to play Short 75 Rules (his favourite by the way) and then showed up on the battle field with German Mountain troops, two guns and NO AFVs or transport for his two guns I personally would be TICKED! Can you tell me that this new rule is now actually an option to the infantry only CAL rule and will the Allies also be allowed to buy TWO towed guns with out transport? You have opened a BIG can of worms here and I am VERY curious as to the effect and consquense of this new rule on game play. I am not at all interested in the prospect of being surprised as the Allies by German Mountain Troops with two towed guns and NO transport or AFV's. RANT Off -tom w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted July 13, 2001 Author Share Posted July 13, 2001 Hi Tom! I had a feeling I'd hear from you on this. I know of no CAL rule, optional or otherwise, that provides for an infantry only battle. Second, a pure Gebirgsjaeger force is within the Short 75, Panther 76, Recon, and Heavy Armor rules. Gebirgsjaegers get no vehicles and no armor. They are allowed towed guns, but can't use them because they can't buy trucks to tow them. This keeps the mountain troops pretty much out of action for CAL battles. This is a shame IMO. By allowing the mountain troops to have two towed guns they have a somewhat better chance of holding up against a combined arms force in good visibility. The odds are still against them under those conditions IMO. It is realistic for Gebirgsjaegers to have towed guns, but not realistic for them to have vehicles. I limited them to two guns because the player doesn't have to buy vehicles for them. If I negotiated a Short 75 game and my enemy showed up with Gebirgsjaegers and a couple AT guns I'd be delighted UNLESS visibility was poor due to weather and/or terrain. For the German to gamble on poor visibility in a random weather game is VERY risky. Look at it this way. We've taken expensive pure SMG platoons and allowed them to have two AT guns. The guns will help if visibility is good, but the platoons are SOL when it comes to HE from AFVs. If visibility is bad the platoons fare better but the guns are useless! In poor visibility the guns would not acquire targets from their setup zone. They would have to be moved very close to the action. That would take half the game with no towing vehicles! Before this rule addition Gebirgsjaegers were allowed under any CAL game, even heavy armor. All I've done is give them a little long range AT capability (that can hardly move)should they find themselves in a good visibility situation. I'd take combined arms over Gebirgsjaegers with two towed guns in conditions of good visibility any day. The entire German game hinges on those two guns taking out most of the enemy armor. I wouldn't even try Gebirgsjaegers with zero towed guns in good visibility. That's the point of the new rule, to make it somewhat viable for a German player with big cajones to use Gebirgsjaegers in random or clear weather. You asked whether the Allied player would know about his opponent choosing Gebirgsjaegers. I never mention revealing force types when I negotiate games. I like to surprise and be surprised. If my opponent brings it up then I tell him, as long as he tells me what force type he is using. I've found that people are split on this issue so I go either way. Even if you don't agree with my tactical assessment of the effect of the two added towed guns and Gebirgsjaegers in general consider this: The ONLY reason Gebirgsjaegers cannot field towed guns under CAL is because they can't buy trucks to tow them. This is a another hole in the rules which we have just plugged up. You might want to ask Kiwi Joe to reveal his force type if you haven't already done so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted July 13, 2001 Share Posted July 13, 2001 Hi Treeburst from this page: http://tournamenthouse.com/CM/CAL/Opt.shtml These are CAL optional rules: CAL has been built upon ideas and suggestions from players of CMBO and members of Tournamenthouse. If you have suggestions we would like to hear them. CAL’s mailing list will host discussions for further guideline additions and opponents wanted. All CAL members are welcome to participate in these discussions. Many additions to this section are planned for the future. Let us here your ideas. Sign-ups for CAL’s mailing list is located on the main CAL page Here 1) Infantry Battles (No vehicles) Select Infantry force in CMBO. "Towed guns will be limited to no more then 3 per side up to 1000 points spent. 1 gun per 1000 points spent thereafter. (Example 2,000-point game up to 4 guns allowed per side, 5,000-point game up to 7 guns per side). This includes all guns from the “support” category of CMBO. (Artillery caliber limitations may be imposed by player agreement prior to game setup). 2) Mechanized Battles (No Tanks) Select Mechanized force in CMBO. Towed guns will be limited to no more then 3 per side up to 1000 points spent. 1 gun per 1000 points spent thereafter. (Example 2,000-point game up to 4 guns allowed per side, 5,000-point game up to 7 guns per side). This includes all guns from the "support" category of CMBO. The Attacking player and both players in Meeting Engagements will purchase halftracks or trucks capable of towing each gun purchased. (This makes the increased costs of guns something to consider and sometimes will add the missing Halftracks back into the force mix). Jeeps and Kulbewagon type vehicles will not count towards this total. (Artillery caliber limitations may be imposed by player agreement prior to game setup). British Wasps some players have noticed them being used to set terrain on fire intentionally, as a sort of mobile minefield projector. They could be agreed to be excluded as any flame projector vehicles could be. It would be much better to just avoid this type of play. German soft skinned AA vehicles. There is some debate as to CMBO's game engine correctly modeling damage to these vehicles. Small arms fire seems to attack them ok but longer range heavy weapons fire is said to be modeled incorrectly. http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=018686 Last Updated 05/15/01 Copyright © TournamentHouse.com, 2000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted July 13, 2001 Share Posted July 13, 2001 Hi I'm sorry I still unclear about this new mountain troop optional rule. Does the German player have to select Combined Arms and then gets to spend NOTHING on tanks or vechicles? OR does pick unrestricted and then pick German mountian troops and max out on infantry and TWO towed guns? I'm sorry I'm just unclear as to how this rule is supposed to work? -tom w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted July 13, 2001 Author Share Posted July 13, 2001 This is an interesting question, Tom. The German player still selects Combined Arms at the TOP of the QB menu per CAL rules. The interesting thing is the next item down on the QB menu. If the German goes "unrestricted", his points in each category are much different than if he chooses "Gebirgsjaegers" on the menu. It breaks down like this: Unrestricted: Inf 930, Support 372, Vehicles 375, Armor 300, Arty 225 Gebirgsjaeger: Inf 1,500, Support 600, Arty 225, no points alloted for vehicles and armor. I've never noticed this before. The German player is allowed much more flexibility if he is "restricted" to Gebirgsjaegers as opposed to using the "unrestricted" menu item. In the more common "unresticted" game the Gebirgsjaeger player has points allocated for vehicles and armor where there are none available. He must max out every other category to spend his points. Under the "Gebirgsjaeger" restriction he can buy all infantry if he wants. I can put together a force I'm happy with out of either setting, but there's much more flexibility with the Gebirgsjaeger setting. Gebirgsjaegers by there very nature are somewhat immune to the restrictions of the combined arms setting since they CAN'T buy vehicles or armor. All their points will have to go to the other categories no matter what. Using the "unrestricted" force restriction does limit the German player more than using the "Gebirgsjaeger" force restriction as mentioned above. How's that for confusing? The question is, which of the force restriction choices on the QB menu should be used, unrestricted or Gebirgsjaeger? If the German is forced to use "unrestricted" the Allied player WILL face lots of support units such as panzerschrecks, and MGs, and the two towed guns. The German player will also be maxed (as far as possible) on his arty. If allowed to use the "Gebirgsjaeger" restriction the Allied player could find himself fighting a full 1,500 points of SMG companies. This would not be too smart for the German player to do IMO. This is not a big deal IMO, but it is interesting. If the Allied player sets up the game he will either have to use the unrestricted force type for the German player or he will have to KNOW to select Gebirgsjaegers for his opponent [ 07-13-2001: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted July 14, 2001 Share Posted July 14, 2001 Well KelsieD and I agreed to a very early ceasefire as his army was shattered and had little chance of pushing forward. Unfortunitly for me a hidden german squad and the other side of a hill contested the main flag and robbed me of 24% Nice move scott Final score : 64-12. Total victory to my brave british lads! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted July 14, 2001 Author Share Posted July 14, 2001 Here's the updated standings after Kiwi Joe's victory over KelsieD. Congratulations, KiwiJoe!! KelsieD...279...6...46.50 Kiwi Joe...147...2...73.50 aka_tom_w...142...3...47.33 Sajer...134...3...44.67 GClement...124...2...62.00 Stalin's Organ...65...2...32.50 The_Capt...56...2...28.00 Sock Monkey...0...0 Labappel...0...0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted July 14, 2001 Share Posted July 14, 2001 Im just mopping up Sajer's remaining forces... 4-5 crews and 3-4 broken, badly cut up rifle squads. Actually I cant understand why there hasnt been an automatic surrender. Oh well. Another stunning victory on the way people! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalin's Organ Posted July 16, 2001 Share Posted July 16, 2001 An update - Tom & I are on T24 now, just waiting for BER to stop us. His brave Ami's are partially encircled but unfortunately right on top fo the objectives!! His one remainig Stuart is bravely hiding behind a building as a Lynx and Puma encircle it from front and rear! Sock Monkey's praying for a game end I think - again he's got the remnants of a platoon surrounded on an objective tho' which may spoil the party, and part of a 2nd platoon lurking in woods clsoe to a 2nd objective waiting for a rush I think - ha - bet you thought I'd forgotten those guys!! Can't remember thh names of the other players sorry, but we're 2 tanks each in one game (Malcock?), with much of the US side of the board lookung like a lunar landscape - as do 2 areas on my side where there used to be guns!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sajer Posted July 16, 2001 Share Posted July 16, 2001 Just to let you guys know - I will be on vacation for the next week camping - I will be sending my turns on Monday the 23rd. Sorry about the delay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts