Oak Posted July 9, 2003 Share Posted July 9, 2003 First, following is a list of players (19 altogether) that have expressed interest in SC PBEM. If there is anyone on the list that doesn't want to be on it or that isn't on the list and wants to be ... let me know. Second, the focus of this group will be on playing SC for fun. The plan will be for everyone on the list to play everyone else on the list once. We will keep a win/loss record, which will become a de facto ladder. The purpose of the record/ladder will be so that players can more knowledgably select others to play against (ie. if someone wants to play a better player they can play someone who has a good win/loss record and if someone wants to play a not-so-better player they can play someone who has a poor win/loss record) We'll play on getting this all going within the next few days. One thing I need from those on the list is their email addresses. I can then send the list together with email addresses to everyone on the list. So, can you let me have your email address by sending an email to: reid@pacific.net.sg with your Forum user name in the subject line? Oak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oak Posted July 9, 2003 Author Share Posted July 9, 2003 Sorry, I forgot to post the list of 19 players. Here they are: JerseyJohn Panzer39 KDG disorder Reepicheep Hueristic Shaka of Carthage kenfedoroff xediel Leopard Oak Rol Wan Edwin P. Thales Blakey Dragonflame Bill101 Tigleth Pilisar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paqman Posted July 9, 2003 Share Posted July 9, 2003 Please add myself to your list. I have never played PBEM before (only a few TCP games). Paqman Email = mpaq74@hotmail.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curry Posted July 9, 2003 Share Posted July 9, 2003 I'm new to SC and learning. Would like to join up. Fordiplomacy@msn.com Curry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaka of Carthage Posted July 9, 2003 Share Posted July 9, 2003 I'm not sure when you want to address this, but in my case, I would not be interested in playing a game unless there was a restriction on the number of air units. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted July 9, 2003 Share Posted July 9, 2003 Oak Great job with this thing, you're really getting it organized and moving it along. -- As you said in the other thread, a means needs to be found of running manageable tournaments. I'd recommend small events with perhaps four or six players each in round-robins where each participant plays each of the other participants. As this is PBEM there's a certain latitude with making moves so it wouldn't be unreasonable for a person to be playing in two or even three tournaments simultaneously, but I'd make three the limit as otherwise people will be taking too long to return moves. At a normal response time even a small round-robin would take a few months to play. Shaka introduced a topic that also needs addressing -- House Rules. Does the League use them? If so do they vary with different tournaments and how are they decided upon? Another question is which scenario or scenarios do we use? My suggestion is to have a list compiled and draw different scenarios but the same one to be used for an ENTIRE Tournament. In another thread it was suggested that a new scenario be used in each round -- NO! That's like having some screwy event where in the first round everyone plays baseball and in the second it's hockey. It just doesn't work that way, once a tournament is begun it has to be consistant all the way through. Officials Even with a small group different people need to handle different functions or it becomes chaos. Someone needs to officially keep track of the games played, results and standings. Someone needs to officially calculate ratings, etc ... . I'd also recommend a small committee that makes most of the functional League decisions with the big issues decided by votes. I've sent the rating ideas to disorder. After we've tossed it about for a few days I'll post our suggestions. We're trying to devise something that's easy to keep track of, feasable for a small group of players and reasonably reliable in determining varying playing levels. [ July 09, 2003, 10:17 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDG Posted July 9, 2003 Share Posted July 9, 2003 Since this is for fun, and given the fact that we are PBEM and I doubt that we will face everyone on the list, I think if two people want to play with a house rule, then so be it. Let them decide what the house rule is going to be. Additionally, if they want to play with a custom scenario, once again, so be it. Have the list, keep track of wins & losses(I'd like to see this broken down to Allies and Axis), and allow individuals to decide what they want or don't want. I'd take the list one step further, and have each person state preferences(i.e. house rules, scenarios, axis, # turns per week, etc) and include this underneath a persons name. Example KDG Overall 1-5 Axis 0-3 Allies 1-2 House rules fine, scenarios fine, either side, 8 turns per week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oak Posted July 9, 2003 Author Share Posted July 9, 2003 I think the general agreement is that we keep this informal. So, players can discuss and agree on any house rules between themselves. Fall Weiss seems to be the accepted standard in campaigns, so we will use that. As for choosing sides, we can either have a fixed system where people alternate between Allies and Axis, or use a bidding system to decide. We can set up small tournaments, etc. and an ad hoc basis. I suggest that we wait awhile so we can get a feel for the level that everyone on this list is at. Then, for example, we can have a tournament for the top 10 and bottom 10 players. Again, the key benefit in all this is a list of players that want to play PBEM that other PBEM players can turn to in order to find opponents and challenging games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted July 9, 2003 Share Posted July 9, 2003 Oak Agreed on all counts but you might want to consider using Bill Macons 1939 Fall Weiss Campaign. It's an improvement over all the earlier versions, a much better OB for both sides, along with some research tweaks. It isn't as minimalist as the original and, aside from being more enjoyable to play, may also be more balanced for all levels of play. I want to add that anyone with ideas of creating their own scenarios should first download Bills 1939-40 & 41 MODs and study them. They are the standards and full of great design techniques. [ July 09, 2003, 02:40 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oak Posted July 9, 2003 Author Share Posted July 9, 2003 From what I've seen, the 'standard' Fall Weiss seems to be the standard campaign scenario. However, the name of the game with this PBEM league is to keep things informal and flexible. So, if players want to agree to use a different campaign scenario feel free to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agamemnon Posted July 11, 2003 Share Posted July 11, 2003 I would like to sign up for this PBEM League. [ July 11, 2003, 02:38 AM: Message edited by: SetBack ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts