"The Luga Breakthrough" Tourney Now COMPLETE

[Holien]

AND THE FINAL RESULTS ARE....

Allied Player...>Points....>Allied %...>Allied Pts

Neutral Party...>1615......>74% .......>7

Booz............>1706......>68% .......>6

MrSpkr..........>1483......>68% .......>5

Malakovski......>1473......>45% .......>4

Andrew Kulin....>952.......>25% .......>3

jdsu............>672.......>20% .......>2

Vic Charlie.....>476.......>14% .......>1

Axis Player.....>Points...>Axis %......>Axis Pts

Sgt Gold........>2039.....>86% ......> 7

Walpurgis.......>2676.....>80% ......> 6

Brent Pollock...>2816.....>75% ......> 5

Wicky...........>1768.....>55% ......> 4

Preserved Kil...>800......>32% ......> 3

Tracks..........>697......>32% ......> 2

a1steaks........>574......>26% ......> 1

So Combined scores from previous games and here are the Allied positions: -

Allied Player....>Points

jdsu.............> 21

MrSpkr...........> 19

Neutral Party....> 18

Andrew Kulin.....> 17

Vic Charlie......> 13

Malakovski.......> 12

Booz.............> 12

And the German Players: -

Axis Player....>Points

Walpurgis......> 23

Brent Pollock..> 18

Sgt Gold.......> 18

Tracks.........> 15

Wicky..........> 14

a1steaks.......> 12

Preserved K....> 12

Well done to all the players and thank you for being so prompt with turns and making this a fast and I hope a fun tourney.

I certainly had fun play testing these scenarios and more fun watching the various approaches taken.

I will bundle a zip together for those who want it to show final positions in all the games.

I am also going to try and pull together scenario notes for the designers as a small thank you. Please send any notes to me about each scenario and I will cut and paste them so the designers get a report.

Who knows there might be another tourney and if anyone fancies helping or running it please get in touch.

H

Edited to swap scores for Wicky and Malakovski, does not alter positions.

[ August 17, 2005, 02:08 PM: Message edited by: Holien ]

[Bimmer]

Just a quick note of congratulations to all the players, and particularly those who managed to come out on top of their respective groups. Special thanks to my fellow designers, George and Rick, and of course to Holien for running the whole show. We all had fun designing and testing the scenarios, and hope that they provided an interesting set of challenges for the players.

After Holien has recovered, I'll start talking to him about another tourney, so watch this space. I've already got some scenario ideas...

-Bimmer

Lead Designer

[Brent Pollock]

Well done everyone, especially the designers - man-o-man, I love driving Pz 38(t)s

Originally posted by Holien:

AND THE FINAL RESULTS ARE....

Axis Player.....>Points...>Axis %......>Axis Pts

Sgt Gold........>2039.....>86% ......> 7

Walpurgis.......>2676.....>80% ......> 6

Brent Pollock...>2816.....>75% ......> 5

Seeing as I inflicted more damage but got a lower percentage, I'm guessing that Messrs. Sgt Gold & Walpurgis did not send an entire Pz 38 platoon, one StuG and part of an infantry platoon to their death like I did Those units formed the anvil while the rest came in as the hammer. The anvil group was sent on a high speed left hook through the burning grainfield. The hammer group was only able to rescue the HQ and three infantry teams...at least the anvil took out more than its weight in AFVs, including 2 x T-34.

Did anyone else find that the PSWs counted as medium armour in that battle :cool:

[ August 17, 2005, 04:22 PM: Message edited by: Brent Pollock ]

[MrSpkr]

This last scenario was very good. I was ready for a left hook through the fire -- I assembled a firing line of ten BT tanks near the edge of the wheatfield. When ted raced over in that direction, I was able to flank his lead units and do a great deal of damage.

I chose not to try to advance green infantry through the town, preferring to set up strongpoints and attempt to win by killing more points than Ted could kill of me. I had some bit of luck in this tactic -- Ted's gunners couldn't buy an effective hit on my armor for the first twenty turns.

All in all, this last scenario more than off-set the bad taste in my mouth from the second scenario.

Thanks to Mark and all the scenario designers, as well as to my opponents for putting up with my rather ugly schedule in June and July.

Steve

[Wicky]

Malakovski and I agreed quite early on the scenario seemed balanced and then proceeded to a well fought out draw. I was shocked at the end to see he had a flamer which thankfully was taken out by throwing everything I had, inc AT infantry, at what appeared to be a vanilla t-34. Finally it was taken down by my Pz 38 as they mutually destroyed each other at point blank.

Pandamonium in the back streets esp when Malakovski tried to manoeuvre his hordes of tanks around my flanks and rear to get at my stugs. His command delays must have been painful as I got the drop on him and somehow set up hasty contermeasures.

Great scenario with plenty happening right to the end

[MrSpkr]

Yeah, the command delays for the Soviets were a killer (1941 scenarios tend to exacerbate the problem). That's one reason why I didn't go on the offensive.

Steve

[Holien]

The PSW's in that last scenario if handled right were lethal.

Of course it only counts if you ID correctly the target and are not scared off something saying it is a T34.

The key to that last game is keeping some PBI in front of the tanks / armour. If you don't have them around you will die quickly as the spotting is pretty poor in those conditions.

Some spectacular explosions as the flame tanks hit home.

The command delays are a pain in the bum for the Soviets and you have to work carefully with that else the Germans will run rings around you.

I think the last game seemed the most balanced and certainly had me on edge every turn, right upto the end.

The first scenario had a great map and a great look and feel to it. I really enjoyed play testing that one.

The second game is a real test of defence with not a lot and if you get it wrong the game will not play well for the defender. A great challenge for players.

The third game gives the Soviets a chance to try their assualt tactics and see how they can fair against a light German force.

I really enjoy playing low tech battles and I think it makes a great change from some of the late war games.

Cheers

H

[walpurgis nacht]

For the life of me I still don't get how I was supposed to know the last scenario we an ME? The briefing lead me to believe it was an Axis probe/attack. So that is pretty much what it turned into since I didn't rush forward at the very beginning.

Those flametanks really caught me off gaurd. 75m max range in an 82m LOS map! Most if not all of my armor lost was to those flames! It was such a cool visual shock when it started to happen I can't say I minded all that much.

I came in as a replacement player getting my ass kicked in the first scenario so I don't have much opinion on that one. The middle scenarios were ok, but this last one stole the show. An absolute riot.

Thanks for all the hard work H. I had a lot of fun playing in this tourney.

[SGT_Gold]

I lost very very few vehicles in the final scenario while killing almost all of the Russian armor including the T-34's. What I didn't have time to do was roll up through the middle of the town and reduce the isolated Russian infantry. If it weren't for what was possibly the worst streak of bad luck I've ever had in a game, I would have come out of the thrid scenario with a better point total and a solid second place in my division.

Originally posted by Brent Pollock:

AND THE FINAL RESULTS ARE....

Axis Player.....>Points...>Axis %......>Axis Pts

Sgt Gold........>2039.....>86% ......> 7

Walpurgis.......>2676.....>80% ......> 6

Brent Pollock...>2816.....>75% ......> 5

Seeing as I inflicted more damage but got a lower percentage, I'm guessing that Messrs. Sgt Gold & Walpurgis did not send an entire Pz 38 platoon, one StuG and part of an infantry platoon to their death like I did ]

[Holien]

How did players feel about the system of trying to match the players against one another?

It should have provided more even matches than random grouping.

It also meant that some players avoided playing one another, and others played one another several times. How do you feel about that?

Did it make a difference? Did it work for you?

H

[Neutral Party]

I think as a whole the Tournament was very well put together. For me at least it gave a feel of how bad it must have been to be Russian in 1941

Of the scenarios I think my favorite was the first one. There was something really nice about the map and the force compositions were such that I felt that the Russians could have done some damage if handled well. The only thing I would have changed was to either have put more VLs near the bridge or made it a German exit scenario. The bridge after all was the military objective.

The second scenario was a real kobayashi maru. It had a great map but IMO the Russians were hopelessly outmatched. The only reason I got a half decent score in this one was that all my units routed off the map before the Germans got a chance to kill or capture them.

The third scenario was also a killer for the Russians due to having to attack with conscript forces with long command delays against an enemy that could kill the armor and break the infantry from a long way off. Also the map was a bit dull IMO.

The fourth scenario was great fun and gave the Russians a chance to get their revenge. Very short LOS and T-34s (Oh my! - what I would have done for T-34s in the first 3 scenarios). The flame tanks were comically effective - definitely produced the biggest explosions of the entire tournament Having pioneers was nice too. I think the trick here was to have these guys hidden in cover with short arcs when the German armor came along.

Due to the fact that complex route planning would have been impossible in this scenario due to all the rubble and fires, I finally figured out what to do about the Russian command delays i.e., just click on the desired destination and let the tacAI figure it out.

In all cases there was always going to be an element of luck involved. Apart from the last one, all scenarios were very short, so attacks had to be carried out quickly and if the initial plan didn't work out there was no chance of trying another one.

The defender has a plan, based on what he thinks the attacker will do, and vice-versa. If the plans match the defender has a chance, if they don't he's screwed.

For a tournament of longer duration, the player matching system might not be ideal as it is inevitably geared towards reducing everyone to an average score. However it worked ok in this case as there were definite winners.

All in all I had a great time and ain't got no complaints. Many thanks to everyone who contributed.

Joe

[Brent Pollock]

I don't think I played anyone twice...I'd prefer a system that avoided that, possibly by enforcing a mandatory switch with the next lower/upper group...but that could get messy.

[konstantine]

The most positive feature of this tournament was that it was set in the east front/CMBB and early in the war. The early war is too often overlooked. The force picks were excellent. I personally love the Pz-38t (although I haven't mastered the tactics).

I liked the system of matching players. No problems there.

I enjoyed all the scenarios, especially the first one. For the second to be balanced it obviously needs some strengthening of the Soviet forces.

The third was a little boring as the Germans (to be expected given the parameters). I would include a little CAS, widen the map, and give the Soviets a bit of experience to reduce command delays.

The fourth--a great scenario but I did not enjoy it as much. I think my luck ran out. I lost most of my tanks in a couple of turns to the OT-34s. That was before the T-34s showed up. Like some others, I misread the briefing and I began the scenario thinking that I was on the attack. I would have been more daring had I understood I was in a ME.

As a final note I would very much appreciate a scenario pack from the tournament whenever it is possible to do so. Thanks.

p.s. also, I would definitely play in any further CMBB tourneys you guys organize. Do you intend to give us "veterans" first crack at any slots for a new tourney?

[Brent Pollock]

I also enjoyed the early war focus. I'd add to that that the "single campaign" aspect seemed to be a nice touch.

[walpurgis nacht]

Originally posted by Brent Pollock:

I'd add to that that the "single campaign" aspect seemed to be a nice touch.

Agreed! Very cool idea. I'd love to see them work something like into a ROW VI.

[jdsu]

This tourney was a blast. I really enjoyed playing in it and applaud all the work put in by Holien, the tourney designers and playtesters.

I really liked the tourney format, especially in terms of how players were matched up (I'll admit playing the same player twice would detract unless it was the finals) and in the theme of related battles. Also, the strict adherence to a timetable kept the interest at a high level.

This is the 2nd tourney I've entered, the first tourney which started just before this is just now entering the 2nd game ! zzzzz....

Thanks to all my opponents for fun games, and thanks to Walpurgis Nacht for kicking my butt in the final game.

While everyone went right for me in the first and third battles, it seemed everything went wrong in the final one. Starting from my flawed battle plan and the inability to realize quickly enough that the battle plan was flawed.

The Germans got into town one or two turns quicker than anticipated and my green troops all decided to fold at the first pistol shot. A much worse performance than my conscripts in the prior game.

The flame tanks refused to hit anything. How hard is it for a gunner to fire two flame shots straight down a road ! @*%)#.

The T-34's, one gets it's gun knocked out after firing one shot by a 20mm gun, the other gets kaboshed by enemy infantry because it refused to fire any of its plentiful cannister, while the last one surrenders before taking out any enemy armor or infantry, it also failed to fire any cannister #%#$#@%@.

But I hear revenge is sweet, so ermm ...Im hoping I get to taste just how sweet :0. Don't let the light resistance fool you WN, your advancing exactly how I didn't setup my D to counter. eh ? oh oh.

[Brent Pollock]

*BUMP*

[Holien]

Hi Brent et al

Thanks for the feed back and I am really glad you all enjoyed it.

This came out of an idea for a weekend face to face with some UK CMers which did not happen and I am glad it did not go to waste.

I need to pull together the feed back for the designers and should do that this weekend.

There may be more, but perhaps not until later this year or when I get back from Australia / New Zealand early next year.

The idea to get something with a quick turnaround was a success, and linking the games (campaign idea) seemed to work. The designers did a great job and if you want something sooner if anyone out there wants to run it I can give some help on how best to go about it.

Get in touch.

H