To All WineCape Tourney Vets

[CombinedArms]

As Enoch has just suggested, I don't think many of us are likely to bail out because of losing a few games. Treeburst has invited us to this tourney BECAUSE we are proven tourney finishers. I have now finished two Winecape tourneys despite losing the majority of my games both times, and I enjoyed myself immensely.

My first ROW game was a total wipeout against Wreck. This did not dim my enthusiasm in the least. So I don't think that's a worry.

Anyway, I'm definitely going to be somewhere in the lower echelons if sections are ranked by previous scores, and I've been thinking of upsides and downsides from that vantage point.

1. The downside of having all the "uber" players in one section is that I won't have the learning experience that comes from receiving a really professional drubbing. There's a lot to be said for playing the best, even when you lose.

2. The upside is that I might have a chance to actually win my section--as would all the other "down under" players. That would add a certain spice to the action.

These upsides and downsides about equal out, for me. So I come back to the point that Treeburst should stage the kind of tourney he wants to see, and we can then go on from there. I'm a little leary of getting involved inthe hassles of a triple blind tourney, but I'll even go for that if it's what Treeburst prefers.

In any case, the kind of ranked tourney originally proposed is necessarily a one shot deal, since the rankings produced by THIS tourney will no longer be reliable assessments of ability.

[ April 23, 2002, 10:39 AM: Message edited by: CombinedArms ]

[Redwolf]

Yes, Treeburst should just say what he prefers.

But whatever it is, I want to play KiwiJoe

Maybe, just maybe we can poll for those who have a strong enough opinion to drop out when one option is chosen, but then in email please. As for the triple-blind email server, I can set that up and I have suitable machines. Obviously, that kinda breaks FOW for me :-/

[Wreck]

I agree with Combined Arms that Treeburst "should" set the rules the way he wants them. The man that runs the tourney makes the rules, and if we don't like them we are free to play somewhere else.

But!

I think Treeburst is honestly undecided as to what he wants to do, and he is using the debate here to clarify his thinking. So the debate is useful in that regard. I hope nobody debating is so stuck on his position that he would quit the tourney over it, and I really don't think anyone is.

BTW I agree with the point about dropouts. As we saw with the Nordic Wannabees, dropouts are very bad for the tourney if they happen late. But this group are proven fighters who play for the fun of playing. I don't think we will see many dropouts, and I don't think we will see any dropout for no reason.

[MrSpkr]

Wow. I sleep for seven hours and all this gets posted in the meantime.

I hold to my earlier position. I do understand the opposition to QB's and will address that later today.

Right now, these b*st*rds who pay me have the gall to require ME to ACTUALLY WORK for my paycheck.

Silly sods.

Steve

[Scheer]

Gentleman,

as lowly officers candidate I am, I would prefer random. For me CMBO playing against guys like ciks or Wreck or some other of the Uberdudes means learning. I take honor in playing against a better player than me.

Random I say ...

[Holien]

Hmmm more votes for random.

As for triple blind I have some questions.

What if I want to play TCP / IP to finish a game off or speed it along?

What if I enjoy a bit of banter, especially if I get a decent chap like CDIC or JK?

H

[Treeburst155]

Wow, lots going on here, and I absolutely MUST get on with my testing of the playoff scenarios for the Nordic and Wannabee tourneys.

1)Wreck is right. I'm undecided about seeding.

2)There does seem to be quite a few players from the lower sections who enjoy playing the more experienced guys. This I admire.

3)The Wild Bill tourney was random. It was a success. Should we mess with success?

4)The playoffs WILL be run with the quality Boots & Tracks scenarios, and scored with the highly competitive modified Nabla system. Human designed scenarios are just more fun IMO, especially when played double blind. This issue is no longer open for debate.

5)The anonymous opponent idea was a 3AM idea, if you know what I mean. I was thinking a max of maybe 50 emails per day (48 players). That number would more likely be 200 since players will have five games going.

This does not mean I wish to kill the idea now. It just means I will need to work on it a bit to see if it can be done. I have a couple volunteers to help. Perhaps it can be made to happen. We will revisit this issue.

_______________________________________________

For now let's have an official vote on how sections will be assigned. We've had a good debate. The arguments have been presented. Here's the ballot:

1) Random section assignment picked from a hat.

2) Section assignment based on prior performance.

3) All sections seeded (even distribution)

No previous posts to this thread will count as a vote. It's too much trouble to dig them up IMO. The polls will close at 2200 hrs (GMT-5) on April 30th. That gives one week for everybody to respond. The polls are now open to all who have signed up, even waiting list players.

Now, I need a Floridian to take charge of the vote counting. Holien, where do you live?

________________________________________________

I vote #2, grouped by prior performance.

Treeburst155 out.

[Ricochet]

One of things I enjoy about playing in tournaments is talking to other players from all over the globe about the last move, the scenario, the game, what’s going on and what’s life like in their part of the world.

If I didn’t know who I was playing it would almost feel like a game against the AI, very impersonal.

I’d prefer not to have a triple blind.

[Treeburst155]

Ricochet,

That's a good point. I have considered that drawback too. Meeting new PBEM opponents is part of the fun of tourneys IMO. IF it turns out to be a doable thing, we will have a vote on it.

Treeburst155 out.

[CombinedArms]

I vote for #1, random assignment.

[Kingfish]

Originally posted by Captitalistdoginchina:

Combined Arms..............its your lucky day.

Now this is a tough decision to make......but i must give up my slot to someone else as much as i would love to participate. I can't miss the opportunity to playtest these scenarios

Good luck Comrades

CDIC

PS. I think Comrade Kingfish will have the same dilema!

The Fluffer is right!

The same dilema, and the same tough decision.

Treeburst,

You can take my name off the list, and replace it with the next lucky bastard in line. Like CDIC, I too am a tester for Boots and Tracks, and like CDIC I can't pass up the chance to test these scenarios before being released to ROW II.

Good luck, and good hunting.

P.S. Treeburst, I live in West Palm Beach. I'd be happy to count the votes for you

[gredeker]

I vote for #1, followed closely by #3.

[Ricochet]

I vote #1, random all the way

[Treeburst155]

The second Boots & Tracks team member signed up for the tourney has shown his dedication to the team by bowing out of the tourney in order to work on our scenarios. This just goes to show what a great design team we have working on our tourney. There is obviously a high degree of loyalty to the team, and high team morale. This makes for good scenarios IMO.

Your decision is admirable, Kingfish.

This means the luckless, downtrodden, ignored, left out, Sir Uber General, is now player #48 in the tourney. Congratulations Sir Uber General! You owe Kingfish a beer now.

Ari Maenpaa is now number one on the waiting list with Tuomas in the second slot.

___________________________________________

Cast Your Vote!!!

1) Random section assignment picked from a hat.

2) Section assignment based on prior performance.

3) All sections seeded (even distribution)

#1) 3 votes

#2) 1 vote

#3) 0

[MrSpkr]

I take a break from slavery to vote for No. 2.

Steve

[Treeburst155]

Cast Your Vote!!!

1) Random section assignment picked from a hat.

2) Section assignment based on prior performance.

3) All sections seeded (even distribution)

#1) 3 votes

#2) 2 votes

#3) 0

______________________________________________

BTW, if you vote twice I will catch you.

[Joseph Porta]

I vote for # 1

[Jarmo]

I'm with Ricochet. Chatting with weird opponents is something I wouldn't like to miss in a tournament like this.

But I can't vote since I dont understand the choice number 3. Even seed distribution? Did we become farmers or sumfink? :confused:

[Treeburst155]

Jarmo,

The third option means that all the various experience levels will be evenly distributed throughout the sections.

Treeburst155 out.

[Redwolf]

My vote is number 2 (prior results).

[ April 23, 2002, 06:02 PM: Message edited by: redwolf ]

[tabpub]

Brother, I do the good husband thing and looks what happens...I miss the sign up for a tourney in which the game isn't out for yet! I'll be durned....TB155, put me on the durned waiting list, although I am a bit put out that non-prior players have already been accepted, :eek:

We who have been through the wringer and come out clean should have some more consideration

I vote(I assume list waiters can still vote?)random. I also say, tag my handle to Wreck's. I owe him one for Ranville...slowly I turned, inch by inch, mile by mile, RANVILLE!!!!!!!! I am still seeing a psychologist about that one.....

[Thomas Norton]

I will vote for number two. Of course, if Mike does not like that, then my vote could mean anything he wants, as I am sure the ballot did not get counted....

Trip blind sounds the best, but I think the work is too much to ask.

Bottom line, this is not our tourney, thanks Mike, for allowing us to play! This is your house, and your rules.

Get some.

Tom

[Cogust]

I vote #1, all random.

[Michael Dorosh]

Dudes, what on earth is all this fuss about? I am willing to play anyone, anywhere under any conditions. For God's sake, it is JUST a game.

And you know what? IT WILL BE A BRAND NEW GAME We will ALL by tyros, and I suspect that the revolutionary changes will make it akin from going from SL to ASL. A master at one does not equate to a master with another.

So enough with the bandwidth already. Great idea, put it on the shelf, and when CMBB comes out let's rock and roll.

If someone else said all that already, my apologies - after going through the Tripod Thread for the 15th time, I don't have the strength to even begin to look at this one in-depth.

[Treeburst155]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cast Your Vote!!!

1) Random section assignment picked from a hat.

2) Section assignment based on prior performance.

3) All sections seeded (even distribution)

#1) 6 votes

#2) 4 votes

#3) 0

______________________________________________

Tabpub is #3 on the waiting list. Welcome, Tabpub! If you don't get in on this one you will play in an exact duplicate tourney with a different prize sponsored by me. All orphaned WineCape tourney vets who wish to, will play. Newcomers will be allowed in the overflow tourney(we will need them), but they will be CAREFULLY screened first.

M. Dorosh,

This is not "just a game". It is a Combat Mission tourney. Big difference! Are you going to vote?

[ April 23, 2002, 07:41 PM: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ]