Jump to content

Will the Rumblings of War tournament (Row) be Returning

Recommended Posts

  • 4 weeks later...
  • Replies 299
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Calling Kingfish, Rune, Holien, Spanish Bombs, WineCap or any of the other guys who had a hand in running the ROW.

I am looking for current links or copies of the

ROW Rules,

The Nabla scoring system,

and any other files used to run the ROW


will there be any scenario's that could be used for the ROW in the initial release or will we need to wait for user built scenario's.

to see if we have all the tools to set up the ROW BN

fav post from Row IV (this what a game should do to you)

“I am currently embroiled in "Sounds in the Night" with Greg and let me just say there is a special place in the 7th circle of hell for whoever designed this one. I suggest it be destroyed after the Tourney in order to prevent it from escaping and destroying society as we know it. Personally, I am going to need therapy after this game”

The Capt

Link to post
Share on other sites
Can you guys enlighten me? What is RoW?

What is Rumblings of War? Simply THE premiere wargaming tournament that ever was held using the Combat Mission games.

Probably the single toughest tactical wargaming challenge that ever scarred a hard drive.

To summarize, hand-made scenarios by some of the most evil, twisted designers that ever were allowed outside of an asylum. These men take the high art of torturing grogs to a new level....I swear to god I had nightmares.

These scenarios are not balanced and in fact some cases are downright unfair!! The Nabla scoring system (outlawed in at least three countries btw) doesn't measure the players final score, it measures his very worth as compared to every other player in the tourney. I have personally seen grown men break down and weep like babes when the numbers were crunched and it was time to "come to Jesus".

What is Rumblings of War????.....the best time you will have with your clothes on....check that I am convinced some crazy bastards played naked except for warpaint. To win is to become a God among men, to lose is to be expected.

Seriously though...damn good time....so lets do another shall we?

Link to post
Share on other sites
What, where did you find the release date? What it is, haven't found it anywhere...

It´s there in preorder announcement - but I overlooked it too the first couple of times:

"Combat Mission: Battle for Normandy is scheduled for release around the end of April, 2011"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not? If your name is not on this list below, you can forget getting through the revolving door, unless ......

76mm/Tom Reiter


Ace Pilot


Andrew Kulin/Ankulin




Big Dog




Bil Hardenberger

Bimmer (Gestapo has to verify this one)


Boris Balaban

Brent Pollock


Capt T

Combined Arms

Cpl Carrot




Dangerous Dave

Deadly 88



Diesel Taylor


Elmar Bijlsma






Frenchy/Steve Dixon


George Mc

Green Hornet



Heavy Drop








John Bertles

John D Salt

John L

John O



K.A. Miles

Kanonier Reichmann



Kip Anderson




Lt Bull



Mick Oz

Mike8g/Marcus Bloss



NG cavscout



Other Means

Panzer Twat











Scott B





Spanish Bombs



Steve McClaire





Stryker/Kevin Grande



The Enigma



Tom Travisano



Victor Charlie

von Lucke


Walpurgis Nacht

We Build We Fight




xerxes/Marc S

Link to post
Share on other sites
Walpurgis Nacht and Wreck.....fear...so much fear...
The Deadliest Duo in Dodgeville. I can state, with certainty, that the above two were the most phenomenal and dangerous players in all of Rumblings of War, Nabla or no Nabla* scoring system used.

"The Nabla" has as premise:

"Unlike chess, CM is not a perfectly balanced game. Due to its very nature,

inequities will always exist to some degree. This is true whether playing

designed scenarios or QB meeting engagements. This makes competition

CM somewhat problematic.

How does one measure player performance relative to the competition when

all is not equal at the beginning? To complicate matters further, we don’t

even know how far, or which way, the scales are tipped for the Axis or

Allied side.

The Nabla system for CM alleviates this balance problem to a great degree.

In fact, the scoring system was designed specifically for the purpose

of scoring CM competitions that utilize deliberately unbalanced scenarios.

Competition scenario designers are now free to design scenarios with fun

as the primary goal, rather than balance. Hours and hours of playtesting

for balance are no longer necessary! Lopsided scenarios can be thrown into

tournaments to keep players on their toes. No longer can players make the

assumption that their forces are adequate to achieve the mission assigned

if properly employed! That is the strength of the Nabla system.

The foundations of the scoring system can be condensed into four principles.

1. The baseline against which performance is measured is set by average

performance in a scenario.

2. It is equally difficult to be a winner in a scenario, regardless of victory

margins. Therefore, the level of skill needed to score well in a scenario

is considered to be equal in all scenarios.

3. When determining the goodness of a player from a set of scenarios,

uniformly strong gameplay is rewarded.

4. In a scenario, both players should always have an incentive to strive

for more CM points. That is, gaining a few more CM points should

always be rewarded.

The mathematical operations used to implement the first 3 objectives

are, in corresponding order, difference from median, normalization of mean

absolute deviation, and an asymmetric, nonlinear scoring curve.

We believe that the Nabla system takes competition CM to a new level of

fun and excitement for players and scenario designers alike, while providing

an excellent way to determine players’ relative performance in a competition


PS: Experience has taught that the best way to organize the Nabla scored tourney is to use 24 players tournaments, divide them into 4 equal sections of 6 players. This arrangement means that each scenario will be played 12 times.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Stikkypix(x)ie,

You stick. Close enough. :-)


And sending keys to your holiday house(s) in exotic places...

Apart from the competition, the beauty of RoW was that scenario designers spawned scenarios for RoW specifically, and these designers received an added bonus to their off-beat creations: AAR's were compulsory for RoW participants as they carried extra points to get into the play-offs. Anything from as simple as a couple of typed pages to a full blown pictured AAR scored you the full compliment of tourney points allocated to AAR writing.

In this small way, scenario designers were thanked for their unique RoW tourney created scenarios with a detailed set of comments about their work, which were thoroughly stress-tested; it gave them excellent ideas/indicators regarding future tweaking and/or public release of their handiwork in the CM fraternity. A win-win situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I didn't play in any ROW tournament, I searched about the NABLA scoring system, and I found a hot discussion about it's fairness.

I think a Bridge competition has exactly the same problem: the cards are almost never dealt 'fair'.

For single pairs - that is when you are not forming a team with another pair - the score is simply linear according to order of result for both sides:

When a scenario is played 5 times, the best allied player and the best axis player get 8 points, second best 6 points, and worst 0 points. Equal results share, so with equal 2nd and 3rd places both get 5 points.

This system has worked satisfactory for serious competitions for almost a century, so why wouldn't it work for CM?

Actually, the more serious world championships are played in a different way, where two pairs join to form a team to play a match against a different team, and the same hand is played on two tables with changed sides. Each team totals the result of both sides, and the difference with be converted to match points (where very large swings are reduced a bit).

The team play emphasizes the ability to score big, or to prevent the others to score big, while the singe pair competition favours those players that can just get that result that is a little bit better than most of the others.

Link to post
Share on other sites
As I didn't play in any ROW tournament, I searched about the NABLA scoring system, and I found a hot discussion about it's fairness.
The Nabla worked well in various Rumblings tourneys given past experience. It was, if memory serves, also tweaked from the original Alpha given input/discussion.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I *KNEW* I was in on the first one! Just had to dig up the proof: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=247009&postcount=89

So what's the going bribe these days?

Look at the list again previously in this thread. ;)

I don't see Fionn on that list.

Fionn riled Treeburst155 so heavily that the latter tendered his resignation. Since Treeburst was more valuable then Fionn from a tournament perspective, there was a certain decision we made, way back at the Invitational if I remembered correctly....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...