(12-08-2010, 05:46 AM)2ndLt_Fjun Wrote: [ -> ]Otherwise, great idea Nick. I would join the tourney! Sounds like great fun. On a small map hiding size 0 units would be quite difficult unless you are doing the mistake to buy vehicles only - but then it's your own fault.. :)
That's it in a nutshell Fred. To paraphrase Forrest Gump, this game would be like a box of chocolates, you never know what your gonna get.
So, you might run in to an opponent that buys bunches of size 0 units - you'll have to deal with it. The fun is having to figure out a way to deal with it. Everything is "what if". What if I buy nothing but heavy artillery and ammo trucks? What if I mix a force of Russian tanks, US marines, Japanese infantry and British artillery?
Its the Christmas present from Aunt Sally in the big box...it might be a new bike or it might be a year's supply of underwear. Either way, you've got to deal with it.
Okay got it now romans bit on the AI threw me.
If voted,which i didn't.
I have to vote on the negative on this plan,it just seems to arcadish,not that it's a stupid idea,just not something i would want to play, won't place a vote on you're third option.
you wanted opinions:whis:
(12-08-2010, 10:48 AM)Gila Wrote: [ -> ]If voted,which i didn't.
I have to vote on the negative on this plan,it just seems to arcadish,not that it's a stupid idea,just not something i would want to play, won't place a vote on you're third option.
you wanted opinions:whis:
No worries Brother. I'm certain this won't be everyone's cup of tea.
Hello Gunslinger,
Something like this would be a riot to play during the cold war period (1960's - 1975-ish)
think of all the stuff out there to cross-purchase.. and the possibility of meeting same equipment on the battle field..
Couple of suggestions..
Leave the troop training off and set for value of 75 or so and have minimum visibilty range of 40.. (makes it harder for an army of '0' size units to hide)
need to have a few more points for MBT as the Armor is a bit more expensive than WW2..
Greybeard
The response to my poll has been mostly positive...in fact overwhelmingly so, if I consider the "maybe's" as relatively positive.
However, out of over 200 views - only 15 people have thus far voted.
Perhaps in hind sight, I shouldn't have set the poll to identify who voted for what...
But, with the overall positive response - I may press forward with the tournament. So if you are on the fence about voting, I'd ask you to go ahead...don't be shy...and vote so that I have a more clear representation of whether this would be of interest.
If you do vote and/or would like to participate - then let me know any additional ideas you may have to make this work. Remember - the goal is to basically allow anything. So, the only limitations I really forsee is that everything has to be onboard. What I really would like are some suggestions on handling scoring, provided that one player doesn't crush another. The traditional use of points would not be appropriate.
Perhaps it could be as simple as adding up how many points you have left and subtract from the total you started with...who ever has the most would win? Perhaps with a modifier for the overall morale of each side (the more units pinned, retreating, routed affects the score negatively).
Or, do we just set the turns so high that the game would undoubtedly end with one side eliminating the other (or their will to continued)?
Suggestions?
(12-14-2010, 05:14 AM)GUNSLNGR Wrote: [ -> ]What I really would like are some suggestions on handling scoring, provided that one player doesn't crush another. The traditional use of points would not be appropriate.
Let's make it completely different - an elimination tournament, or the world cup in SPWW2/MBT whatever game is chosen ;) To give all players the chance for a few games, place the players randomly into groups where all battle each other. A win is 2 points, a loss is 0 points. Top two players from each group enter the quarter finals (semi finals or whatever, based on the number of participants). Loser leaves the tournament, winner goes on etc. until there's only one winner.
(12-14-2010, 05:24 AM)2ndLt_Fjun Wrote: [ -> ]Let's make it completely different - an elimination tournament, or the world cup in SPWW2/MBT whatever game is chosen ;) To give all players the chance for a few games, place the players randomly into groups where all battle each other. A win is 2 points, a loss is 0 points. Top two players from each group enter the quarter finals (semi finals or whatever, based on the number of participants). Loser leaves the tournament, winner goes on etc. until there's only one winner.
Yes it would be the "Last Man Standing" Tournament. I'm not sure about scoring the rounds as you move up in the brackets though...like preliminary rounds in the World Cup. To keep it simple and stupid, I thought it would be best for single elimination - once you lose a game, you're out of the tourney. That might be a bit unfair to newer players, but remember this is not a standard game where the usual strategies apply...kill or be killed. However, if the consensus would be to have multiple rounds with points deciding who advances, I'd consider it...but I still like the single elimination way the best.
I do like the bracket idea. I'll have to post it after each round, so the tourney progression could be seen by players and observers. Like you said, it depends on the number of players - but there could be several brackets and rounds up to the championship between the last two remaining.
Perhaps we'll do it twice, once for WW2 and then MBT - to keep everybody happy ('cept the WaW guys...sorry I don't play it anymore).
HI Guys
I ran a WW2, World Cup style, no-holds barred touney q uite a few years ago here.
It worked well, tough it turned into a zero size battle by the end.
I suggest some ruling to keep zero size units to a minimum...somehow.
Also, having a 'group' stage before the knockout quarters, semis etc means you have a huge amount of battles to deal with...and all the time they take to play.
It's a good idea, but masses of work. I'd keep it to straight knockout...the more simple, the more chance there is of finishing.
Dropouts will be your biggest hassle...especially if you allow long battles.
2 months to finish a 20 turn game is not unrealistic, times 6 battles, is a year.
Good luck
Gunslinger, drop me a message or an email and I will have some info for you this.
But to be honest there are numerous guys signed up to the Sp ladder, but only a core pf players that step up for these sort of things.
Tournaments are not some peoples cup of tea, if you know what I mean.