Scenario for the 2nd round:
I would propose 2 year of April scenario, final score on Trn 49, with 2 best CSA and 2 best USA players advancing to the semis. I hope official 1.04 will be out by the time we start the next round.
Ace wrote:If I interpreted your answers well, here are the votes from 9 players:
[ATTACH]29291[/ATTACH]
It seems the majority is not in favor of implementing HR-s. We have only narrow vote for toning down NM autobalance.
I would be reluctant to enforce HR which at least 2/3 players haven't agreed with, so no HR until we get at least one more vote for toned down NM autobalance.
A quick overview how NM autobalance works. Every turn, Union gets 4 rolls for increase in NM. The probability for increase in NM is equal to 100-(current NM). So, if for example Union, has 80 NM. It will have 4 rolls with 20% probability to increase 1 NM. In theory, it can gain as much as 4 NM/turn this way. I would reduce it using my mod which limits it to only 1 roll per turn.
Adding to NM words - CSA has 7 rolls to recover. An example for USA recovery at the other end of the scale is 4 rolls with 1% probability to increase. How does the reduction from NM above 100 work?
Late Apr62. Moni Kerr USA (NM 118 VP 925 +51 67k) vs PGR CSA (NM 90 VP 762 +40 103k)
In Tennessee AS Johnson repulsed Grant from Fort Henry for a while but now the Union are across the Cumberland in force, Nashville falls and the CSA lose a series of battles in Murfreesboro and Nashville as Polk and ASJ fail to co-ordinate and are defeated in detail. West Tennessee still intact though except Columbus.
In the east J Johnson & Smith hold the line Fredricksburg/Albemarle but some Union cavalry sneaking south taking Burkeville. Further south Jacksonville in union hands and a small force lands at Savannah
In Tennessee AS Johnson repulsed Grant from Fort Henry for a while but now the Union are across the Cumberland in force, Nashville falls and the CSA lose a series of battles in Murfreesboro and Nashville as Polk and ASJ fail to co-ordinate and are defeated in detail. West Tennessee still intact though except Columbus.
In the east J Johnson & Smith hold the line Fredricksburg/Albemarle but some Union cavalry sneaking south taking Burkeville. Further south Jacksonville in union hands and a small force lands at Savannah
"Stay low, move fast"
It seems Lindi (CSA) - Guru94 (USA) and FelixZ - Moni Kerr will be the quarterfinal matches in the right side of the draw. I doubt Pgr will get to 1300 points in the remaining 6 turns. And Moni has already passed over Havi's total. Left side of the draw has proven to be more intense, with Liberty doing above expectations (considering him being new to the game 
)
)-
pgr
- General of the Army
- Posts: 672
- Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 9:33 pm
- Location: Paris France (by way of Wyoming)
I will end up doing a standings update tomorrow morning. We are approaching the point where we can identify the finalists for the next round. At this time, I am leaning to accept Ace's suggestion of the April 61 campaign for a period of 2 years (final score on turn 49). As for house rules, we will keep the same as we have had in the first two rounds. (We will not be adopting any of the 6 points put up for discussion). As far as using mods, we'll stay with the vanilla game, using the beta 1.04 patch.
I can't resolve turn between Citizen X and Seraphim so I post in beta forum for find help and more chance to playeur can't watch order to other playeur.
if people can help is very good new for me because I try to ask new save to citizen X, not work, try on other compture not work, etc always not work. Citizen X file is for me prob, I have see the prob in past with other file to citizen X he only do a new save and that work.
Exception is : Exception caught: Violation d'accès à l'adresse 007F4D9C dans le module 'CW2.exe'. Lecture de l'adresse 00000030 Upkeep & Cleanup Segment
if people can help is very good new for me because I try to ask new save to citizen X, not work, try on other compture not work, etc always not work. Citizen X file is for me prob, I have see the prob in past with other file to citizen X he only do a new save and that work.
Exception is : Exception caught: Violation d'accès à l'adresse 007F4D9C dans le module 'CW2.exe'. Lecture de l'adresse 00000030 Upkeep & Cleanup Segment
Final LB Liberty Bell(USA) vs Jim-NC(CSA) L Jul 62
USA VP 1,238(63) - NM 114 - Losses 50,135
CSA VP 997(32) - NM 123 - Losses 55,606
USA holds Harpers Ferry, Donelson, Nashville, Island 10, For Pillow, Memphis, Pensacola, Mobile, Meridian, Vicksbrg, New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Jefferson City, Rolla, Fayetteville, Madison, El Paso and Tucson.
CSA holds Bowling Green.
USA aggessively attacked along the Mississippi and Gulf Coast and never allowed CSA to recover. The situation was still very fluid with signs that the CSA was finally beginning to respond.
USA VP 1,238(63) - NM 114 - Losses 50,135
CSA VP 997(32) - NM 123 - Losses 55,606
USA holds Harpers Ferry, Donelson, Nashville, Island 10, For Pillow, Memphis, Pensacola, Mobile, Meridian, Vicksbrg, New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Jefferson City, Rolla, Fayetteville, Madison, El Paso and Tucson.
CSA holds Bowling Green.
USA aggessively attacked along the Mississippi and Gulf Coast and never allowed CSA to recover. The situation was still very fluid with signs that the CSA was finally beginning to respond.
Liberty 
A new star is born.
There is even the possibility that the raining champ may go out to a rookie! What an interesting system this is. It favors the bold over the cautious...
It seems 7 quarterfinalists are almost sure, the last spot on the line between Liberty and Seraphim...
Since Jim's score is rather bad, CitizenX is the favorite to go as top CSA player in this part of the draw regardless if he is defeated by Seraphim, and Seraphim may go out regardless of the victory over CitizenX, what a system - we need an update on that match asap
Seraphim, do you think you can top Liberty in the remaining turns?
A new star is born.
There is even the possibility that the raining champ may go out to a rookie! What an interesting system this is. It favors the bold over the cautious...
It seems 7 quarterfinalists are almost sure, the last spot on the line between Liberty and Seraphim...
Since Jim's score is rather bad, CitizenX is the favorite to go as top CSA player in this part of the draw regardless if he is defeated by Seraphim, and Seraphim may go out regardless of the victory over CitizenX, what a system - we need an update on that match asap
Seraphim, do you think you can top Liberty in the remaining turns?
-
pgr
- General of the Army
- Posts: 672
- Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 9:33 pm
- Location: Paris France (by way of Wyoming)
I have just updated the top of the thread with current standings, AND placed them in the bracket!!! (Now officially, my match is still 2 turns away form ending, but the end isn't much in doubt!)
As soon as our down-to-the-wire match is finished, we will start the next round...and the next thread. Speaking about the next round, I'd like to have the loosing parties do the hosting duties for the next round across the bracket. So I will host Skibear's game, and Havi hosts Ace's game....As for Lindi and FelixZ...well we are still waiting on the results.
Ace and I need to sort out the exact campaign for the next round, but we will communicate it as soon as possible. (I'm leaning towards April 61, for 48 turns, or to April 63).
I would like to know what you all think about the elimination rules. We decided to go with the top CSA- top USA from each side of the bracket because we were worried about game balance issues. As it happens, the wins have been pretty balanced...if anything with the US having a bit of an advantage (which is not what most would have predicted.)
So as a discussion subject, should we keep the top USA and top CSA system into the next round, or should we have a direct competition between the two players in the match?
As soon as our down-to-the-wire match is finished, we will start the next round...and the next thread. Speaking about the next round, I'd like to have the loosing parties do the hosting duties for the next round across the bracket. So I will host Skibear's game, and Havi hosts Ace's game....As for Lindi and FelixZ...well we are still waiting on the results.
Ace and I need to sort out the exact campaign for the next round, but we will communicate it as soon as possible. (I'm leaning towards April 61, for 48 turns, or to April 63).
I would like to know what you all think about the elimination rules. We decided to go with the top CSA- top USA from each side of the bracket because we were worried about game balance issues. As it happens, the wins have been pretty balanced...if anything with the US having a bit of an advantage (which is not what most would have predicted.)
So as a discussion subject, should we keep the top USA and top CSA system into the next round, or should we have a direct competition between the two players in the match?
July 61 to July63 might be more interesting otherwise the game ends just after winter rather than at Gettysburg-ish time with a chance for at least another half summers campaigning. Either that or make it April 61 to July 63 anyway.
These last round might be relatively balanced on points but another 12 months the gap will almost certainly widen to USAs advantage. You can have relatively limited ambitions as USA and then hunker down and ride out a points victory. Best USA and best CSA would be fairest and encourage competition. The final should then be the sides reversed so the best USA plays CSA in next round to avoid specialization.
These last round might be relatively balanced on points but another 12 months the gap will almost certainly widen to USAs advantage. You can have relatively limited ambitions as USA and then hunker down and ride out a points victory. Best USA and best CSA would be fairest and encourage competition. The final should then be the sides reversed so the best USA plays CSA in next round to avoid specialization.
"Stay low, move fast"
April61 to July61 turns are ideal to get to know your opponent. July scenario throws you right in the middle of the action without knowing your opponents style of play. I don't mind extending it few turns, so the game can run from April 61 to LateJuly63 (after playing EarlyJuly63 turn - Gettysburg and Vicksburg dates). It should be enough for cautious and aggressive players alike.
About elimination rules, these are not ideal - the possibility that raining champ may go out without a defeat proves it, but I can't think of better ones (if we stick to one match per round). Out of 4 elimination matches, we had 3 USA victories in just 1 game year. It shows that VP wise, USA will win every 2 year scenario simply because they can raise much stronger army.
About elimination rules, these are not ideal - the possibility that raining champ may go out without a defeat proves it, but I can't think of better ones (if we stick to one match per round). Out of 4 elimination matches, we had 3 USA victories in just 1 game year. It shows that VP wise, USA will win every 2 year scenario simply because they can raise much stronger army.
-
pgr
- General of the Army
- Posts: 672
- Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 9:33 pm
- Location: Paris France (by way of Wyoming)
Ace wrote:April61 to July61 turns are ideal to get to know your opponent. July scenario throws you right in the middle of the action without knowing your opponents style of play. I don't mind extending it few turns, so the game can run from April 61 to LateJuly63 (after playing EarlyJuly63 turn - Gettysburg and Vicksburg dates). It should be enough for cautious and aggressive players alike.
I'm inclined to agree that the next round folks should have the benefit of building up from April 61. To play through Early July, that would make it through turn 56, correct?
Of course if we are worried about balance issues (plus time to play issues), there could be an argument for ending at the end of 1862 (last turn LDec 62) because the economics and VP tilt towards the Union as time goes on. I'm still leaning summer of 63, but am wanting to get some thoughts.
Ace wrote:About elimination rules, these are not ideal - the possibility that raining champ may go out without a defeat proves it, but I can't think of better ones (if we stick to one match per round). Out of 4 elimination matches, we had 3 USA victories in just 1 game year. It shows that VP wise, USA will win every 2 year scenario simply because they can raise much stronger army.
Ya, I dislike the idea that you can win, and still "loose" under our current system. Of course we did it this way because the fear that VP would be unbalanced. (Although to be fair, CitizenX isn't completely finished
).
The problem is that the final match (and the 3rd place match) will be a direct contest. (Unless we want to assign the top two from the left and right side as Union, and the second place as Confederate, with the gold metal going to #1 Union, silver to #2 Union, and bronze to #1 CSA.)
Of course for the championship game we could just say that the USA must win a NM victory, or else the CSA wins. Then we wouldn't have to worry about accounting for every last VP.
Ace wrote:1) Summer 63 (score calculated at the start of LateJuly63)
2) Final and 3rd place matches have to have a rematch. There is no other way.
For pv to USA is true, so for next round I propose to play same in this round, so the best CSA win, and the best USA WIN in each side.
And after for final and 3rd place if the lose playeur ask rematch with switch side, do that, but for pv you add the total of pv for the two match for each playeur
Ace wrote:April61 to July61 turns are ideal to get to know your opponent. July scenario throws you right in the middle of the action without knowing your opponents style of play. I don't mind extending it few turns, so the game can run from April 61 to LateJuly63 (after playing EarlyJuly63 turn - Gettysburg and Vicksburg dates). It should be enough for cautious and aggressive players alike.
About elimination rules, these are not ideal - the possibility that raining champ may go out without a defeat proves it, but I can't think of better ones (if we stick to one match per round). Out of 4 elimination matches, we had 3 USA victories in just 1 game year. It shows that VP wise, USA will win every 2 year scenario simply because they can raise much stronger army.
The USA should get a handicap in vp and game mechanics. The CSA can only cope the USA if they use every bit of their cards, wich mostly cost vp. In a short game even a constant 5vp hit can make you lose. Also, but this is a general problem with the game, amphibious landing and mainting is so ridiciously fast and so absurdly cheap that the CSA player doesn't know if he should laugh or cry. A restriction to two landing sides and a ban on the detachment cards would balance it out just a bit. Naturally also a restriction of transports to coastal waters and a ban to go past New Orleans on the Mississippi. Plus a 10 VP advantage to the CSA per turn played.
I believe that the mechanism chosen for this tournament is way better than a pure elimination but still needs finetuning.
"I am here already.", said the hedgehog to the hare.
July62
Moni Kerr NM129 VP 1308 (+60) KIA 81k
PGR NM89 VP 937 (+33) KIA 129k
USA Captured Tuscon, El Paso, Galveston & Houston out west/TX.
CSA Holds Jefferson & Rolla in MO
USA captured Memphis, Corinth & Nashville in TN
USA captured Pensacola & Jacksonville in FL but repulsed from Savannah GA
USA captured Culpeper, Charlottesville and Manasas in VA, but recently lost Harpers ferry and strasburg in the valley to JEB Stuart.
Moni Kerr NM129 VP 1308 (+60) KIA 81k
PGR NM89 VP 937 (+33) KIA 129k
USA Captured Tuscon, El Paso, Galveston & Houston out west/TX.
CSA Holds Jefferson & Rolla in MO
USA captured Memphis, Corinth & Nashville in TN
USA captured Pensacola & Jacksonville in FL but repulsed from Savannah GA
USA captured Culpeper, Charlottesville and Manasas in VA, but recently lost Harpers ferry and strasburg in the valley to JEB Stuart.
"Stay low, move fast"
-
pgr
- General of the Army
- Posts: 672
- Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 9:33 pm
- Location: Paris France (by way of Wyoming)
Skibear wrote:July62
Moni Kerr NM129 VP 1308 (+60) KIA 81k
PGR NM89 VP 937 (+33) KIA 129k
USA Captured Tuscon, El Paso, Galveston & Houston out west/TX.
CSA Holds Jefferson & Rolla in MO
USA captured Memphis, Corinth & Nashville in TN
USA captured Pensacola & Jacksonville in FL but repulsed from Savannah GA
USA captured Culpeper, Charlottesville and Manasas in VA, but recently lost Harpers ferry and strasburg in the valley to JEB Stuart.
Jeb with one last ride. Congratulations Moni for a flawless effort.
-
Liberty Bell
- Captain
- Posts: 179
- Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 1:34 pm
- Location: Gothia
You don’t have to be sorry Seraphim. Congratulations to you and congratulations to Jim-NC, well played. I must tell you all that I had a great time and are very happy that I joined this tournament. I meet some fantastic new friends from who I learned the game (FelixZ and Skibear). My goal was to play a second game against Skibear and this time don’t loose with another 1400 VPs 
And I won my last two games. But Seraphim, you showed up from the blue and my dreams was crushed. I must say that I like this forum, but someone has to say that for a rookie you are all nerds 
You discuss house rules in details, at the the same time you have tournament rules very hard to understand. Look at my picture. I have one serious comment for the finals though. I think it’s a huge advantage to play against the results in other games. Seraphim you had 12 turns, half a year! A simple thing would be to keep the end results hidden in the future. Well this was all for me and I wish you all good luck in this great tournament. Now when “Elvis has left the building” ….
[ATTACH]29731[/ATTACH]
And I won my last two games. But Seraphim, you showed up from the blue and my dreams was crushed. I must say that I like this forum, but someone has to say that for a rookie you are all nerds You discuss house rules in details, at the the same time you have tournament rules very hard to understand. Look at my picture. I have one serious comment for the finals though. I think it’s a huge advantage to play against the results in other games. Seraphim you had 12 turns, half a year! A simple thing would be to keep the end results hidden in the future. Well this was all for me and I wish you all good luck in this great tournament. Now when “Elvis has left the building” ….
[ATTACH]29731[/ATTACH]
- Attachments
-
Liberty Bell wrote:You don’t have to be sorry Seraphim. Congratulations to you and congratulations to Jim-NC, well played. I must tell you all that I had a great time and are very happy that I joined this tournament. I meet some fantastic new friends from who I learned the game (FelixZ and Skibear). My goal was to play a second game against Skibear and this time don’t loose with another 1400 VPs
[ATTACH]29731[/ATTACH]
By looking at the picture, you seem to deserve to advance to Q-finals, but Seraphim inflicted 110.000 CSA casualties to you inflicting 55.000 CSA casualties. The game adds VP for each regiment destroyed. There may lay the answer for his VP tally. And it seems, there was a bloodbath in last 6 turns of their game, with CSA casualties rising for additional 50.000 (your total in 24 turns).
As for knowing the score, you are right, Seraphim was very much privileged by knowing your score tally, he knew he should push to catch you up and that information has resulted in more bloody match earning him higher score. I admit that was an error on my part, but I cannot rectify it now other than say I am sorry it happened. This is a new system proposed by FelixZ, and never tried before, with its good and bad parts. Learning from it, we should not let that in the second round. Every 6 turns, score should be PMed to pgr who will publish the standings only after all matches have passed 6 turn mark. That is fair.
Also, for side choosing, I propose each of us send it by PM to pgr, so there is no uneven advantage by those who choose to wait and see what the other pair choose. Lindi, FelixZ, Skibear and me get to choose which side they want.
About last match of this round, CitizenX had some complaints, I propose he posts them here, so we can rule if they are valid or not to advance to the next round.
I would also wait for official 1.04. (should be available in the next week) to start the next round.
Return to “PBEM and multiplayer matchups (all games)”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests