FIDA PBEM Tournament Sign-Ups and Info

[Carico67]

Guys, details to follow, but sign ups are beginning right now. 128 Players maximum, single-elimination.

What is FIDA? FIDA is the collective names of the group that worked with Larry in making the LHTR ruleset. Involved were members of all 4 PBEM clubs (Flames of Europe "F" AKA: FOE, International Axis and Allies Players Association "I" AKA: IAAPA, Deutscher Axis and Allies Klub "D" AKA: DAAK, and Axis and Allies Members Club "A" AKA: AAMC)

Tournament Info:
FIDA Kick-Off Tournament; Using Larry Harris' Tournament Rules.

Prizes:
1) Both Finalists will receive the A&A game of their choice sent to them, hand signed by Larry himself. For the winner of the finals they have the additional luxury of.... Bragging Rights

A&A Players:
FIDA (committee name of the group that played a part in the LHTR creation process) is happy to sponsor our kick-off tournament event, using the Larry Harris' Tournament Rules set, with the assistance of RichyJ (Director General of Days-Of-Infamy) and his diceroller program. The event is open to the first 128 members to sign up, and will be played via Play-by-email. The tournament event is Single-Elimination. The policy for moves will be as follows:
1) 1 Move within 72 hours of your opponents or a warning is issued*
2) Error correction rules (mistakes, forgetting to ask for OOL and assuming etc) will be posted soon, just prior to the events beginning.
3) *3 Warnings in a game will result in a DQ.
4) FIDA withholds the right to DQ a player if they are destructive or found guilty of being malicious on ANY of the A&A message boards found throughout the community. Expect warnings on this first, this DQ refers to extreme measures.
5) Judgement, penalty assessments, and proceedures of that nature for this event are under review and should be posted soon... all 4 clubs currently handle things differently...

It appearswe will be using DAAK's error correction policy and AAMC's tourament guidelines in regards to decision and move speed processing. I will post those in full soon. For the time being...

Please post below if you want to enter this event. Entry is free, but please make sure you are serious about trying to complete games within the posted guidelines. I also ask that you do the following:

Send Carico67@hotmail.com an email. Under the "TOPIC" please put the following: "Email Information for the FIDA Tournament Event"

I get a LOT of junk mail, and without that header am likely to delete it. I will need the emails to update and notify players of events as the tournament unfolds. Sign-Ups will go on until June 15th I believe, so please post below and send me that email. Also, feel free to list any questions here. Thanks, Chris C, event main coordinator.

Also, diceserver used will be via RichyJ's Wargamer dicey, and his help in this is GREATLY appreciated. For those that need map utilities please note such on the email you send me an I'll send you link information on Mapview and Atti's Battlemap utilities, both usabale for AAR play.

[ June 08, 2004, 11:23 AM: Message edited by: Carico67 ]

[axis_roll]

Are there going to be allotments for vacation time (seeing as it IS the summer in the northern Hemisphere)????

There will be a period of 14 days I will be unavailable....

If that is not allowable, then I will be unable to join the tourneyment.

However if I can swing that... SIGN ME UP!

[Atlantikwall]

I´ll join the tournament and have just sent you an e-mail.

Even if I would love to start quickly, I think a sign-up period of only a week is a little bit too short. Lots of people are still in (whitsun) vacation and others may start their summer break. So I think you should at least give them 10 days to sign up, better 14.

And just 2 prizes for (potentially) 128 players is not very "generous ;) ". Couldn´t someone ask Avalon Hill if they might sponsor additional prizes, may be a signed D-day-edition for all quarter-finalists? Six free games certainly would not "ruin" that company!

[ June 08, 2004, 01:04 PM: Message edited by: Atlantikwall ]

[Carico67]

Vacations and such...

In the first round they often prove problematic, but seldom after that. Anything like this (business trip away for a few days etc) can be used to weigh judgement if a game goes to decision if tourney staff feel it should; but what ussually happens after the first round is that we start 2nd round (or 3rd or 4th) ASAP when the match ups are ready to allow for extra time to play. This, however, in no way expands or changes expected move rate... it just reduces the instances where it comes to judges decisions in a tourney event, and allows players more time to play things out if and when possible (a much better case for both players and tourney staff).

I will post the official policies of such soon, but cannot access AAMC from here (at school) to post the complete policy and proceedures. In regards to your question Axis_Roll, as long as things of this nature (being away) is communicated to your opponent and tourney staff, it is rare that such is used against you. At AAMC we reach very few needs of judging games using the policy in mention, as it should be, hence we are using tourney guidelines from such (not to mention I'm more familiar with them than the other clubs, and will be in charge of handling such). We've had 134 man tourneys as recently as 1.5 years ago that went on very smoothly, so no worries, and DAAK's error correction rules are very user-friendly. Let the players play, and decide the victor... :cool:

[AxisRoll]

Count me in 2! email to follow.

[DY]

Count me in 3. Emailing you now...

[Shmooie]

I definately in too!

[Carico67]

I'l update list later from work, about to leave.

1 note, when emailing me info please note "Name" you use here on MB's and such soI know who's who. Thanks guys, about 10 so far I believe. C2

[Carico67]

Note: for information on map utilities, where to find them an such, please email me and post as subject: "AAR Mapping Utility Info Needed" so I don't assume junk mail and delete. I'd post here, but don't know which links are allowable and which aren't. Thanks, Chris C

---Also, list of players coming, but I need time to figure out who's emails are for who as info not sent in all cases... hopefully free time this afternnon to sort some of it out. Numbers above a dozen now and climbing...

[Carico67]

Bump.... we're back in business. Wil have list to date up soon....

[Carico67]

Axis_Roll
MHeinz
INDIA
DY
AllWeNeedIsLove
Shmooie
Nusspli
AxisRoll
Attrition
Atlantikwall
Glueside
Wazzup
Drajeck
Cape
AXIS77
LeeMorrison
Enigma

Please shoot me an email w/your name (real and one you want used for MB) ASAP if you want to get in. We may cut off at 64 if things develop slowly, to get things off and running. Thanks, Chris C, Carico67@hotmail.com

[Attrition]

Carico,

Just to be official (even though I know you got my email) - I'm in!

[Cape]

I send the email just now

Thanks
Cape

[Carico67]

not sure this will work....

[DY]

Luke Smolucha's nick on the AH Forums is "Shmooie" since his surname is pronounced "Shmoo-ha"

[AxisRoll]

I don't see the tourneyment in any of the AAMC pages. Is it not there yet?

[Carico67]

http://www.dicey.net/nuke/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=1340&start=0

[AxisRoll]

http://www.aamc.net/axisandallies.shtml

Is this the same site? I registered at this one. Do I need to do both?

[AxisRoll]

OK, figured it out. I should do that first before asking the question. lol.

[Enigma]

I just sent an email and got registered on the new area.

[Carico67]

Axis_Roll
MHeinz
INDIA
DY
AllWeNeedIsLove
Shmooie
Nusspli
AxisRoll
Attrition
10) Atlantikwall
Glueside
Wazzup
Drajeck
Cape
Nemo97
LeeMorrison
Enigma
Felix Steiner
HailStone
20) Hephaistos
Eike
Leuchtturm
Komp
Cousin_Joe
Az Hakim
Babu
Gotrex
Winkelmann
Panther
30) Guderian
HoRRoR
Il Diavolo
Willem
Fuchs
MatildaMike
Squirecam
CommC
V-2
sajac

Please shoot me an email w/your name (real and one you want used for MB) ASAP if you want to get in. We may cut off at 64 if things develop slowly, to get things off and running. Thanks, Chris C, Carico67@hotmail.com

[Panther]

I send you a lot more registrations today I got directly from DAAK members. I think there are 2 double registrations but thes wil be easy to recognize I believe. :)
I still wait for some more players from DAAK.

Panther
Vicepresident, Minister of Rules, Minister of LL A&A, DAAK

[Carico67]

Added Panther, 35 and rising by about 7-10/day right now...

[Carico67]

Bump... up to the top. I actually have free time (an hour or so) and nothing to do! Please email me entries ASAP folks, once we feel sign-ups have near peeked we're going to close option quickly and get this event rolling! Thanks, FIDA staff.

[AxisRoll]

So we are looking at 64 players? How long will this go on for?

[DY]

Are Larry Harris games 9 VC no bid by default?

Or is this a 9 VC no bid tourney using LHTR?

[Panther]

So we are looking at 64 players? How long will this go on for?

I guess we will not wait too long. At some point we will start no matter if we have 64 participants or not. But I will leave this to Carico as he is organizing this tourney. :)

[Panther]

Are Larry Harris games 9 VC no bid by default?

Or is this a 9 VC no bid tourney using LHTR?

We want to use LHTR, going for 9 VC AND using a bid procedure to determine who is who.
Details will be announced before the tourney starts.

[Carico67]

I think it's time to set it: Next Friday, at 10 AM EST, sign-ups close for the event. Draw will be done on Friday afternoon. Expect a full copy of rules/error-correction rules before this weekend is over. PLEASE, sign up ASAP... I don't want to suddenly see us jump up 10 sign-ups next THUR and push us over 64 and an extra round at the last second, after having constructed a form for a 64 player draw.

[DY]

So 9 VC isn't the "standard" victory condition for LHTR?

It's still a choice of 8,10 or 12?

That's what the rules seem to suggest, it's just that I remember reading 9 VC was the implied victory condition for all LHTR games.

I'm guessing it's a positive bid for the Axis to place units on the board before USSR1.

[Chunksoul]

I want to register also. I will send you an email shortly.

Russell.

[Carico67]

That's what the rules seem to suggest, it's just that I remember reading 9 VC was the implied victory condition for all LHTR games.

Correct, sort of. LHTR is designed to be used at any of the previous 3 settings, plus the additional one of a moderate victory condition (9 VC's). In PBEM the moderate victory condition, 9 VC game, will be the norm.

[AllWeNeedIsLove.]

Will there be a bid system. and if so how will it work

[DY]

There is going to be a bid. I don't think they will tell us the system until Friday 25-th June. I assume the bid will give initial units on the board to the Axis. I guess it will either be:

a) lowest bidder gets the Axis with the units they bid for,

or

b) highest bidder takes the Allies and gives the Axis player the higher bid to spend on starting units.

[pagan]

lowest bidder for axis PLEASE.

It makes more sense, In My Opinion.

[DY]

Both make equal amounts of sense IMHO.

Bidding system (a) says "I think the Axis have a good chnce of winning if you let me have 'x' IPCs of starting units and I am happy to play them under those conditions."

Bidding system (b) says "I'm so confident in my ability to win with the Allies, that I'll give you 'x' IPCs worth of units"

[Carico67]

Bid rules will work as follows:

Each players will make a 1 time bid, sending it in to the tourney director as follows:
1) Name of player sending it in (as being used in the tournament)
2) Name of Opponent, and their email if known
3) Bid for the axis powers...

The lowest bid # will receive the axis powers. Up to 1/2 (rounded down in an odd # case) of the bid amount may be allocated in units placed pre-game. These units must be placed in a territory or Sea Zone where other troops of the same nationality already reside. Here's some example's to clarify:
EX1:
One player bids -6, the other 3. The -6 bid would be the axis player. His opponent would play the allies and receive 6 IPC's in bid. 1 Infantry unit could be placed pre-game, and the other 3 IPC's spread out amoung R/UK/USA IPC totals as desired. A player could also opt to simply not use 3 IPC's for pre-start placement, and instead give all 6 to IPC-on-hand status if desired.

EX2:
One player bids 14, the other 18. The 14 would be the axis power, and receive 14 IPC's in bid. Up to 7 could be placed in pre-game units. If the player decides he needs a Tank unit he could choose to place a tank somewhere, Libya perhaps with a new German tank, and spread the other 9 IPC's out to pre-game starting IPC totals amoung GER/Japan as he see's fit.

EX3:
One player bids -8 the other -5. The -8 Bid would play the axis powers. 8 IPC's would be received by the allied player, and if desired an infantry or artillery piece could be placed pre-game, and any remaining funds spread out amoungst the allied starting IPC-starting-totals as saw fit.

Any buyable unit is allowable in bid placement, be it a land/sea/air/IC/AA Gun piece, so long as it is affordable to the bid level. A UK infantry selected in pre-placement buys from a bid must be placed in a land territory where other UK land pieces are present, etc.

Please drop any questions on this to me and I'll do my best to answer them ASAP. Thanks, Chris C

[Carico67]

Axis_Roll
MHeinz
INDIA
DY
AllWeNeedIsLove
Shmooie
Nusspli
AxisRoll
Attrition
10) Atlantikwall
Glueside
Wazzup
Drajeck
Cape
Nemo97
LeeMorrison
Enigma
Felix Steiner
HailStone
20) Hephaistos
Eike
Leuchtturm
Komp
Cousin_Joe
Az Hakim
Babu
Gotrex
Winkelmann
Panther
30) Guderian
HoRRoR
Il Diavolo
Willem
Fuchs
MatildaMike
Squirecam
CommC
V-2
sajac
40) Pagan
Onkel Tom
chunksoul
Nergal
Utah
Celeritas


Please shoot me an email w/your name (real and one you want used for MB) ASAP if you want to get in. We may cut off at 64 if things develop slowly, to get things off and running. Thanks, Chris C, Carico67@hotmail.com

[cousin_joe]

1. I assume if both players bid the same amount, there will be a way to randomly assign one player to play Axis and one to play Allies. Can you clarify?

2. I assume National Advantages will not be used. Is this correct?

3. Not so much a clarification, but I think it would be interesting to collect bid information, along with game results, to get an idea of where a bid should be. Personally, I think things are pretty close to even, and bids should be small either way, but it would be nice to see some hard data. Information to collect would be Winning/Losing Player, Winning/Losing Side, How Bid was Distributed, Amount Each Player Bid. Will this be considered?

Whether this information is kept as a running database or as info to be only released after the tournament is up to you guys, as the issue of bid secrecy may be a concern if using a running database (able to see how players bid previously). Again though, collecting the information would really be useful for future games as it would give a ballpark idea for new players on how to bid.

4. Some further info worth collecting might be regarding Tech (Which Side got Tech, Which Round, Did they win the game?, etc). Again, more hard data for making future changes to Tech (NEEDED!). Consider making a post-game survey for the winner to fill out when reporting results.

Anyways, that's all I got.

[DY]

Hey good ideas gordillo (c_j ???). I wouldn't want to see any bidding info released until after the tourney ends as I wouldn't want my next opponent (assuming I don't get bundled out in the first round) to know what I'm likely to bid.

I think collating data on attempts at techs would be a useful indicator as to how CB and HB might need to be revisited in LHTR v1.2

[cousin_joe]

Yeah, it's me, cousin_joe, back from vacation to find out the boards have all been changed and they're displying the actual user names now rather than preferred names. I'm working on getting it fixed though :)

I agree about having information about your previous bids being available for future opponents. Perhaps they can still collect all the information, but when displaying it (as the tournament progresses), they can simply show bids with outcomes, but not the actual players making those bids.

eg.

Bid at Start of Game | Result
------------------------|------
x IPC (+/- distribn)| Axis
y IPC (+/- distribn)| Axis
z IPC (+/- distribn)| Allies

This way, the data becomes available for analysis much sooner (waiting for the end of the tournament could take several months)

[DY]

Yeah that's a much better plan and it gives players a feel for what each side is worth, without knowing what their next opponent specifically bid.

[cousin_joe]

Some further information that might be worth collecting in survey form when the winner posts the results...

1. Round of Victory
-to get an idea about how long games are going

2. Method of Victory
-which VC's were captured, did opponent concede?
-this could be useful for considering future changes to the game (ie. VC's) as I suspect most Axis victories will be India, Karelia, Russia (repetitive)

3. Did Germany Build an AC?
-some hard data on strategies, instead of just theorizing. Will be able to see success rate by cross-referancing info to game winner.

4. Did UK Build an IC in India?
-see 3

5. Did Allies go KGF of KJF?
-see 3

6. Comments on how to improve the game
-some feedback from players after just having played a game on percieved problems which might need revision for LHTR 1.2

It might seem an arduous task to collect all this info, but it could actually be done quite easily by creating a Webpage for people to post game results (which they have to do anyway) and then creating some drop-down menus which contain the different possible answers to the questions. The information would be extremely useful in suggesting further changes to the game - and possibly an Advanced A&A Revised Edition, if that's still in the works :)

[DY]

Yep all of the above sounds good to me.

PS I think LHTR is the "advanced edition" that we all asked for way back when.

[cousin_joe]

DY,

When LHTR was first released, Blackwatch and Carico hinted at the possibility of the committee working on an Advanced A&A ruleset. My impression would be that this would be amped-up with more strategies and choices for the veteran player (without the need to keep rules simple for the benefit of new players and 12-year olds as has been done with the LHTR version)

In fact, the LHTR version actually kills a lot of strategy and choices available in the Original AH version (Sealion, Any US-HB strategy at all, Tech). Things I'd like to see in the Advanced Version, if ever released, would be a BALANCED Tech system, USEABLE National Advantages, IMPROVED AIR/DD/SUB Interaction, Fighter INTERCEPTORS, REDUCED Cost ICs, and with more HISTORICAL ACCURACY and STRATEGIC OPTIONS overall. Of course I'll play LHTR rules for now, but this is what I feel the game needs in order to be a truly GREAT strategy game.

[DY]

Good point. LHTR is actually a "dumbed-down" version of AH rules. I thinkthe LHTR NAs are pretty good though.

[Carico67]

I agree totally on that "dumbed-down" point, well, sort of. I like to think a 12 year old (as advertised on the box for player age) could now pick up a ruleset and read one clear enough that they could play it the same way elder members play, as there are little or no "shades of grey". I'm not going to argue or touch on any of the "player options" points, but say simply LHTR is designed for standardized and rated competitive play, without some of the far-fetched game-breaking flaws that can be exploited in the AH version (IMO). Seeing as I expect that last line to be copy/pasted ad attacked on the MB's by the ever-naysayers, I will state there are a great number of things done I wasn't in full agreement with. Yet there were far more that I was. I did a lot of querying online on issues, and presented a lot of links to subjects talked about here and at DonRae's--- hundreds of hours were spent by those involved to finalize the work there-in, and test it. Is the ruleset different, yes, and more in line with the way the games creator wants his game to be played.

I have hopes AH will adopt the ruleset for the reasons above: EVERYONE, from beginner to veteran, should be able to pick up that ruleset, clearly understand it, and be able to play by the same set of rules. I've seen firsthand, through hundreds and hundreds of incidents, the confusion over the 2nd edition rules and their interpretations; and saw many similar actions before the FAQ release with the AH version (which did resolve the vast majority of Q's for sure, excellent work by MS and DY and all others involved). However, I do not believe the rules as printed are for ages 12 and older... any disagreemets on that point? Anyone here who's ever played F-to-F, online, or whatever has probably also encountered similar incidents of differing rules interpretations as I referred to about 2nd edition earlier. While this can be interesting at times, to me (this is obviously an IMO) it could, and should, be unnecesary.

[DY]

Dumbed-down doesn't equal worse, it's just that LHTR isn't really "advanced" in the sense cousin_joe is talking about.

I voted for LHTR over AH (on the other current thread talking specifically about the differences between these two rulesets).

[cousin_joe]

Carico67,

From a clarity point of view, the commitee has done an EXCELLENT job with the new rules. I realize making them clear and concise, to eliminate any confusion as to their interpretation, was the primary focus for the LHTR and in that regard you have succeeded. :)

The problem I have with the new rules however, is that not enough attention was focused in increasing the Strategic Options in the game. In fact, by essentially killing Tech, players actually have Less Choices in LHTR than in AH (this would have been even moreso if existing FTRs were not allowed on new ACs). True, you have removed the gamebreakers, like US HB and Sealion, but of the many ways to deal with these, it would appear the commitee was more focused on simplicity (ie. "dumbing things down") rather than preserving strategic options. This appeared to be the general trend throughout the LHTR, with specific examples being:

1. Super Subs at 3/3 rather than introducing any SUB/DD/FTR interaction
2. Neutering HB to the point of uselessness, rather than re-introducing FTR Interceptors
3. Delaying Tech to kill Sealion outright, rather than other solutions which would keep Sealion a possibility in selected games (specifically "R&D solution", note: Sealion is entirely preventable by the Allies)

I do hope an Advanced Ruleset, with more focus on creating additional Strategic Options, rather than Simplifying the Rules, will eventually be created. Great strategy games are about choices, and having multiple ways to accomplish your goals. A&A Revised under the LHTR rules now, is basically A&A Original with a few extra bells and whistles. True, you might be more apt to buy an AC for Germany for that Atlantic Push, or an UK IC in India for Stall Japan, but by far, the most viable strategy remains Triple Team Germany for the Allies (via Karelia), and Race to Moscow for the Axis, using mainly Infantry Push Mechanics. With A&A Original, games were so repetitive, it got to the point where it was like Deja Vu, again and again and again :) Bottom Line: The Game needs more choices thus resulting in a gerater variety of playouts.

In summary, the LHTR is a nice, clear, concise ruleset, and is certainly tournament ready from that point of view (unlike the AH rules). From a strategy point of view though, the LHTR has a long way to go, and I would hope the commitee realizes this. There is so much more potential to make A&A Revised a truly great strategy game.

[Atlantikwall]

From a strategy point of view though, the LHTR has a long way to go, and I would hope the commitee realizes this. There is so much more potential to make A&A Revised a truly great strategy game.

I alreay wrote it in the LHTR vs. AVHR thread, but I have to "repeat" it in other words: Techs shold be so strong, that you can reasonnably go for them, but these should not dominate the whole game. Increasing the the "power" of techs means increasing the influence of LUCK in this game. And you already "admitted" that the old HB and "tech-sea-lion" were very bad for the game. Delaying techs is absolutely neccesary to make A&A a strategy game. If you have to "live with the permanent fear" of your opponent luckily getting LRA, you can not reasonnably defend your countries/fleets. If your "calculate" with LRA, you play highly defencive and sub-optimal for that reason. If you calculate without LRA, you have always the risk of loosing a very big share of your armies/fleets or even your capitol just because of a lucky tech roll. With the immediate implementation of techs, A&A would not be a strategic game, it would be a "tactical" one. Therefore it is absolutely neccessary that the taskforce does not move towards the "wrong" direction you apply for.

[DY]

Nice to see you got your old name back c_j. Now as for this:

"1. Super Subs at 3/3 rather than introducing any SUB/DD/FTR interaction"

The original LHTR introduced the SS/DD/Ftr interaction and many (including me) pointed out that this interaction was actually going to be BAD and UNDESIRABLE in many situations.

I, for one, feel that the interaction was APPROPRIATE for AAE and AAP but it is INAPPROPRIATE for the AH revised AA. We (the bulk of those posting at AH) requested that super subs be changed to 3/3 which was done in LHTR v1.1

[cousin_joe]

Atlantikwall,

I agree with you 100% about not having Techs too strong. With all techs, the risk (30 IPC avg investment) and the benefit (gain from having tech), should be about even. HB was clearly worth much more than 30IPC in AH, but now in LHTR, it is clearly worth much less and therefore not even worth investing in. Super Subs, Combined Bombardment, and LRA (Delayed) also are not worth investing in.

It is not Tech itself that is bad, it is overpowered or underpowered Techs that are bad. I certainly am not in favor of overpowered Techs, what I am in favor of is Techs whose benefit is approximately equal to their risk (30IPC). This can be done by making all techs worth about 30IPC , or by making different strengthed Techs cost different amounts (I had proposed the idea earlier of Major (5IPC/roll) and Minor Tech (3IPC/roll))

With regards to LRA specifically, my concerns were the exact same as yours, and I didn't like the immediate implementation of Tech. Delaying Tech was certainly a solution, but not the only solution. It does work, but in the process, you have devalued ALL the techs significantly, just to fix ONE. What I had proposed earlier was a 'research' fee of 5IPC that you would have to pay at least a turn prior to trying to 'develop' each Individual Tech (Axis could bid for Tech). This way, Tech was effectively delayed one turn, and you knew which players might go for LRA or Sealion (at a 5IPC cost to them) but at least you didn't have to guard against EVERY player.

Anyways, Delayed Tech is what they went with, and personally, I have no problem with it since it works. However, don't expect any half decent player to go for Tech at all, as it simply isn't worth the investment. Incorporating Tech into your overall strategy is a big no-no. Expect more of the same old, same old Triple Team, Race to Moscow, IPM strategies we are all used to. :rolleyes:

[cousin_joe]

DY,

The problem with the LHTR 1.0 Super Subs is that it made planes not able to hit subs unless a DD was present and therefore, in the UK Air vs. Ger Navy Baltic SZ battle, the defender could not use SUBs as fodder. It was not the DD/FTR/SUB interaction that was bad, it was the rule that was bad. What they should have done, would be to give the sub the option of Diving to Avoid Combat. With this option, SUBs could still be used as fodder, while at the same time, preserving their decreased susceptibility to air which is sorely needed. That extra 0/1 on defense is not going to do the SUB any good vs. an Allied air strafe and so you pretty much are left with another Tech pretty much there to take up ink, as it is definitely not worth the 30 IPC investment.

[Carico67]

Axis_Roll
MHeinz
INDIA
DY
AllWeNeedIsLove
Shmooie
Nusspli
AxisRoll
Attrition
10) Atlantikwall
Glueside
Wazzup
Drajeck
Cape
Nemo97
LeeMorrison
Enigma
Felix Steiner
HailStone
20) Hephaistos
Eike
Leuchtturm
Komp
Cousin_Joe
Az Hakim
Babu
Gotrex
Winkelmann
Panther
30) Guderian
HoRRoR
Il Diavolo
Willem
Fuchs
MatildaMike
Squirecam
CommC
V-2
sajac
40) Pagan
Onkel Tom
chunksoul
Nergal
Utah
Celeritas
AdamD021
supercrooky
Pat McKinnie
16 Slots left open....

Please shoot me an email w/your name (real and one you want used for MB) ASAP if you want to get in. We may cut off is Frday 10 AM EST to get things off and running. Thanks, Chris C, Carico67@hotmail.com

[AdamD021]

can you make a +10 bid as the axis...and put 5 on a tech roll that if succesful gives you that tech at the start of the game.....or if that is too big....at the start of round 2? I think its an interesting idea.

[Carico67]

Bids can only be used on units, pre-game tech rolls will not be allowed here or at club level in any of the clubs.

[Wazzup]

If anything, techs should be done away with. IMHO(in my humble opinion), techs seemed to be the ONLY way axis could beat allies w/o a bid (unless you were a complete newbie, and were playing a very experience axis player). Now, we have bids, and techs aren't nearly as important unless you are an underacheived player (or the dice has screwed you).

Now, in A&A revised, we have NAs.. which should be the technologies. To me, these are what should be technologies to roll for, and each unique only to that country. Yep, that would be 36 unique NAs. To me, this was the original intent of Techs.. which was to put into play advantages one country had over another, because not all units (of equal description) were of equal strength.

I guess I'd rather see NAs rolled for. This would be the true breakthrough.

[cousin_joe]

Wazzup,

Techs are effectively eliminated as pretty much all of them, with possibly the exception of rockets, are not worth the average 30IPC spent on them. :(

As for National Advantages, choosing these is the best way to go. The whole concept of a strategy game is for players to choose their strategies, rather than leaving these key game elements to chance (ie. a dice roll). The problem with National Advantages right now is that they are still so grossly unbalanced (both between nations and within nations) that they have no place at all in Competitive Play.

[DY]

I think that the LHTR NAs give one NA of similar strength to each nation. Most are pretty balanced onthe second strongest NA, but then it's anything goes. Japan probably has the worst 1-st and 2-nd tier NAs, Germany the best.

AH NAs are woefully imbalanced.

[Carico67]

are not worth the average 30IPC spent on them

C-J since you insist on posting complaints about this on our TOURNAMENT SIGN-UP thread I'll address some troubles with your analysis and hopefully you'll stop posting about it, at least on this thread.

30 IPC's is an fair estimate amount, but 20 IPC's is the true expected amount by which to gauge techs when designing the game, as this is above 50% return... Teching is not meant to be an exact and benificial science, it is a risk and reward, not a standard for strategy in the game designers mind. Sorry, complain as you will about it, but his preference carries a lot of weight.

I for one am not anti-tech, but on this point, like others I was unjustly accused of 'backing' in posts prior, will now defend the decisions made by the FIDA commitee and LH. Top level players will look at tech as a 20 IPC risk with called techs. 30 further helps insure success, but in a game where one always tries to "weigh" and "play" the odds, 20 IPC's is the standard. I've held my tongue on this continued oversight by many here on the AH MB's till now, but since it's apparent it's a topic that will be misrepresented and washed into a thread not meant for ruleset argument, I'm going to let loose some.

Will there be optimal-play/advanced versions coming? I would expect so, AFTER the game has been through initial trial and error and discovery. LH hinted at working with the public on such a long time ago and whether he opts to or not I could likely round up all the PBEM groups into 1 group to work hand in hand with the public on such, WHEN the time for it is right. I fully understand you've played as many games as most at AAR, and against top-level players, and feel you have a good/superior grasp of it, and feel it's time to move on with ideas. However, the mainstream, and the number of responses and feedbacks to the same level of competence as yours, is not broad enough yet. Hold tight C_J... this game has massive potential, but you cannot just rush into things (referring to rated play) because once it's established you don't want prior rates scewed into newer finish rates of an entirely seperate entity. (The FIDA group is getting back together in a few months when more returns on games have come through, and tournament play can be analyzed, etc). Hope I wasn't overly wordy this paragraph and it makes sense. Thanks, Chris C

[axis_roll]

this game has massive potential, but you cannot just rush into things (referring to rated play) because once it's established you don't want prior rates scewed into newer finish rates of an entirely seperate entity. (The FIDA group is getting back together in a few months when more returns on games have come through, and tournament play can be analyzed, etc).

So rated play in the PBEM clubs won't start until after the next FIDA group meeting? Since I've retired from pre-4th edition A&A (a.k.a. Axis&Allies Revised), I haven't played a rated game in a while... so the itch to climb a ladder is growing......

[Carico67]

Yes, rated play will be up and running in all of the clubs soon. (FoE has already started it, and AAMC is running it via MB's till automation of the new site is complete, then moving in stats when it's ready; I am not sure of exact status in regards to IAAPA and DAAK but both are close to supporting it with databases, and works are underway at all of the clubs to do so).

We do realize there will be changes, which points against what I have mentioned beforehand, but it is ineveitable; and best if changes are lumped, rather than a piece here, then there, then a little later, etc. Even the 2nd edition DB's in all of the clubs have undergone rules changes over the course of time, but it is not one of those things done lightly for the aforementioned reasons. Accuracy of ladder ratings is a very 'precious' thing to many (and not so to others who still play rated online), and as club heads it's our responsibility to do the utmost to insure minimal 'tweaking' of standard play to keep the integrity of the DB stats as pure as possible.

I'm no words wizard, so I hope this is expained clearly... Blackwatch or others who are more efficient at explanation and familiar with that perspective feel free to chime in...

Thanks, C2

[DY]

Carico, good to see someone standing up to good ol' cousing_joe. You are correct, this is not the correct thread for such rules discussions.

[supercrooky]

im in, email sent

[cousin_joe]

Carico67,

My apologies :o You are correct, this is not the thread to be discussing LHTR rules. I initially started out suggesting information that could be collected when winners report the results so that we could use the data to further improve the game, and then got sidetracked on what some of those improvements could be. I apologize for my rude forum etiquette :o

I am glad to hear though that advanced versions are likely and can understand the need to be patient with these now that I see your proposed approach (I was thinking fix everything now (Rules AND Strategy) prior to rated play, rather than your approach (Rules THEN Strategy)). I will refrain from making any further posts on the matter on this thread and will tone down suggestions for game improvements for the time-being.

As for the Techs costing about 20IPC, you are correct, 4 dice nets you a 51.8% chance of acquiring the Tech and should be the number quoted as the average investment. Hail Lord Carico :D

One last note. I hope everyone isn't getting the impression that I'm a constant complainer, out to criticize everything in sight (aka. Zombie :rolleyes: ). I truly appreciate all the commitee's hard efforts, and it's just a matter of the Axis & Allies fan in me wanting this game to succeed as much as anyone.

Alright then, tournament sign-up ends in two days, so if you're reading this and haven't signed up yet, what are you waiting for?!?!? As someone else said, we don't want anyone getting free byes!!! Peace.

[Carico67]

Be ready to help us out when that time comes (review of things). We will be wanting a lot of feedback from active top guys when advanced rules and the search for them is undertaken! In regards to apologies; no need boss, you're an A&A fanatic and part of the family! I just wanted to get the thread back in focus. C2

[AxisRoll]

"I think it's time to set it: Next Friday, at 10 AM EST, sign-ups close for the event. Draw will be done on Friday afternoon. Expect a full copy of rules/error-correction rules before this weekend is over."
Did you send out the copy of rules/error corrections?

[Carico67]

Error correction rules

1. Fundamentals

While playing games by email (PBEM), there is always the possibility of unintentional errors. Most of the errors occur during combat declaration by the attacking player.

Examples of errors:
- Attacker in doubt about the type and number of units in certain countries
- Incorrect interpretation of the rules
- Errors regarding the movement points during the Combat Move

The number of possible errors is extremely high which makes it almost impossible to have a rule for every situation. Therefore the first and most important rule is:

If there are any errors that are not covered by the rules, the players should act with fairness and common sense.

It is quite possible, that someone will try to exploit these error correction (or other) rules to gain an advantage (so called rule lawyer). On the other hand there are players who will produce error after error during their moves, which can be very annoying for their opponents, who have to correct all these errors. Both won´t be accepted nor tolerated by us.
In such cases, the game supervisors (if needed after consulting the government) can make decisions that differ from the existing rules. In some cases the players can receive a warning or even be disqualified.
Please keep this in mind: We aim to provide sound competition, but only as long as the games are played in a friendly and fair manner. Blind ambition and a -win at all cost- mentality won´t do the game any good. We are here to enjoy this game, aren´t we?

2. Purchase errors

2.1 Player did not buy enough or did not buy at all?
If the active player has rolled the first die he can´t modify purchases (except his opponent allows him to do so). It is strongly recommended to use the according functions for purchasing and combat declaration in Dicey. This will minimize errors such as forgetting to purchase the units. This procedure remains intact even if playing with Mapview, unless criteria as listed in "8.0" below is met and agreed upon.
2.2 Bought too much (i.e. purchased more units then your money allows)?
In cases an error has been noticed after rolling the dice, one should proceed as follows: Take away as much of the purchased units, until the available money suffices. Start with the cheapest units, i.e. Inf first, Arm second etc. in elimination.

3. Combat declaration errors

Battles that contain combat declaration errors are invalid and have to be repeated or canceled. This will only be applied to battles that contain combat declaration errors. The results of battles that were correctly declared will stand.

Exception: If the results of some or all of the correct battles have any effect on the decision of the attacker to repeat incorrect battles, then the defender can ask for a reroll of these (correct) battles. If the players can´t agree, the game supervisors will decide.

3.1 Incorrect type/number of attackers or incorrect combat moves
The attacker has two possibilities:
1) He cancels the attack. The involved units are not allowed to participate in any other battles. They are allowed to move in non combat movement.
2) He attacks. The originally declared target is the only allowed target (exception: see 3.3). Only units that did not participate in other combat moves can be used.

Exception: If the attacker declares multiple combat moves, with units originating from one and the same territory, and where the total number of attackers (per type) is incorrect, then all the battle results where these attacking units participated are invalid.

3.2 Incorrect type/number of defenders in the attacked territory
The error correction procedure is the same as in 3.1 with one exception: If infantry instead of artillery are declared, while the number of units is correct, then the battle results will stand, because infantry and artillery have the same defensive value.

3.3 Incorrect declaration of the name of the attacked territory
If the name of the attacked territory was incorrectly declared in combat move, while it is apparent which territory was meant, then the battle result will stand. The term "apparent" is obviously quite flexible. Therefore a couple of examples are presented:
- The attacked territory can be identified by its defending units. E.g.: Combat move declaration: 10inf 1arm 2ftr UK to Eeu vs 10inf 1ftr aa. Suppose there are 12inf 2arm in Eeu. The combat move is invalid and would have to be redone. Furthermore suppose there are 10 inf 1 ftr aa in Weu (the declared defending units). The attacker apparently made a typing error and wanted to attack Weu. The battle results will stand.
- In the combat move, a "walk in" (wi) has been declared, while the incorrect indicated territory is already possessed by the attacker. Particularly obvious cases arise when the allies need to prevent a M84

E.g. After Japans turn, the axis income is at 87 ipcs. The US player decides to attack two territories to get the axis income under 84 ipcs:
#1: 3inf 1ftr Rus to Cau vs 2inf
#2: 1inf Spa to Fea vs nothing
Suppose battle #2 is incorrect, because the territory is already possessed by the UK. Con (which borders to the same sz as FEA) is German territory though. It is obvious that Con was meant and so it should be interpreted.
Apparently fairness should prevail while handling these situations. If the players can´t agree, the game supervisors should be contacted.

3.4 The sea zone for the amphibious landing is not specified
There are a lot of land areas that border to multiple sea zones. If the sea zones of the unloading transports and the battleships (support shot) for an amphibious attack are not specified correctly, the following situations can arise:
1) Sea zone is unambiguous: the ships only have one legal territory to go to. Solution: the combat move is valid.
2) There are multiple sea zones from which the transports can unload, but the ships are located in one of them at the start of the turn.
Solution: The combat move is valid. The ships will end their move within the sea zone they started.
3) There are multiple available sea zones AND the ships are not located in anyone of them.
Solution: The combat move is invalid and needs to be redone or canceled (see 3.1).

3.5 Combat move errors, but correct in Dicey
If the attacker notices his error before rolling the dice, while adjusting the units in Dicey accordingly, the battle results will stand. This will also cover typing errors in the combat move declaration. Note: Use the COMMENTS section of Dicey to clarify such issues.

3.6 Major errors: canceling the complete combat move
In these cases the attacker can ask his opponent if he may redo his combat moves. His opponent does not have to comply with this request. The attacker can contact the game supervisors, who may grant him to redo the combat moves. In general this will happen when the attacker is inexperienced with PBEM games.

3.7 The combat movement has not been accurately declared
If it has been noted (after a battle) that the route of the attacking units has not been declared accurately in the combat movement declaration, the following situations can be identified:
1) The route to the battlefield is obvious. Solution: combat movement and combat results are valid.
2) The route to the battlefield is not obvious.
a) There is a (one) shortest route. Solution: the shortest route will be choosen for the combat movement. The battle results are valid.
b) There is more than one shortest route and the choice of the route could make a difference: (e.g. for possible retreats)
Solution: The combat movement is not valid. The battle will have to be repeated. Important: the shortest route for planes is identified as the shortest possible way that does not encounter AA fire.
Note: often the route of the attacking units in the combat movement is crucial for defining retreat routes!

[Carico67]

4. Dicey errors

4.1 In general
In this section it will be assumed that the combat moves are correct and that the error occurs when entering the type and number of units in Dicey. In general the active player should reroll from the point of error.

4.2 Forgot to activate the AA
The complete battle will be rerolled if air units were used to attack.

4.3 Entering incorrect type or number of units in Dicey (attacker or defender)
A reroll will take place from the moment an error occurred. The term ?moment? applies to a complete round of either attacking or defending dice. In other words, single die rolls will not be rerolled, but only complete rolls of attacking or defending dice. If the type of unit is incorrect, while it has the same attacking or defending value as the correct unit (whichever applies), the roll will stand.
Examples:
1) The attacking units are incorrectly entered, the defending units correctly. Solution: Reroll the attacking and the defending dice.
2) The attacking units are correctly entered, the defending units incorrectly. Solution: the attacking dice are valid, because they where rolled before the error occurred. The defending units need to be rerolled.
2a) As is example 2 with the following difference: Dicey has not rolled all attacking dice, because not enough defending units where entered. Solution: Both the attacking and the defending units will be rerolled. Ok with deleting the LL note
3) Only one defending unit was incorrectly entered (e.g. bmb instead of ftr).
Solution: the attacking dice stand, while the dice for the defending units need to be rerolled completely.
4) Attacker: a bomber has been incorrectly entered instead of a battleship (or defender: an arm instead of an inf).
Solution: the roll is valid and will not be redone.

4.4 Ignoring of OOL
1) If a specific OOL is ignored, 4.3 will be applied.
Specific means that the defender already accurately specified his OOL.
E.g.: The defender has specified the following OOL for a sea battle: BB, Ftr, Ftr, AC. Accidentally the attacker uses the standard OOL. Solution: As 6.4.3 example 2 describes: reroll from the moment of the first incorrect defending diceroll.
2) If a general "OOL stop signal" (described in 3.2) has been ignored by the attacker, the battle will be rerolled from the moment where the defender should have declared his specific OOL. This is independent from the defenders concrete OOL decision (even if it has not been changed).
E.g.: 3 trn, 1 sub are under attack by 2 bmb, which score at least 1 hit. Chapter 3.2 explains: in case of defending subs, the defender can determine his OOL after the attacking, but before the defending rolls. Suppose the attacker ingnores this and continues to roll. All the diceresults after the attacking roll are invalid and have to be rerolled (after the defender has specified his OOL). This also applies for further battlerounds if the sub still lives.

5. Illegal non combat movements and placement errors

a) The following power hasn´t rolled yet: The player corrects all incorrect movements and/or corrects his placement errors. He can also alter the correctly moved and placed units.
b) The following power already rolled: Incorrect movements will be corrected. Incorrectly placed units (or units that weren?t placed at all) will be placed in the capitol of the power (if possible). The opponent can allow other solutions but is not obliged to do so.
After that, the following power will start its turn over (i.e. purchasing, combat moves etc.).
If the errors haven´t been noticed within one complete round of play (e.g. Rus2 - Ger 3), the game will continue without any corrections, as if there were no errors at all.



6. Non combat moves inconsistent with unit update or map

If the positions of units differ between Map (or -List of units-) and the non combat moves and placements, the opponent needs to be contacted immediately (by mail) for clarification of the board position.
A player cannot appeal to a correct non combat move, while continuing to play if the unit update does not correspond.
If a player continues to produce errors (at least 5), then his opponent can continue with the position resulting from the non combat moves, without continuously verifying with the unit update. A short note should be send to his opponent and the game supervisors after which the player can continue in the future without any further comment.

7. Responsibility of the players

Every player is responsible for checking the board update and for correcting any errors or misunderstandings in agreement with his opponent immediately. The best error prevention of course is by playing as careful as possible!
If the players can´t solve a problem by themselves, the game supervisors should be contacted. Both players need to have all the necessary documents available. Therefore all emails of a game should be saved, so the player is able to present all needed information.
The players can agree to correct the errors differently than above rules, but please, be careful!
The agreements should be applied consequently during the entire game. Besides that, the players will have a big responsibility. Any discrepancies can result in tough decisions for the game supervisor.

8.0 Mapview Notes

With Mapview it will not be necessary to type out combat moves so long as a copy of the map is sent before rolls, but ONLY IF both players agree to playing as such. Otherwise, even with mapview, players should type out combat moves and post them w/rolls in dicey as per normal PBEM play. OOL checks are still necessary and not eliminated (or expected to be sent with maps) while using Mapview

[AxisRoll]

Now that's Service!

[AxisRoll]

Saw a couple of changes

3.2 talks about inf and tanks defending at 2. tanks have changed.

4.3 does the same thing about rerolling

[DY]

Err Infantry and armour do NOT have the same defensive value in AAR (3.2)

Upon further reading this was obviously a cut-and-paste job from AAMC's MB 2nd ed AA rules page. So shall we assume for AAR replace "armour" with "artillery" ?

[Carico67]

Fix in a sec. DAAK gets the credit on these errror-correctionrules.... not AAMC. I edited in a little, to allow for Mapview, w/Panther's help.

That said, clock is ticking, 1:10 to go. A few new sign ups I need to add too :D

[AxisRoll]

Should we look for information here or AAMC or DAAK?

[Carico67]

Info will be here, draw out later tonight I'm guessing. Babysitting and getting driven nuts right now, so won't be able to to until late PM EST.

Sorry, C2

[AxisRoll]

me 2 feeding baby. what a joy...:D

[DY]

yes bring it on!

[cousin_joe]

Yeah, bring it!!! And if I get a 1st round bye, you can toss it back in, because I've been waiting to kick some tournament butt since this game came out!!! :D

[DY]

Same, I couldn't want a bye less!

[AdamD021]

You can give me one of their byes..............I will be out of town for a week for the 4th of July..I should still be able to make a move but it just makes my life easier

[Carico67]

There will be no byes. "3" 16 player brackets will be made, and the finals will be a 3-player round-robin event. I can't, and won't, have specifics of how the FIDA group wants that to work out, so I'll say now; it will be done soon, but we are moving on immediately. I am about to go find a random # generator... draw should be up within 4 hours (wife going to drag me to watch a movie.. sorry, no escape from it).

[Carico67]

FORMAT:
Single Elimination.

LENGTH OF ROUNDS:
Two (2) Months (rounds may be lengthened based on number of entries) approximately.

SPECIAL NOTES:
If any, then they will be posted here. It is the player's responsibility to check for updated information ON THE MESSAGE BOARD as the tournament develops and continues.

SPECIAL ADVISORY:
Please understand the following when playing:
1) Each player should submit a turn NO LATER than 3 days after his opponent's last move, with 1 day being the standard norm;
2) Each player MUST inform the Tournament Department of infractions, we do not check without notice;
3) Three (3) such infractions will result in a disqualification from that specific tournament;
4) Games not completed by the "STATED DEADLINE" will result in an adjudication process (those games will be judged to determine who advances to the next round of the tournament). An adjudicated game ONLY reflects who advances, not who WINS said game. The game MUST be completed outside the parameters of said tournament for all win/loss and ratings purposes;
5) Adjudicated games are judged by very experienced players and their decision on who advances is FINAL AND IRREVERSABLE.
6) Absences due to vacations or work travels need to do the following: Contact the tourney director (Carico67@hotmail.com and topic it "FIDA Vacation Info") BEFORE your absence to not receive any warnings. Weight of decision, should that process apply, can be afffected, though less so if notice's are given causing delays/slow-play.



A note to those concerned:
Vacations and such...
In the first round they often prove problematic, but seldom after that. Anything like this (business trip away for a few days etc) can be used to weigh judgement if a game goes to decision if tourney staff feel it should; but what ussually happens after the first round is that we start 2nd round (or 3rd or 4th) ASAP when the match ups are ready to allow for extra time to play. This, however, in no way expands or changes expected move rate... it just reduces the instances where it comes to judges decisions in a tourney event, and allows players more time to play things out if and when possible (a much better case for both players and tourney staff).
1C)

__________________________________________________ _______________


1) FIDA withholds the right to DQ a player if they are destructive or found guilty of being malicious on ANY of the A&A message boards found throughout the community. Expect warnings on this first, this DQ refers to extreme measures.

2) Diceserver used will be via RichyJ's Wargamer dicey.
2A) Game #'s will be sent out to players after draw is posted and RichyJ is contacted to set things up.
2B) Bids for games should be sent either to me, or (especially if either player has a problem with that) via the AAMC bunker bid system. http://bunker.aamc.net/aamclogin.asp (sign up us free, then go to "bidding". Both players would need dogtags to do it in thismanner. For that matter, any of the other clubs bidding systems may be used as well if both players wish.. I simply know AAMC's to help with any Q's....

3) Game's will be to 9 VC's as per description of victory in the LHTR ruleset

4) Bidding

Bid rules will work as follows:

Each players will make a 1 time bid, sending it in to the tourney director as mentioned above:
1) Name of player sending it in (as being used in the tournament)
2) Name of Opponent, and their email if known
3) Bid for the axis powers...

The lowest bid # will receive the axis powers. Up to 1/2 (rounded down in an odd # case) of the bid amount may be allocated in units placed pre-game. These units must be placed in a territory or Sea Zone where other troops of the same nationality already reside. Here's some example's to clarify:
EX1:
One player bids -6, the other 3. The -6 bid would be the axis player. His opponent would play the allies and receive 6 IPC's in bid. 1 Infantry unit could be placed pre-game, and the other 3 IPC's spread out amoung R/UK/USA IPC totals as desired. A player could also opt to simply not use 3 IPC's for pre-start placement, and instead give all 6 to IPC-on-hand status if desired.

EX2:
One player bids 14, the other 18. The 14 would be the axis power, and receive 14 IPC's in bid. Up to 7 could be placed in pre-game units. If the player decides he needs a Tank unit he could choose to place a tank somewhere, Libya perhaps with a new German tank, and spread the other 9 IPC's out to pre-game starting IPC totals amoung GER/Japan as he see's fit.

EX3:
One player bids -8 the other -5. The -8 Bid would play the axis powers. 8 IPC's would be received by the allied player, and if desired an infantry or artillery piece could be placed pre-game, and any remaining funds spread out amoungst the allied starting IPC-starting-totals as saw fit.

Any buyable unit is allowable in bid placement, be it a land/sea/air/IC/AA Gun piece, so long as it is affordable to the bid level. A UK infantry selected in pre-placement buys from a bid must be placed in a land territory where other UK land pieces are present, etc.

Please drop any questions on this to me and I'll do my best to answer them ASAP. (Carico67@hotmail.com)

Error correction policy is already in this thread a few pages back, please review those 2 parts of doctrine as well.

Best of luck to all! Please realize their are some players entered that are new to PBEM and patience will be needed. The FIDA staff working this is ussually very prompt, so have some faith in us to help the new players along and bear in (addressing the veteran guys...). Atti's Battlemap, and MOT's Mapview are the 2 recommended mapping tools. I have heard mention of Triple-A and if both players agree then that is fine as well. ENJOY, and happy hunting!

FIDA Staff

[Carico67]

Top 1/3:

Axis_Roll
vs
Fuchs

Az Hakim
vs
chunksoul



Glueside
vs
Guderian

Hephaistos
vs
CommC




Nergal
vs
Felix Steiner

HoRRoR
vs
Enigma



Onkel Tom
vs
Celeritas

Gotrex
vs
Attrition



Middle 1/3:

V-2
vs
Pagan

Cape
vs
Wazzup



Atlantikwall
vs
supercrooky

HailStone
vs
AdamD021




Drajeck
vs
Utah

DY
vs
Eike



Winkelmann
vs
Willem

Shmooie
vs
LeeMorrison


Bottom 1/3:

Komp
vs
AxisRoll

Nemo97
vs
MHeinz



Nusspli
vs
INDIA

Leuchtturm
vs
sajac




AllWeNeedIsLove
vs
MatildaMike

Il Diavolo
vs
Cousin_Joe



Panther
vs
Babu

Squirecam
vs Bye,,,,

Gentleman, emails will be sent out tonight and game #'s assigned once I am in contact with RichyJ

Also, we had 1 late drop-out, hence the bottom bye.

[Atlantikwall]

"3" 16 player brackets will be made

It stongly looks like that, but just to make sure: Does that mean that (with the draw above) the next three games are already set? So in my exemple, I would (in case of victory) play against the winner of Hailstone/AdamD021 and so on.

[Carico67]

You are absolutely correct.

When deadlines of rounds are posted, you will see how this formatting allows for maximal use of time to get games started "early" when possible and avoid decisions. It can lead to a wait if one zips through a few games, but saving games from being judged as much as possible is best for all involved.

C2

[cousin_joe]

I recall a post about 2 boardgames autographed by Larry Harris as prizes for the two finalists. Has this changed at all now that there are 3 finalists? Are there any other prizes we should be aware of? :) I'm only asking because DY wanted to know :D

[AdamD021]

Also will these games be going on Simultaneously.....(the finals)

ex. Finalist 1 has a game going agianst both 2 and 3 at the same time?

[DY]

I recall a post about 2 boardgames autographed by Larry Harris as prizes for the two finalists. Has this changed at all now that there are 3 finalists? Are there any other prizes we should be aware of? :) I'm only asking because DY wanted to know :D

Well, now that he mentions it...:D

[cousin_joe]

Thanks for asking that one for me c_j! No problem DY, glad to be of service! :D Just let me know if there's anything else you need to "ask". ;)

[Atlantikwall]

2 boardgames autographed by Larry Harris as prizes for the two finalists. Has this changed at all now that there are 3 finalists

I heard that Bazaar-of-wonders.de (sponsor fo DAAK) has offered another prize, but that is still only 3 prizes. As this is the "inauguration" tournament, there should be (at least) 6 prizes for all semi-finalists. Couldn`t someone ask AH/WoC to sponsor another 3 games? This is certainly nothing for such a big company.

@ c_j: You don`t have to care about prizes as you`ll be beaten in round 1 by Il diavolo!

[cousin_joe]

@ c_j: You don`t have to care about prizes as you`ll be beaten in round 1 by Il diavolo!Atlantikwall,

Don't you mean DY? :D I see you DAAK guys have a Duck as your logo. How appropriate. In fact, I think you guys should just go all the way and rename your club from DAAK, to DUCK. Sitting DUCK that is!!!, because that's all you'll be in this tournament! :D

And as for you Il diavolo, bring it!!!

[AxisRoll]

So were waiting for emails with game numbers to get started?

Should we send our bid to Carico yet?

What do you guys think bid will be? 16? add more german boats... lol

[Cape]

I see you DAAK guys have a Duck as your logo. How appropriate. In fact, I think you guys should just go all the way and rename your club from DAAK, to DUCK. Sitting DUCK that is!!!, because that's all you'll be in this tournament! :D

allways thought, the canadian are real nice guys ????

looks like a misinformation :confused:

[cousin_joe]

Hey Cape,

Come on, man. :) Don't take it seriously. It's just a little friendly trash talking :)

P.S. Don't forget to thank Bazaar-of-wonders.de (sponsor of DUCK ) for the prize AAMC will be getting when we win this thing. :D

[Cape]

Hey Cape,

Come on, man. Don't take it seriously. It's just a little friendly trash talking

P.S. Don't forget to thank Bazaar-of-wonders.de (sponsor of DUCK ) for the prize AAMC will be getting when we win this thing.

No problem :-)
That I am not the one to win a price is obvious... but look at my logo

[Atlantikwall]

I think you guys should just go all the way and rename your club from DAAK, to DUCK. I have to "help" c_j a little bit: I found that a very funny statement. But I have to tell you, there`s also another german club (flames-of-europe) involved, whose logo is less "peaceful". And therefore I tell you: We`ll "burn" your marple leaves:D and have a smooth and confortable win for the good "old" Europe!

[cousin_joe]

Speaking of the other clubs, is there anyone from IAAPA in the tournament?

Do they even know there is a tournament? :)

Even if they knew about the tournament, would they have enough members to join, i.e. One? :eek:

Did someone play a cruel joke, and tell them there would be a $12 fee to join? :D And that they would have to submit a log with each game turn, of what they did from the time they woke up in the morning, to the time they slept at night, or they would be immediately disqualified? :D

Come on IAAPA, bring it!!!

[richyj1]

Top 1/3:

GAME #71
Axis_Roll
vs
Fuchs

GAME #72
Az Hakim
vs
chunksoul

GAME #73
Glueside
vs
Guderian

GAME #74
Hephaistos
vs
CommC

GAME #75
Nergal
vs
Felix Steiner

GAME #76
HoRRoR
vs
Enigma

GAME #77
Onkel Tom
vs
Celeritas

WILL BE GAME #78, missing e-mail for Attrition
Gotrex
vs
Attrition


Middle 1/3:

GAME #79
V-2
vs
Pagan

WILL BE GAME #80, MISSING E-MAIL FOR 'Cape'
Cape
vs
Wazzup

GAME #81
Atlantikwall
vs
supercrooky

GAME #82
HailStone
vs
AdamD021

GAME #83
Drajeck
vs
Utah

GAME #84
DY
vs
Eike

GAME #85
Winkelmann
vs
Willem

GAME #86
Shmooie
vs
LeeMorrison

Bottom 1/3:

GAME #87
Komp
vs
AxisRoll

GAME #88
Nemo97
vs
MHeinz

GAME #89
Nusspli
vs
INDIA

GAME #90
Leuchtturm
vs
sajac

GAME #91
AllWeNeedIsLove
vs
MatildaMike

GAME #92
Il Diavolo
vs
Cousin_Joe

GAME #93
Panther
vs
Babu

Squirecam
vs Bye,,,,


You should have all (sans the games I'm missing e-mails on) recieved an e-mail from 'Wargamer's Club' with the URL links to use for purchase and rolling.

Enjoy!

Rich

[CommC]

I did not receive an email. Could you resend?

Thanks.

[Cape]

What is this all about the missing email for Cape??

I did send my mail adress to carico.

anyway where must I resend it to?
Thanks
Cape

[Babu]

No email received here either.

[Wazzup]

Ok, no email received here either.

[DY]

I just go my email in the last hour

[DY]

Oh great, I drew one of DAAK's top 10 players in round one. :(

[richyj1]

I did not receive an email. Could you resend?

Thanks.
Done.

Make sure to check your ISP's 'Suspect SPAM' folder, too. The was I do the domain name for wargamersclub.org (maps to one of my work servers) doesn't support reverse DNS so some ISPs are a little picky about the e-mail and you may have to flag it as okay.

Rich

[richyj1]

What is this all about the missing email for Cape??

I did send my mail adress to carico.

anyway where must I resend it to?
Thanks
Cape
Carico probably just botched it when he sent me the list (there were two dups and two missing). I've requested the missing info from him - or you can just e-mail directly at info@wargamersclub.org.

Rich

[richyj1]

Ok, no email received here either.
Wazzup - your e-mail has not yet gone out, pending my reciept of Cape's e-mail address from either him or Carico67.

Rich

[richyj1]

No email received here either.
Babu,

In hotmail, go to your 'Junk E-Mail' folder, it should be there. Then click the box next to it and click 'Not Junk' up at the top.

Rich

[Cape]

Hi
I just sent my emailadress trough.
In any case, it is the same adress I registered with here, so if you just press on my nick, you will be able to read it, too.
Regards
Günther

[richyj1]

Hi
I just sent my emailadress trough.
In any case, it is the same adress I registered with here, so if you just press on my nick, you will be able to read it, too.
Regards
Günther
Got it, game #80 setup and e-mails on the way to Cape and Wazzup.

Rich

[cousin_joe]

Anybody recieve word yet on what the result of their bid was? :confused: I sent my bid into Carico but haven't recieved anything back yet. I am assuming he will send results of the bid after both players have e-mailed him? :confused:

[CommC]

OK, it looks like my main email address has a spam filter that prevents me receiving the computer generated emails of the tournament organization and the dice roller results. I have sent you an email with an alternate email address to use for the tournament.

Thanks.

[Carico67]

Been in Conn all day at a B-day party. Vecna's son (my college roommate) had his 3rd, so the boiys were playing all day long. I have to start matching up bids info, and will send out reesults ASAP.

C2

BTW, thanks Rich for getting us rolling today while I was away. C2

[Carico67]

AdamD021
DY
Winkelmann
Cousin_Joe
supercrooky
AxisRoll
AAWarrior AKA: Glueside
wazzup
CommC
Hephaistos

NEED TO CHECK AT HOME AND GET SOME STARTED--earlier bids saved there (currently at inlaws house, newly received)
Axis_Roll
Eike --Plays Axis vs DY
Enigma
HailStone
chunksoul
CAPE
Shmooie


That's it so far gentleman... get bids in ASAP or contact opponent and do it through 1 of the clubs bid-sending systems. 1 request if donee that way though; I need to know it's been done, and what bid amount is and to who for information sourcing and analysis.

Thanks, Chris C

[AA Warrior]

Carico67,

I sent you mine.

[Carico67]

Vince Touhy;
When you send in your bid I need your tournament name. I want to post this here to save further problems of the nature. I will not go 'looking' to match these things, I am entirely too busy. PLEASE make sure to list info guys when emailing me.

VT, don't take this personal, you just happened to be the first :D, so you've done me a favor to get this posted. If I don't say anything now I'll drive myself mad trying to get things kept up.

Thanks, C2

[Carico67]

Jeff, no sign of it yet. If your on IM send to me (MSN), same addy as my email; Carico67@hotmail.com

Also, I have to go run (training, NYC Marathon in Oct.), so no worries if I don't reply in the next hour or so boss. C2

[AdamD021]

Since I'm first on the list I'm assuming I was first in with the Bid

BOO YA!!!!

[Carico67]

C-J had you by a step :D He sent me his before I'd even asked for them.... Not that he's anxious to get started or anything!

[Carico67]

I got an email today 9this moning) that reads as follows:
Hello,

I'm simply4est on the AH Boards. I've just been catching up there the last few days after not having been there for a while and just now came across your tourney. I see that the signup deadline is past but noticed you had a drop - any opening as a result?

Thanks,

I intend to add him to play Squirecam unless I receive any reasonable objections. I see no reason to allow 1 player a free pass while 47 others sweat it out. I wanted it posted here for review before simply "doing it" as I like to be very upfront about things, but don't want to just subject decisions without opinion. Thanks, C2

[cousin_joe]

C-J had you by a step :D He sent me his before I'd even asked for them.... Not that he's anxious to get started or anything!

Oh yes!!! Very anxious!!! :D If I'm Allies, R1 will be out in under 10 minutes. Much like Carico has been training for the NYC marathon, cousin_joe has been "training" for his special moment as well, to win the FIDA tournament! :D MUHAHAHAHAHA!!! :D

[Wazzup]

I don't see any objections as long as he was the first person to post a request to replace a drop out.

regards,

Wazzup

[Carico67]

He was the first...

[DY]

Squirecam's a good guy from what I can tell reading his stuff on the boards. I'm sure he'd actually prefer to play rather than take a free ride. I have no objections.

[richyj1]

Game #78 between Gotrex and Attrition has been setup and the e-mail sent - Attrition, please follow the hotmail instructions above if you don't recieve the e-mail directly.

I would also like to echo Carico67's point about including as much information as possible in any e-mails to me regarding the tourney. Namely, make sure to include tourney sign-up name and game #.

Thanks,
Rich

[Babu]

Richy,

>Babu,

>In hotmail, go to your 'Junk E-Mail' folder, it should be there. Then click the >box next to it and click 'Not Junk' up at the top.

>Rich

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

Could you resend? My junk mail filter was set to auto-delete, changed now. Thx.

Babu

[Atlantikwall]

Hello Carico67 and supercrooky,

my e-mail-server doesn`t work (i.e. I can not check my messages). Hope it can be repaired on Monday. Sorry for the "delay".

Andreas

[Carico67]

AxisRoll:
Out of town for 48hrs. FYI
----Noted, np boss

[Carico67]

A * denotes bid received

Top 1/3:

GAME #71 Game Finished
Axis_Roll* (Axis) ---ADVANCES
vs
psampson*

GAME #72 ---Game Finished
Az Hakim*
vs
chunksoul* (Axis) --ADVANCES

GAME #73 ---Game Finished
Glueside*
vs
Guderian* (Axis) --ADVANCES

GAME #74 --Game Finished
Hephaistos* --ADVANCES
vs
CommC* (Axis)

GAME #75 Game Finished
Nergal*
vs
Felix Steiner* (Axis) --ADVANCES

GAME #76 --Game Finished
HoRRoR* ---ADVANCES
vs
Enigma* (Axis)

GAME #77 ---Game Finished
Onkel Tom*
vs
Celeritas* (Axis) --ADVANCES

WILL BE GAME #78 ---Game Finished
Gotrex* --ADVANCES
vs
Attrition* (Axis)


Middle 1/3:

GAME #79 ---Game Finished
V-2* --ADVANCES
vs
Pagan* (Axis)

WILL BE GAME #80 --Game Finished
Cape* ---ADVANCES
vs
Wazzup* (Axis)

GAME #81 ---Game Finished
Atlantikwall*
vs
supercrooky* (Axis) --ADVANCES

GAME #82 --Game Finished
HailStone* --ADVANCES
vs
AdamD021* (Axis)

GAME #83 --Game Finished
Drajeck*
vs
Utah* (Axis)

GAME #84 ---Game Finished
DY* --ADVANCES
vs
Eike* (Axis)

GAME #85 --Game Underway
Winkelmann* (Axis)
vs
Willem* --ADVANCES

GAME #86 ---Game Finished
Shmooie* --ADVANCES
vs
LeeMorrison* (Axis)

Bottom 1/3:

GAME #87 Game Finished
Komp* --ADVANCES
vs
AxisRoll* (Axis)

GAME #88 Game Finished
Nemo97*
vs
MHeinz* (Axis) ---ADVANCES

GAME #89 Game Finished
ssg_field* (Axis)
vs
INDIA* --ADVANCES

GAME #90 ---Game Finished
Leuchtturm* (Axis)
vs
sajac* --ADVANCES

GAME #91 --Game Finished
AllWeNeedIsLove*
vs
MatildaMike* --ADVANCES

GAME #92 --Game Finished
Il Diavolo* (Axis)
vs
Cousin_Joe* --ADVANCES

GAME #93 Game Finished
Panther* (Axis) --ADVANCES
vs
Babu*

GAME #95 --Game Finished
Squirecam* (Axis) --ADVANCES
vs
simply4est*


You should have all (sans the games I'm missing e-mails on) recieved an e-mail from 'Wargamer's Club' with the URL links to use for purchase and rolling.

Enjoy!

[Carico67]

Also, I will be out of town with no access to the internet for the 4th of July weekend (camping trip), specifically, July 1st to July 5th.

---Noted, np Enigma.

I am appreciating the communication gent;leman, keep up the goo work and best of luck in your games! Chris C

[Carico67]

Bump... I need bids from those not * ASAP please....

[richyj1]

Could you resend? My junk mail filter was set to auto-delete, changed now. Thx.

Babu
Done.

Rich

[Panther]

Oh great, I drew one of DAAK's top 10 players in round one. :(

Should be no problem for you, Eike is good with 2nd ed. but has not much experience with AAR. ;)

[Panther]

Bump... I need bids from those not * ASAP please....

Also did not get email.
Changed my adress and send that and the bid to you.

Babu, do you have my email. If yes please send me a mail because I dont have yours and PM seems not possible on this board.

Thanks

[Atlantikwall]

Hello carico67 and richyj1,

my e-mail-server works again, but I didn`t receive your e-mail. But it might also be the same "old" problem, that I had when I unsuccessfully tried to join AAMC: I did never receive the confirmation e-mail (even after another request). Propably my spam-filter blocks your automaticlly generated e-mails, so therefore I have to ask you to send me the e-mail once again from your private adress. Sorry for the circumstances!

Bye,

Andreas

[richyj1]

Hello carico67 and richyj1,

my e-mail-server works again, but I didn`t receive your e-mail. But it might also be the same "old" problem, that I had when I unsuccessfully tried to join AAMC: I did never receive the confirmation e-mail (even after another request). Propably my spam-filter blocks your automaticlly generated e-mails, so therefore I have to ask you to send me the e-mail once again from your private adress. Sorry for the circumstances!

Bye,

Andreas
Done, however if that is the case you won't recieve dice roller e-mails either. I have sent a test roll to verify. If this is the case you may want to consider supplying an alternate e-mail address (although you could just check the log to verify results).

[squirecam]

I got an email today 9this moning) that reads as follows:


I intend to add him to play Squirecam unless I receive any reasonable objections. I see no reason to allow 1 player a free pass while 47 others sweat it out. I wanted it posted here for review before simply "doing it" as I like to be very upfront about things, but don't want to just subject decisions without opinion. Thanks, C2


Never !!! :)

Just kidding. I'm happy I get to play rather than sit. I'll email a bid pronto.

Squirecam

[DY]

pagan you should have been sent an email from RichyJ giving you a link to your game number and the associated purchase units and battle rollers.

[pagan]

lol...

yep i just got it in my email, and i came here to erase my message.

thnx DY

[Carico67]

Guys, been gone for 16 hours today at work and fastpitch... will have time tomorrow afternoon and get everything caught up. Apologies on delays, but no fears, I haven't posted rounds end time and will date it from when I do for at least 2 moinths from that date.

Thanks, Chris C

[Babu]

Panther wrote:

"Also did not get email.
Changed my adress and send that and the bid to you.

Babu, do you have my email. If yes please send me a mail because I dont have yours and PM seems not possible on this board.

Thanks"


Hi,

Have seen 2 addresses for you, not sure which is current so sent an email to both addresses. Let me know which is correct.

[AdamD021]

I just sent off Germany 2....anybody else that far?

[Panther]

Hi,

Have seen 2 addresses for you, not sure which is current so sent an email to both addresses. Let me know which is correct.

You should have got a mail from me by now.

[pagan]

I've got a Question for the Tournament:

What about Existing Fighters landing on Newly Built Carriers?

I know that the rule was initially changed to a defintite: NO

But the current LHTR says different...

Copy/Paste follows from this site which Larry Harris site directs you to: http://dicey.net/revised/viewforum.php?f=2&sid=8615d99085094cfbb2289ab823fde3bf
________________
Completing Air Units’ Move

An air unit may end its move ("land") in a territory that was friendly at the start of your turn. Air units cannot land in a hostile territory or in a territory you just captured. Fighters (not bombers) can also land on a friendly aircraft carrier, provided that there is a free spot on the carrier. Fighters which do not have a valid landing space at the end of the noncombat move phase are destroyed.

Exception to normal fighter landing spaces rules: Your fighter may also end its move in a sea zone adjacent to an industrial complex you own if you have purchased an aircraft carrier that turn and will subsequently place that carrier in the seazone where your fighter ends its turn.

You must have a carrier move (or remain in place) to pick up a fighter that would end its noncombat move in a sea zone. You cannot deliberately move any air unit out of range of a potential safe landing space (a kamikaze attack).
______________

[DY]

Well that's the whole point pagan, we (the forum members) rebelled against the definite "NO" and FIDA changed the rule to the one you quoted above in LHTR v1.1

[cousin_joe]

So what happens if your opponent doesn't send in a bid? It's been almost a week now since this tourney started, and I've even e-mailed my opponent directly a few days ago with no response. Are we looking at re-seeding or are we going to call a forfeit at some point? Aaaaarrrggghhh!!! I need to beat somebody :mad: ... any takers? :D

[kwijebo]

Got a newbie question on PBEM. Could someone explain OOL etiquette / protocol? At what point does a player specifiy a non-standard OOL for a stack, during their turn? And what's an "OOL stop signal"? And any other relevant info. Thanks in advance.

[Carico67]

I have a ton of catching up to do guys, but chaos is almost over for me. 2 Late fastpitch games this week and a veryt demanding Basketball camp have eaten up my time; good news is I'm free in less 19 hours to be on a lot and get reesponses out ASAP. C_J, no worries, I haven't officially started the round in regards to 2-months play time.. I may even have your bid. I have almost 60 messages I'lll try to get to, but likely not all tonight. Most ask a lot of Q's that take me a lot of time (about PBEM etc... BTW, could someone take a sec and post a copy/paste of OOL proceedeure to answer the Q above so I can work on getting bids out.

Thanks, Chris C

[Carico67]

AllWeNeedIsLove:
Roadtrip till Sunday Night....

[Carico67]

This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification.

Delivery to the following recipients failed.

MrGhost@gmx.de

Tom, I need this resolved ASAP please... I tried sending you bid info 2 times.... you are axis. Please contact willem or send me an email from a email addy I can send back to. Thanks, Chris C

[Carico67]

Email sent out to all who have not bidded; warnings and DQ's will come soon if no reply; though I fear in many cases it is a language barrier and just an initialization problem which I took steps in thsat email to help resolve I hope. I apologize, I'm only fluent in 1 language, and barely at that, which is part of the problem! :D

C2

[Panther]

Got a newbie question on PBEM. Could someone explain OOL etiquette / protocol? At what point does a player specifiy a non-standard OOL for a stack, during their turn? And what's an "OOL stop signal"? And any other relevant info. Thanks in advance.

Here are the OOL definitions we use at DAAK for PBEM games:


3.2 Order Of Loss in battles (OOL)
3.2.1 In battles, first the inexpensive (IPC value) and weakly defending units are removed, and only then the more expensive units.

Standard OOL is:
inf, ari, arm, bmb, ftr for land combats;
trn, sub, ftr, des, (bmb), ac, bb for sea combats.

The dice server automatically removes both attacking and defending units in this order. The attacker (being the one to operate the dice server) has the possibility to manually correct the OOL for his units.
Example. Attack on GER, 4th battle round: 1arm 4ftr 1bmb (attacking) vs 1inf 2ftr (defending). Say the defence scores two hits, then the dice server will automatically remove the tank and one of the fighters as losses. If the attacker prefers to conquer the territory instead of just clearing it, he?ll rather want to keep the tank and sacrifice a second fighter. He may do this by manually correcting the appropriate fields in the dice server form.
Of course, the attacker is not allowed to change the order of loss for the defender, except in those cases the defender specifically told him to do so (see below).

3.2.2 Whenever bomber, submarines or loaded transporters are amongst the defending units, the attacker rolls the dice for his attacking units and then waits for an answer of his defending opponent. The defender then has to tell him what units he loses. This principle holds for every round of combat unless the defender states an OOL for the entire fight.

3.2.3 For some combats, the defender may depending on his strategy wish to give an OOL that is different from standard OOL even though the conditions of 3.2.2 are not fulfilled. The defender has to declare this special OOL when ending his turn. To do this, he may either state a concrete order of loss (e.g.: OOL for SZ 5 = trns, bb, 1st ftr, ac, 2nd ftr) or set a general "stop signal" (e.g.: If Karelia is attacked in your turn, please pause after rolling the attacking dice and notify me allowing me to determine my OOL). Please take great care when using this latter option - it is very time consuming and causes quite a delay in the game.

[Panther]

though I fear in many cases it is a language barrier and just an initialization problem which I took steps in thsat email to help resolve I hope. I apologize, I'm only fluent in 1 language, and barely at that, which is part of the problem! :D

C2

If the language barrier is between English and German I gladly offer my help. :)

[pagan]

I've got a question that needs answered....

Bidding Rule Excerpt:
The lowest bid # will receive the axis powers. Up to 1/2 (rounded down in an odd # case) of the bid amount may be allocated in units placed pre-game.

Q. Why do we have this '1/2' thing rather than just a basic bid and then place?

[Hephaistos]

Edit: I'm sorry....I've deleted the details about the bid

[DY]

You really shouldn't name names and bids, because if CommC beats you then his next opponent will have the unfair advantage of knowing what he bid in the previous game. Please edit your post to remove the details.

[Carico67]

Axis_Roll:
9 days in mid July
---VERY concerned about bid wait from Fuchs....

[Panther]

I've got a question that needs answered....

Bidding Rule Excerpt:
The lowest bid # will receive the axis powers. Up to 1/2 (rounded down in an odd # case) of the bid amount may be allocated in units placed pre-game.

Q. Why do we have this '1/2' thing rather than just a basic bid and then place?

There were some fears about a new sea lion threat.
If you could place the complete bid as units before game start the bid would somehow be limited to 7 IPC. (as 8 IPC gives you a 2nd trn in the baltic)
With the actual rule bids until 15 IPC are "sea lion save" while it does not limit the possibilities too much.
I personally dont see this as a real problem one way or the other.

[axis_roll]

Axis_Roll:
9 days in mid July
---VERY concerned about bid wait from Fuchs....I hope he didn't realize that he was in a Revised rules tournament and then just quit. He did send me Russia combats (with no bid, he just started a 2nd edition game).

i have no heard from him either, as I sent emails to him as well.

[AxisRoll]

MY opponent (KOMP) is gone till Thursday.

I am waiting for UK 1.

[DY]

I think the bidding system is good, because many of us feel that the Axis needs > 8 IPCs and as "panther" mentioned, a Trn for Germany gives a reasonable chance for Sealion on G1 even with LHTR delayed tech.

[Winkelmann]

Hi Carico,

I ve contacted Willem, and we will start the game soon..

Thanks

[Moderator Sinister]

Hey if you guys want, could you send me the brackets and tournament info when its all set up. I'll ask the powers that be if we can post the tournament progression on this site.

Greg S,

I could see if we could post the gen con and orgin results here as well.

[Hephaistos]

@Panther:

Even with the risk of sounding like a noob: What do you mean with "sealion".
Why is a Trn at BAL a too strong bid? In my opinion, trying to take GBR in GER1 still hasn't real chances for success even while the chances are increased.
Or have you been talking about something completely different?

Feeling a little bit confused....

Hephaistos

[pagan]

I started the post about OSL here in the Avalon Hill site, and have since changed my mind completely.

Too much is made of that opening gambit by Germany. It is not as powerful as presumed.

The change in Weapons Development for LHTR removes that opening move.

The game was better WITH the OSL opening move.

[cousin_joe]

Bidding 1 free TRN for Germany can yield the following attack on G1

2INF, 2ARM, 2FTR, 1BMBR Germany vs. 2INF,1RTL,1ARM,2FTR,1BMBR UK

-assuming Germany wants to try and hold with 1ARM, and UK wants to lose it's BMBR after the rest of the ground units, the results break down as follows:

Attacker Captures: 35.5%
Defender Holds: 60.0%
Tie: 4.5%

-As we've said before, under competent hands, a successful Sealion significantly increases the chances of victory, while a failed Sealion significantly decreases them
-If you feel you and your opponent are about even (50/50), then it's OK to bid 16+ IPC because his chance of success with the gambit is lower than his chances playing you straight up.
-If you feel you are far superior to your opponent (90/10), then bid low as you don't want to let Sealion be possible (as it would increase your opponents chances of success ie. from 10% to 35.5%)
-If you feel you are far inferior to your opponent (10/90), it's okay to bid high as your opponent can beat you straight up anyway and will stay away from Sealion (as it would lower his chances of success vs. playing straight up)

[Panther]

Thanks cousin_joe, for this perfect analysis. I cannot check the numbers because I dont have a combat simulator her at work, but the main thing is: Sometimes even a 30% chance to win is the best chance you get in a game. ;)
This is one of the reasons why it does make sense to somewhat limit the bid of units.
Did this answer your question, Hephaistos?

[Carico67]

Hey if you guys want, could you send me the brackets and tournament info when its all set up. I'll ask the powers that be if we can post the tournament progression on this site.

Greg S,

I could see if we could post the gen con and orgin results here as well.

Greg, that would be awesome, thank you! The tourney brackets are on page 13 of this thread. I don't have a complex tourney draw sheet I use (I have yet to find one online, but if anyone knows a good source please chime in!), so it's rather primitive looking. In regards to Origins and GENCON I can get you info to both. Shoot me an email if you have time and I'll direct you to Greg Smorey and the 2 of us could get you whatever you require and in whateer formt hopefully. Thanks for your interest and time!

Just a heads up to those awaiting bids.. the info is at home, and I'm on the road a day longer than expected. Those 2 bid winners will be emailed out today.

Thanks, Chris C
Carico67@hotmail.com

[Carico67]

Your message with Subject: RE: Newbie question on dice roller
could not be delivered to the following recipients:

spead@iarc.....com


Spead, don't know what the problem is, but your opponent has the email info...

C2

[Carico67]

Forfeit Warning:
Unfortunately with new events this happens early on... I am posting a 48 hour forfeit warning if I do not receive bids from:
Fuchs
Nusspli
MatildaMike--Bid received, game started.

Guys, you need to contact me ASAP. ANyone who knows these individuals, please prod them to send me anny information (bid, not playing, death in the family or whatever...)

Thanks, Chris C
Carico67@hotmail.com

[kwijebo]

Just curious watching the tournament updates beginning to come in, who are the PBEM veterans that are considered the strongest players? Was the draw seeded?

[Carico67]

There were no seeds in the tourney. I am familiar with a lot of the names here, but unfamiliar with just as many.. we have quite a worldwide participation going on here! Favorites?-- don't know, but they'll likely need to roll well, competition is stiff.:D

[Panther]

Forfeit Warning:
Unfortunately with new events this happens early on... I am posting a 48 hour forfeit warning if I do not receive bids from:
Fuchs
Nusspli
MatildaMike--Bid received, game started.

Guys, you need to contact me ASAP. ANyone who knows these individuals, please prod them to send me anny information (bid, not playing, death in the family or whatever...)

Thanks, Chris C
Carico67@hotmail.com

Just send a mail to Fuchs and Nusspli.

[pagan]

how about rather than a forfieture of a game, you just add a NEW player.

I have a friend that would like to jump in. I'll have him email you Carico.

paganed@verizonmail.com

[axis_roll]

Just send a mail to Fuchs and Nusspli.
I am sure Chris has tried to contact Fuchs via email, as have I (his opponent) to no avail.

In fact, he sent me battle results with him as USSR... for a 2nd Edition game!

anyways, personally, I think he realized he signed up for the wrong tournament (AH Revised vs 2nd Edition MB) and decided to quit. Just wish:
1). I am wrong about that
2). If I AM right, that he would've told us such about his withdrawal from the tourny.

[Carico67]

This sounds great. Since I haven't started the round yet officially, please have them email me with the email info they want used for doceroller in their game. I think TomJaggerd also wants in so that would fill the last 2 open spots. Thanks, C2

[Cape]

Since I haven't started the round yet officially, Thanks, C2

Are we not suppose to play allready?
My opponenet allready gave up, does that not count now??

Regards
Günther

[Carico67]

Te tourny has started, I just haven't set an 'official' start time down in regards to each round of play going 2 months time. Once I think we have 32 games summarized (started or forfeits, or whatever) I'll post that official note. For now, all play is a "head-start" to avoid judgements when that 2 month date comes into play. To re-iterate something I posted here a few pages back: We are trying to let players decide games, and avoid judgements if at all possible. Hope that clarifies. C2

[Carico67]

And in regards to your opponent having "given up", it's news to me; please email me information if this is the case, so I can post the win. Thanks, Chris C

[Panther]

I am sure Chris has tried to contact Fuchs via email, as have I (his opponent) to no avail.

In fact, he sent me battle results with him as USSR... for a 2nd Edition game!

anyways, personally, I think he realized he signed up for the wrong tournament (AH Revised vs 2nd Edition MB) and decided to quit. Just wish:
1). I am wrong about that
2). If I AM right, that he would've told us such about his withdrawal from the tourny.

Im also sure Chris sent a mail. I just wanted to try again. While I dont know Fuchs, Nusspli is a long time player at DAAK, played 40 PBEM games and never forfeited. I asked other players. They told me he did not respond since quite a while wich is very atypical for him, so I guess somethings happened.
Anyway, the show must go on, so I fully understand if Carico finds a replacement.

[Carico67]

Alright, Pavans friends and TomJ both have pulled out from joining. Anyone who wants to fill in needs to contact me in the next 24 hours or we post an official sart time and 2 free bye's in round 1....

Carico67@hotmail.com

[Panther]

Didnt SSG_Field on the AAMC MB say he would have liked to participate?

[Carico67]

SSG_Field has filled in one of the spots (and already submitted his bid). When I get a second (if I do) then I'll random roll to see who plays who.

C2

[moppar]

are you guys doing a loosers bracket?

[DY]

Too much administration for a losers bracket. I'd be very surprised if they organise one (it is a single-elimination tourney after all).

[Carico67]

Second spot filled, by Paul (waiting MB name, played at Origins...)

I will get his name, then do random roll for fill in, then assign games. Should all happen very soon.

No losers bracket wil be done. Because of workload in AAMC (we are in the midst of getting a new site running full-steam) I don't have the time to run it, nor do the other FIDA staff who are all club heads or rules officials.

[SSG Field]

Cool, I am in :)

[AA Warrior]

Can you hear what is going on way out in Korea?

[Panther]

Does anybody know how to make tech rolls in Richys dice roller?
Thanks for answer

[cousin_joe]

Under Area: "Tech Roll - Jets"
(Or whatever Tech you're rolling for)

Under Comment: "Need a 1"
(This is to remind your opponent, as you must roll the number of the tech now, rather than a 6. Personally I'd rather they had just kept it at 6 as I never remember which is which :) )

Under Extra Dice: Number of Tech Rolls
(Hit the submit key and you should get a string of numbers. Simply just check if it has the one you need)

[Panther]

Thanks cousin_joe, so I will throw my first tech dice.
Lets see if dicey is friendly to animals today, as it mostly wasnt in the last couple of days ;)

And yes I also had prefered to keep the six for the tech rolls, as I have the same problem as you :)

Does anybody know the number for LRA??

Just kidding, forget it, I can look into the manual myself :lol:

[Hephaistos]

Hi...

Is this correct?
Dicey rolls his AA Attacks seperately for Fgts and Bmbs.
Isn't it possible anymore to send some Fgts as "Guards" with the Bmbs to protect them by taking the Fgts as casualties?
The german rule text isn't really certain in this point. If I remember right, it was possible in the second Edition.

Greetings

Hephaistos

[cousin_joe]

Dicey rolls his AA Attacks seperately for Fgts and Bmbs.
Isn't it possible anymore to send some Fgts as "Guards" with the Bmbs to protect them by taking the Fgts as casualties?
The german rule text isn't really certain in this point. If I remember right, it was possible in the second Edition.

You are correct, sir. AAGuns roll against FTRs first, then BMBRs. Using FTRs as "guards" was precisely the reason they were changed, as Mike Selinker felt BMBRs should be susceptible to AA as well. :)

[Utah]

Can someone post a thread to this. So folks can download it.

Thanks

[Hephaistos]

http://www.flames-of-europe.de/modules.php?name=Downloads&d_op=viewdownload&cid=2

[Carico67]

Last 2 matchups:
psampson vs Axis_Roll

ssg_field vs INDIA*

emails to come with bid results in a sec guys, I have to find India and Axis_Rolls emails

[pagan]

Carico

Are you adding people to the tournament that have already been eliminated from the tourney?

I hope not.

[SSG Field]

I haven't been previously eliminated from the tourney. I think a few people dropped out before getting to play and Carico is just trying to avoid giving people a bye.

I think that is the case anyways :)

[Utah]

Thanks Hephaistos!

[Carico67]

Carico

Are you adding people to the tournament that have already been eliminated from the tourney?

I hope not. PAGAN


Pagan, did you read pg 19 of this thread?


SINGLE ELIMINATION... but no free tickets, as SSG responded above. Also, if guys aren't doing a move a day (the standard for this tourney) or AT THE LEAST a move every 3rd day please notify me. I can't enforce problems I don't know about. Thanks, Chris C

[DY]

The roller is down atm, so my move may be late since i have to disappear. Better factor this in to any DQ's Carico.

[Carico67]

I'll set the official start date as soon as I know the last 2 match-ups have started... so that should be soon for the 2 month timeframe.

[Carico67]

Alright, we've OFFICIALLY set the start, round 1 ends SEPT 16th... PLEASE finish games by that point.

Chris C

[Carico67]

Another victor.... but no round 2 match-ups ready to roll yet. Warning's in games being sent out now.... if you don't email me about slow play, I can't fix it...

Hope everyone's having a good, tight, game!

C2

[Hephaistos]

Who do I have to mail, that I have just proceed to the second round? :-)

CommC has resigned.
It was a good game. He just had some real bad luck sometimes.
(Game#74)

Hephaistos

[Panther]

Congrats Hephaistos! Mail to Carico please.

[DY]

Darn, that's 2 of my friends out and 1 well on his way to being bundled out :(

[AllWeNeedIsLove.]

hi carico67. game 91 is completed. i have conceded to matildamike today. please put him into the next round.

[Hephaistos]

One question to the draw.
I've understood, that it is a single elimination until ther are only three left.
But will I, as winner of game 74, now play against the winner of game 73 or will there be another draw for round two?

[Carico67]

You will play winner of 73...

[Carico67]

I am posting info here so that it is clear to all what willl not be tolerated in this event;

Il Diavolo,
For the reasons listed below, and no response to my double-warning email (sent several days ago w/48 hour window response time), you are hereby Disqualified from the event.

June 26th - I sent my initial bid and e-mail to Il Diavolo to say hello
July 2nd - Il Diavolo introduced self and stated bid sent
July 3rd - notified by yourself that Il Diavolo has won bid, I sent e-mail asking where he would like to place his units so I could send R1
July 5th - bid information recieved, R1 sent via Mapview
July 8th - received e-mail saying he could not open Mapview, resent using ABattlemap instead
July 12th - received message from Marcus saying he has recieved map and will send G1 tomorrow
July 13th - G1 recieved
July 13th - UK1 sent
July 18th - have still not recieved J1, or any other message explaining for the delay. Sent request for J1 today and asked if there are any problems.
July 19th - recieved e-mail saying he did not recieve map (which is strange coming 6 days after he would have recieved the rolls from Dicey), but I resent, this time using my hotmail address, just in case. I also asked him to confirm receipt.
July 22nd - still no response

[Carico67]

Congrats guys, you are the first round 2 match-up. Email from me coming soon.

C2

[cousin_joe]

Hate to win by DQ, but after nearly a month, and still waiting for J1, that's getting kind of ridiculous :rolleyes: Maybe taking WEur on UK1 scared him off... :D

So anyways, looks like a showdown with Matildamike. So, I guess you beat my PBEM buddy AllWeNeedIsLove, hey? Well, I think it's time for you to come a Waltzing Matilda with cousin_joe... :) And I'm out for revenge... ;)

[INDIA]

Hi,

ssg_field surrenders after RUS04.

It was a good and fair game!! Ssg_field is a skilled and fair opponent. :)

@carico: I'll send you a mail .................

INDIA

[Carico67]

Congrats India, you and Sajac meet next. Need bids from both of you guys...

[INDIA]

Hi Carico,

mail with bid underway ..........

Greetings

INDIA

[Carico67]

C_J and India...

I've sent "need bid" emails to them, no replies yet. Just an update in case you're wondering. C2

[Panther]

Congrats India!
BTW: India is the 4th German victor out of 9! ;)

[cousin_joe]

Any other Canadians out there advancing in the tournament? :)

Panther,

You can add Il Diavolo as the 1st German loser out of 9. The rest of you will meet your fate soon enough ;) :D

[INDIA]

You can add Il Diavolo as the 1st German loser out of 9. The rest of you will meet your fate soon enough ;) :D

Our fate is to win this event. ;)

Soon, very soon ................. :D

INDIA

[cousin_joe]

We'll see abut that INDIA...

Just to get to the finals, it looks like you and Panther are going to have to come through me.. and I just don't see that happening :)

[Panther]

We'll see abut that INDIA...

Just to get to the finals, it looks like you and Panther are going to have to come through me.. and I just don't see that happening :)

Perhaps you should open your eyes to see. ;)

Canadians are my favourite victims :)

[cousin_joe]

Perhaps you should open your eyes to see.

Canadians are my favourite victims
Oh, my eyes are indeed wide open Panther, and I see you falling next round to cousin_joe. :)

Perhaps Canadians are your favourite victims because your victories against them are so few and far between. Personally, I like to beat German players, especially as the Allies. I like to watch them squirm, and send me e-mails in German, as I crush their capital Berlin, and force them to endure the same humiliating sense of defeat that befell their predecessors before them. :) Don't worry Panther, when you face me, you'll be able to share in this sense of defeat :D MUHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! :D

[Carico67]

From C_J:
I will be on a brief vacation from July 30th to August 3rd inclusive. I was hoping to get some turns out tonight but ended up going out, and just having too much to do when I got home. I'll have very limited access to e-mail so will unlikely be able to send out any turns until I return (yeah, I hope I don't go into any A&A withdrawal :) I apologize for the delay and look forward to resuming hostilities when I return.

Absence noted, have fun and no worries.

[Panther]

especially as the Allies.

So I can bid high, hehe :)

[squirecam]

tournament update?

Squirecam

[Carico67]

Guys, I'm at my mom's so here's a heads up. I am 100% unavailable till next TUE. No need for concerns I won't penalize anyone for situations there-in (odd occurences this week etc). I'm on dial up and a comp that won't deal with more than 2 open windows without crashing; and I refuse to work like that (besides no AC this room is humid/heat death.

Anyways, no responses from me till next TUE. DO NOT send me maps, my inbox is getting full already.

Thanks, and apologies if creating any troubles.

Chris C

[original_james]

I have my A&AR box and am ready to go, plus I got a map program, and I'm an eager to PBEM 'virgin' looking forward to next Tournament. (I noticed I'm too late for this one)

so...

Anyone know of a new Tournament starting up soon? I feel I can jump right into PBEM tournament play and still give a good run for my opponents money. I'd rather not "show" my hand in non-tourn. games, and save my 'fun' strategies for a tournament. Since most tournament guys are going to "expect" certain moves. Nothing like new problems to resolve.

Now to discredit me as a 'freak' I have developed 4 turn "KBF" and "KAF" strategies. Plus I have a neat 4 turn "KJF" strategy. Note 'kill' means render useless/factor out of rest of game (Actual Capitals would fall 2 to 5 turns later). Unfortunately I can't use KBF and KAF strats at Gen Con, since turns will be lucky to go 4 Rounds and VC=8 and I don't want to risk a "judgement" when most judge's I've run across don't know how to interpret a 'different' game. (I.E. Japan is pumping out 10 units(inf) a turn in Hollywood(W. U.S.), while Russia attacks German Capital and German survives with 2 tanks left/no Russia next turn attack.(While germans hold Central U.S., Brazil, West Indies, and Panama) (Yes '4' Turn Strategy)Look for detailed post "Opperation Hollywood" to follow.

any challengers? ;)

[DY]

This tournament has another 4 rounds to go with a 2-month per round time limit, so it could be a while. I know DAAK is starting a 2v2 tourney soon, but that may be for the original A&A 2nd edition rules and board.

[AxisRoll]

Are you looking for a 1vs1 or 2vs2 game?

Do you want to bid or random dice for sides?

[original_james]

Are you looking for a 1vs1 or 2vs2 game?

Do you want to bid or random dice for sides?

If you mean me, I don't know how a 2vs2 would work, so I guess a 1 on 1 (you vs me), You get to pick what side you want, I would like to play out of box rules, with a gentlemen's agreement that Sealion is a coin toss and not a long term fun game, I.E. German player agrees not to research LRA on turn 1. I would also like to tie our hands once more, and not use a Major SBR campaign, I.E. only bombers and go for HB. I don't mind if you supplement a long term game with extra bombers and a minor SBR. I mainly want to see what happens when I try my strategies against a serious opponent. I am willing to play LHTR or whatever, but I need to read them( I am mostly aware of the changes).

Being a Gentlemen,<bowing low, taking off hat and extending it in my outstretch arm>
These are the terms I present to you sir, and I defer the privilege of all of their choices to you.
(I have selected the guns, you pick which one to use on me, for our duel, and I offer you first shot if you want it) ;)

Simply email me (see below) with details, remember I am newbee PBEM, so pick 'diceys' and include relevant links for me to find map software you want to use, a brief description of how you want me to note stuff and anything else I need to know. Thank you in advance if you are willing to do this, to get me started. (I am available for daily posting, and twice a day posting, if needed, note this weekend (I will be at a dart tournament 14th-15th) next weekend (19-22) I will be at GenConIndy. (the one wearing a black Jagermeister hat) ;) Hopefully you surrender in like 8 days ;) <joking>

[AxisRoll]

Sounds good. Axis will Work for me. Out of the box rules are just fine. The 2 flaws in the game are the ones you described and will not be used. If in middle of game and things don't look good, then all bets are off, but i think thats what you are saying 2.


Email to follow with links to Mapview and Dicey. Good Luck, Have fun.

[Carico67]

Bump... work and those awaiting bid info expect it within the next 7 hours or so... hopefully kids nap today :)

[Carico67]

India is axis vs. sajac

Draw for round 2 later tonight to clarify the mess... still semi-tied-up.

[Carico67]

Axis_Roll* (Axis)
vs
Chunksoul*


Guderian*
vs
Hephaistos* (Axis) ---ADVANCES


Felix Steiner
vs
HoRRoR


Celeritas
vs
Gotrex


Middle 1/3:

V-2* (Axis)
vs
Cape* ADVANCES


supercrooky (Axis)
vs
Hailstone


Drajeck (Axis) ADVANCES
vs
DY


Willem
vs
Shmooie


Bottom 1/3:
Game #125
Komp*
vs
MHeinz* (Axis) --ADVANCES

Game #123
INDIA* (Axis)
vs
sajac*


MatildaMike* (Axis)
vs
Cousin_Joe* --ADVANCES


Panther* --ADVANCES
vs
Squirecam* (Axis)

[Carico67]

Emails sent out to inform... awaiting bids.

[Panther]

As far as I know Gotrex is still on vacation.

[Carico67]

BUMP... if I missed anything during this chaotic month please email me ASAP.

Thanks guys, Chris C

[DY]

OK Chris, I won game #84 a few weeks ago.

I sent you a personal email regarding this at the time (with "FIDA" in the title -- to try and avoid your spam filter) and also posted it on these forums (the FIDA game update threads).

[Carico67]

Alright, we've OFFICIALLY set the start, round 1 ends SEPT 16th... PLEASE finish games by that point.

Chris C

Just a reminder....

[Utah]

Drajeck has beaten me in Game 83. I wish both Drajeck and DY luck as they kill eachother. :)

[Carico67]

Utah, sounds like it was a good game...

Congrats Drajeck... need bids from both you and DY when you guys get a sec, thanks.

C2

[Carico67]

To the top... Have Drajecks bid...

[Carico67]

Axis_Roll
vs
Chunksoul

Need bids guys...

[axis_roll]

Axis_Roll
vs
Chunksoul

Need bids guys...
Let me know if you didn't receive it for some reason....

[Hephaistos]

Have won my Round 2 game vs. Guderian. Sent you a Mail a couple of days ago, Carico.

Hephaistos

[AxisRoll]

is everyone in the 2nd rd?

[cousin_joe]

is everyone in the 2nd rd?
Not me, I'm in Round 3 :D

[axis_roll]

I just had two battles go against me in G1: 8% outcome AND 2% chance outcomes... could be a quick second game/round exit for me.

[cousin_joe]

I just had two battles go against me in G1: 8% outcome AND 2% chance outcomes... could be a quick second game/round exit for me.
OUCH!!! Makes you want to think about playing Low-Luck. :(

...and cue Panther... now! :D