View Full Version : OPFOR - Round III Info
Siberian HEAT
15 Jan 03, 11:54
After careful consideration and consultations with several staff members and a few playtesters, I have decided to change the format for the last round of the OPFOR tournament.
As you all well know, Tim McBride spent considerable time designing and playtesting OP I and OP II, but even having a few playtesters assist him did not prevent the somewhat lopsided results of the first two rounds. Asking him to commit his time to making an OPFOR III (he has almost no time anymore due to outside obligations) with the intention of having the OPFOR team "inevitably win" seems silly to me. I am looking for something that is a challenge to both sides...
Furthermore, I am most displeased with the behavior of the US Commander who has made it well known he does not like this tournament and has furthermore made it known that it is my fault for ruining it since I took OPFOR over. For better or worse I made a decision that I wouldn't spend another minute trying to entertain said commander nor would I ask Tim or any of the other playtesters to go out of their way when their (our) work is so obviously unappreciated. I have waited several days for a public apology for some harsh public words from him, but with none forthcoming I am prepared to move on. No sweat.
That being said, I don't want to punish all the other friendly US and OPFOR players that have taken this prototype tournament in good spirits. Therefore, I propose a battle royale using the Blitzkrieg scenario (can be found at TDG (http://www.tdg.nu) ). One half of each team will choose players to play as Blue, and the other half will play as Red. This will make leadership and preparation the most important factors. The winning team takes the whole tournament.
Since the US team has the lead in points, I will allow them the benefit of picking opponents as reward for their first two rounds. We will use the same scoring method as the first two rounds, but the only score that matters is round 3 to determine the overall victor. Team composition may have changed since it has been some time since round 2 ended. If so, let me know.
I will be sitting out round 3 so I can focus on running things, instead of playing them. Replacement will be needed.
Questions or comments welcome.
:smoke:
ok Brian, it's a go from this side of the Atlantic.
Dan Neely
15 Jan 03, 12:53
Sounds reasonable to me.
Out of curiosity, did anyone take Jamiam up on his offer of a rematch to the opfor? and if so, who won?
Nope, there were no takers. The offer's still open though, if anyone wants a fast and bloody game.
Originally posted by Siberian HEAT
I have waited several days for a public apology for some harsh public words from him, but with none forthcoming I am prepared to move on. No sweat
:smoke:
And he never came up with the links that I asked for :(
I'm ready to rock and roll with Round 3 as proposed.
It wasn't all lopsided. Some of us struggled for what we got.
So the things I did in the first two rounds don't count for squat now?
That's kinda like telling a football team, don't worry about what happened the first 3 quarters if we score one more point in the 4th quarter than the other team, we win the game regardless of the total score.
You could be establishing a precedent here i.e "Side X has lost the first two rounds of a different tourney and says let's make round 3 all or nothing" How can you deny them that opportunity, based on the precedent of us doing it for the OPFOR Tourney? You have now planted the seed in some people's minds that what I do for 2 rounds won't matter, because we can ask for the "sudden death round" for all the marbles. I'm not trying to sound bitter, just my point of view.
If the situation is this bad, just call the tournament if there is no mathamatical way OPFOR can win. If they can win outright, I have no problem with playing the proposed scenario and losing the tournament to them that way. I just don't agree with "Hey thanks for wasting your time with Rounds 1 and 2 cause they don't count, here's the real deal now."
After the tournament is over we can do a "hot wash or AAR" about what was supposed to happen/what did happen/how to correct it in the future.
:cheeky:
Siberian HEAT
15 Jan 03, 14:43
Originally posted by Popester
I just don't agree with "Hey thanks for wasting your time with Rounds 1 and 2 cause they don't count, here's the real deal now."
I understand your point of view. My problem is that I have two teams with vastly different perspectives on how this tournament was going...and an expectation that round 3 was going to be an OPFOR victory "to even things out."
Part of the problem is that this tournament was unique in that the scenarios themselves were an unknown from day 1. I couldn't plan to do x, y and z scenarios (with their expected outcomes) and therefore balance the tournament before the fact. Therefore, when we get to round 3 and OPFOR is hopelessly buried in a 190 point deficit...and the scenario IS NOT MADE YET...it becomes a little strange for me to "plan" to even things up. That is why playtesting Tims OPFOR Challenge III became impossible and too time-consuming. How do you insure OPFOR wins, yet still make it fair? You cannot. If OPFOR just shot out of the gate and cleaned house with 15 OV's would the US team have come away satisfied? As an OPFOR player even I would have been unhappy with that. I like a fair fight no matter what position I am at in a tournament.
Please keep in mind this is a learning experience for all of us, and is NOT a precedent. Let's have some dialogue here and see what you the players want to do. Keep in mind if we continue we have to use an off-the-shelf scenario as Tim is buried in other things. If there is an outcry to just end the tournament and draw lessons from it I am open to that as well.
The next tournament we will go back to a more tried and true format, while the HQ staff reevaluates how to better prepare for another tourney like this one. I think the biggest flaw was expecting Tim to come up with scenarios in such a short time, mostly by himself. Next time we do this we will have a committee of playtesters to insure quality and take the burden off the designer and have all 3 scenarios done BEFORE we start.
:banana: :banana: :banana:
Heat I understand that it is learning experience. :cheeky: Figured I'd wade in and say my two cents worth. I'm playing Round 3 regardless. Now all I'm trying to do is figure out which half of the folks you fall in in reference to Bilbo's statement.:banana:
I didn't play round 1 or 2, but if you guys need another player, you can count me in.
Siberian HEAT
15 Jan 03, 17:31
Would it make a difference to people if we play Blitzkrieg in round 3, but keep the scoring on line with the other two rounds. Make OPFOR the Blue team (allowing them to move first), but letting the US side pick matchups.
Advantages - consistency with the rest of the tournament
- it gives props to the US players for their victories
- gives a *slight* advantage to the OPFOR/ Blue team since they go first
- will allow us to complete the tournament with minimal controversy
Dis-advantage - OPFOR must overcome a rather large deficit to have any hope of winning the tournament (perhaps insurmountable given the absolute balance of the Blitzkrieg scenario).
possible solution: mirror matches of the first two scenarios. OK, it would be wired if OPFOR now has to attack with US equipment but the scenarios are already made and analyzed so the games could start quickly.
And if these two scenarios are really helping the US side OPFOR should be able to achive some victories now and we'd have a fair end statistic because both teams have the exact same chances for winning the tournament :)
There isn't a great solution for this mess. Some ideas:
1. Call the tournment and just give everyone an equal amount of points for playing.
2. Play a modified Blitzkrieg scenario with the US side getting X amount of VP at the start. This would be a bonus for winning the first two scenarios.
3. Let OPFOR play the second scenario as the US. The first scenario was fairly even so this balances it out.
PS - What is to happen with our infamous leader?
As an OPFOR player I can understand the pressure that we've been under when fighting through badly balanced scenarios - but I have to say that I've quite enjoyed it!
I imagine that the other side (anti-OPFOR?) will still get the ladder points for their individual games, so what is up for grabs is really just the extra points for winning the tournament. I'm personally not particulary bothered about these.
The whole point in me entering these tournaments is to get matched off with opponents with very little effort on my part and to have some fun. Both the 'Sands' tournament and the 'OPFOR' tournaments were quite different from other tournaments in that I was involved with a team. This led to quite a lot of interesting discussions on tactics and I learned a lot. I think that the people who organised these tournaments were trying something interesting and different and I would like to thank them for the effort.
ER_Chaser
16 Jan 03, 10:52
Gen. HEAT, Sir, I think Chuck provided us with some quite decent solutions. Would the general staff consider them?
At this point, as a supposed "swift" tourney bogged down for too long, maybe a fast and simple solution will fit better to people's appetite than a "perfect" solution?
Originally posted by ER_Chaser
...maybe a fast and simple solution will fit better to people's appetite than a "perfect" solution?
It worked for McDonalds...:hog:
Siberian HEAT
16 Jan 03, 17:20
We are not using the old scenarios again.
Here is what I feel a workable solution.
We are going to use a truncated version of Blitzkrieg. The original is 25 turns which is too long for my taste right now. We will only play to 12 or 15 turns max. OPFOR team is going to get team blue. US team will play as red. Scoring will carry over from the first two rounds and will count in the final tally.
HOWEVER, we will spot OPFOR one victory level for scoring purposes. Ladder scoring remains as normal. Therefore, if an OPFOR player manages a draw in this scenario, it will count as a marginal victory for them. You get my drift.
Since OPFOR III was supposed to be a scenario where OPFOR team "should" win...this will simulate that somewhat. However, the OPFOR team will still have to work hard to overcome the remaining deficit in order to win overall. Therefore, it is not a pre-ordained OPFOR win, nor is overall victory impossible for OPFOR. This should motivate both sides to play well, and give each side the satisfaction of knowing the last round is both necessary and fair.
Get your gear together, round up your teams, and lets get this OP3 underway!
Excuse me for being out of touch briefly. (I can hear Dan groaning from here). But after (partially) recovering from serious health issues, I now find myself embroiled in family issues... (My life sucks right now, thank God for TOAW!) I am not at home, and have no idea when I will be next, so again, forgive my tardiness.
At any rate, I'm here now...
First off, I want to make it publicly known that I am as proud of OPFOR as I would be if every one of us had won every single game. No, that's BS. More so. Being a good winner is easy, but to be high spirited in defeat shows a special kind of class. I'd like to make it know that I consider every member of my team a winner. HQ members (US or OPFOR!) are a cut above the rest. (And Kudos to the US team for being sensitive to what their opponents were experiencing!)
Hell Brian, you are/were OPFOR, you read our daily mail. Was morale affected by all this? Sure! But not ONE person '*****ed'! Not one! Quality competitors, gentlemen. Pat youselves on the back, you deserve it. I promise a round of beer to each and any of you that have the opportunity to come and collect!
As to all the proposed solutions to this, I'm committing OPFOR to the Blitz. scenario. We don't need a hundred years debate on this issue, we need closure and completion. The debate should come after the fact. This will help us to assess the tourney, and ensure that such a novel idea isn't disregarded due to poor implementation (which again, is no one's fault; we know better next time!). I hope this format stays with us, as you'll not likely see me entering in a Sands type tourney. I'm a campaign game man, and I don't fancy playing against people for ladder points in a game they've all played 14 ways from Sunday as both sides, and I've never even loaded before. My personal thanks to Tim for his time and effort, which is surely being minimized due to the net results, which aren't his fault in the least. You're not the bad guy here, Tim! OPFOR thanks you! You get two rounds when you visit me!
A last point.
If prior points totals stand (and I hope they will) I must insist that OPFOR receives 'matching' privs this round. US chose up opponents for round 1. All good. OPFOR not knowing who leads her through the beginning of the second round cost us our choice at matching. Understandable. But I feel it my duty to my team to ensure that we at least get one opportunity in this regard. As points are going to stand, I don't imagine this to be an issue. The Blitzkrieg scenario is notorious for being balanced, this decision should not affect the US team at all. It does not give us an 'edge', as the first two scenarios were admittedly unbalanced in favor of the US team, and they got to choose up both rounds. OPFOR having 1/3 selection will not 'unbalance' the issue.
I'm not trying to be a bastard by saying that, but I feel I'd be negligent in my duty if a point occured to me, and I didn't voice it. I can be unbiased if I was just playing. But I'm not, it's my job to make sure OPFOR gets her shake, and I feel this is a very reasonable request. I received the priveledge of being OPFOR's commander. So I'm Devil's Advicate, and biased as hell! This, however, is fair, to mine eyes.
Ok, the REAL last point!
Brian, you're not allowed to leave. It's the Blitz scenario, fer crimminey's sake! I'll have you shot as AWOL!! All executive decisions aside, once the deal is done, you're no different from the rest of us. You have no special knowledge, no secret tactic, no conflict of interest, that makes you ineligible to play this round. I can freely speak that the OPFOR team does NOT want you to desert us in this, the most darkest of hours!
TOAW Section Leader or no (and a fine job you've done, laddie!), I'm still your CO, and I want you IN!
If even >1< US player has a problem with you being in, I withdraw my request.
I don't see that happening.
If you're with me, gimme a HOO-YAA!! (Yes, you US players too!)
:banana: :bounce: :banana:
(Hahaha, I just screwed Brian! J/K, but mate, you can't leave us. Your wanted, and there's no reason you shouldn't be here, except your own honorable version of fair play. It should (I hope) from responses to my post, become apparent to you that there IS no conflict of interest here. So please, reconsider, and stick it out with the boys! We started with you, and even tho you sucked and lost all your games (like I can resist saying this type of thing!) we want to finish with you! So, all joking aside (No offence intended) I strongly urge you to seriously reconsider your decision.
Lemme hear those HOO-YAHs boys! (Any OPFOR team members NOT saying HOOYAH, will mysteriously ALL find themselves matched up against JAMIAM for the final round).
Dan Neely
16 Jan 03, 19:53
HOO_YAH!!
PS that wasn't groan you heard. It was the sound of the great rift valley catastropically breaking appart and dumping the eastern corner of the continent into the sea. :D
Originally posted by Dan Neely
HOO_YAH!!
PS that wasn't groan you heard. It was the sound of the great rift valley catastropically breaking appart and dumping the eastern corner of the continent into the sea. :D
Hahahaha, ****, that's hilarious! Just what I needed, Dan, thanks! lol!
Siberian HEAT
16 Jan 03, 20:10
Originally posted by Brevet
Hoo-Yaa!
*HEAT timidly steps back on stage...*
Well, if no one has any problems with it I'll stay on the team as a player.
All I can promise is more banana's!
:banana: :ar15: :banana:
As an allied player I'd just like to say "Bring it on"!!!
The solution HEAT has formulated seems reasonable and fair, and frankly, I would just like a good challenge.
I'm not obsessed with which team wins the tourney, I just want to make sure I play out each round to the best of my ability. I do however enjoy the camaraderie and the exchange of strategies and other ideas.
So, you have my vote to put the polishing touches on the scenario, make it available for download, and figure out who to match against who, and let's get started!
Game On!
JoeBob
:joy:
Siberian HEAT
17 Jan 03, 00:34
The scenario, Blitzkrieg, is available over on TDG (http://www.tdg.nu) under their scenario section. While in there, be sure to stop by and read the Blitzkrieg AAR. ;)
Let it never be said I am an unfair chap! :thumup:
Fading Captain
17 Jan 03, 01:26
Originally posted by Siberian HEAT
The scenario, Blitzkrieg, is available over on TDG (http://www.tdg.nu) under their scenario section. While in there, be sure to stop by and read the Blitzkrieg AAR. ;)
Let it never be said I am an unfair chap! :thumup:
But we are playing a different version than this one. Right? Is Curt Chambers putting the "modified" version together? And when will this modified version be made available? Inquiring minds want to know. And oh yes:
:hurt: :devil: :skull: :banana: Death to OPFOR!!! :banana: :skull: :devil: :hurt:
P.S.--Note that I've recruited dancing banana man to work my devious acts of darkness!
Siberian HEAT
17 Jan 03, 09:16
He is not working on a version specifically for this tournament if that is what you are asking. Is he working on a newer version otherwise? I just don't know.
Does anyone know off hand if a newer version is in the works?
Fading, please don't hurt those poor little bananas. :cry:
:banana: "We are non-belligerents!" :banana:
Panzerpelle
17 Jan 03, 10:57
Read the very last part of the AAR. I'm pretty sure he implemted the supply points on invadable beaches after I played the game. No other changes was made IIRC.
Siberian HEAT
17 Jan 03, 11:42
Thanks Pelle for the info. Can anyone confirm that there are supply points on the beaches now? I am not at home, thus cannot check this.
Originally posted by Siberian HEAT
Thanks Pelle for the info. Can anyone confirm that there are supply points on the beaches now? I am not at home, thus cannot check this.
Yes, there are. They are noted in the players notes, as well. They are the middle anchorage (beach) hex in each of the beaches with the exception of the split beach on the Eastern coast of Red. There, the supply point is in the city which separates the beaches.
Gentlemen,
With the beginning of Round III near at hand, I should report that I will be out of contact from Jan 19 through Jan 25. Should the festivities begin during that time, I won't be able to respond. But I do look forward to standing shoulder-to shoulder with my OPFOR brethren in the oncoming fracas.
Peace :TRUCE:
Siberian HEAT
19 Jan 03, 02:29
We are going to go ahead and play the bulk of this scenario. However, we are going to end it at the end of turn 20. This is because there is a variable end after that and I want to make sure everyone's game ends on the same turn (to be fair to everyone).
So, to get the final score, we will go by the score when Player 1 opens his turn 21. He will not play the turn at all other than to look at the score.
This is slightly longer than I thought it would be, but since no one has been playing any tourney games in the past few weeks I figure everyone is up for one last hurrah and we could knock 20 turns out fairly quickly. :cheeky:
All of our team save Raver and Tzar have now reported in. Let's give them at least til the end of the week in case they are temporarily indisposed. This means we now have 11 so far:
Tiberius
JoeBob
Chuck
Fading Captain
Grab
Heinz57
Jamiam
Saber
Tex
DNeely
Popester
OK OPFOR why don't you send your first 11 up against us?
What is the current size of your team?
Be careful with that Western equipment, it handles unlike anything you have ever experienced before.
;)
Dan Neely
20 Jan 03, 01:33
Originally posted by Siberian HEAT
We are going to go ahead and play the bulk of this scenario. However, we are going to end it at the end of turn 20. This is because there is a variable end after that and I want to make sure everyone's game ends on the same turn (to be fair to everyone).
So, to get the final score, we will go by the score when Player 1 opens his turn 21. He will not play the turn at all other than to look at the score.
Can we, our opponent willing continue past turn 20 for ordinary ladderpoints, after reporting the t20 result for the tournament, or would that break the ladder setup?
Siberian HEAT
20 Jan 03, 02:58
Originally posted by Dan Neely
Can we, our opponent willing continue past turn 20 for ordinary ladderpoints, after reporting the t20 result for the tournament, or would that break the ladder setup?
Yeah, that is fine...I think I can get some staples and glue to hold the ladder together while you play past turn 20 :p
Our whole team has now reported in.
That gives us a total of 13. I made an
informal investigation of your team (looked
at who dropped out last round) and believe that
OPFOR team total roll call is also 13:
Sadman
Heat
Bruce
Kraut
Mantis
Brevet
Liveline
Rince
Keef
Bad Axe
Marko
Fitz
GunnerC
Nice lucky numbers! Let's get it on!
Siberian HEAT
21 Jan 03, 11:46
If Mantis confirms that number, he can dole out the player assignments and we can begin ASAP.
I have yet to hear back from some people.
Players that are confirmed thus far are:
Mantis
HEAT
Bruce
Sadman Insane
Eric (What's your handle, Eric?)
Rince
Liveline99
GunnerC
Brevet (becomes available on the 25th)
Fitz
Ranger BooBoo has suffered a house fire (our deepest sympathies, Mark!) and will likely not be available until early February.
Kraut, I assume you're in? Didn't you receive the OPFOR team email?
Personal emails have been sent to players that are most likely still around. I need a day or so to hear back from them, and I'm already hunting recruits. I'm back home now, so will be available to complete this task asap.
Anyone interested in playing the Blitzkrieg scenario (with an advantage, no less!) please respond to mantis29a@shaw.ca to sign up!
Bad Axe is also confirmed.
If you get to 11 and are haveing trouble getting more, we could
send Tzar to your side, making it 12 - 12. So far he has not actually plaid on either team, but was an alternate for us. I think it would be good to get things going.
Originally posted by Tiberius
If you get to 11 and are haveing trouble getting more, we could
send Tzar to your side, making it 12 - 12. So far he has not actually plaid on either team, but was an alternate for us. I think it would be good to get things going.
I feel like a hockey player in the middle of trade discussions, and watching where he will end up :D
I don't mind playing for any one of the teams tough, I'll just do my best
:banana: :banana:
I'm going to give the three people I've sent personal emails to all day Saturday to respond. If not, I'll call in the reserves (already have them lined up) and post matchups.
We should (with luck and HEAT's blessing) be able to start Monday or Tuesday.
Siberian HEAT
24 Jan 03, 18:42
Originally posted by Mantis
I'm going to give the three people I've sent personal emails to all day Saturday to respond. If not, I'll call in the reserves (already have them lined up) and post matchups.
We should (with luck and HEAT's blessing) be able to start Monday or Tuesday.
You have the blessing and good wishes of the Quorum of the Twelve, and may the Lords of Kobol protect all who participate in this tournament!
:D
Great, good luck everyone!:ar15:
Eric Weider
25 Jan 03, 03:19
Eric (What's your handle, Eric?)
Are you taking to me??? are you taking to me?? my handle is keef. i am the guy ming stiffed in round two.
Well it's Sunday evening. How about those matchups Mantis? OPFORs can probably start on their first moves. I doubt if the matchup will make any difference as to the first move. -Unless you're gonna get matched up against Jamiam, then just start digging in. ;) Tzar sorry about almost letting go of you. I was just trying to horse-trade a quick start to the round.
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.