OFFICIAL Strategic Cmd ELO Tourney updated June 23, 2020

[gronivaure]

New game started: gronivaure(Axis) vs. Gilber(Allied).

[Taxman66]

Fafnir (Axis) wins vs. Taxman (Allied)
Resigned January 1941.

Axis went All France and Algiers fell near the end of 1940 (already posted events prior in the France 1939 via Maginot AAR thread).
January 1941 turn and I'm shocked by Iraq coup happening.
Then it dawned on me that he must've put a unit in Syria.
Went to check it out with a CV, and discovered enough units in there to take out Egypt, while I had pressed forward to Gazala to force Rommel to show up around Tripoli (Tobruk was bypassed).
I had killed an Italian Medium Bomber and Fighter and 2 GAR, and done 4 damage to a IT HQ and thought I had a fighting chance to significantly delay the Axis push on the Middle East.
Only to have far too many units on the verge of being cut off with no ports to evacuate from; and the bonus of not being prepared to get 2 units next to Baghdad.

Never having seen/experienced All France before was taken by surprise by this maneuver. Given the huge commitment in Algeria, I was sure The Rock was the next target.
Morale of the story: If Axis is going 'All France' MAKE SURE THAT SYRIA PORT/CAPITAL IS GARISONED BY UK UNITS!

I would have been very hard pressed and put my chances of winning at 10-15% (at most) even before this maneuver.
Well played, I'm not in Fafnir's league.

[Ktonos]

First time I see a successful all France too. Either in my games or in others. It must be a first.
I think Fafnir has proven he can win using several different approaches.

On another note. May I propose to change the tourney structure from the coming Fall? We could continue tracking ELO ratings, but this structure has several cons.

[Ktonos]

Tourney game started Ktonos (Allies) vs Fafnir (Axis)

[Rannug61]

Tourney match ended: Rannug(Axis) vs El Condoro(Allies). Axis victory fall 1943.

[Rannug61]

New ELO game started: El Condoro(Axis) vs. Rannug(Allied).

[Ktonos]

Game finished, Ktonos (Axis) vs Gilber (Allies). Axis victory Sep 42

[Gilber]

an interesting and very pleasant game to play like the games with Fafnir and Rannugh61.
these three remind me of the luftwaffe "experten" who had 200 or 300 victories to their credit
interesting, we learn a lot, the difficulty is to survive long enough to learn.[;)]

[Fafnir]

Looking for another tourney match opponent. Any side.
I am quite experienced, so beginners may not have much fun.

[El Condoro]

I have offered my neck for the chopping block.

[El Condoro]

New game started: Fafnir (Axis) vs. El Condoro (Allies).

[Ktonos]

Game ended Ktonos (Allies) vs El Condoro (Axis), Allied victory late 1944

[nnason]

ELO tournament update. We have 37 players (although many are not active) and 93 finished games. I think we have 7 or 8 active games.

As a side note, a 4way game of SC3 WaW is just started. We are working out the bugs. Our method would work for WiE.

[nnason]

Ktonos, What are you proposing for a change to the tournament?

[Sugar]

I guess it`s time to end this tourney and start a new one, perhaps someone could spend some goodies for the winner the next time, hehe.

I find these tourneys very valuable for the balancing, Fafnir seems to have figured out a way to shorten the Axis` road to victory.

Again many greetings and thx to nnason for his fantastic work!

[El Condoro]

The last game has been recorded as my victory but it was Ktonos who won that game.

I would love to see an ongoing ladder where playing the top players gives points even if the game was lost. I used to play PzG2 at a club with such a ladder and it was fascinating to watch as new players rose and the top players fought out to get No 1. It also means games 'mean something' and there is incentive to complete them while giving a tangible reward.

As for a formula, I have no idea except that winning against a higher ranked player is worth more but losing against a lower ranked player does not penalise the higher ranked player too much, otherwise they might not want to play the new ones.

[Ktonos]

I would propose that firstly the ELO rating stand.

For a tourney my idea is that we
1. See who wants to play and commits to finish a game within 2 months
2. Then break the field into groups of 4 or 3 people, based on their ELO standing. These will groups will form small "leagues"
3. Each group will go into a round robin playing with each other mirror matches.
4. The winner of a group advances to the upper category. The last player relegated to the previous one

For example: As the ELO standings are the "Top League" would consist of Sugar, Fafnir and KZ. The second league of Rannug, LLv34mika and me. And so on. If Fafnir wins his league he is declared winner for the season. If KZ is last he is relegated to league B next season. In league B if Rannug tops it he plays in the first league with Sugar and Fafnir next season, and if I go last I am relegated to league B.

I think it needs players to be true to their word and it will be a bit harder for whoever organizes it, but we will have all games being competitive while at the same time players are guaranteed they will play different players next season.

[Taxman66]

I don't think I can commit to playing simultaneous mirror games.

[El Condoro]

Can the PBEM++ server be mined for data? It might be useful for ranking if the actual turn number on which a game ended is available.

The concern I have with a tournament broken into leagues is that the pool of available players is severely restricted. As Taxman66 says above, not all players are available for games or can play at the same pace. I think the table needs to be open to all players with a minimum number of turns (10?) needed to be played for the game to count. That way, if a game is a clear fizzer (like my first game against Ktonos!) it can be aborted without anyone being penalised in their ranking.

[Ktonos]

It was just an idea. I'm sure people will pop up with their own ideas and we will pick something. I just believe that the ELO ranking is kind of underwhelming for a tourney. It is very useful, and it should stand regardless of tourneys in progress.

Regarding too many games though, a tourney, any tourney, will have far more games than one game per player. It can't be otherwise because then it wouldn't be a tourney would it? Just a thought. What a I propose has 4 games per player. It could drop to 2 games if there is no mirror game and lets say that the lower ELO player can choose the side.

In any case, just an idea, I am simply brainstorming here.