Have people enter, and then get a board of top rated players to judge each player, from then creating pairs that are as fair as possible. They then create the brackets. Players would work in 2-man teams in 2 on 2 games. The winner continues on, the loser goes to the loser bracket, but if you lose in there, you are out. Then the top two losing teams face off to see who gets to see the winners champion. Then the winner and loser champions face each other to see who wins there. For playing different games: games like Bulge, D-Day, and Guadal are worth the lowest points for Ws and Ls, while 1940 and Anniversary are worth more points for both winners and losers. To prevent cheating, there will be a judge at each game who will officiate, but will not punish players if they screw up, but will disqualify them if they do things like roll the dice again, or pick their tech, etc.,intentional cheating like that in which there is evidence beyond a REASONABLE doubt. Everyone should have fun, as it is a double then play for fun elimination circut. If your are knocked out of the losing bracket, you then join the other pairs(1/4 of total players at first possible chance), and play for fun, not to advance, as you are knocked out of the tournament. Where and when will the convention be held because I will try to get there if it is in the US.
Greatest Generals
-
as far as military genius, I would have to say Gehngis… Leader, most likely Stonwall… all around although not the best, Rommel… Tactician Zhukov…
-
Yeah, I think we should distinguish between tacticans and leaders.
For instance… Longstreet, brilliant tactican (way ahead of his time) but not that brilliant of a leader.Then you also have to seperate between generals. What type of generals are we talking about here? Frontline ones? Or overall operational generals? Again, big difference between Eisenhower and Patton.
-
exactly. and i would disagree with you GG, about genghis. he did conquer more of the world than anyone else, but there were factors more important than his skills as a general (the quality of his mongolian soldiers, the intimidation factor, the large-scale disunity of much of the world at the time, and the inferiority of many of the enemy armies.)
-
exactly. and i would disagree with you GG, about genghis. he did conquer more of the world than anyone else, but there were factors more important than his skills as a general (the quality of his mongolian soldiers, the intimidation factor, the large-scale disunity of much of the world at the time, and the inferiority of many of the enemy armies.)
True… but he still get’s my vote because he was the first to use Blitzkreig type tactics… that is why I called him a military geinus
-
General Daniel Morgan of the American Revolution. Won the battle of Cowpens, which turned the war in the south around for the Americans and eventually led to the siege at Yorktown.
-
Hannibal, the inventor of the pocket battle.
-
I would not necessarily disagree with Hannibal, Falk (strange, I know). But please elaborate on pocket battle
-
Don’t mind if I step in here……I think the pocket battles F_alk is referring to is when one army encircles another trapping it in a “pocket”
-
True… but he still get’s my vote because he was the first to use Blitzkreig type tactics… that is why I called him a military geinus
What! Genghis Kahn had mechanized infantry and armor with close tactical air support in small independent armies that avoided attacking enemy strongpoints head on, instead, passing them by, encircling them, then letting the regular infantry reduce these pockets and driving deep into enemy territory to attack lines of communication and supply, causing mass confusion along the way? :lol:
-
not quite :wink: …his calvary units attacked swiftly, overwhelmed there enemy, then stole what they needed to get to the next village… Blitzkrieg means lightning war… remember the germans are not the only intelligent ones on military tactics :wink: (I can say that… I’m part German…)
-
I have no doubt that Genghis Kahn was smart military man.
However, because his armies were on horse back, and could get into battle quickly, does not make “BlitzKrieg” that Germany developed.
Blitzkrieg was a concept than the above mention tactics help produce. -
he used the first “blitzkrieg” type tactic…
-
just like some people already pointed out this seems to be an ‘american best of’ list, but i am sure that there must be some decent military leaders from other countries too… :wink:
all in all, i d through my lot with Hannibal as well. clever guy
just because… did u know that ther germans actually didnt ‘invent’ Blitzkrieg… some english bloke came up with the original idea but his folks thought the idea was no good, until some german officers came across it and developed it into what it became known for… interesting fact i think :D
-
just like some people already pointed out this seems to be an ‘american best of’ list, but i am sure that there must be some decent military leaders from other countries too… :wink:
all in all, i d through my lot with Hannibal as well. clever guy
just because… did u know that ther germans actually didnt ‘invent’ Blitzkrieg… some english bloke came up with the original idea but his folks thought the idea was no good, until some german officers came across it and developed it into what it became known for… interesting fact i think :D
are you trying to make fun of me?
-
what u mean?? :o
-
some english bloke…and the crooked smile
-
easy tiger, that smile is just there because i was happy that i could fit this rather amusing, but on the other hand quite useless information in. be happy for me too :)
i am german myself, i wdnt let harm to my people, would i??
:wink:
anyways, bed time here now, laters
-
Cao Cao (though I have seen different English translations), the Lord of Wei ranks near the top of my list (as far as Einsenhower-Lee type generals go). This guy was a genius, skilled at politics, the military organization, and leadership, logistics, a wartime economy. In the year 208, he commanded over one million men.
-
commanded them where? to what end?
-
commanded them where? to what end?
To countless victories victories are across China. Just look at how much of a badass Cao Cao was
– In the year AD 192, Cao Mengde forced over three hundred thousand Yellow Turbans to surrender to him at Ji Bei
– Cao Mengde took Emperor Xian to Xu Chang as a hostage and used him as puppet Emperor, elevated himself to Great General and Lord of Wuping.
– In the fifth year of Rebuilt Tranquility (AD 200), Cao Cao killed Lü Bu (another badass in his own right), made Zhang Xiu surrender and fought against Liu Bei. He conquered the counties of Ji Zhou and after fighting Yuan Shao at Guan Du, pacified all of the north (China).
– In the spring of AD 213, Cao Cao led an army to Ru Xu Mountain where he captured Gongsun Yang, receiving the Imperial Jade Seal from the Emperor, placing him above all the other lords
– In the twentieth year of Rebuilt Tranquility (AD 215), he annihilated Zhang Lu (yes, more badasses - Cao Cao didn’t go against half-wits like Rommel) in Han Zhong





