1st Annual Cellar Gaming TripleA Octathalon – Brackets and Win Posts

Redrum (Caesar Salad fans) defeats DizzKneeLand33 (gimme some MEAT) in 270BC, after 18 rounds……

Link is here:

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=38132.0

Napoleonic Empires:

Bacala [Sides: even is Coalition, odd is Carolingians] vs redrum Rolling 1d20:
(1)

Lord Of The Rings:

DizzKneeLand33 [Sides: even is Good, odd is Evil] vs redrum Rolling 1d20:
(13)

270BC:

redrum [Sides: even is Roman, odd is Anti-Roman] vs Bacala Rolling 1d20:
(4)

Balladeer [Sides: even is Roman, odd is Anti-Roman] vs DizzKneeLand33 Rolling 1d20:
(4)

So, I’m thinking of starting the next tourney in October – I was hoping for twice a year, but lmfao, that is never gonna happen.  So, let’s all play with once per 10 months/year if you like.  Also, we talked about the fact that Total Ancient War would be replaced.  So, in the next few weeks, I will post the full rules for your feedback.  The generic gist is that there will be no changes other than timing between turns.  There will be a bump after 96 hours here (72 hours in league, so still slower) with an allowable vacation to cover those times.  There would also in the case of extreme tournament situations the scenario where a game is on the clock.  This would mean that the 96 hours would be cut in half until that bracket is caught back up.

I’m hoping for even more players in the 2nd version!  What do you guys think?  I would love feedback – lots of it!

Last time when we started, each tourney started quickly.  This time, I’m thinking 10-14 days between starts will be the case, allowing for more time for people to become assimilated.  Also, The final four players will have the first 4 byes by their standings/seedings.  So, if there are 12 players, then 5-12 start the first round, and 1-4 have a bye.  This will help those players who are still playing in the prior tourney to have some time to get started in the new one.

Let me know your thoughts and by all means invite your friends and friends of friends!!

Great post, redrum – I’m going to address which games to include first, and then post about the bump rule and so forth – I know Balladeer is going to post too and hopefully a few others.

So, right now I was thinking that “Domination 1914 – No Man’s Land” would replace Total Ancient War.  Also, I would be willing to replace a second game with “Big World” (is it version 3?) that everyone seems to be playing and liking a lot.  It will take a while to absorb that map, but what do you guys think of those two?

1. Domination 1914 – No Man’s Land
2. Big World v3 [just to confirm, this game is fully balanced and play tested, correct?]

Then the question would become which game do we replace?  The choices seem to be Great War, LOTR, or TRS.  I guess my personal choice (even though it’s one of my favorites) would be to replace Great War – I think TRS is a nice balance to NWO, and I like having a non-real war game in LOTR.  However, I’m very open to what you guys think.

NWO:

Bacala [Sides: even is Allies, odd is Axis] vs BalladeerRolling 1d20:
(16)

DizzKneeLand33 [Sides: even is Allies, odd is Axis] vs captain walkerRolling 1d20:
(11)

Has anyone seen dawgoneit?  It’s been a couple weeks now…. :(

@redrum – regarding the proposed “bump” rule, it would be that you would need to play a turn within 96 hours after your opponent plays one, so that 4 days can in reality be 8 days between turns.  I think that should be doable, especially when people can have vacation times in between as well as the fact that it would be 4 bumps (proposed) before a player is actually forfeited (once a bump is recorded, the player has another 96 hours).  I’m just looking for something reasonable to keep things moving along.

There would also be an “on the clock” for games that are holding up brackets, but this wouldn’t occur for a while.  In essence, the first round would go 3 months before being “on the clock” and the winner’s brackets would go in 2 month increments after that (the loser’s brackets would need to move a bit more quickly since there are more games, but there are also more byes that pass through those, so it probably balances out).

So, I see the point of Big World being something between Revised and G40.  That being said, the alternative would be Total World War (TWW 1941 is what you mean here, right redrum?), which looks completely awesome – it also looks like it would take 4 years to play a double-elimination bracket.  :-D

I like keeping TRS as a balance to NWO imho.

So, redrum, since I don’t think any of us has played TWW, are you saying that we would be able to finish the rounds within one calendar year?  If so, I’d definitely like to see what people prefer between Big World and TWW.

I count 18 sides plus 4 “neutral” sides.  But, does it flow pretty quickly with regard to the flipping of sides in a two-player game?

And I guess the real question is: which game would bring us more new players?

How do you guys like the Civil War game?  And, I assume the version titled “A House Divided” is the one that is play tested and balanced?

I haven’t had a chance to play it at all, but it looks more interesting than Big World on the surface at least.  We already have a full WWII game (WaW) along with the Europe and Pacific theaters so would it be better to add a different period to our warring efforts?  :-D  That would increase the number of periods to 5 (Roman, Napoleonic, Civil War, WWI, WWII).

I also want to check (redrum, I’m sure this is your department lol) whether or not the rail stations work properly and so forth – I know you told me before that this is one of the more finished maps, but just want to confirm that.