Posts made by Veqryn

i can wait another 2 months, or w/e, but i would like if hank could cover for awn for just a few turns in order to get some momentum back

everyone in the game can save the game at any point

so you can start a game, and save it later, and continue the next day

also, you can take a play by forum game and start playing it live in the lobby, and also you can take a live game and start playing it pbem.  the games can switch at any point you want.

there is no faq, but you can ask your questions here

how to do it:

1. start triplea

2. click “play online”
(this causes a “lobby” screen to show up, listing all the available servers)

3. ask if there is anyone who wants to play XXXXX game

4. join someone’s hosted game

5. start playing

cool badge! and thx

i wouldn’t mind finishing this game before i forget how to play it

global 1942 is now included with the global 1940 zip download

1914 is being worked on still, but is probably a long ways off

Test summary from TripleA, engine version: 1.8, time: 23:20:46

@Veqryn:

Global 1940 2nd Edition, version 3.7 is released

download it now!

changes from 3.6 to 3.7:

1. fixed japanese national objective so that if germany/italy takes india and/or the other power centers in asia, that japan gets her money

2. allowed rockets to gang up on infrastructure

3. Added some things to the game notes about what is NOT covered by the engine (and therefore, what you need to manually keep in mind):

Rules the engine does not do, but you must follow:

• Do not allow blitzing or movement through Friendly Neutrals.
• Air units may not land in or move through Friendly Neutrals, including the same turn they are captured.
• Friendly Neutrals can not be ‘captured’ with an AA Gun, only by land units with an attack power.
• Air units may not move through Unfriendly Neutrals unless they are attacking them.
• Air units may not move through a Neutral territory IF that neutral territory had been attacked on some previous turn by some power (because technically that neutral stops being neutral at that point, and joins the other side).
• If UK Pacific captures Japan, the money goes to UK Pacific, even if UK Pacific’s capital is occupied.
• Do not allow USA movement to end in any Sea Zone that touches a Japanese owned territory (Sea Zones 6, 17, 19, 20, 22, 32, 33, 34, 36, and 37).
• You must place all units you purchased if you are able to, or as many as you can. Any units not placed get refunded to you (triplea instead carries them over to the next turn).
• The victory conditions must be held for a full continuous round after they are achieved (so for example if Italy takes Egypt as the 8th European VC, then the Axis must hold 8 VCs continuously until Italy’s next turn).

Lastly, I wish to introduce 2 things that everyone may not know already exist within the TripleA engine:

1. Edit Move Units
To “Edit Move”, you must first be in some movement phase.  
Then turn on Edit Mode.
On the right side you see some tabs: “Action” tab, and “Edit” tab, and other tabs.
When you turn on edit mode, you switch automatically to the ‘edit tab’.  However you can still perform ‘actions’ during edit mode, and edit mode changes those actions to reflect that you are in edit mode.
So now click on the “Action” tab, and then move the units just like you would normally.
Because you are in edit mode, the movement validation is turned off, so this allows you to basically move units where-ever you want, including moving enemy units, or even making an enemy attack, or loading transports, etc.

2. Game Comments (aka: a way to tell what fighter is on what carrier, among other things)
Click “View” menu, then select “Show Comment Log”
From there, you can type out and add comments to the game.  The comments will go into the History Panel, and be permanently added to the game save.
Things you could possibly use this for: telling your opponent which fighter is on which carrier, when you have a mixed-nation fleet.

Global 1940 2nd Edition, version 3.8 is released

download it now!

changes from 3.7 to 3.8:

• Moved Politics phase to be after Purchase phase and before Combat Move phase.
• China can declare war on European Axis if they move into China’s allowed movement range.
• ANZAC can now declare war on True Neutrals.
• Added the 1942 scenario.

Did everyone who wanted prizes, get theirs?

Let me know if you didn’t.

this time of year is busy

i’m sure allweneed will have more time around the 28th of dec weekend

sorry again,
i got all screwed up because I didn’t realize you could attack my malaya fleet (using that silly rule where you suicide a dd into my india fleet that way your air will have a “landing zone”)
here is what my noncombat would look like with that in mind
i would leave 1 carrier, 1 fighter, 1 dd, 1 cruiser on malaya, and have 4 air and the rest of my fleet off india

ya, my bad

TripleA Turn Summary for game: World War II Global 1940 2nd Edition, version: 3.7

Game History

Round: 4

Purchase Units - Japanese
            Japanese buy 2 artilleries, 1 factory_minor, 3 fighters, 3 infantry and 1 transport; Remaining resources: 0 PUs; 6 SuicideAttackTokens;

Combat Move - Japanese
            1 infantry moved from Shensi to Szechwan
                  Japanese take Szechwan from Chinese
            1 submarine moved from 35 Sea Zone to 54 Sea Zone
            1 destroyer moved from 42 Sea Zone to 39 Sea Zone
            1 artillery moved from Sumatra to 41 Sea Zone
            1 armour moved from Shan State to India
                  Japanese take Burma from UK_Pacific
            3 artilleries and 5 infantry moved from Shan State to 37 Sea Zone
            3 artilleries, 5 infantry and 4 transports moved from 37 Sea Zone to 39 Sea Zone
            1 artillery and 1 transport moved from 41 Sea Zone to 39 Sea Zone
            4 artilleries and 5 infantry moved from 39 Sea Zone to India
            2 fighters and 2 tactical_bombers moved from 37 Sea Zone to India
            2 fighters moved from 42 Sea Zone to India
            2 bombers, 7 fighters and 5 tactical_bombers moved from Hunan to India
            1 battleship, 1 cruiser and 1 destroyer moved from 41 Sea Zone to 39 Sea Zone
            2 carriers moved from 37 Sea Zone to 39 Sea Zone

Combat - Japanese
            Battle in 54 Sea Zone
                Japanese attack with 1 submarine
                ANZAC defend with 1 cruiser and 1 transport
                    Japanese roll dice for 1 submarine in 54 Sea Zone, round 2 :  0/1 hits
                    ANZAC roll dice for 1 cruiser and 1 transport in 54 Sea Zone, round 2 :  0/1 hits
                    Japanese roll dice for 1 submarine in 54 Sea Zone, round 3 :  1/1 hits
                    1 cruiser owned by the ANZAC lost in 54 Sea Zone
                    1 transport owned by the ANZAC lost in 54 Sea Zone
                    Japanese roll dice for 1 submarine in 54 Sea Zone, round 4 :  1/1 hits
                Japanese win, taking 54 Sea Zone from Neutral with 1 submarine remaining. Battle score for attacker is 19
                Casualties for ANZAC: 1 cruiser and 1 transport
            Battle in 39 Sea Zone
                Japanese attack with 1 battleship, 2 carriers, 1 cruiser, 2 destroyers and 5 transports
                British defend with 1 destroyer and 2 transports
                    Japanese roll dice for 1 battleship, 2 carriers, 1 cruiser, 2 destroyers and 5 transports in 39 Sea Zone, round 2 :  2/4 hits
                    British roll dice for 1 destroyer and 2 transports in 39 Sea Zone, round 2 :  0/1 hits
                    1 transport owned by the British and 1 destroyer owned by the British lost in 39 Sea Zone
                    1 transport owned by the British lost in 39 Sea Zone
                Japanese win, taking 39 Sea Zone from Neutral with 1 battleship, 2 carriers, 1 cruiser, 2 destroyers and 5 transports remaining. Battle score for attacker is 22
                Casualties for British: 1 destroyer and 2 transports
            Battle in India
                Japanese attack with 1 armour, 4 artilleries, 2 bombers, 11 fighters, 5 infantry and 7 tactical_bombers
                British defend with 3 aaGuns, 1 airfield, 1 armour, 2 artilleries, 1 bomber, 1 fighter, 1 harbour, 18 infantry, 2 mech_infantrys and 2 tactical_bombers; UK_Pacific defend with 1 factory_major
                    AA fire in India :  3/9 hits
                    3 fighters owned by the Japanese lost in India
                    Japanese roll dice for 1 armour, 4 artilleries, 2 bombers, 8 fighters, 5 infantry and 7 tactical_bombers in India, round 2 :  7/27 hits
                    UK_Pacific roll dice for 3 aaGuns, 1 armour, 2 artilleries, 1 bomber, 1 fighter, 18 infantry, 2 mech_infantrys and 2 tactical_bombers in India, round 2 :  9/27 hits
                    1 bomber owned by the British , 3 infantry owned by the British , 5 infantry owned by the Japanese , 3 aaGuns owned by the British and 4 artilleries owned by the Japanese lost in India
                1 armour retreated to Burma
                UK_Pacific win with 1 armour, 2 artilleries, 1 fighter, 15 infantry, 2 mech_infantrys and 2 tactical_bombers remaining. Battle score for attacker is -25
                Casualties for Japanese: 4 artilleries, 3 fighters and 5 infantry
                Casualties for British: 3 aaGuns, 1 bomber and 3 infantry

Non Combat Move - Japanese
            3 fighters moved from Manchuria to Shensi
            1 tactical_bomber moved from Japan to Manchuria
            2 bombers moved from India to Shensi
            1 fighter and 2 tactical_bombers moved from India to 39 Sea Zone
            1 infantry moved from Celebes to 44 Sea Zone
            1 infantry and 1 transport moved from 44 Sea Zone to 37 Sea Zone
            1 infantry moved from 37 Sea Zone to Malaya
            2 destroyers moved from 35 Sea Zone to 37 Sea Zone
            6 fighters and 5 tactical_bombers moved from India to Yunnan
            1 carrier moved from 42 Sea Zone to 39 Sea Zone
            1 battleship moved from 42 Sea Zone to 39 Sea Zone
            1 fighter moved from India to Yunnan
            1 submarine moved from 42 Sea Zone to 39 Sea Zone
            1 submarine moved from 37 Sea Zone to 39 Sea Zone
            1 cruiser moved from 42 Sea Zone to 37 Sea Zone

Place Units - Japanese
            1 artillery and 2 infantry placed in Manchuria
            3 fighters placed in Japan
            1 factory_minor placed in French Indo China
            1 transport placed in 37 Sea Zone
            1 artillery and 1 infantry placed in Malaya

Turn Complete - Japanese
            Japanese collect 59 PUs; end with 59 PUs total
            Objective Japanese 4 Control Dutch East Indies: Japanese met a national objective for an additional 5 PUs; end with 64 PUs
            Turning on Edit Mode
            EDIT: Removing units owned by British from India: 1 infantry
            EDIT: Adding units owned by British to India: 1 bomber
            EDIT: Turning off Edit Mode

Territory Summary for Japanese :

Caroline Islands : 1 aaGun, 1 airfield, 1 harbour and 2 infantry
    Iwo Jima : 1 infantry
    Paulau Island : 1 infantry
    Shantung : 1 flag
    Kwangsi : 1 flag
    Kiangsu : 1 flag
    Kiangsi : 1 flag
    Japan : 3 aaGuns, 1 airfield, 1 factory_major, 3 fighters, 1 harbour and 1 infantry
    Jehol : 1 flag
    Manchuria : 1 flag, 1 aaGun, 1 artillery, 1 factory_minor, 10 infantry, 1 mech_infantry and 1 tactical_bomber
    Shensi : 1 flag, 2 artilleries, 2 bombers, 3 fighters and 6 infantry
    Yunnan : 1 flag, 7 fighters and 5 tactical_bombers
    Suiyuyan : 1 flag
    Kweichow : 1 flag
    Hunan : 1 flag, 1 airfield
    Hopei : 1 flag
    Szechwan : 1 flag, 1 infantry
    Chahar : 1 flag
    Anhwe : 1 flag
    Shan State : 1 flag
    Burma : 1 flag, 1 armour
    Malaya : 1 flag, 1 artillery, 1 factory_minor, 1 harbour and 2 infantry
    Borneo : 1 flag
    Kwangtung : 1 flag, 1 harbour
    Philippines : 1 flag, 1 airfield and 1 harbour
    French Indo China : 1 flag, 1 factory_minor
    Celebes : 1 flag
    Java : 1 flag
    Sumatra : 1 flag
    42 Sea Zone : 1 flag
    37 Sea Zone : 1 cruiser, 2 destroyers and 2 transports
    39 Sea Zone : 1 flag, 2 battleships, 3 carriers, 1 cruiser, 2 destroyers, 1 fighter, 2 submarines, 2 tactical_bombers and 5 transports
    54 Sea Zone : 1 flag, 1 submarine

Production/PUs Summary :

Germans : 41 / 60
    Russians : 34 / 56
    Japanese : 59 / 64
    Americans : 52 / 72
    Chinese : 3 / 4
    British : 28 / 34
    UK_Pacific : 5 / 6
    Italians : 25 / 35
    ANZAC : 10 / 15
    French : 8 / 0
    Dutch : 0 / 0
    Mongolians : 0 / 0
    Neutral_Axis : 0 / 0
    Neutral_Allies : 0 / 0
    Neutral_True : 18 / 0

alright, i and my awesome luck may have just lost the game

3 aa hits, and very very few hits by my japanese attackers
and you got a bunch of hits for your defenders

i just clicked right through the first round without thinking, but actually because you did so well I do need to ask you your casualty selection (and if it is different than the “default”, i need to roll the rest of the battle in the forum)

so in other words, for the first round of battle, what are you losing?  7 hits only

see the save

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.tsvg

Test summary from TripleA, engine version: 1.7.0.3, time: 02:10:10

ya, i totally didn’t see that potential hit in berlin… that would have sucked

and wow, russians are in korea

this is going to be a tough choice,

do i take my chances at 91% odds in india

or do i slaughter china (96%) and russia (also 96%) at the same time, while letting india live…

since china and russia are sort of captive and can’t flee, I think I’m still going to go with india

but i am sort of surprised both india and russia didn’t flee

you know you don’t have to tell them this stuff ahead of time….

let them guess, cus otherwise you are just helping them plan…

Another good read is the Gambler’s Fallacy, which definitely applies to any A&A game, online or real-life: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler’s_fallacy

Here is another good, and short, article on why we see patterns in random sequences: http://www.problemgambling.ca/en/resourcesforprofessionals/pages/whyweseepatternsinsequencesofrandomevents.aspx
I have copied the text below:

Why We See Patterns in Sequences of Random Events

This chapter began with a table showing the contrast between what people think random events are like and what they are really like. Here we will explore some of the reasons that people have these erroneous beliefs. It has been well documented that most people—even those who understand that any result of a series of tosses of a fair coin is a random sequence—make errors in their judgements about random sequences. The following is a list of some possible explanations for this tendency. The focus here is not on superstitious beliefs, but on cognitive processes and experiences that might lead a person to hold faulty beliefs. For a more complete examination of erroneous beliefs in gambling, see Wagenaar (1988); Ladouceur and Walker (1996); Kahneman and Tversky (1982); Toneatto (1999); and Toneatto, Blitz-Miller, Calderwood, Dragonetti, and Tsanos (1997).

People will often judge the coin-tossing sequence of H, H, H, H, H, H as being less random than H, T, H, H, T, H, even though the probability of obtaining each of these given sequences is identical: 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2 = 0.015625. Note that this is the probability of getting a specific sequence compared to the probability of getting a second specific sequence. Kahneman and Tversky (1982) call this tendency the representativeness heuristic. People who make this error are often computing the probability of getting 6 consecutive heads compared to every other possible sequence. Most random sequences of heads and tails do not have an easily recognizable pattern. This tends to reinforce the belief that a sequence of all heads is less likely. However, any one specific arbitrary combination of heads and tails has exactly the same chance of occurring as any other specific combination. Another factor that contributes to this error is that there is only one possible way of getting 6 heads and only one possible way of getting 6 tails, while there are a total of 64 possible ways of tossing six coins, 20 of which produce exactly 50% heads (e.g., H, T, T, T, H, H or H, T, H, H, T, T). This gives the illusion that combinations that “look random,” are more likely, but in fact each one of those specific combinations (e.g., H, T, T, T, H, H) has the same chance of occurring as H, H, H, H, H, H.

Another reason for errors in our understanding of randomness may be confusion between the way the word random is used in everyday speech and the way it is used in statistics and mathematics. According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, the most common meaning of the adjective random is “lacking a definite plan, purpose, or pattern.”  It also lists “haphazard” as a synonym (www.m-w.com). Judging solely by its appearance, a sequence of 6 heads in a row might appear to have a pattern. Probability theory, however, is concerned with how the events in a sequence are produced, not in how they appear after the fact.

A third reason is the tendency of the human brain toward “selective reporting”—the habit of seizing on certain events as significant, while ignoring the other neighbouring events that would give the chosen events context and help to evaluate how likely or unlikely the perceived pattern really is. Big or salient events will be recalled better. We recall plane crashes because they are highly publicized. Uneventful flights are ignored. Because of the occasional well-publicized plane crash many people are afraid to fly, even though plane crashes are much rarer than car crashes. Kahneman and Tversky (1982) call this tendency the availability heuristic.

A closely related tendency is for people to underestimate the likelihood of repeated numbers, sequences, or rare events occurring by pure chance. The basic problem is that we do not take into account the number of opportunities for something to occur, so we are often surprised when random chance produces coincidences. As an example, in a class of 35 students, we assume that the chance of 2 people sharing a birthday is very small, say 1 in 365, or maybe 35 in 365 (Arnold, 1978). The actual probability that at least two people will share the same birthday is close to 100% because there are actually (35 x 34) / 2 = 595 possible combinations of people in the class. Because the possible combinations of people (595) exceed the number of days in the year (365), the chance that at least 1 pair of people will share a birthday is surprisingly high.

Our minds are predisposed to find patterns, not to discount them. It is argued that we have evolved the ability to detect patterns because to do so was often essential for survival. For example, if a person was walking in the jungle and saw a pattern of light and dark stripes in the shadows, it would be prudent to assume that the pattern was a tiger and act accordingly. The consequences of incorrectly assuming that the pattern is not a tiger far outweigh those of incorrectly assuming that it is. But when applied to random events, this survival “skill” leads to errors.

Some errors might be the result of the way in which statistics are disseminated. Academics, journalists, advertisers and others often report statistics using terms such as “1 out of every 10,” or “1 death every 25 seconds.” These statements might lead to the impression that the events reported occur in a regular manner.

We learn through experience and logically induce general rules on that basis. If our experience is limited, we may induce the wrong rule. A chance occurrence may lead to false expectations. As a result, a win the first time one plays a game, or a win after some extraneous event, may lead to the formulation of an erroneous general rule. For example, a bingo player reported that she was once about to buy her bingo booklet, but was called away for some reason. Later, she bought her booklet and then won. Now she has a ritual of going back to the end of the line if she does not feel that the serial numbers are lucky, and she reports that this system has worked for her on at least one other occasion.

Natural human reasoning tends to assume that a premise is reversible. That is, given the premises that all As are Bs and all Bs are Cs, the correct conclusion is that all As are Cs. However, people tend to assume that all Cs must also be As. In fact, this is incorrect. All that we can be certain of is that some Cs are As, but there may be many Cs that are not As. This “conversion error” is common and it creates all manner of problems (Johnson-Laird, 1983). Even highly educated individuals frequently make conversion errors. The basic flaw in the law of averages is the error of converting the correct premise “The number of heads and tails even out in the long run” to the incorrect conclusion “Since the number of heads and tails even out in the long run, I should win if I bet on tails.”

Individuals who gamble often think that random events are self-correcting. One possible reason for this is that their experience seems to be consistent with this belief. Closely related to the law of large numbers is the phenomenon of “regression to the mean,” which predicts that exceptional outcomes (e.g., very high or very low scores) will most likely be followed by scores that are closer to the mean. For example, a father who is very tall is more likely to have a son who is shorter than he is, not taller. It is true that a tall man is more likely to have a tall son than a short one, because height is partly under genetic control. However, the random factors that influence height (the recombination of the parents’ genes, nutrition, accidents, diseases, etc.) will tend to pull the son’s height down closer to the average for the general population. The fact is that, by pure chance, there is more room to move down, closer to the mean, than up, away from the mean.

To turn to a gambling example, suppose a coin is tossed 100 times, and 80% are heads. If the coin is tossed another 100 times, the net outcome is more likely to move closer 50% heads than to stay at 80% heads or to increase to 90%. But it is important to understand that regression to the mean does not have to occur: the son could be taller or the next 100 flips could all be heads. But it is more likely that the son’s height or the number of heads and tails will be closer to the mean because the mean is the single most likely outcome. In the context of gambling, regression to the mean might produce the illusion that the random events are “evening out.” Unusual events (long losing streaks or winning streaks) seem to be corrected over time, but in fact they are not corrected, only diluted. The average converges towards the mean; it is not pushed there. But the experience from event to event gives the illusion that it is pushed there by some sort of force.

Increased bets may also play a role in convincing those who gamble that random events are self-correcting because “chasing” works. Doubling a bet after a loss has the interesting effect of increasing the player’s chance of walking away a winner. The rationale behind this practice is again the law of averages. Since people expect random events to correct themselves, doubling after a loss may seem like a good investment strategy. Incremental betting strategies appear to push around random events so they do not look “random” (Turner & Horbay, 2003). Turner (1998) has shown that a doubling strategy would be successful if random events were self-correcting. The chapter “Games and Systems” discusses this betting system and its flaws in more detail. It is enough to note here that most of the time doubling appears to work, thus reinforcing the idea that random events correct themselves. This system usually produces a very slow accumulation of money. Eventually, however, the player experiences a disastrous losing streak

One final reason for errors in judging random events is that our minds tend to segment events in ways that are consistent with what we expect. Given a heads and tails sequence of H, H, H, H, T, H, H, H, T, T, T, T, H, we are likely to divide this string into a segment in which H was more likely to appear (H, H, H, H, T, H, H, H) and one in which T was more likely to appear (T, T, T, T, H). This segmentation process is very often used by sports commentators (e.g., “The Blue Jays have now won 5 of their last 6 games,” or “A player has struck out 11 times in his last 15 at bat”). In segmenting the sequence this way, it is very easy to convince oneself that tails did in fact come up more often, to correct for the excess of heads. As noted above, our minds are predisposed to find patterns, not to discount them.

the code is open source, and you may take a look at the dice generator if you wish to

there are 3 methods of generating dice:

1. For online live games, we use an encrypted stream of random numbers generated by a Mersenne Twister PRNG by both computers involved.  
The Mersenne Twister PRNG is considered one of the best PRNG’s that exist, that can be both deployed on personal computers (instead of needing, say, a super computer) and that can generate random numbers quickly (instead of there being a significant lag between numbers).  It is often used by institutions and programs that need high quality random numbers quickly.  The one we use is open source and well vetted, and is more than qualified for a board game.

2. For play-by-forum and play-by-email games, we use an external dice server of your choosing.  
The code for the external dice server is not part of triplea, it is held elsewhere.  It is not hard to make a dice server, and Axis & Allies.org website could easily set one up for triplea to use.  Currently the main one people use is TripleAWarClub.net, which I believe uses another modern open-source PRNG implementation.

3. For local games, (ie: games just against the AI, or just against yourself), TripleA just uses the default Java PRNG.  This PRNG is well known to suck, and you should not ever roll dice in local mode for any kind of serious game.

I also wish to state that Dice are Dice.

Getting a result with 0.1% odds does not mean the dice gen is broken.  You could even get such a result several times in a row, and it would still not be broken.  You would have to factor all games ever played on TripleA, to determine whether this result is occurring more often or less often than it “should”.

I should also mention that we, as human beings, are very bad at determining randomness.  Strings of the same number in a row, actually occurs fairly often in sets of true random numbers.  When you ask a person to make a list of random numbers, they make a list of numbers that does not seem to include very low probability events, such as strings of numbers.  When you show a person a list of true random numbers, people rarely believe the numbers to be random and always think there is a pattern of some sort.

In fact, this tendency for humans see patterns in random events even has a name (or a couple names, it is also called a “type 1 error” in statistics): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apophenia

The last thing I want to bring up is Selection Bias ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selection_bias ) and Confirmation Bias ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias ), which are the tendency all people have to filter everything they see through their preconceived conclusions.  For example, you may get a lot of misses, or maybe you just had half your air hit by AA guns, so now you form a hasty conclusion that the dice are complete crap.  Following this, you now remember all events where you think the dice were crap, while simply not seeing or remembering all the times the dice were not crap.  Throw in the fact that getting hits in an A&A game can mean any dice between 1-4, while missing can mean any dice between 2-6, and the fact that some events like losing air or losing an important battle matter more than other events, and you have a situation ripe for someone to draw literally any conclusion they want to draw, including opposite conclusions, while both looking at the same sequence of events.

Please do more research and think very hard about what “randomness” really is, before posting this sort of thing.

a reminder: you only need to have finished 5 of the 6 rounds to be able to get a prize

please pm me your email accounts before the end of this year, preferably sooner