The Legend of Nemo

This new stand alone release based on the legendary War in the Pacific from 2 by 3 Games adds significant improvements and changes to enhance game play, improve realism, and increase historical accuracy. With dozens of new features, new art, and engine improvements, War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition brings you the most realistic and immersive WWII Pacific Theater wargame ever!

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Post Reply
User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

The Legend of Nemo

Post by Canoerebel »

Nemo121 was a legendary WitP/AE player who vanished from the community two years ago. He was one of those unforgettable players whose ability and personality demanded attention. Some players admired him. Some players battled with him. Some players feuded with him. But every player paid attention to him.

Nemo’s last post was 25 months ago. All of us long-timers remember him, but there is the new cadre of players who don’t. With that in mind, I wish to set down some memories of him.

To make things clear from the outset, I ought to tell you that Nemo and I got crossways in the forums. In fact, our AE relationship fractured and was never repaired before he departed. So my memories are not tinted by friendship. Despite these differences, however, I looked upon his AE prowess with admiration, and I found his personality equally interesting.

I should also say that I did not keep notes during the five or six years Nemo was part of the community. My knowledge of him isn’t encyclopedic. And many of my memories have grown vague or fuzzy with the passage of time. So these are impressions that may occasionally lack precision in detail but which may convey an impression of the man.

To begin with, how many of you remember Nemo121’s avatar? All of us old-timers do. But just for old time’s sake, which of the three posted at the bottom was it?

Nemo was one of those players who picked apart the mechanics of the game. He knew the engine, its strengths and weaknesses. Combined with his knowledge of psychology and the science of warfare, this understanding of the game made him an elite-level competitor. In fact, I considered him one of the two best players (or potential players) in the community.

The other player (or potential player) was and is Alfred. I need not say anything more about Alfred’s ability and reputation, other than to note that he doesn’t actually play the game, at least against humans. And some of us aren’t even sure that Alfred is human. He may be some Matrix-like conglomeration of Artificial Intelligence developed by a superpower.

But there was no doubt that Nemo121 was human. He’d sometimes get irritated and frequently became enmeshed in interesting disputes. I vaguely recall one in which FatR, a player from St. Petersburg, Russia, accused Nemo of cheating. That turned into an epic brouhaha that was as interesting to watch as any AE match.

As I’ve already said, Nemo could pick apart the game engine in wondrous ways. I recall one tactic he revealed in detail. In early 1942, he sent Allied subs into enemy waters around the Philippines in a carefully planned pattern. Then he monitored detection levels for each sub. Keeping track of those levels, he determined where the Japanese player had air surveillance of the seas around the islands. Where he noticed gaps in surveillance, he sent destroyer and light cruiser task forces raiding deep, deep, deep behind enemy lines. The results were spectacular in terms of sunk enemy ships and unhinging the Japanese player.

In a game versus One-Eyed-Jacks, Nemo employed a forward defense pretty much everywhere, but especially in the DEI. The theater encompassing Sumatra, Malaya and Borneo became the focus of action. Nemo developed an unbreakable Allied fortress in these waters…and he simultaneously went on the offensive. In fact, there wasn’t ever a time when he wasn’t on the offensive.

Brave Sir Robin for Nemo? Hah!

Poor One-Eyed-Jacks was pulling out his hair from the outset of his match with Nemo. I don’t recall exactly when that game ended, but I feel sure it was in 1942. My memory, perhaps clouded by awe, seems to hold that the end came in the first half of ’42.

There was a time when a few Forumites lobbied unsuccessfully for a match between Nemo and Alfred. That would have been a titanic contest! Many would have paid for the chance to spectate. I would have.

Who would have won the match? I don’t know. Both of them were very good, though it seemed to me that Alfred was almost machine-like while Nemo operated in the world of the human psyche, manipulating things to his advantage. I don’t know if he could have used that to effect against Alfred, so perhaps I’d have picked Alfred. But the match would have been epic.

I think Nemo might have spontaneously combusted had he lost.

Nemo’s real name was Fionn. I think he lived (lives) in Ireland. He was a psychologist by profession in real life and by practice in the realm of AE. He was a scientist in the art and science of warfare. He was all the time quoting from the great thinkers of military science like Von Clausewitz and others I’d never heard of. He’d speak of things like “white space” and offered insight into the thinking and theory behind what he was doing in the game.

Sometimes I could briefly grasp theories upon which he expounded. I recall a brief lucid interval in which I grasped the concept of White Space. But mostly I remained befuddled, like a young student overwhelmed in his introduction to physics.

I think Nemo served as a military consultant for some Western powers. I have fuzzy memories of him mentioning Special Forces and special ops and NATO and the Warsaw Pact. I have feverish thoughts of him training Spetsnaz teams or showing how Russian bombers could avoid NATO radar by monitoring detection levels. Or was it all just a dream?

Nemo delighted in taking over for players who had surrendered games no longer competitive. Then he’d make them competitive. He did this more than once, but the one that stands out in my mind is when he stepped in for Floyd in a match against Damian. Air bridges and massed use of TF to supply the Kuriles became his mantra.

Then he took Japan in the Downfall Scenario and showed how to defend the Home Islands in ’45. He developed and described intricate plans to use kamikazes and ships, and then employed them successfully.

Nemo enjoyed teaching younger or newer players. He was the active aide-de-camp that helped GreyJoy in his epic match against Raider. Nemo helped me seize on the radical idea of a Fortress Palembang that turned out decisive in one of my games.

I don’t recall why Nemo disappeared from the Forum and AE. I’m pretty sure it had to do with friction with some others. He may still lurk. He may even read this. I hope he does. And I hope it does some justice to his memory.


Image
Attachments
Nemo121Cropped.jpg
Nemo121Cropped.jpg (20.39 KiB) Viewed 391 times
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
Yaab
Posts: 5041
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:09 pm
Location: Poland

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by Yaab »

Uhm, a match between Alfred and Nemo would be like bringing an encyclopaedia to a gunfight.

I would rather see Nemo play PzB.
User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7191
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by HansBolter »

Middle pic.
Hans

mind_messing
Posts: 3394
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 11:59 am

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by mind_messing »

I have somewhat of a more jaded view of Nemo as a player.

Nemo never fought a campaign game right through from start to finish (at least one that I've seen AAR'd). If I recall correctly, he liked his scenarios a lot more. Nothing wrong with that, but there's a lot you miss out on if you don't play the game from Dec 7th onward.

It's fine to post long-winded discussion on the application of military theories to the game, it's another to get a campaign game from Dec 7th to a conclusion. As for the accusations of cheating, I don't know enough to comment.

FWIW, my definition of a "good player" is someone who can either beat Japan before the historical surrender date as the Allies or postpone the Japanese collapse till after the historical surrender date, against an opponent of equal skill.

The "best players" are those that can do both.

User avatar
Canoerebel
Posts: 21099
Joined: Fri Dec 13, 2002 11:21 pm
Location: Northwestern Georgia, USA
Contact:

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by Canoerebel »

I think his match versus One-Eyed-Jacks started on December 7, 1941 and continued through to Japanese surrender.

There may have been others, but I can't recall. I don't recall Nemo bailing out of games early, though there might have been some. (I didn't follow all of his matches due to time constraints.) I do recall a few ending due to some ill-will. I think his game with FatR ended early for that reason.

Then there was the game he picked up for Floyd vs. Damian. In that case, if memory serves, it was Damian who called the match.

Nemo could be fractious, which probably resulted in a number of games ending, but I never had the sense that he wanted to end any game because of competitive reasons.
"Rats set fire to Mr. Cooper’s store in Fort Valley. No damage done." Columbus (Ga) Enquirer-Sun, October 2, 1880.
User avatar
AW1Steve
Posts: 14518
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:32 am
Location: Mordor Illlinois

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by AW1Steve »

Nemo's genius was in psychological warfare. He coached me on several of my PBEMs. He tended to "play the player , not the war". I can imagine him as an incredibly frustrating opponent. [:)]
mind_messing
Posts: 3394
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 11:59 am

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by mind_messing »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

I think his match versus One-Eyed-Jacks started on December 7, 1941 and continued through to Japanese surrender.

Which was in 1942 IIRC. 1943, 1944 and beyond are completely different in terms of how the game plays out.

As for Nemo as a player, he had some interesting insights into psychological warfare, an area that's fairly ignored in AE.

Beyond that, in the absence of an objective ranking measure of player skill (like an ELO rating), I can't comment on Nemo. The only way to get a real measure of the quality of a player in AE is to actually play them. AAR's and such provide some insight, but can be biased for a number of reasons. The choice of opponent is another key factor (again where an ELO type rating would be handy), as it's easy for one player to make a good impression against someone not as well versed in the game - see Greyjoy & Radar for pretty much the classic example.
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24520
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by Chickenboy »

I agree with everything you've stated in your two posts, mind_messing.

What is an ELO rating?
Image
User avatar
Bullwinkle58
Posts: 11297
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:47 pm

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by Bullwinkle58 »

One correction, CR. He is a psychiatrist, not a psychologist. An M.D.

I did some googling on his career once--anyone can--and found an academic paper he had presented at a conference. Subject was PTSD in soldiers I believe.

He also had a strong presence in another game's forums, going back to the late-90s I think, where he got into it with the moderators and was banned, at least for a time.

He was an excellent player for sure. But I would join MM in pointing out he never played a GC front to back, and he played a far earlier incarnation of the game, especially in terms of the air models. But he thought about strategy and not tactics, and that's pretty rare.
The Moose
mind_messing
Posts: 3394
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 11:59 am

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by mind_messing »

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

I agree with everything you've stated in your two posts, mind_messing.

What is an ELO rating?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system

Chess ranking system that has been applied to video games before.

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

One correction, CR. He is a psychiatrist, not a psychologist. An M.D.

I did some googling on his career once--anyone can--and found an academic paper he had presented at a conference. Subject was PTSD in soldiers I believe.

He also had a strong presence in another game's forums, going back to the late-90s I think, where he got into it with the moderators and was banned, at least for a time.

He was an excellent player for sure. But I would join MM in pointing out he never played a GC front to back, and he played a far earlier incarnation of the game, especially in terms of the air models. But he thought about strategy and not tactics, and that's pretty rare.

Any chance you could PM/email me the links to his paper?
User avatar
geofflambert
Posts: 14887
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 2:18 pm
Location: St. Louis

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by geofflambert »

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
The other player (or potential player) was and is Alfred. I need not say anything more about Alfred’s ability and reputation, other than to note that he doesn’t actually play the game, at least against humans. And some of us aren’t even sure that Alfred is human. He may be some Matrix-like conglomeration of Artificial Intelligence developed by a superpower.

Has he played a gorn yet? I don't know, he doesn't seem to have a sense of humor.

User avatar
Lokasenna
Posts: 9303
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 3:57 am
Location: Iowan in MD/DC

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by Lokasenna »

Ho-hum.
User avatar
AW1Steve
Posts: 14518
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:32 am
Location: Mordor Illlinois

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by AW1Steve »

ORIGINAL: geofflambert

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
The other player (or potential player) was and is Alfred. I need not say anything more about Alfred’s ability and reputation, other than to note that he doesn’t actually play the game, at least against humans. And some of us aren’t even sure that Alfred is human. He may be some Matrix-like conglomeration of Artificial Intelligence developed by a superpower.

Has he played a gorn yet? I don't know, he doesn't seem to have a sense of humor.
BTW I have a "Gorn question". I'm very fond of gator tail. A young one , properly fried , taste like "sweet chicken". Does Gorn? [:D]
User avatar
AW1Steve
Posts: 14518
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:32 am
Location: Mordor Illlinois

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by AW1Steve »

ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58

One correction, CR. He is a psychiatrist, not a psychologist. An M.D.

I did some googling on his career once--anyone can--and found an academic paper he had presented at a conference. Subject was PTSD in soldiers I believe.

He also had a strong presence in another game's forums, going back to the late-90s I think, where he got into it with the moderators and was banned, at least for a time.

He was an excellent player for sure. But I would join MM in pointing out he never played a GC front to back, and he played a far earlier incarnation of the game, especially in terms of the air models. But he thought about strategy and not tactics, and that's pretty rare.
To some degree. As someone who collects every book , pamphlet and electron on strategy and strategic thought, I'd say he thought about "creating strategy" , as opposed to classic studies of it, or strategic thought. But often his strategy was geared toward creating psychological effects , versus using psychology for strategy. I've never played against him , but PM'd and emailed him , and often asked his thoughts on a issue or tactic. I have no doubt he was master of the mind game. [:)]
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 9798
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by PaxMondo »

Agreed he liked scenarios ... what he did in Armageddon was classic. As IJ, he re-took Okinawa and forced the allies to retreat in complete disarray. Brilliant. You have to read and then reconstruct his moves to see what and how he did it.

Another game he picked up a bad position, similar to what Lowpe picked up in his 1st AAR, but turned it around completely. He took it on as a challenge against some others in the community ... put a few noses out of joint. [;)]

As for not finishing ... cannot recall a game that ended where it was not done. Irrespective of who left the game and when, his position was so dominant it was moot. While it might have been nice to see him invade NA or HI, I don't think the +200 days to get there was what Nemo was interested in ... nor would I be for that matter.

The last point I would make is that in addition to the psych side of the game, and make no mistake he was very strong there, he understood one key concept thoroughly: "put all your power into 1 square inch"* .... force concentration ... how to achieve it within the game and then how to use it to seize the initiative and once you have the initiative to never let it go ....


*Karate Kid
Pax
pws1225
Posts: 1166
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2010 7:39 pm
Location: Tate's Hell, Florida

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by pws1225 »

I once had the pleasure of chatting with Nemo via PM. This was back in the early days of my AE career and I had asked him about the concept of whitespace (if I recall correctly). I found him to be quite generous with his thoughts and patient with a newb such as I struggling to learn how to play the game well. During the course of our exchange, Nemo confessed to using his skill with language to confound those he crossed swords with on this forum and that he rather enjoyed the opportunity to employ those skills. I do miss the likes of Nemo. He was a rare bird indeed.

By the way, as Nemo explained to me, the concept of whitespace is to influence or control events in the battle space that you do not physically control through the psychological manipulation of your opponent. Nemo appeared to have mastered the application of this concept which made following his AARs so entertaining.
Alfred
Posts: 6683
Joined: Thu Sep 28, 2006 7:56 am

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by Alfred »

Nemo was one of the very few players who thought about strategy.  Many players claim to do so but they really are thinking in tactical terms, not in strategical terms.  He was very prolific in posting to the forum, especially in AARs which caught his eye.  This dispersion of output makes it difficult for many to get a solid handle on his thoughts.
 
Back in August 2011 in discussing strategy in a hartwig AAR I wrote the following assessment of Nemo.
 

As we seem to be the only two sitting by the log fire, sipping our cognacs, whilst discussing the concept of strategy, I think it is safe to continue. Of course, if we were leaning over the dinner table, moving the salt and pepper shakers to illustrate our discussion points, we would be discussing tactics not strategy.[:)]

You were quite correct to say in post #8 that on the AE forums, much which passes for discussion as strategy is really at best only tactcs only some of it being truly operational planning in nature. Eventually Nemo will discover this AAR and probably comment as strategic matters greatly interest him. If you ran an AE poll, I have no doubt that he would be voted overwhelmingly as the best AE game strategist. That would be a result I would not quibble with except for one point, albeit in my view very critical. Most of Nemo's writings deal with and his great game results demonstrate, his superior operational planning rather than strategic insights. As I said in post #12 operational planning is really tactics. It is however useful to assess his operational plans against others to ascertain why his level of success is not generally replicated by others.

Nemo's operational pre-planning is meticulous, but then so is other players' operational planning. It is very much mated to logistical considerations, an area which very few other players match to the same degree. His operational planning focusses on optimal objectives which are pursued ruthlessly. Too many other players direct their operational planning towards sub-optimal objectives and are diffident in their execution. Above all else, what distinguishes Nemo's operational planning and play from the maority of AE players is that it is always truly subordinated to and consistent with his grand strategy. At this point i would remind you again of what i said in post #12.

[align=center]Strategy is the plan to bring victory. Tactics is the means adopted to implement the adopted strategy.[/align]

Nemo may very well dispute my assessment but I believe that he would agree that compared to the real world, the freedom to formulate and pursue various grand strategy options in AE is limited. At it's centre, the game is much more about operational planning. To me, his games have limited variation in strategy (a function of the game's limits) but considerable variety in operational play. His operational play is so closely tied to his grand strategy, that it is easy for others to mistake one for the other. To give just a single example of this, I draw your attention to my comment in his AAR v 1EyedJack that essentially his entire Pacific operation was a trap.[;)]

Now to come back to your observation made in post #8 that the generic comment made by some that they intend to build up the Aleutians with a view of striking the Kuriles. You are correct, that is not strategy
, at best it is operational (aka tactical) play. Most would dispute what I have just said, so I need to justify my statement.

OK, let's take at face value that building Aleutians, striking Kuriles is strategy. Once accomplished, then what? Now that the so called strategy has been accomplished the player should be able to simply derive the benefit of his strategy by merely engaging in a sitzkrieg. I don't see any victory resulting and therefore the definition of what is strategy is not met. The Kuriles, like any piece of real estate, does not in itself have any value. The value of the real estate derives from how it is used to bring about victory. So how would the Kuriles be used. They could be used as sub bases to interdict the enemy's SLOCs. That could be furthering an overall strategy
of interdicting industry inputs (mentioned in an earlier post) but if Japan's merchant fleet has already been sunk or no raw material production nearby remains available to Japan, the value of the Kuriles drops dramatically. Alternatively the Kuriles might be viewed as providing airfields close to the Home Islands, enabling destruction of Japanese industry. But if they have been captured on the 30th October, or the airfields are yet to be built, or the Allied player simply lacks the air units/airframes, or the Allied SLOCs cannot be maintained, all being factors which will prevent prosecution of an effective Allied bombing campaign, then the Allied player is no closer to victory than before.

I could go on but I think enough has been provided for further thought.[;)] Now if you would be so kind as to pass over the bottle of cognac...



Needless to say, Nemo a few posts on he chimed in with his retort to my observations.  The exchange should provide some insights in a relatively concentrated spot.
 
I don't have time just now to go into much more detail, but a couple of short responses to some of the comments made re Nemo earlier in this current thread are appropriate.
 
1.  Nemo was never a consultant to a Western military establishment.  Nor had he ever served in the military.
 
2.  In his school days, he had been a very keen chess player.
 
3.  His departure from the forum was very much driven by the general attitude displayed on the forum to the cheating charge laid by FatR against him.  In short FatR claimed to have spotted Nemo reading his opponent's AAR and that Nemo's great game successes was not due to intellectual ability but simply to reading fully his opponent's dispositions and intentions.  FatR then proceeded to inform Nemo's opponent of his "finding" and return the favour by disclosing what Nemo was up to.  What riled Nemo greatly was firstly that the accusation had been made and "justified" by FatR publicly and secondly FatR, who was heavily involved in producing the John3rd mods, was not treated as a pariah by the forum whereas he perceived himself to be.
 
I might later expand on my recollection of Nemo.
 
Alfred
User avatar
PaxMondo
Posts: 9798
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 3:23 pm

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by PaxMondo »

Alfred,

As usual, your pull together your thoughts much better than I do.
ORIGINAL: Alfred
Nemo's operational pre-planning is meticulous, ... It is very much mated to logistical considerations, an area which very few other players match to the same degree. His operational planning focusses on optimal objectives which are pursued ruthlessly. …. Above all else, what distinguishes Nemo's operational planning and play from the majority of AE players is that it is always truly subordinated to and consistent with his grand strategy. At this point i would remind you again of what i said in post #12. [/color][/i][align=center]Strategy is the plan to bring victory. Tactics is the means adopted to implement the adopted strategy.[/align]

Very much what I was referring to related to his Armageddon AAR … to fully appreciate what he did, you have to replay his moves. Literally. Get the game up and see where and how he did what he did by getting the same units into play. I’m not good enough to be able to state exactly what his strategy was in that AAR, but I can see how he built this operation … ‘meticulous’ barely suffices to describe the preparation but ‘ruthless’ is totally accurate to describe his execution. He lost so many units, I remember thinking as the AAR unfolded that he was throwing half of his forces into a boiling pot … but his objectives were achieved. He not only took back Okinawa (tactical goal), but forced his opponent to fall back in total disarray (a strategic goal to me). Who knows what the final outcome would have been as the AAR ended at this point, but he achieved a stunning victory. Only PzB, in my mind, has achieved anything similar.
Pax
mind_messing
Posts: 3394
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 11:59 am

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by mind_messing »

ORIGINAL: Alfred

3.  His departure from the forum was very much driven by the general attitude displayed on the forum to the cheating charge laid by FatR against him.  In short FatR claimed to have spotted Nemo reading his opponent's AAR and that Nemo's great game successes was not due to intellectual ability but simply to reading fully his opponent's dispositions and intentions.  FatR then proceeded to inform Nemo's opponent of his "finding" and return the favour by disclosing what Nemo was up to.  What riled Nemo greatly was firstly that the accusation had been made and "justified" by FatR publicly and secondly FatR, who was heavily involved in producing the John3rd mods, was not treated as a pariah by the forum whereas he perceived himself to be.

I might later expand on my recollection of Nemo.

Alfred

It's worth mentioning that he has departed from previous strategy gaming forums under a similar bad cloud. I only stumbled across this as his internet footprint in terms of his strategy gaming is bigger than the internet footprint of his publications.
dave sindel
Posts: 488
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 7:51 pm
Location: Millersburg, OH

RE: The Legend of Nemo

Post by dave sindel »

I'm relatively new to WITP AE, and to this forum as well - March of this year. I don't post often, but I read the forum almost daily. I follow several ongoing AAR's and have read many others. Early on I discovered Nemo's AAR's and enjoyed them thoroughly. As Canoerebel stated, a lot of what he wrote went over my head, but some of it stuck. Some of it prompted further research, such as the Soviet theory of "Deep Battle". The strategy discussion that Alfred cited between Nemo, Hartwig, and himself was also most enjoyable. I have that thread bookmarked for ease of reference.
Post Reply

Return to “War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition”