Tournament

Warplan is a World War 2 simulation engine. It is a balance of realism and playability incorporating the best from 50 years of World War 2 board wargaming.

Moderator: AlvaroSousa

Post Reply
generalfdog
Posts: 324
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2020 4:41 pm

Tournament

Post by generalfdog »

Has there ever been and will there ever be a war plan tournament? Just curious they looks interesting.
User avatar
ncc1701e
Posts: 8177
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 7:50 pm
Location: Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards

RE: Tournament

Post by ncc1701e »

Is it really needed? [:D]

Winner: Harrybanana
Chancellor Gorkon to Captain James T. Kirk:
You don't trust me, do you? I don't blame you. If there is to be a brave new world, our generation is going to have the hardest time living in it.
Harrybanana
Posts: 4098
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 12:07 am
Location: Canada

RE: Tournament

Post by Harrybanana »

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e

Is it really needed? [:D]

Winner: Harrybanana

I am flattered that you think so, but I am not at all convinced this is true. If Magic Missile returns he is at least as good, and probably better, than me. I have yet to play Sveint who is also very good. I also suspect that there are great many excellent players who just are not that active in the Forum, but might play in a Tournament.

The problem with a conventional tournament is that the only game worth playing (for me anyway) is the 39 scenario and it takes several months to complete a game. So if you had 16 people in the Tournament playing in single knockout style it would take 4 rounds for a winner to be determined. This would take well over a year and maybe two. An alternative would be to divide the 16 players into four "conferences" of 4 players. The players in each conference would simultaneously play mirror games against the other players in their conference. So this would mean 6 games for each player going at one time. After all the games are played the 4 winners of each Conference would then play mirror games against the other winners in the same fashion. Although a lot more games are being played I think it would be quicker over all.

However it is organized I would be interested in a Tournament.
Robert Harris
CHINCHIN
Posts: 486
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2012 6:42 am

RE: Tournament

Post by CHINCHIN »

A tournament is always an extra incentive to play, I would sign up.

I agree that the 1939 scenario is the best, you can plan everything from the beginning. But for a first tournament I think the most appropriate would be a short scenario.
My native language is Spanish, and no English language mastery, sorry.
User avatar
sillyflower
Posts: 3509
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:39 pm
Location: Back in Blighty

RE: Tournament

Post by sillyflower »

ORIGINAL: ncc1701e

Is it really needed? [:D]

Winner: Harrybanana

OH NO! @#~*
I'm playing him at the moment and so far it's like this:
web exchange

Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi

Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?
Nirosi
Posts: 1909
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 5:01 pm

RE: Tournament

Post by Nirosi »

Could be the 1940 scenario from start to fall of France. Both players play both sides in two successive games. At the end of each game one calculate the losses differential and the player with best total differential for both games wins. A bonus in points could be given to the player that forced Vichy faster. Something along those lines?
User avatar
sillyflower
Posts: 3509
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:39 pm
Location: Back in Blighty

RE: Tournament

Post by sillyflower »

Has the advantage of being short, but the bonus for capturing P'town earlier would have to be huge, otherwise the winning G strategy would just be going after french units all around the map while trying to avoid F surrendering.
If playing french, I would just run away and hope my opponent just got a quick surrender.

Perhaps a better approach would be the winner is the 1st to get F to surrender. If the date is a tie, then the player with fewer G casualties, or fewer total casualties from both games, wins.

Full disclosure: this is written from a neutral perspective because the competition does not appeal to me
web exchange

Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi

Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?
Nirosi
Posts: 1909
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 5:01 pm

RE: Tournament

Post by Nirosi »

This could also work very well indeed. It also removes the need to find a balance in term of bonus for the 1st to make France fall to.
Nirosi
Posts: 1909
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2017 5:01 pm

RE: Tournament

Post by Nirosi »

Or maybe a mix of both : the 1st to make France been Vichy. But for each 5 loses differential (or whatever number), the date goes up or down (depending if you have less or more) by a day for the calculation? Always calculated on the turn of German application of Vichy. Tiebreaks could be in favor of the player that has taken more Morale points?
User avatar
sillyflower
Posts: 3509
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 4:39 pm
Location: Back in Blighty

RE: Tournament

Post by sillyflower »

The more complicated the system, the more it will be gamed. Keep it as simple as possible!
web exchange

Post: I am always fearful that when I put this game down on the table and people see the box-art they will think I am some kind of neo-Nazi

Reply: They already know you're a gamer. What other shame can possibly compare?
Post Reply

Return to “WarPlan”