Update 5/1: Well, the poll has run and the people have spoken. I would like someone to join me as a co-organizer, as now there is the tedious business of individually inviting back the people who I told we would be allowing freestyle. Assuming someone steps up, you can obviously have credit as a co-organizer, and I would still work with you to manage and run the tournament. If anyone is interested, please PM me. The co-organizer will also be able to have input into any other changes in the format ... and it may be that a total relaunch is needed, so if you have thoughts on how this could be better set up, I hope you will step forward. Thanks!
Update 4/16: It has been two months since the date signups started. While the number of participants has slowly grown, the number of recent drop outs suggests that interest in the tournament is tepid at best. I am not officially calling it off yet, but that seems where things are heading. I realize that the number of people dropping out has to do with the decision to allow freestyle settings, subject to some very important "equalizer" rules that I described on page 3-4. I want to explain why I'm not inclined to change the freestyle rule briefly... this tournament was conceived after reading a lot of posts by new or lower ranked players who complain that they don't see many top players joining their games, or at least not joining unless it's a team game and they have already got a locked up heavily favored team together. The thought was that a senior player would be challenged to play along side some junior players and in the process foster some much needed interaction across ranks, and also maybe have some mentoring, etc. etc. Getting teammates together at an appointed time to all jump on a freestyle game and lauch a coordinated attack could be part of that interraction. It's a risk-benefit decision for each team captain to make. So I resist telling any team that wants freestyle that they can't have it. So I'm now reevaluating whether this tournament should go forward at all. I've created a poll that will be open for 15 days. Please voice whether we should continue or call it off. If the vote is to continue without freestyle, I may ask for someone else to take over the tournament. Thanks all...
Teams comprised of 3 non-officer's and one team member with officer rank of Seargeant of higher. (Yes, Seargeant is technically not a commissioned officer, so if comes down to too much interest, teams with higher ranking officers will have priority).
UPDATE 3/27: I am considering what to do about the recent unannounced rank inflation. I seems to me not dynamic I was going for to have the possibility of a 1301 sgt. leading a bunch of 1299 CFC's. However, based on the fact that I've watched confirmed teams go up and down as (silly me) the sign-up process takes a little longer than I had expected, I'm also not inclined to be too much of a stickler. If you have any thoughts on the issue, please post up in the thread or PM me. Thanks (oh, and congrats to most of you on our recent rank promotions :lol: )
We will take 16 teams, total 64 players needed. We will not be taking reserves due to the nature of the tournament.
Teams will be paired randomly. Losing team will select one member as the "casualty". Those teams will then fall into a "tripples" bracket and face off in random pairs. Losers will fall into a "doubles" bracket" and ultimately a "singles" bracket. For those of you paying attention, this means lots of chances to score points even if you don't win the tournament. However the real bragging rights will go to the Army commander who is able to whip a team of cadets, cooks and privates into a victorious army.
To add another element of realism, each team will select one of the "historic battle maps" and the game elements (fog-of-war, cards, etc.). Each round will take place on the home battlefield's of one side, based on a random draw. In essence, officers must prepare their unit for battle at home or abroad on foreign soil in unfamiliar terrain.
Choices of Home Battlefield Are:
1) American Civil War 2) Battle for Austrailia 3) Battle of Actium 4) Berlin 1961 5) D-Day 6) Duck & Cover 7) Pearl Harbor 8) Waterloo 9) WWII Eastern Front 10) WWII Iwo Jima 11) WWII Western Front
Commanding officers, post team member names here (soldiers please post confirmations as well). Commanding officers please PM to me - do not post - your choice of battlefield, which can be deferred until the tournament roster is filled.
If a member of a team "deadbeats", the game will go on as though the soldier went AWOL to the disadvantage of the that person's team.
This is the opportunity to show which of the top officers of cc are truly worth of the ranks bestowed on them as leaders of armies, and which are mere bushwackers praying in dark circles on the green noobs.
Good luck.
Last edited by gdeangel on Thu May 01, 2008 2:27 pm, edited 11 times in total.
(U) denotes unconfirmed. Commanders, please ask your unconfirmed troops to post here indicating they are on board.
NOTE: If a brigade has less than 4 players at the time we hit 64 on the roster, the organizer reserves the right to randomly assign mercenaries to understaffed brigades. At any time prior, commanding officers may also designate specific mercenaries they want to have in their brigade.
Last edited by gdeangel on Wed Apr 16, 2008 9:30 pm, edited 18 times in total.
I'm in!!! Just a lowly Cadet needing some "senior leadership". What do I need to do? Anything. This would/will be my first tournament. Please excuse my ignorance.....
Thanks for your interest UVM. Try rounding up a team... when you play well against a senior officer or they give you some good feedback, mention the tournment. Finding troops is going to be easier than finding an officer to lead. As we get more interest, I'll start a running list of unattached singles as well, but I wouldn't wait for that at this early stage.
I've posted an announcement in the officer's mess and the officer's club, so we'll see whether anyone is going to show up to the party.
Last edited by gdeangel on Sat Feb 16, 2008 2:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I'm in...we cann't bring a team with us? random pairing?
If I can bring in a team it would be myself (hiddendragon), kronic69, and littlebrother2k7. We would still need a 4th...if it truely is random pairing then forget the players I just tryed to force in but allow me to play anyways=P
Excellent - Natewolfman & hiddendragon you are both in.
[Edited] To clear things up, Captain hiddendragon you can definitely bring your own army... only requirement is they be seargeants or lower in rank (but no new recruits). The team you mentioned you can certainly play with little brother2k7 (I'm not going to nit pick that he is SFC) but Ltnt. kronic69 would need to field his own army and cannot be on your team as a second ranking officer... for your third/fourth player you might want to hook up with UVReign whose looking for a team...
Obviously there is no rule against checking into the battle record of the people you will be fighting with shoulder to shoulder.
I will need to get confirms from Roadhawg, SkywardShadow, Alchemy70 and littlebrother2k7 as well. We would of course welcome Lieutenant kronic69 to field an army, so please pass this information along and let him know we'll try to pair him up with some grunt singles if he still wants to play.
Good luck!
Last edited by gdeangel on Sat Feb 16, 2008 10:56 pm, edited 3 times in total.
gdeangel wrote:Excellent - Natewolfman & hiddendragon you are both in.
To clear things up, hiddendragon you can definitely bring your own army... only requirement is they be seargeants or lower in rank (but no new recruits). The team you mentioned would be fine... four your fourth you might drop a PM to UVReign... obviously there is no rule against checking into the battle record of the people you will be fighting with shoulder to shoulder.
I will need to get confirms from Roadhawg, SkywardShadow, Alchemy70 and kronic69 and littlebrother2k7 as well.
Good luck!
alright ill tell them to post... they are all 3 corporal 1st classes i belive
Last edited by Natewolfman on Sat Feb 16, 2008 10:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Apparently The Truculent Alliance is the only clan where they think the NCO's are worthy to play with the officers... ? I see a lot of smack talk from the clans in the callouts... so where's the beef!
You still didn't answer the question...is it random pairing or can we bring mates with us....as to your question about this translucent alliance, at least they listen and work together which more then i can say about most commisioned officers...they're not bad partners, i have won with them as mates many times...