GS 2.1 win/loss records--help up collect the data!

[Diplomaticus]

Folks,

I appeal to all CEAW GS players who have played or are still playing version 2.1 (beta, soon to be released officially) to please post a record of their games played. We are trying to compile data so we can get a sense of how game balance is working out.

TYIA

--Diplomaticus

[Diplomaticus]

I'll get it started.

Diplomaticus (Allies) v Morris (Axis): Allied Strategic Victory.
Diplomaticus (Allies) v SuperMax (Axis): Allied Minor Victory.
Diplomaticus (Allies) v Zechi (Axis): Allied Minor Victory.
Diplomaticus (Allies) v Pion Urpo (Axis): still in play, but probable Axis Minor Victory.
Diplomaticus (Axis) v Joachim (Allies): still in play, but probable Allied Strategic Victory.
Diplomaticus (Axis) v Tor (Allies): still in play, too early to tell.

[Edit: All 6 of these games began as RC11 and were updated as patches became available]

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Remember to only collect games started with the latest version and not earlier GS v2.1 versions. With the latest version I mean GS v2.1 RC11 or later. That version was the latest where we made a deliberate game balance tweak. All newer versions have been bug fixes only.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

I also think we need to collect the player strength of each side when reporting. We should at least divide the players into the following 3 categories:
1. Recruit
2. Veteran
3. Elite

E. g. if an elite Allied player meets an veteran Axis player then I would say a major or strategic Allied victory is what we can expect.

If a veteran Allied player meets an elite Axis player and wins then maybe we could discuss the game balance. Usually the player of the highest category should win regardless of side. If both are of the same category THEN the result is the most important.

I think we have a pretty good idea who the elite players are. Most players will be placed in the veteran group. Veteran players are the average strength players. The recruit group is for players quite new to GS v2.1.

[Diplomaticus]

I also think we need to collect the player strength of each side when reporting. We should at least divide the players into the following 3 categories:
1. Recruit
2. Veteran
3. Elite

E. g. if an elite Allied player meets an veteran Axis player then I would say a major or strategic Allied victory is what we can expect.

If a veteran Allied player meets an elite Axis player and wins then maybe we could discuss the game balance. Usually the player of the highest category should win regardless of side. If both are of the same category THEN the result is the most important.

I think we have a pretty good idea who the elite players are. Most players will be placed in the veteran group. Veteran players are the average strength players. The recruit group is for players quite new to GS v2.1.

This is a good idea. We might see some interesting patterns when the data starts coming in. I could imagine, for instance, that there might be a very big jump in Axis success rates when the Axis player is 'Veteran' level. In other words, I would guess that between two opponents who are beginners, Axis would do much worse as compared to two Veteran players.

[joerock22]

Good, I was hoping for this sort of analysis. Unfortunately I can only report one finished game at RC11 or later:

Joe (Axis) v. Ronnie (Allies) - Axis ultimate victory

I know, I'm slow.

[Peter Stauffenberg]

Ronnie is no walkover and Joe is an elite player. Joe played as the Axis and won an ultimate victory. Doesn't that tell us something about the Axis having a fair chance of winning?

[Cybvep]

Pion Urpo played the Axis and kicked my ass 2-3 times. That was before the latest Soviet tech change, though. I would rate him as 1 level above me, i.e. if I'm a Veteran, then he is Veteran+ or Elite.

I played 3 games with Schurri, won 2, lost 1. IIRC 1-2 games were before the Soviet tech change. I was playing the Axis in all cases. I think that are our skill levels are comparable.

I think that I played 1 game with Tim Taylor and I won (the Axis surrendered in 1942). I would rate him as 1 level below me. His opening in 1939-1940 was good, but his Barbarossa was very bad.

[Diplomaticus]

Pion Urpo played the Axis and kicked my ass 2-3 times. That was before the latest Soviet tech change, though. I would rate him as 1 level above me, i.e. if I'm a Veteran, then he is Veteran+ or Elite.

I agree that Pion is very good at playing Axis. I think he could give lessons on what Borger's been talking about: the crucial balancing act for Axis between East and West.

[Cybvep]

Pion Urpo played the Axis and kicked my ass 2-3 times. That was before the latest Soviet tech change, though. I would rate him as 1 level above me, i.e. if I'm a Veteran, then he is Veteran+ or Elite.

I agree that Pion is very good at playing Axis. I think he could give lessons on what Borger's been talking about: the crucial balancing act for Axis between East and West.

This guy is a killing machine - he always attacks with high-tech, high-EXP ARMs and MECHs supported by TACs and obliterate everything in his path in 1941-1943. I call this tactics "guaranteed attacks" - he rarely makes any unnecessary moves and attacks only when odds are clearly in his favour, which simply destroys the Soviets. Then he moves good units west and you can guess what happens .

[rkr1958]

Joe (Axis) v. Ronnie (Allies) - Axis ultimate victory

Ronnie (axis) vs Duane (allies) - Axis ultimate victory.

Ronnie (axis) vs Leonard (allies) - Draw.

I also think we need to collect the player strength of each side when reporting. We should at least divide the players into the following 3 categories:
1. Recruit
2. Veteran
3. Elite

No to offend anyone but for the four players involved in these 3 games I would say:

Joe (Elite), Duane (Recruit - a very good wargamer who's just learning GS and will soon be a Veteran), Leonard (Veteran) and me (Veteran).

If others will make such assessments for the games reported, and to be reported, I will collect, maintain, organize and display the statistics.

[rkr1958]

I'll get it started.

Diplomaticus (Allies) v Morris (Axis): Allied Strategic Victory.
Diplomaticus (Allies) v SuperMax (Axis): Allied Minor Victory.
Diplomaticus (Allies) v Zechi (Axis): Allied Minor Victory.
Diplomaticus (Allies) v Pion Urpo (Axis): still in play, but probable Axis Minor Victory.
Diplomaticus (Axis) v Joachim (Allies): still in play, but probable Allied Strategic Victory.
Diplomaticus (Axis) v Tor (Allies): still in play, too early to tell.

[Edit: All 6 of these games began as RC11 and were updated as patches became available]

OK, not to offend again, but I would rate Morris and Max as elite. And Diplomaticus, since you won against both Morris and Max, I would also place you in the elite category. That leaves Zechi, Pion Urpo, Joachim and Tor. How do you rate yourself (Veteran or Elite)?.

[Diplomaticus]

We need a lot more data if we want to come up with a meaningful picture.

Maybe some players are reluctant to post publicly their win/loss records? If somebody would send me the list of our beta team, I would volunteer to send PM's to everybody, asking them to submit their results for RC-11 games and later. Do you think that's a good idea?

[rkr1958]

We need a lot more data if we want to come up with a meaningful picture.

Maybe some players are reluctant to post publicly their win/loss records? If somebody would send me the list of our beta team, I would volunteer to send PM's to everybody, asking them to submit their results for RC-11 games and later. Do you think that's a good idea?

Sure. I like this idea; but I think a less intrusive approach might be for us to ask folks to PM their results to you, whether or not one or both players wish to remain anonymous and then you could post them in this thread. For example: axis (Veteran) versus allied (Recruit) - Strategic axis victory. Though, if players don't mind being identified then you could post by their name. I could then collect, organize and post the results. Unless, you would like to take on thyat job, which would be more than fine with me and one less thing for me to do.

[Diplomaticus]

I would be happy to take the job on. I would suggest, though, that sending PM's may be more effective in actually getting people to submit their results. I promise to be diplomatic and polite. I don't think being intrusive is really an issue. It's just an email, after all, and it's only sent to members of the beta team who, presumably, signed on as part of a commitment to help us develop the game. This is part of that effort. What do you think?

[JimR]

Sure, beta testers are fair game to receive an e-mail asking them to report 2.1 win/loss results. After all, we signed up to report on our experiences, and have had the opportunity to help shape CEAW 2.1 as it develops.

[Schnurri]

I'm happy to report my results but haven't kept a tally so it will have to be future and current games.

[rkr1958]

I would be happy to take the job on. I would suggest, though, that sending PM's may be more effective in actually getting people to submit their results. I promise to be diplomatic and polite. I don't think being intrusive is really an issue. It's just an email, after all, and it's only sent to members of the beta team who, presumably, signed on as part of a commitment to help us develop the game. This is part of that effort. What do you think?

You're hired! The pay's lousy but the benefits are great.

And, as I see it, it's yours to run; however you see fit.

[Diplomaticus]

I've received private messages from a couple of Beta testers providing their win/loss records playing GS 2.1. Thank you!

There are still many of you I'd like to hear from. To repeat, we're trying to gather stats on win/loss for 2.1 (games starting version RC11 and later only, please). We need to know whether Axis or Allies won, and what the victory level was. If possible, please specify the relative experience level of each player (recruit, veteran, elite). If you send this info to me as a PM we will keep all results anonymous.

TYIA

--Diplomaticus

[Diplomaticus]

Update:

Over the past several weeks, I've been getting private messages from a number of you 2.1 players out there (beta team). I haven't had time yet to collate those numbers, but I hope to do so soon. Please keep sending in your results--and again I remind you that we're looking for only version 2.1, RC11 or later versions.

TYIA