>Could a matchup count here and also be part of another tourney? Say
>AATorpedo and I are matched up to play in March Madness (!!!) and we
>think we might as well kill two birds with one stone. Would that be
>possible?

This is not an option for administrative reasons. I get cc'd all gamestarts
that are marked as tourney games which cuts down on me needing to
chase people around for their game numbers etc. If we started using
CL games as other tourney games it will be the same old story from when
I first started running the tourney office. People forgeting to send me
game numbers, not notifying me of game finishes etc. It will just be
a headache to deal with and I am not going to keep track of which game
belongs to which tourney and the like, no sir-ree bob.

>I'll have to see this in action, but I think it may be hard to get people to
>take on the Allies against low (17) bids. What is the plan if too many
>people want to bid low and there are no takers? Maybe we just wind up
>moving toward the middle of the bid range.

I see no big problem. Just find a guy who has already played that particular
theatre game (eg - a European theatre, as allies) and say: "hey, how about
another CL game in the so and so theatre that you have already completed,
I will bid 17 as the axis". The game will only count for you (in the CL) and
will just be a regular game for him.

>It also seems that the relative difference in ranking won't matter much
>there. If a 4 star general plays his Axis game with a 17 bid against a
>rookie, he'll get 3.25 for the win. I don't know if it would work...
>To win most tourneys requires playing several high caliber players along
>the way and I'd like so see this impressive concept ensure that the eventual
>champ does not ascend to the throne on a few 3.25 games against vastly
>inferior competition.

I think the rating rule will help somewhat. (We tried to come up with a fair
bonus point system based on ratings but whatever we tried usually penalized
the high ranks). I would say that it is virtually impossible to come up with
a way to do it. If you could then it would be hopelessly complicated and hard
to implement.

We will see what happens in the first season. If I remember correctly when
developing the ITSl we were considering implementing a "ratings cap" on
teams to prevent any "dream teams" developing. So far the ITSL has been
very competitive.

Anyway time will tell. I surmise that you will find that occassionally a guy will
be the champ from bottom feeding but often they will not. We will see.

> To win most tourneys requires playing several high caliber players along
> the way.

I would like to point out that in regular tourneys the winner could very well
play the allies in every game they play (it has happened) or they come up
against a high calibre opponent and beat them in 3 rounds because their dice
sucked (that happens too). A regular tourney too can be won in not so
glorious circumstances. Overall the League will be a tough ask. maybe
tougher to win than a regular tourney.

The Hall of Fame will also show everyone the calibre of each years champion
as I will post both the champs points and sum rating. Something you never
really know about a champ in a regular tourney is how they went about it (
unless you check thru his games yourself). In the league a players accomp-
lishments will be on view for all to see.

rgds,
RedDwarf