<table border="0" cellpadding="0" width="90%" bordercolorlight="#1B1B1B" bordercolordark="#000000" id="table1" style="border-collapse: collapse"> <tr> <td>

</td> </tr> <tr> <td>

7 January 2006 </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>

News & Information

</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>I'm back from my LoA...and there was much rejoicing... yet, I might miss some things this week, holla if I did.</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>The Semi-Finals of the Second CHL have been reduced to a single battle-though, not without it's fair share of controversy. GM Jac Cotelin and KPN Muz Ashen Keibatsu continue their battle with what may prove to be one of the best so far - and a nightmare for me :)</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>The ACCLive! tourney is running. Updated signups can be found here: http://www.darkjedibrotherhood.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=2224 and any questions can be forwarded to KP Kat Pridemore. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>ACC battle judgment notifications now go to the leadership of the fighters involved. A good thing I believe, helps with the tracking of activity - but it does mean more mail :)</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>The latest Clan comp that has begun is a LONG one, the** Sadow Dueling Competition so, faithful members of Naga Sadow...get on it! :P</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>ACC **Rules and Guidance has undergone some renovation. Due to some recent events, some clarification was in order, it will be version 2.1 - so when that heading is at the top of the rules section, then that is the current one. The parties required have it, but now we are just waiting for it to be put up</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>The "new" ACC History has been 'approved' by the GM and is on it's way to the folks who need to make sure it's gonna fly. Why did we need a 'new' history? Well, we actually didn't - it wasn't a 'must' in the grand scheme of things, but after some discussion, it became clear that things just didn't jive, fictionally. So, we (Corran and I) took Xizor's original history and fused it with the current history, along with some input from Jac, Firefox, Mairin, James and a couple of others to come up with something that (we believe) is more fitting to the 'actual' existence of the ACC. This will really only be 'cool' for those who take the ACC as a fictional part of their characters instead of just a DB activity. More to come as the situation develops.</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>With the New Year having arrived, it is time to dust off the Cooperative Competition. Some played in the Cleaning the Combat Master event, and while you may have had fun, you must admit that it wasn't all that great. Suffice it to say, I ran that comp to appease a traditional requirement of the ACC, i.e. running a Co-Op annually/semi-annually, but it was far from being my 'dream' event. The Derelict Code still does not have a start date, but I am shooting for 1 March - we'll have to see what the DB has planned. Yes, I know that seems far away - but considering the scope of the competition, I want everything to be perfect! Well, as close to perfect as I can get. Just to refresh you, this comp will cover 3 main aspects of ACC competition - flying, ground combat and a deathmatch. Each 'phase' will be completely autonomous (save the story line) so you only need to participate in what suits you. Currently the participation breakdown looks like this: 1st-3rd winners for each phase (teams); 1st-3rd winners overall (teams), 1st-3rd winners for each phase (individual), 1st-3rd winners overall (individual). Effectively, teams can take wins for each phase as well as the overall, but there will also be 'individual' awards for best posts in each phase and overall - for example, a writer can take 1st with his/her team in each of the three phases, 1st as an individual in each of the phases, 1st with a team overall and 1st individually overall - that's a lot of kudos :) As with the lottery - you'll have to play to win, so, if you're still an INI - better get on your qualification! - more details to come.</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>For those who aren't aware - two staff changes have been made in the ACC. First, due to her ability, JH Siyavash Kaida **has been selected for the position of ACC Trainer. Unfortunately, she has encountered some computer issues as of late and will be unavailable for a time. Nevertheless, we welcome her aboard. Secondly, as of just a day ago (or so) **DJK Famosus Aspicio has been hired on as an ACCLive! Judge, we welcome him as well and hope this is the beginning of a great future in the ACC for both of them.</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Finally - a HUGE thanks goes out to the ACC Staff for not burning the place down while I was gone, especially to Corran, the DCM who seemed to usher a flawless couple of weeks. Thanks guys!!</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>

Reminders

</td> </tr> <tr> <td>- CS's If you're 'updating' a CS with things that got "approved" by a former CM - don't be surprised if it gets declined. "Old approved items", for example, are clearly tallied on the forum - what you see there is ALL that was approved by former CM's (they were asked repeatedly for updates, I've washed my hands of it). Bottom line? I don't go by what you "tell me" another CM approved. If there is no proof of approval from a former CM (which I would gladly honor), didn't come through me or Corran, contradicts any policy changes or is just basically a pile of sh*t - it's going to be declined. The CM and DCM are the only two that are approving declining CS's, currently. We are on the same page with 99.9% of it and it will stay that way until rebirth. _</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>- Echani as a fighting style has been taken up by the Commander of the Guard where it's 'approval' is concerned. The CM/DCM will no longer process approvals or declinations for this style, rather, should you wish to be approved for its use - please seek the counsel of the CoG.</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>- The** Force Pool System** has been released - combatants with battles that started on or after the 1st of Nov should see an OOC in their intros. You can find the FP System information here.</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>- Concerning time-outs: If you know you're going to be LoA, you need to "officially" request a battle extension, even if I know you're going to be gone. You MUST mail the CM, DCM and your opponent with the request BEFORE your battle times out. If your opponent says "no"... tough luck, if you "forget" to send your request in time, to those mentioned... tough luck. "Acts of God" and unavoidable instances will be considered - but they will not replace poor planning on your part.</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>- To have a competition 'set up' through the ACC, the coordinators need to mail the CM or the DCM. Once all the specifics of the competition have been worked out, the CM or DCM will submit the competition FOR YOU! This is to cut down on the last-minute "hey, remember that competition I told you about 5 months ago and haven't brought up with you since... yea, well... it's starting tomorrow..." stuff. This way, we can track your competitions and make sure they get set up properly and in a timely manner - "forgetting" about it becomes our fault, not yours. _</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>

Tip Of The Week

</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Posting First or Second</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>Ask a lot of active ACC folks about which they prefer and you'll get a lot of different answers - even in the case of ACCLive! The reality of it, apart from ACCLive! is that, it shouldn't matter. Of course you can have a preference, but your ability shouldn't be dictated by posting first or posting second. In fact, I regularly see people, who hate posting first, failing to challenge anyone because of that fear, IRC and the MB's are a good example. You'll note a lot of 'challenge me' subjects and offers, but I submit that if they really wanted a battle - they'd submit challenges themselves, so I gotta chalk it up to the fear of posting first. Why? Dunno. Some get skittish with the idea that they have to basically layout the flow of the battle and their skill may not give them the confidence to do so...so, how do you fix it? Training, perhaps or the understanding that it actually doesn't matter. Those who like to post first, or actually prefer it are no different, really. Case in point: I was just a part of a discussion with an ACC member who seemed to address the notion that, after the first post, things like terrain and environment can't be addressed anymore - at least not like in a first post - how untrue! Basically, a "good" ACC post will always follow the same basic formula, whether posted first or second (and not necessarily in this specific order); React, Establish; Formulate and Execute - with "Wait" being added if that is commensurate with the individual's style. No matter who they are, or if they know it or not, great combatants use these things to write their posts. React - Simply covering what happened in a previous post, be it damage, an intro, a reflection of events, has the environment changed?...whatever. Establish - Where are you now? What are the immediate conditions of yourself, your terrain and/or your opponent. Is the previous sequence still in progress, can you counter attack or are you on the defensive? Formulate - What's the next course of action? Are you planning and contriving or are you simply bent on your skill which triggers an instinctive process whereby 'formulating' a plan is simply not noticed? Are you still dealing with a sequence of events? Execute - get on with it! fulfill the intent of the post, fight, escape or evade, deal damage - reflect, if need be, the apex of the post can be here if it fits. "Wait" is for those who like to play the 'fight and stop' game which has each post as a series of "I hit you, now I'm gonna wait to see what you do..." sequences. I'm not a fan of those - it's too cliché, almost like the 10 guys surrounding the fighter, yet they all attack one by one...kinda unlikely. Nevertheless, it's the style of some and I won't knock that because of a personal preference. A lot can be said for the effect of it and the drama it can cause, which is good sometimes - just not when over-done. Apart from that, the "Execute" idea can be the end of a post, you can 'end' your post in the middle of a sequence - the middle of a punch, having just delivered a kick - whatever. Leave your opponent to address it. More often than not - MOST combatants miss it, and totally forget to address things that happen in that manner - which gives you an upper hand in the continuity realm. Never forget that there is a severe element of overall strategy in an ACC battle, good combatants know this. </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>ACCLive! is a different beast. The 'trick' has been revealed a little bit here and there - but some are quite aware: there is an advantage to posting second. I figured, if you don't know, then I'll just let the dire cat out of the bag: After a combatant posts second, they can start on their deathpost because they have already established the beginning of the end. Thus, they thwart the time issue by essentially gaining an extra 5 minutes...it's an unavoidable 'glitch' in the game, but one that just makes it part of the game. However, there are combatants who play in Live! that also don't mind - they are good enough to still win even if they go first, which makes their wins a little more respected because they did it at a disadvantage. I submit that the ACCLive! Judges handle it the best they can - often giving the 'challenger' the choice to go first or second. Of course, most challengers will pick 2nd, which simply means that fighters should just do more challenging, hehe. In the end though, the skill of the writer is the master, I guess.</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> <table border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" width="90%" bordercolorlight="#1B1B1B" bordercolordark="#000000" id="table2"> <tr> <td>Have a great weekend! Until next time...</td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>DA Dalthid</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Combat Master</td> </tr> </table> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td>

</td> </tr> </table>