Jump to content

QB points preference


Recommended Posts

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by phil stanbridge:

What do people prefer?

I can't make up my mind if I prefer the small QB's or the 1000+ pointers..

<hr></blockquote>

Actually 1000 points is small for my taste.

I generally play 1250 - 1500 as a minimum. While I like bigger ones, I will likely choose a designed scenario instead of a quickbattle.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>

Do people prefer playing against another human opponent or the computer?

<hr></blockquote>

That are two different games, not a variant of one game, so the question makes few sense :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by phil stanbridge:

Redwolf, I don't understand. Do people prefer playing QB's against the AI, or against another bod?<hr></blockquote>

They have fun aginst the AI or against a human, or both. If both, they won't stop one or another, that was my point. It is like if you like eating icecream and you like drinking Coke, you won't stop one of them for the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think each battle size is fun in its own way. For instance, big battles of 2000 or more are neat cause you can start to coordinate attacks with more degree of difficulty which means it's more of a challenge. It can also mean success on the battlefield for well-coordinated plans using many pieces of armor.

The smaller battles of 1250 or less are cool because each armor piece becomes so important and the challenge lies much more in getting as much production out of the unit as possible before it gets killed. Extra effort seems to be put in to not exposing it to dangerous situations.

In a 3000 pt battle, you might risk the piece to take an objective or gain a major advantage somehow. In the small battles, the risk becomes much, much higher and the payoff needs to be much higher to take those risks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my personal favorite size is 2000 pts. its big enough to have two 'large' forces of a couple platoons with some tanks; buts its not soo big that it takes you 30 minutes to plan a single turn.

i always play QB against another person. i find playing the AI a bad experience because you develop tactics that dont work against someone who doesnt rush you in every situtaion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never played human opponent below 1500p. Preference 2000-5000, the bigger games leave less margin for luck and the better guy usually wins, you can think infantry companies and tank platoons, which I think give more realistic touch, and you get to see that the general plan truly counts. Will need a new machine for CMBB, whatever the wife says. Want to see them doodads on 9km map, and regiments!!! Half a day for one turn, who cares...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is very interesting!

To throw something else in, when/if you play 3000 pointers how many turns do you have? I would imagine you'd have to have the maximum (60) in order to fully justify the point size. I know you could do it with less, but I can't imagine the time you'd spend plotting the battle.

I've never played TCP with anything above 800 points, and even then I've only done that once. I normally do 300-500 point M/E QB's. These are really challenging I find. A platoon and perhaps one or two afv's. You really need to plan those moves. I've never taken so much care of that 81mm mortar before.. smile.gif I really want to try something larger now - I need to find an opponent.

I have played larger QB's v the AI and these are less intimidating I find, although still reasonably challenging, but boy are they fun. They also take less time to play which is the bonus IMHO.

Finally, what is the biggest QB anyone here has tried? If I remember, I think mine has been around the 8000 point?? Is that possible I ask myself now ;)

WOOT! I've just tried the maximum point size, 22500! I did automatic setup and it took me more than a minute just to scroll across the map and the units. Now that is a challenge! Anyone tried one? I don't dare!

[ 12-21-2001: Message edited by: phil stanbridge ]</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by phil stanbridge:

This is very interesting!

To throw something else in, when/if you play 3000 pointers how many turns do you have? I would imagine you'd have to have the maximum (60) in order to fully justify the point size. I know you could do it with less, but I can't imagine the time you'd spend plotting the battle.

<hr></blockquote>

I prefer around 27 for MEs and 29 for attacks. I generally do not connect the number of turns with point sizes. And the reason is that a very long battle with so many units will end up with fragmentation of the game, several games in one.

That may be desireable, but usually I want to combine all arms into a large effort.

The whole point about a military game is to learn and explore military principles, and that means striking with the best concentration. If the game has too many turns, that will fall apart.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>

Finally, what is the biggest QB anyone here has tried? If I remember, I think mine has been around the 8000 point?? Is that possible I ask myself now ;)

WOOT! I've just tried the maximum point size, 22500! I did automatic setup and it took me more than a minute just to scroll across the map and the units. Now that is a challenge! Anyone tried one? I don't dare!

<hr></blockquote>

The limit is 255 or 256 units per side, not a point limit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by phil stanbridge:

So you can only have 255 or 256 units per side? So how does 22500 points fit into that? Surely you would be left with a lot of points if you had to go for an infantry heavy game?

<hr></blockquote>

You misunderstand, there is no points to miss since there is no point limit. There is only the number of units limit. So you can get much more points when choosing elite King Tigers than conscript LMGs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm finding now that I prefer 3000 point QB MEs

when playing PBEM oppenents. Specifically with combined arms, med-heavy trees and a large map. With the large map it is necessary to have at least 35 turns. You really want to give both players a chance to manuever, attrit or whatever they need to do to win.

3000 pts w/ large map is very interesting because it is generally difficult to rush and hold all VLs as players will do in smaller QBs. What ends up happening is fights for individual VLs take place seperately and sometimes simultaneously. So if you win one fight, you can shift some forces to help take/hold another VL. Or with so many VLs to go around, simply hold the ones you can and attrit the enemy. (remember that if you lose more units than it is worth to take or hold a VL then the victory points will not swing in your favor) :eek:

These make for the most fun QB pbems and offer plenty of variety with forces / terrain. One interesting thing to note is that with 3000 point combined arms ME, Axis has only 600 armor points to Allies 900. This can create a mismatch if the German player does not buy good support HTs and ACs.

Just my $0.02 tongue.gif

-SS

[ 12-21-2001: Message edited by: Sarge Saunders ]

[ 12-21-2001: Message edited by: Sarge Saunders ]

[ 12-21-2001: Message edited by: Sarge Saunders ]</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by phil stanbridge:

To throw something else in, when/if you play 3000 pointers how many turns do you have? I would imagine you'd have to have the maximum (60) in order to fully justify the point size. I know you could do it with less, but I can't imagine the time you'd spend plotting the battle.<hr></blockquote>

That's what I thought before I played them, but after playing quite a few I've decided that 35 turns is best for 3000 pts. Anything more than that is pointless as the battle is over by then anyway.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Finally, what is the biggest QB anyone here has tried? If I remember, I think mine has been around the 8000 point?? Is that possible I ask myself now ;) <hr></blockquote>

No, 5000 is the largest QB you can do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by redwolf hates artillery:

I prefer around 27 for MEs and 29 for attacks. I generally do not connect the number of turns with point sizes. And the reason is that a very long battle with so many units will end up with fragmentation of the game, several games in one.

That may be desireable, but usually I want to combine all arms into a large effort.

The whole point about a military game is to learn and explore military principles, and that means striking with the best concentration. If the game has too many turns, that will fall apart.

<hr></blockquote>

What about fun? There is a difference between scales, and if one doesn't feel comfortable at the larger scales then stick to company by all means. But I love seeing how those superficially separate smaller encounters really affect each other, and it all works in beautifully in CM. Smaller games tend to be all against all, but in bigger games you can and must a find a way to create local superiority, in every possible action. If you can't, and stick to one on one or worse, you've lost. I thing bigger games leave more room for imagination and variation, and you really have to have a grasp of the "system", ie how various troops, formations and landscape interact.

The number of turns depends on the speed of your units, 40 turns for 3000p armoured is more than enough, but similar points infantry heavy obviously needs more time. 30 turns is fine for smaller (1500) battles, but I prefer not to go under that. In ME's the battles are usually decided before time runs out, which is just as it should be. In attack/defend time has a much more crucial role, more time gives better odds for the attacker. Only one time I've beaten back the attacker, but many times I've slowed him down enough to contest the flags and/or force him to do something foolish in the last minutes, and get a draw.

[ 12-22-2001: Message edited by: Kallimakhos ]

[ 12-22-2001: Message edited by: Kallimakhos ]</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

..So people reckon 35-40 turns is enough to represent a large battle with 3000 points?

Interesting point #2. I have played several huge scenarios, and have never gone for anything less than 50 turns. Admittedly, after around 40, normally the battle is over and I'm mopping up - but it does depend on quite a few things. Primarily, that I'm able to beat the opponent. Sometimes that is a struggle. I just can't imagine a QB against a person with 3000 points or above. I think I'm going to have to try it out. Anyone game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by phil stanbridge:

Vanir, Are you sure about that? smile.gif

You can choose 5000 points, but if you increase the advantage by say 100% you just wait and see what happens.<hr></blockquote>

Boot up the game and see if you can select more that 5000 pts for a QB.

Of course in any attack/defend game the attacker gets more points than that. That goes without saying. It's still a 5000 pt game because that's the setting you select.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...