Chad Harrison Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 Quick question: Are there any plans to bring back a type of QB 'Combined Arms' limit similar to CMx1 games? For those who dont know what that is, it was a QB force composition setting that allowed the payer to purchase infantry, support, vehicles, armor and artillery but set maximum limits to each category. It was a nice balance between 'Infantry Only' and 'Armor Only'. As it stands in CM:BN right now, your choices are 'Infantry Only', 'Armor Only' and 'Mix'. The issue though is that 'Mix' allows you to spend your points however you like: ie. a force of all MG42's, or a force of all M7 Priests or a force of all jeeps if you like. For PBEM this could be addressed with a pretty extensive, and specific, House Rule. For AI play, theres no such option. And I have found that the AI is very likely to always take mech heavy force compositions when allowed too (ie. the 'Mix' setting). So, is there any plans to bring back this type of 'Combined Arms' QB force composition control? Obviously it may be a way down the road if it is, but I wanted to see if it was intentionally left out, or if it was too much to code at this point. Would like to see it come back for both PBEM and AI play. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 Plus one!!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humbug Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 Don't have much to add, I agree 100%. I've also really missed the combined arms option. It would definately be my most used option if it was added. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinnart Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Agree. It creates a more balanced force IMO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpabrams Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 I am happy with the "mix" command. If you haven't figured out how to stop the M7 or jeep assault by now you have bigger problems. What I hate is the limitation on points, tiny, small, medium etc. Suppose I want a slightly larger than small assault which is 1900 points and change but less than a medium assault which is less 3000 points and change? Remember the old scale in CMx1? At least you can still "buy" gear. Have you tried a CMSF QB? It's total BS. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted April 10, 2012 Author Share Posted April 10, 2012 I am happy with the "mix" command. If you haven't figured out how to stop the M7 or jeep assault by now you have bigger problems. My point is not balance for the sake of winning or losing like some mass-marketed RTS game. My point is the force composition balance that came with the 'Combined Arms' setting. A supported infantry force - instead of a supported mech heavy force. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirocco Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 In my limited QB experience I've been disappointed with Mix. As stated it always seems to come out armour heavy. Would really improve QB's to re-add this option. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExurbanKevin Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 In my limited QB experience I've been disappointed with Mix. As stated it always seems to come out armour heavy. Would really improve QB's to re-add this option. And the reverse seems to be true on offence. I pick a balanced mix of armor, infantry and artillery, and the AI goes with 88's backed up with MG42 nests and mortars with nary an infantryman in sight. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 Regarding the points between battle sizes: you can plus up, or minus down, in percentages for each side. Not perfect, but +50% is a bit more than tiny. Ken 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted April 10, 2012 Share Posted April 10, 2012 You can only adjust the points for one side: the attacker. I don't know why they didn't do the same for both sides. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted April 11, 2012 Share Posted April 11, 2012 My solution is simple: Take a lot of points but don't necessarily use all of them. That way, I can set up a QB of any composition I want. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bradley Dick Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 I wish they would take some of the features they've added to CMx2 since Beyond Normandy and patch them into CM:SF 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixxkiller Posted April 12, 2012 Share Posted April 12, 2012 I wish they would take some of the features they've added to CMx2 since Beyond Normandy and patch them into CM:SF I agree. I still loved my time with CMSF more than any WWII setting. I mean I never thought I would say this, but it surpassed CMBO for me in terms of wow factor. I mean never say never as far as making it backwards compatible. BFC has been surprising us a lot lately. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted April 16, 2012 Author Share Posted April 16, 2012 BFC, any comment? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.