QB reinforcements

[SlowMotion]

Since there is now a thread about adding Combined Arms type to QBs, I thought I'd add my feature request as well. I'd like to have an option in QBs that players could have 1 or 2 reinforcements. The generating player decides how many.

Then additionally you could select

-the turns when reinforcements arrive (+ some randomness so you can't know the exact moment when playing)

-how many percents of your units arrive as reinforcements - same for both players. Like

In setup phase: 60%

Reinforcement1: 20%

Reinforcement2: 20%

And maybe the final option:

whether reinforcement units are bought by player or computer.

I think this would add a new random element because you wouldn't know exactly when the new units arrive and if bought by computer, what kind of units there will be.

What do you think?

[ASL Veteran]

I'm not sure what the utility of this feature would be for QBs since the player is using points to hand pick his own force to his desired specifications. In a scenario reinforcements make sense for a variety of reasons, for example if the scenario is historical then maybe that's what happened in the real battle. In a fictional battle perhaps the scenario designer is attempting to create some sort of outcome or specific set of circumstances by using reinforcements.

For a QB I'm just not seeing the usefulness. You buy your own force to your preferred specifications and then you are going to want the computer to randomly withhold some of that hand picked force until some randomly determined later time? What would that accomplish other than to throw off the balance of the match? What if the computer chooses to withhold something important? If you are choosing what gets withheld yourself then there isn't much of a point to that either. If you want to keep those forces out of combat then you can just hide them behind a hill or something and not use them. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me for a QB because it just doesn't seem to fit what a QB is typically all about or why a QB is typically played. That's just my opinion though. I have to admit that this request confuses me. :confused:

There would be technical limitations as well since reinforcements are placed on the map in the editor before the battle begins. In other words, you would have to have a way to deploy them on map in order for the reinforcements to disappear after the start of the battle. There would be no way to have some sort of randomly generated location where reinforcements appear. That's just not the way it works in CMx2.

[SlowMotion]

Well, I don't know why you play QBs, but for me the reasons are:

- ability to buy your own units

- guarantee that your opponent doesn't know your units - like if he has played the scenario before

In my idea reinforcement units could be hand picked, but they could also be computer picked. You could mix different purchase ways in same QB.

Not getting all units in the beginning would accomplish exactly the same thing as in scenarios: you have to play differently. Just like scenario designers can use reinforcements to adjust the pace of the battle. If a small number of units is on map in the beginning you could have recon phase. And then say 15 minutes later you get more. Now in QBs (especially in meeting engagements) there's the initial rush when you try to get good fighting positions and often then the battle is locked in these positions during later turns. This depends on the map, but reinforcements could lessen this problem.

[Michael Emrys]

If a small number of units is on map in the beginning you could have recon phase. And then say 15 minutes later you get more. Now in QBs (especially in meeting engagements) there's the initial rush when you try to get good fighting positions and often then the battle is locked in these positions during later turns. This depends on the map, but reinforcements could lessen this problem.

That's a point that interests me. I like the idea of an advance force entering the map early to do recon, and then the main body arriving a little later. Of course it is possible in the existing arrangement to divide your on-map forces, sending a recon force forward while the main body waits. But I sort of like the arrival of the main body to be a little random and outside the player's control.

Michael

[SlowMotion]

Also, currently when you know there won't be reinforcements you can take more risks. Once you have cleared one part of the map you can ignore that area. Remaining enemy units are else where. But if reinforcements were possible, they could arrive from some corner of the map that you have already once secured. More surprises - just like in scenarios.

[ASL Veteran]

Also, currently when you know there won't be reinforcements you can take more risks. Once you have cleared one part of the map you can ignore that area. Remaining enemy units are else where. But if reinforcements were possible, they could arrive from some corner of the map that you have already once secured. More surprises - just like in scenarios.

That's great in theory, but you typically want reinforcements to be placed in a location that you are fairly certain will not be in the LOS of the enemy as soon as the reinforcements appear. If you have reinforcements appear in the middle of the enemy or within their LOS then a massacre can take place. Either way, neither player would be happy with it.

It sounds to me like this is the 'weak sister to a scenario' approach to Quick Battles as mentioned by MikeyD in another thread . I can't imagine this feature being used in competitive QBs. In general, when someone is going into battle they are going to want all their assets right from the beginning because generally speaking the player wants to win the fight. In a scenario the amount of force the player has to command is specified by the scenario designer. The player who plays the scenario has no choice in the matter since they have no input on either the size, composition, or timing of the forces they command. In a scenario the force limitation for the player is being imposed by a third party - the designer.

With a QB the player himself is in full control over the composition of the force they have to command. By definition the player would be consciously choosing to withhold forces they purchased until a later stage in the battle. This then means that the player is choosing to fight with a smaller initial force than would otherwise be possible and so is going into the battle with less force than they otherwise could. In other words, the player isn't fighting the battle to win but rather to play within the confines of a self designed narrative. Certainly, I'm sure that you would still want to win the battle - I'm not implying that - I guess what I'm saying is that you want to win the battle within the confines of the self created narrative as opposed to just fighting the battle for the sake of winning it. Regardless of whether the player chooses the force or if he lets the computer purchase the force the player is still selecting the number of points that they are going to spend and they will set some sort of parameters for what is purchased. So rather than simply fighting a QB this feature would let the player impose a self chosen narrative on the battle.

It's an interesting way to enjoy the game. Regardless though, there would be technical issues as I pointed out above. The scenario designer places all forces on the map in the editor and then assigns the reinforcement groups and times of arrival. In the editor you can see all the forces on the map at once - reinforcements included. When you start the battle in order to play it, the game simply makes the reinforcements invisible so you can't see them until their time of arrival. You, as the QB player, would have to have a means by which you could designate reinforcement groups and place those forces on the map (including outside of your designated set up zones) and still have them vanish when the battle starts. This can't be done in the deployment phase of a battle. It currently has to be done in the editor. The player himself would also be placing the reinforcements onto the map just before the battle and probably setting their time of arrival as well. I doubt too many players would want them to arrive at some randomly determined time - you might not see your reinforcements until there was only five minutes left . So in other words there wouldn't be very much of a surprise factor for the player placing the reinforcements. It would be a case of 'I'm going to place these guys here and have them appear on map at such and such time' then during the battle 'wow, there they are - exactly where I placed them a few minutes ago'. There could be a surprise factor for your opponent, but generally speaking having friendly forces beaming into the middle of the enemy is going to be something frowned upon by your opponent.

With a scenario, since the designer has placed the reinforcements you may or may not know reinforcements are arriving depending upon what is in the briefing. Even if you know you are getting reinforcements and where they will generally appear, you wouldn't know precisely how the reinforcements are arranged until they appear - unless you have gone into the editor and looked or maybe played the scenario before or something. There would be none of that uncertainty factor if the player placed the reinforcements himself just before the start of the Quick Battle.

[SlowMotion]

That's great in theory, but you typically want reinforcements to be placed in a location that you are fairly certain will not be in the LOS of the enemy as soon as the reinforcements appear. If you have reinforcements appear in the middle of the enemy or within their LOS then a massacre can take place. Either way, neither player would be happy with it.

Reinforcement arrival locations could be in the back part of the map. Either automatically calculated or placed there by map creator - just like he has to define movement of AI groups, if the map is supposed to be played against the AI. Not as flexible as scenarios, but better than no reinforcements at all.

It sounds to me like this is the 'weak sister to a scenario' approach to Quick Battles as mentioned by MikeyD in another thread . I can't imagine this feature being used in competitive QBs. In general, when someone is going into battle they are going to want all their assets right from the beginning because generally speaking the player wants to win the fight.

Then why are scenarios used in tournaments and ladder games?

In a scenario the amount of force the player has to command is specified by the scenario designer. The player who plays the scenario has no choice in the matter since they have no input on either the size, composition, or timing of the forces they command. In a scenario the force limitation for the player is being imposed by a third party - the designer.

When I've played PBEM QBs the first thing to do is *negotiate* what kind of QB we should play. Which side you play, how big map and so on. I see reinforcements as a similar QB generating *option* that the QB generating player always selects when making the QB. If players get better tools for creating the QB they want, I see that as a good thing.

With a QB the player himself is in full control over the composition of the force they have to command. By definition the player would be consciously choosing to withhold forces they purchased until a later stage in the battle. This then means that the player is choosing to fight with a smaller initial force than would otherwise be possible and so is going into the battle with less force than they otherwise could.

Units can be also bought by the computer, so the player does not have full control over unit purchasing. My idea was that to reduce this "I know what kind of reinforcements I'm going to get" problem you could decide whether you want to buy those unit or let computer buy.

In other words, the player isn't fighting the battle to win but rather to play within the confines of a self designed narrative. Certainly, I'm sure that you would still want to win the battle - I'm not implying that - I guess what I'm saying is that you want to win the battle within the confines of the self created narrative as opposed to just fighting the battle for the sake of winning it.

Aren't all QB generating options tools for creating this self designed narrative - the kind of battle that you and your opponent wish to play?

...

It's an interesting way to enjoy the game. Regardless though, there would be technical issues as I pointed out above. The scenario designer places all forces on the map in the editor and then assigns the reinforcement groups and times of arrival. In the editor you can see all the forces on the map at once - reinforcements included. When you start the battle in order to play it, the game simply makes the reinforcements invisible so you can't see them until their time of arrival. You, as the QB player, would have to have a means by which you could designate reinforcement groups and place those forces on the map (including outside of your designated set up zones) and still have them vanish when the battle starts. This can't be done in the deployment phase of a battle. It currently has to be done in the editor.

Adding reinforcement groups automatically based on how many reinforcements there are should be trivial. Arrival areas *could* be similarly placed automatically to the back part of the map if reinforcement shouldn't increase the work load of QB map makers. Reinforcement areas placed by map maker would be of course more fool proof and flexible. Units could be then automatically placed inside these areas just like units are now placed when you design a scenario and press Deploy in Scenario Editor.

The player himself would also be placing the reinforcements onto the map just before the battle and probably setting their time of arrival as well. I doubt too many players would want them to arrive at some randomly determined time - you might not see your reinforcements until there was only five minutes left . So in other words there wouldn't be very much of a surprise factor for the player placing the reinforcements.

In my first post I suggested that players could define arrival times like "15 minutes + (0 to 10 minutes)" so you could get them after 15 minutes or 25 minutes or some time within those limits. The random part would prevent you planning your moves knowing exactly when the reinforcements arrive.

...

With a scenario, since the designer has placed the reinforcements you may or may not know reinforcements are arriving depending upon what is in the briefing. Even if you know you are getting reinforcements and where they will generally appear, you wouldn't know precisely how the reinforcements are arranged until they appear - unless you have gone into the editor and looked or maybe played the scenario before or something. There would be none of that uncertainty factor if the player placed the reinforcements himself just before the start of the Quick Battle.

In most scenarios I've played the briefing gives you a pretty good idea of how many reinforcements there will be and some idea of the units that will be in each group. Like I wrote earlier, units can be placed inside the arrival area automatically. Just requires enough map tiles where units can move - don't put arrival area to map corner that has deep water, steep cliffs etc.