Jeff Heidman Posted October 10, 2000 Share Posted October 10, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maj. Bosco: I'd like to clear up the historical allied/axis advantages that CavScout is talking about. The German advantage is quality of equipment and the Allied is quantity. His problem is that whenever the germans get an advantage in equipment that is (or is at least called) historical the allies do not get a reciprical increase in the quantity of equipment they can buy. .<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> <Boggle> Do you really think that is his problem? If so, he is not exactly thinking very clearly. I am not aware of anyone who has claimed that some hypothesized (since there actually have not been any German tweaks since the game was released) increase in some German units capabilities would not be matched by an equivalent increase in that units cost. Jeff Heidman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CavScout Posted October 10, 2000 Share Posted October 10, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV: ...try Allied air when forces are 5-800m apart and you'll find what the Allies found (and why they quit doing it). That's not what Allied air turned out to be real good at. They excelled at whacking units on the way to the front... but the Allied troops (and generals) themselves didn't want 'em launching that close to the lines...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Very ture which is why in CM this gives the Germans an added advantage. They [don't] have to fear none of the Allied interdiction. They buy four Panthers and they know they'll have them for the battle. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> It's called "scenario editor" and if you want to jellify a company of Green Volksstuermers with 14" batteries, or whatever, you can do it all day. Words like "hypocrisy" really don't achieve whatever it is you want to achieve. Local superiority (or parity), and concentrations in time and space, were understood by attackers and counter-attackers of all sides. These concepts are well-represented in CM. Are you trying to prove that the Allies won the war (sorry, needs documentation )? You have yet to state just what it is you are "for"? Like, specifically? In CM terms? What Allied tweaks are you interested in researching and presenting, other than just that there were more of them? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I really don't have a problem with CM. I do have a problem with how SOME players implement it. Cav [This message has been edited by CavScout (edited 10-10-2000).] [This message has been edited by CavScout (edited 10-10-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CavScout Posted October 10, 2000 Share Posted October 10, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Heidman: Do you really think that is his problem? If so, he is not exactly thinking very clearly. I am not aware of anyone who has claimed that some hypothesized (since there actually have not been any German tweaks since the game was released) increase in some German units capabilities would not be matched by an equivalent increase in that units cost. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> All one has to do is look around this board and see "the Germans need this" or "the Germans need that" threads. Cav Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted October 10, 2000 Share Posted October 10, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Cav wrote: Very ture which is why in CM this gives the Germans an added advantage. They have to fear none of the Allied interdiction. They buy four Panthers and they know they'll have them for the battle.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But this is historically correct. Those 4 Panthers might have been 10, but the Jabos got 6 on the way to the front. This is the same issue with equipment failure, road congestion, lack of fuel, etc. If a unit is on the battlefield it means it has already "passed the tests" as it were. Air intradiction, fuel issues, traffic jams, etc. were rare issues to be felt on the battlefield. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I really don't have a problem with CM. I do have a problem with how SOME players implement it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I assume what you are talking about here is "Rarity", which has been discussed quite a bit lately. This would limit the player's ability to buy King Tigers on a whim. It also, incidentally, applies to US players who always by Jumbos or M36 Jacksons when the majority of times a regualr Sherman or M10 would be the vehicle in question on the battlefield. Cost is something that works against the German heavies. I know when I play the Germans I do NOT go for Tigers and King Tigers. Instead, I go for as many PzIVs as I can afford <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>All one has to do is look around this board and see "the Germans need this" or "the Germans need that" threads.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> While I agree that there has been more "the Germans need to have x, y, and z modeled" discussions than there has been for the Allies, nobody has argued in favor of giving the Germans these advantages for free. That is what Jeff is saying and I agree with that. OK, so someone thinks the Tiger should have laser aiming devices on it, but nowhere has it been argued that this should not increase the unit cost. Increasing the unit cost should then keep things on a par with the Allied vehicles since cost = capabilities. This means the Allies get to by more units than the Germans. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj. Bosco Posted October 10, 2000 Share Posted October 10, 2000 Just a thought about air power. Since allied air didn't go in for the dive bombing on the battlefield type stuff the luftwaffe did maybe allied air can just straight off the bat subtract some tanks and vehicles? As it stands right now buy air power is a stunning waste of points. Oh, and I agree with Cav that the allies need more attention from the developers. I'm not sure he ever comes out and says it but that's the upshot of the thread. In particular please change tungsten use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
engy Posted October 10, 2000 Share Posted October 10, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lorak: I've tried to not say anything, But It has gotten to where I really don't understand what the issue is. I view the Quick battles in CM as kind of a WWII chess match. Try and make both sides as even as possible and then ... . . ~snipped...no need to repeat the whole thing~ . . Lorak <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Very well put. Couldn't agree more. However, I didn't think that intelligent posts were allowed from Cesspoolers? engy <rats, forgot to include my signature> ------------------ "He who makes war without many mistakes has not made war very long." Napoleon Bonaparte [This message has been edited by engy (edited 10-10-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted October 10, 2000 Share Posted October 10, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by engy: However, I didn't think that intelligent posts were allowed from Cesspoolers? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Tsktsktsk - in fact dear lad, if you have a good look around, you will see that Cesspoolers are a significant proportion of the people making intelligent posts on this board. Major Bosco, I think we are getting somewhere now. Maybe... I like the idea about the abstracted use of airpower, it looks good (haven't thought about it). As it is, I find airplanes to be either a waste of points or much too effective, given historical limitations. But then again, abstacting it would mean that one very 'cool' thing about the game would go. Some people may not like it. ------------------ Andreas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Man Posted October 10, 2000 Share Posted October 10, 2000 I am almost finished playing my first PBEM game. I had chosen the Germans.It looks like I might get a minor win or perhaps a draw.Here is my take on my first experience. I had the bad side of the map..I had to climb over an exposed hill to reach the Large flag in Woods.My opponent was much closer to the woods and the Town.I still managed to reach the Main Objective very early. But guess what? The americans have access to an overwhelming amount of artillery and I have been getting bombarded for 20 turns by 81mm mortar fire.Now I know the Americans had an abundance of Arty,but 20 turns worth .My achin Head !Conversely,because the Americans were allowed more Artillery purchase points he bought too much and had too few squads.So a combination of experience ,smart tactics and luck will really determine who wins and who loses.Also, I have noticed that since this is a game,if you are losing by a few points and the end is near you can make a mad dash for the opponents flag.And although you will take unnecessary losses you can neutralize the flag and win on points.That would not happen in real life.It is definately a gamey tactic,but this is a game. ------------------ "If Patton were alive today,he'd play Combat Mission." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
engy Posted October 10, 2000 Share Posted October 10, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Germanboy: Tsktsktsk - in fact dear lad, if you have a good look around, you will see that Cesspoolers are a significant proportion of the people making intelligent posts on this board. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ahhh, my fault entirely. *Grovel, grovel.* I realize now that it's only in the pool that all the intelligence sinks to the bottom... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts