Kurtz Posted July 23, 2000 Share Posted July 23, 2000 The QB generator is really a lot of fun but there are two things that could be improved, IMHO. This only applies for multiplayer games, of course. The first one is that all relevant parameters (time of day, weather, terrain, date and type of combat) should be available to the second player (the one who didn´t initiate the game). It isn't fun to type everything only to find out there is something you forgot. The second issue is about what forces should be used. As it is now the initiating player decides this (comb.arms/inf./armour..) but I think it could be more interesting if the opponent can make his choice when purchasing forces. That way you wouldn't be sure of what to meet. If I know it will be a pure infantry battle I will obviously not purchase lots of antitank guns (and haul them over the snow-clad hills in the middle of the night only to find out, once the get to the fighting, that there are no targets worthy their attention.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurtz Posted July 24, 2000 Author Share Posted July 24, 2000 Any comments on this? Especially regarding isssue #2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gezeder Posted July 24, 2000 Share Posted July 24, 2000 totally, 100% agree. i've been a silent observer of these forums for months (too lazy to register!) but i had to register to whole-heartedly support these suggestions...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted July 24, 2000 Share Posted July 24, 2000 Yep it should show the 2nd player ALL of the settings when he recieves the 1st file. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Posted July 24, 2000 Share Posted July 24, 2000 I may be mistaken, but wasn't the quick battle generator set up for play between human and computer? If you want to set more parameters you need to do a scenario design. Just wondering. Wayne. ------------------ Blessed be the Lord my strength who teaches my hands to war and my fingers to fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurtz Posted July 24, 2000 Author Share Posted July 24, 2000 You can play QB any way you like - against the computer, PBEM or hotseat (and TCP/IP when this becomes available). I´m not really asking for more parameters, just a option for the opponent to select his force "package" separately. Regarding the terrain and weather parameters I think it would be nice if they could be sent with the file for the opponent to view before he purchases his forces. (Although this is a minor issue). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hundminen Posted July 24, 2000 Share Posted July 24, 2000 I also agree wholeheartedly. If there is one thing I'd like to see in the 1.03, it's to know what kind of force your up against. In addition, it would be nice to see the whole map before picking units (as in CC3) but I'll settle for Kurtz's suggestions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teutonicc Posted July 24, 2000 Share Posted July 24, 2000 How about a no restrictions option on the type category like there is for the force category. ------------------ Teutonicc [This message has been edited by Teutonicc (edited 07-24-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kurtz Posted July 26, 2000 Author Share Posted July 26, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hundminen: I also agree wholeheartedly. If there is one thing I'd like to see in the 1.03, it's to know what kind of force your up against. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ??? The type of force you´re opposing is already known (armor/inf/mech..), the player who initiates the QB decides this and will hopefully tell you. I think it would be more challenging if you didn´t know this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
von Lucke Posted July 26, 2000 Share Posted July 26, 2000 Yes, I agree that the non-innitiating player should have access to all the pre-generated map characteristics of the scenario he's going into. Maybe just a QB Parameter Info Sheet right before the Unit Purchase screen? Hmmmm, not sure about #2. On the one hand, it would be more of a challenge not to know what force limits have been placed on yr opponent. But on the other, yr gonna look pretty foolish showing up to a gun fight with a just a knife... And if you take the "less intel the better" tack, then why even have Force Modifiers when purchasing? Why not just make it no-limit-buy-whatever-you-want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gezeder Posted July 26, 2000 Share Posted July 26, 2000 well, i don't think you'd show up with that foolish equipment - even if u had an infantry force you'd still take a few AT guns - incase your opponent has tanks... the main thing i think, though, is that the second game (the person who didn't choose the settings) should know EVERY detail that the originator did.... it's only fair (well, almost fair.... they still can't choose the settings) this requirement doesn't sound impossible... hell, even if they just made it more obvious in the email, or if a small program could interpret it for us & find out.... not sure, but any more information would help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schrullenhaft Posted July 26, 2000 Share Posted July 26, 2000 I think it would be an excellent option to allow for the opponent to choose his force selection (which wouldn't have to be revealed to the initiating player) with the allotted points. That way you would have to take a more balanced approach to your force structure. Go heavy with tanks and you could be facing all infantry and find yourself swamped, etc. It just increases FOW that much more. So, basically I'd like to see the following options in QB: 1) An option for PBEM (or possibly even against the AI) for the initiator to select one side, the battle type, his force composition, the point total and the terrain options. Then allow for the other side to get a terrain preview (if their the defender) pick their force composition (the selections would remain hidden from the respective opponents). In the case of a meeting engagement the computer can select the terrain randomly (or just as a plain option for any QB) and not allow any terrain preview. If the receiver is the attacker they wouldn't get a preview, just a listing of the selected options for terrain. Both players would get to know time of year and weather conditions before making their force selections. 2) Although this violates the idea of a Quick Battle (instead I'd look at it as a quick scenario generator) - I'd like to see some reinforcement options available to the player much like operations have (this would be nice for scenarios in general). Like the Battalion - Regiment - Divisional reinforcements. Though most battles would technically be too short for such options, a longer battle could be a possibility for situationally-dependent reinforcements (again based on a point total). Reinforcements could be based on a modifier that would be dependent on the ratio of on-board force points to those set aside for reinforcements (with a max #or percentage of points that could set aside for reinforcements). So at a certain ratio of on-board to reinforcement points your reinforcement points could be multiplied by 1.5X (as an example). Again a maximum number or percentage would limit the abuse of such a reinforcement system. Admittedly there are an endless number of options that could be requested for QB (or CM in general) and the details of their implementation for CM1 may be too much at the moment. [This message has been edited by Schrullenhaft (edited 07-26-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philistine Posted July 26, 2000 Share Posted July 26, 2000 I agree with both suggestions (let the opponent see all the parameters relating to terrain and environment as well as letting the opponent choose his force type independently). The only caveat is, as some have pointed out, if you allow the 2nd person to choose his force type, you shouldn't show the first person's force type to him. My other wish for multi-player QB is allowing the "delete" function to work on units bought as part of a formation. Just my $.02. --Philistine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS_PanzerLeader Posted July 26, 2000 Share Posted July 26, 2000 This is how I would like to see it, 1. All paramters given to recieving player unless agreed other wise - which would also be messaged to the recieving player by... "PLayer creating scenario has chose to keep parameters hidden" 2. would like points to each side ddisplayed at the start of the scenario.. incase of modifications (not sure if this is already there) 3. Would like to be able to view the map, but it be locked on viewing so nobody can change it. that way we know what terrain we are dealing with before purchasing ------------------ SS_PanzerLeader.......out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gezeder Posted July 27, 2000 Share Posted July 27, 2000 Philistine, i'd be hesistant about that one - since larger formations actually make troops cheaper! i could just see it - u buy a battilion, where rifle squads cost 16pts instead of 18pts (or whatever...) then delete it down to platoon size - instant cheaper platoon! i don't think battlefront is likely to do anything big though - i'd like to think that perhaps informing the 'reciever of the battle' of what he'll be up against is only fair. otherwise, unless he says so, the 'creator of the battle' has: better terrain knowledge. better enemy forces knowledge. (force type & nationality) better weather knowledge the ability to give themselves a points advantage (of course, this is only for the truly dispicable player.....) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philistine Posted July 27, 2000 Share Posted July 27, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gezeder: i'd be hesistant about that one - since larger formations actually make troops cheaper! i could just see it - u buy a battilion, where rifle squads cost 16pts instead of 18pts (or whatever...) then delete it down to platoon size - instant cheaper platoon! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hmmm, I didn't realize that you got a "volume discount" when buying a higher level formation. I'm not sure why you should.... My issue would be to trim off some of the support units when I buy a company (especially those flamethrowers in British) in order to give more flexibility with the point limits in the QB. I agree this would be problamatic if you would be able to get cheaper platoons by judicious deleting. I don't see the rationale for why they should be cheaper. --Philistine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guachi Posted July 28, 2000 Share Posted July 28, 2000 The problem with buying an infantry battalion and deleting everything but a platoon to make it cheaper is that you will still be left with the battalion HQ and at least one Company HQ. The point cost reductions are 5% at platoon level, 10% at company level, and 15% at battaloni level. This isn't EXACTLY how point costs are calculated, but ask for my COMPLETE point cost chart, and I'll send it to you and you can see for yourself. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gezeder Posted July 28, 2000 Share Posted July 28, 2000 hmmm, perhaps. personally, i'd kill for another commander or two without having to get the whole company sometimes - great for mortar-team leading! it would give you a lot of flexibility too... i doubt they'd do anything along those lines myself though - i suspect battlefront put in the 'cheaper in bulk' mentality so that we wouldn't all end up with scattered troops, (ie, one SS rifle platoon, one of this, two of that, one of this... etc) it's still possible to do this, but there is some incentive to have a more..... historical OOB. (of course, this is just my opinion) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts