Cherry Picking (Wargamers Topic)

[Guest Big Time Software]

KiwiJoe,

You should pop over to the "Are Shermans Overpriced" thread. The vehicle costs are based on their overall offensive and defensive capabilities vs armor and infantry targets/threats. I personally never pick "super tanks". In fact, I don't even purchase Panthers when I am the Germans. I rather use the points for more infantry.

And using rough math, if you are on the attack as the US you can probably purchase 5 Shemrmans for the one Jagdtiger the enemy picks up. If the US is on the defensive, it is more even. But I don't understand how a German player can win if he spends all his extra cash on the big tanks and not on a healthy mix. Unless, of course, the Allied player doesn't take a healthy mix either

Steve

[Combatboy]

Well, the guys who made the game answered me. That is very cool. I was reading the other list and starting to think a King Tiger couldn't take on a vegetable cart .

I am not a grog (whatever that is) but this has been a great list to read on my day off. I was getting the impression from other threads that no one listened to each other or read each other's posts -- especially when it comes to the 88, but I am wrong. And I even posted a dumb question and was treated nice.

Thanks!!!

[Abbott]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Combatboy:

Well, the guys who made the game answered me. That is very cool. I was reading the other list and starting to think a King Tiger couldn't take on a vegetable cart .

I am not a grog (whatever that is) but this has been a great list to read on my day off. I was getting the impression from other threads that no one listened to each other or read each other's posts -- especially when it comes to the 88, but I am wrong. And I even posted a dumb question and was treated nice.

Thanks!!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You just caught us off guard on a good day

[KiwiJoe]

The below refers to all reg units to make things simple.

In a 1500 meeting u both get 450 points to spend on tanks. My point is u can only buy 3 M4A3's (360) and have enough left for an M8 or priest. As jerries u could afford 3 PzIVJ's and an assualt gun or marder etc. Or you can buy 2 Jumbo 76's, or a JDTiger and Panther. What would you choose? 3 weak armoured average gunned tanks and a support tank... or 2 kick ass tanks that can penetrate any normal tank at any range and bounce off anything they can throw at it in return? You really need a 3:1 ratio to be able to flank with any confidence and even then its a risky venture. U can still afford 4-6 platoons of infantry if u buy out in the tank category so thats not an issue. This game is focused around PBEM's 2000 points and under as far as I can see, thats where the focus for realism should be.

Still luv the game, and I may in fact be totally wrong, just trying to gauge what others think to see where I stand.

[Guest grunto]

Perhaps my biggest offense in this area is my early use of T8s - almost exclusively - as American transport. I didn't realize until much later that they were 'practically real tanks' and 'not that common.'

For more realism I've switched over to Jeep .50s in that role.

In real life the M8 HMC was mostly used as indirect fire support, so what I do now is try to use the more expensive and in my opinion less effective, M8 Greyhounds instead for direct fire. This is more realistic in my opinion.

In battles of my own design I'll often substitute a 75mm FO (200 rounds) for 6 M8 HMCs. This represents the off-board M8s in their 'most common' role - indirect support.

The biggest instance of Cherry Picking I've seen is where people buy Fallschirmjagers with something other than StuGs for AFV support.

I'm fine with that though as in every one of those cases my forces were 'massed T8s and M8 HMCs' on the American side.

Perhaps we all get the opponents we deserve.

Andy

[Guest grunto]

Yes the StuG is very common in infantry support.

Tigers operated out of independent batallions and usually had veteran to elite crews, at least around normandy.

now the german SS were probably veteran-to-elite hq units with veteran to green squads, and they would all be fanatical in most scenarios.

the panzer IV and panther were probably about the same in availability during the time period of CMBO. the ratio should overall be slightly higher in favor of the PZ IVs, maybe with an edge to the Panthers when representing elite regular army units such as panzer lehr.

the paratroopers would have stugs for armored support.

the 20mm aa was not too uncommon. i like to have several of them if i have them at all, to represent an ad hoc aa unit. sometimes i throw in a couple of 37mm AAs too.

i notice that a lot of people will take a 150mm IG over a 75mm. i always take 75mm IGs.

I'll often take a 50mm AT instead of a 75mm.

There is simply more gratification to winning with the 'weaker weapons.'

Typically I'll buy a company, then throw in some 75mm IGs, and/or recoilless rifles. Then some number of machineguns, either light or heavy, and some panzerschrecks, and perhaps then the above-mentioned aa guns.

i often include some kind of transport with a gun, even if i am on defense.

To recreate shock troops, totally laden with ammo for the big attack, I'll design a scenario, then split the infantry squads and put them on transport and armored cars.

then i'll go back into the editor, and max out each half squad on the demo charges and rifle grenades. that way there are twice as more heavy weapons per squad.

you have to keep the infantry apart during battle though, for if the half squads re-combine it appears you lose the extra demo charges and rifle grenades.

anyway, there is enough stuff you can do within the realm of possibility that cherry picking between say canadian vehicles and american paratrooper infantry sounds absurd.

IF YOU WANT THE PHREAKIN' KANGAROOS THEN BE _ALL_ CANADIAN!!!

ok...

thanks for letting me get that off of my chest

man i'm glad i haven't run into anyone _that bad_ yet.

Andy

[Guest grunto]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:

Our solution to Atypical force creation was to make point costs higher depending on hor rare the vehicle was for that time period. Unfortunately, this was shelved for CM1 because we didn't have time to implement a well researched and tested system. However... there is CM2 coming up <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Please tell me though that you will offer both a 'battle effectiveness' cost (as you have now) and a 'rarity' cost so players can decide which point system to use.

Thanks for your consideration,

Andy

[Slapdragon]

The T8 got stuck, at least according to one book I have, acting as a scout partner with Hellcats. So did a version of the Hellcat that was an APC (but really rare).

Stugs and Fallshrims are a natural combination.

[Guest Big Time Software]

Andy, see my previous post

KiwiJoe, the problem isn't the costs it is the fact that the German heavies aren't penalized for being rare. That is what is really needed here. The current cost system is logical and "scientific". Lowering the cost of one thing or raising the cost of another, arbitrarily, is asking for trouble. Best to keep it as is and then offer the option of a Rarity system. That way, in a Meeting Engagement, the Germans will NOT be able to buy the big stuff and the US won't be getting any Jumbos either. What you are likely to have for a 1500 point game is a couple of Shermans and a couple of PzIVs on each side. Since a Meeting Engagement, without point bonuses for one side, is supposed to be even, this looks good to me. I'd take 3 Sherman M4A3(75) over 3 PzIVhs I think, and definately M4A3(76) without a second thought.

Steve