Best Settings For Competitive Balance

[Dreghorn2]

Gentlemen,

I would like to know from those of you that have played extensively against human opponents what the best settings are for competitive game play.

Admittedly the majority of my experience has been versus the AI, but my personal feeling is that if the point values are close in a battle the Axis side has a large advantage in that they get more 'bang for the buck' in purchasing power. The AI, while fun, simply does not provide the competition that a good human player can, so any evaluations based gleaned form playing solo are somewhat irrevelant.

I'm getting long-winded. My question is, when playing against humans what is the fairest setting? When attacking as the Allies should the game settings be 'attack', 'probe' etc.. When defending as the Allies what should the settings be?

In a game i recently set up i'm defending as the Allies, 1500 points 'probe'. When i checked later to see what points the Axis player receives in this situation i saw it to be 2250. Even though a probe i feel i'm going to be hard pressed against any Axis player with that type of point advantage, and i would certainly be concerned if i had to attack the Axis with an advantage of only that amount.

How are the rest of you finding it? When playing against a capable opponent what are the fairest settings, and how have the results gone? Any advantage showing up for either side?

Yours,

------------------

'A mans greatest pleasure is to crush his enemies, sweep them before him, to take from them that which they possess, to see their women and children in tears'

[Marlow]

I find that neither Germans or the Allies have any signinficant advantage in the point value department. Obviously the Americans can rairly stand up to German heavies in a slugging match, but you would be foolish to use them in this manner. Utilizing the proper tactics for the tools you have is the key.

I personally play the Yanks more often than not, and have done OK.

[Marlow]

As far as conditions to use for a balanced game, anything other than flat, open maps should be fine.

[Hiram Sedai]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dreghorn2:

Gentlemen, SNIP

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Meeting Engagement is perfect for PBEM's and TCPIP when you want it to be fair pointwise.

Its best to discuss with your opponent what they think is fair so you can find a middle ground.

------------------

Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. - Blaise Pascal

[This message has been edited by Hiram Sedai (edited 01-09-2001).]

[Bruno Weiss]

I agree with the former statements and would add, that nothing replaces negotiated agreements, or another way of putting it, an exchange of mutually acceptable expectations. In so doing, you eliminate a good deal of the root causes for misinterpretations, surprises, and bad endings. To that end, Fionn Kelly's rules of engagement often serve to form the basis of tactical parameters which both prevent unbalanced situations from developing, and provide a documented structure for mutual agreements. For further information, refer to: http://www.rugged-defense.nl/cm/Fionn3.htm

------------------

"Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses

open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth."

-Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916)

[Dreghorn2]

Gentlemen,

Yes i've read Fionns 'rules of engagement' and they sound like decent parameters.

I'm getting a little confused, i went to the Tournament chat room to elicit opinions, and i ended up hearing that generally either side on the attack with 'Attack' points (if you know what i mean), will have too great an advantage because it is too easy to simply concentrate on one side of the map and overwhelm it. However, they also mentioned that they felt that any attack with 'probe' points was not enough, for either side.. i'm still dubious that it isnt enough for the Axis.. so i'm still not sure what gamers are finding as the best settings for the fairest games.

Yours,

------------------

'A mans greatest pleasure is to crush his enemies, sweep them before him, to take from them that which they possess, to see their women and children in tears'

[Dittohead]

Use the Attacker -10% setting, this helps give the attacker a smaller more manageable advantage.

This works esp. well when doing an attack, since the objective flags are deeper in your defensive area.

[Dreghorn2]

So as the Allies for example, you think that Axis using 'attack' points -10% is fair. Interesting.. i would be extremely concerned as the Allies with the Axis getting anything over 'probe' points. What about as the Allies in attack, same thing -10%?

Yours

[Olle Petersson]

Depends on how you define fair and competitive.

I prefer unbalanced battles. The result presented by the game system is thrown out the window, and an after action debriefing between the players decide the actual outcome in win-draw-loss terms, based on the resources at hand and the use of them.

Cheers

Olle

------------------

Srategy is the art of avoiding a fair fight...