I/O Error Posted January 10, 2001 Share Posted January 10, 2001 Well then, check out this link: http://www.rugged-defense.nl/cm/Fionn3.htm It's a REAL pity more people don't know about this, except for the (remarkably closed) society of Peng cess-poolers... This guy has the first and best workable solution I've seen to all these PBEM games with nothing but Pershings and KTs. I figure somebody else BESIDES me also likes the occasional idea of using older equipment or maybe just infantry. (after all, if I all I wanted was big tanks I could go play some foolish shooter game in an arcade... ) If you've seen this, great. Help me spread it around some more! If you haven't seen this, I suspect it will make your CM multiplayer games MUCH more enjoyable! ------------------ Honor, Duty, Courage. Valhalla awaits you, honorable warrior... ------------------------ "If you find yourself alone, riding through green fields with the sun on your face, do not be troubled, for you are in Elysium, and YOU ARE ALREADY DEAD!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted January 10, 2001 Share Posted January 10, 2001 Well said I/O Error (great username BTW). Personally, I HIGHLY recommend these (house?) rules. No one has to use them all of the time. Just agree to with an opponent before you play and you'll see something different. It will challenge and hopefully please you. My friend and I are not cesspoolers, but we insist on using these rules. They help us to have a game that is more historical in "flavor" and more fun IMHO. We also add rarity to them to avoid having the types of games where 6 Pumas show up. (Only 101 were ever produced.) So, give 'em a try and you won't be disappointed. Jumbo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Porta Posted January 11, 2001 Share Posted January 11, 2001 Nah, what's the fun in that ? ------------------ " Mind, Sir, or I shall take off my belt, and by Thunder my trousers will fall down" -Mr. Hardwood, Blackadder Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted January 11, 2001 Share Posted January 11, 2001 Originally posted by Joseph Porta: Nah, what's the fun in that ? The fun is testing your limits by using your brain to outwit your opponent as opposed to ALWAYS out-smashing your opponent in an unhistorical manner by using only the best equipment. Does a person always need the best tanks or troops to win? Can't he/she win without them? For me, always using the best equipment simply became boring after a while. I'm not 100% against the uber-tank battles. They can be fun too -now and again. I guess that I prefer my wargaming experience to have more than a single dimension to it. Perhaps that only came about for me with age. I guarantee that after a while, the appeal of the all uber-tank battle will wear off and something else will be sought after. When that happens (however long it takes), check out Fionn Kelly's optional rules for CM. You won't be disappointed. Until then dive into the uber-tank battles with both feet and have a great time! Jumbo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Heidman Posted January 11, 2001 Share Posted January 11, 2001 The thing is, Fionns rules makes for exactly the same thing. What is the difference between both sides having the best weapons, and both sides having the 2nd best weapons? In either case you end up playing the same, because the realtive strengths have not changed. The Fionn rules just force both sides to have moderate weapons at best, rather than excellent weapons at best. It does not keep anyone from optimizing their forces anyway, it just re-defines what is optimal. In my experience, it is better to find people who will play with semi-historical forces ebacuse they wish to. The Short-75 rules and such just re-define what the uber-tank is, they do not force anyone to play without them. That's just my opinion from having played with those rules a couple of times. Jeff Heidman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasoncawley@ameritech.net Posted January 12, 2001 Share Posted January 12, 2001 These are fine ideas, but I would add to them additional options. One of the gamier things players do when buying uber items is they mix and match with abandon. This is not realistic, and it makes uber items more affordable in effect. A partial solution is to require that tanks or armored SP guns / TDs be bought mostly one type, and in historical formation sizes, or not at all. To allow variety, one other lighter armor type can be allowed, with more flexibility on the number (the restriction to one type is enough). So for example, the players can buy the tank type they like, but must buy 4 or 5 of them, or 8 or 10 of them. (SS and US used 5 tank platoons, while regular German army and Brits used 4 tank platoons). If you want to blow your points on 4 Tiger Is, OK. The secondary vehicle rule excludes main battle tanks and heavily armored TDs. But Priest of Sexton SPA, or halftracks, or carriers, are OK. This is you chance to buy 1-2 vehicles of a special type, but not 1-2 vehicles of *each* special type. Or to buy a troop of M-8s or enough halftracks for all of your armored infantry - but not *both*. Similarly, I've heard of a German player taking 2 Wespes and a Hummel, for all the world straight out of Panzerblitz - LOL. More realistic would be to take 1 module of 105mm arty support and be done with it, but if you are going to bring them on map, they would certainly be one type not mixed. They fought and fired together in batteries and battalions you know, and would not mix types because it would mean supply, ammo, parts, and range coordination headaches to no good purpose. Players might still use the exclusions about the level of items purchased. But the idea is that making the main armor purchases "lumpier" will force tougher decisions on the players. Going for armor may mean really skimping on other things, for instance. A seperate idea is to restrict the portion of people's force expenditures that can be spent on armored vehicles, to 25% of the force or whatever. The drawback of this is that it provides both players with some info about what they are likely to be up against. But it may be better than a pure infantry battle restriction. Incidentally, I also have a few quibbles with the existing recommendations, but quibbles is all they are. I wouldn't include Pumas in recon battles, because really there were only a tiny number of them in the entire war on all fronts. And on the other hand, I'd allow the M-10 tank destroyer for the Americans in the 75 battles. Yes, they have a better gun, but they also have a weak turret and they were not the rare uber-item the Jacksons and Hellcats were, but in fact were quite common pieces of equipment. I'd similarly allow the British Sexton - seems strange to allow the Priest (U.S. SP 105mm arty) but not the Sexton (Brit SP 25-lber arty), since they really are comparable in every way. It might be the 88mm designation that throws people off. That is just a 25 lber howitzer on the Sexton, not a German high-velocity AA/AT gun. I'll also pass on another suggestion I've seen that I think has merit. Check the number built of any item. If it is less than 1000, do not use it, as too rare to show up much. Obviously, purely optional - some people like playing with the stranger toys of course. But for a more realistic sense of the fighting, the 1000+ restriction makes sense, because few people saw the other stuff at all. A few hundred items on a continent over years means not much chance they are on your mile of front on one particular day. On arty restrictions, I like the 105 rule but would relax it slightly, to 120mm for the middle setting there. That allows the medium German mortars, which are mostly comparable in weight and common-ness to 105mm arty. And I might allow a single module only of stuff about 120mm in the other cases (Panther 76 rule I mean). Some support by heavy guns in a higher tech, less restricted, or harder battle makes some sense. But nobody is going to get the support of 4-5 batteries of 155mm or anything like that. So, combining all of the above, one might see 5 Shermans, 105mm Arty, supporting M3 HTs or M8s but not both. One might see 4 Panthers, 2 AA halftracks, 120mm mortars. But one would not see 2 King Tigers, 1 Nashorn, 1 Jagdpanther, and a flamethrower Hezter. Just some additional ideas for realism in force choices, for those who are interested... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moriarty Posted January 12, 2001 Share Posted January 12, 2001 When it comes right down to it, you are your own master of the game. An infantry-only game can be just as challenging (sometimes moreso) as racing around in armor in an ubertank slugfest. So, too, is limiting armor to the light tanks and armored cars. I disagree with Mr. Heidman that Fionn's rules do little more than redefine the ubertank, moving a few notches down the scale, as it were. The armor in the Short 75s can just as easily be taken out by the 37mm and 50mm equipped ACs and lights as by another 75mm tank. And they are more susceptible to AT weapons. I would submit that there are no "ubertanks" in this rule. The true ubertanks have few equals from the lower ranks. Fionn's rules are a good starting point. But what you do with CM is limited only by how you and your opponent limit yourselves. ------------------ "Moriarty, you suck." -- Dunno, but somebody must've said it somewhere along the line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Duke Posted January 12, 2001 Share Posted January 12, 2001 Funny how players that normally play the Germans tend to want to limit the Allies in one form or the other. Either they can't have Arty or Aircraft. And then say..."Oh yeah, my Panther is equall to your M4A3(76), honest" LoL... ------------------ One shot...One Kill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted January 12, 2001 Share Posted January 12, 2001 Personally I find Fionn's 76 rule to be flawed. It still allows the germans the awesome Panther with its 172mm penetrating gun but removes the american's best hope at killing it, the 90mm, which only penetrates 143mm. It all seems set up to make the Panther king of the battle field and remove anything on the allied side that has even a small chance of dealing with it. (frontally). If you really wanted a system that removed the heavies then why not just do that - remove the heavies. Exclude: King Tiger, JagDTiger, JagDPanther, Perushings, Jumbos. All done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commissar Posted January 12, 2001 Share Posted January 12, 2001 KiwiJoe, Actually it doesnt limit the Allied killing power, but increases it. Want proof? Do an all armor battle, where your opponent buys all Panthers (for about 180+ a pop) while you buy all M-18's (76mm), for about 120 a pop). Then, watch as the M-18's completely and totally BUTCHER the Panthers with their superior speed, tungsten ammunition, and very fast turret rotation. Ive done it myself, and when used wisely, a platoon of M-18's will do wonders for destroying the fiercest of German Uber-tanks. ------------------ "...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..." - Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back" [This message has been edited by The Commissar (edited 01-11-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marlow Posted January 12, 2001 Share Posted January 12, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The Commissar: Ive done it myself, and when used wisely, a platoon of M-18's will do wonders for destroying the fiercest of German Uber-tanks. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Amen Brother. Pound for pound the little hotrod M18 is the best tank killer in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted January 12, 2001 Share Posted January 12, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KiwiJoe: If you really wanted a system that removed the heavies then why not just do that - remove the heavies. Exclude: King Tiger, JagDTiger, JagDPanther, Perushings, Jumbos. All done.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Kiwi Joe, That is exactly what the 76 Panther "rule" does anyways. I have right here in front of me and it removes the heavies IMHO. On another note, Fionn's own disclaimer says: "Please note that these 'rules' are guidelines only and provide a solid basis for players to set up balanced battles without worrying about whether your opponent has brought a killer heavy tank. If you play by these 'rules', you should agree with your PBEM opponent before starting the battle." Moriarity is right. We are the masters of our own game. People do find pleasure in using these "rules". It is wrong to expect another to dislike them just because someone else says not to like them. I'm just saying "Here they are, check them out and make up your own mind". So many different ways to play this game......so many different kinds of people. I'm glad that we're all different. Jumbo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rex_Bellator Posted January 12, 2001 Share Posted January 12, 2001 I suppose I have the luxury of playing against people I know and we always try and make things fairly historical which is probably the best way to deal with the Uber-Tank issue. Fionn's rules are definitely a good idea IMHO for other battles. Me and my buddies have also agreed to restrict the amount of Artillery which we feel is way too prevalent in our 1500-2000 point battles. Try dealing with a well thought out attack/defense without being able to simply sit back and wait for the shells to arrive. Very challenging and rewarding. Our simple forumula for the maximum number of spotters, which seems to be working well at the moment, is: Meeting engagement - No spotters allowed. Probe - 0 for defender, 1 for attacker. Attack - 1 for defender, 2 for attacker. Assault - 1 for defender, 3 for attacker. I'm sure it wouldn't be to everyone's taste but so far so good for us. ------------------ "We're not here to take it - We're here to give it" General Morshead's response to the popular newspaper headline "Tobruk Can Take It" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mr. Johnson-<THC>- Posted January 12, 2001 Share Posted January 12, 2001 Ok Time for my 2 cents. I really don't care if anyone says he you can't use those vechicals together cuz they were not supposed to be on the same piece of paper for the fill in blank of anti-tank company. Yes the germans wanted to always deploy Jagdpanthers in groups of 8 at a time. But thats only what the WANTED. In battle when the Brits and Ameris start tossing everything at you and you front line shatters and gets chased back to another town. Your Communications are shot. And no reinforcements are coming for you. You get you Luger and stick in the Lts face and tell him nicely to bring up his Marders to help you Jadgpanthers right frigging now. And you tell that Flak company to stop shooting up and start targeting any allied unit that comes over that hill. This is a Wargame guys and in war your assigned strength is very diffent then how many tanks or trucks you can actually put in action. Now I am all up for a realistic game with no Big cats and no Jumbos. You guys could play earlier games so Pershings are not avaible yet also. For myself I don't like combined ops all that much cuz I want a few more tanks maybe, so I like to play Armor QBs but only spend 500 or 600 on armor, in a 1250 to 2000 pts game. Thing is your oppenent could cheat if he wanted too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Posted January 12, 2001 Share Posted January 12, 2001 Lucky me, I haven't had a king tiger versus pershing game yet. Maybe BTS should release a patch to remove all tanks and vehicles. Well, we could keep jeeps then have Fionn's rule of jeeps: no .50 cal mg jeeps, only trucks. Bumper cars! Tiger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mr. Johnson-<THC>- Posted January 12, 2001 Share Posted January 12, 2001 I really like your spotter rule Rex. But I would want 2 spotters on defend Assault cuz your gonna be closer to your armys big guns instead of outrunning them if your on the attack. [This message has been edited by Mr. Johnson-<THC>- (edited 01-11-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pak40 Posted January 12, 2001 Share Posted January 12, 2001 Honestly, I've never had this problem. In all the games I've ever played there's been only been one KT and that was mine. And I lost that game by a last turn infantry rush. I never buy those heavy tanks, too many points spent on one vehicle that could be disabled by an 81mm mortar round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted January 12, 2001 Share Posted January 12, 2001 No Jumbo it doesnt. It takes away the best yanky TD IMO - the Jackson. It's 90mm gun can rip threw the front armour of the Panther at quite a distance yet it's penetration is far less than the Panther's, which is still left in. I have never had a problem with allowing people to buy anything they want. I've only encountered 1 JagDtiger a few JagDpanthers and 0 KT's playing as allies. Playing as jerries I've never seen a Perushing and once seen a Jumbo 76. Most people don't like to select these large monsters as the thought of having 300 odd points destroyed with a single "lucky" hit is too much to bare If your having too many "monster tank" battles I'd suggest looking for different oppentants instead of limiting purchase descisions. Half the battle is trying to figure out what the other guy is going to buy and how to counter it effectively. If you remove the ability to select these larger tanks it limits the game overall IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I/O Error Posted January 12, 2001 Author Share Posted January 12, 2001 KiwiJoe: Then you are indeed among the fortunate, to have opponents not clever enough to buy such super-killers... Personally, I think Jumbo and Commissar have it EXACTLY right. Fionn deserves full marks for his idea, and it is a useful link to bookmark. ------------------ Honor, Duty, Courage. Valhalla awaits you, honorable warrior... ------------------------ "If you find yourself alone, riding through green fields with the sun on your face, do not be troubled, for you are in Elysium, and YOU ARE ALREADY DEAD!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumbo Posted January 12, 2001 Share Posted January 12, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KiwiJoe: If you remove the ability to select these larger tanks it limits the game overall IMO.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Kiwi Joe, You misunderstand me. Nobody is removing anything. What I'm talking about is a CM battle where both sides agree that there are no heavies -(hmmm, maybe every once and a while?) Nothing is mandatory unless agreed upon by the two players. It just adds a different dimension to the CM 'experience', thats all. Were the heavies always on the battlefield? I wasn't there and I can't say for sure. Yet, I wouldn't be afraid to put some money on the idea that they weren't always there. Does anyone know for sure? (IMHO, when considering scenario balance, the M-36 Jackson is a "heavy", only because of it's gun. I know that you feel different and thats no problem to me.) Jumbo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted January 12, 2001 Share Posted January 12, 2001 Thats the whole point, they arnt super killers. The 1 time I faced a JagdTiger I knocked it out with a flank shot at 500m with a reg m8 - HMC. I would have had a harder time dealing with 2 Panther's... which I never would have exposed my M8 to. But I knew the JDT was too big and slow to react in time and I would certainly get at least 2 shots on its flank before it tried to spin around, at which my M8 would have poped smoke and reversed behind the crest of the hill it was on. Safe move against the JDT, not agianst a Panther. Super tanks have their place, and can be tuff nuts if used correctly (like I do with the Jumbo 76 but they arnt alwasy the best means to win a battle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts