So what's the story with November 44

[Warmaker]

Don't get started on a CM equivalent of a conspiracy theory please. The King Tigers are available quite early. Personally, I don't give a rat's a$4 about the SMG heavy platoons. IMO their useful roles are only limited to very short ranges. Give me 1944 Rifle/Panzergrenadier platoons over them ANY time. Personally I mostly play in the July-August 1944 or later than March'45 setting. No I don't remember the availability dates of things like the Jagdtiger/Ostwind/etc. Hell, I'll even be quite happy with a good Fallschirmjager force to do dirty work. Panzers or no panzers.

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

"Uncommon valor was a common virtue"-Adm.Chester Nimitz of the Marines on Iwo Jima

[109 Gustav]

Originally posted by Germanboy:

The words 'over' and 'analysing' do come to mind...

Agreed. When I PBEM, I more or less pick a random date, depending on whether I want early or late war.

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

Well my skiff's a twenty dollar boat, And I hope to God she stays afloat.

But if somehow my skiff goes down, I'll freeze to death before I drown.

And pray my body will be found, Alaska salmon fishing, boys, Alaska salmon fishing.

The Last Defense- Mods, Scenarios, and more!

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by 109 Gustav:

Agreed. When I PBEM, I more or less pick a random date, depending on whether I want early or late war.

Ya, BUT........

I played a guy last night that was happy I wanted the Allies and then Requested (specifically requested) Nov 44. At the time I had NO clue why, now I have a clue thanks.

So when your opponent gives you the choice of sides and then is THRILLED that you picked Allies, and then they pick Nov 44 I would say be prepared to face VG SMG squads. No Doubt about that.

As Allied Players we are not paranoid, Just SLOW (Duh!) because up until this thread I had NO idea there "might" be an advantage to the Axis forces in Nov '44 except that the Allied Tungsten rounds were not really widely available at that time. So when you face a KT and have no Tungsten in a 1000 point QB scenario, you have a Real problem IMHO.

This is not a paranoid conspiracy theory is it just a simple investigation into why as Allied players we have others requesting Nov 44 when they get to pick the use of the Axis forces and then buy whatever they want, last night we played "unrestricted".

This ALL reinforces my complete disdain for the inherent gaminess when some players prefer to "buy" units. I have accomondated requests in TCP/IP play to allow for Players to "buy" units, in the past but I REALLY prefer play tested canned scenario's or the QB where the computer AI chooses the forces for both sides.

Just a few comments.....

not a witch hunt or a conspiracy theory

-tom w

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 03-05-2001).]

[Hamsters]

Originally posted by Warmaker:

Personally, I don't give a rat's a$4 about the SMG heavy platoons.

Don't ever give a rat $4, because he'll only spend it on booze and cheese.

[tailz]

Originally posted by 109 Gustav:

Agreed. When I PBEM, I more or less pick a random date, depending on whether I want early or late war.

Yep, I generally offer up some sort of vague 'historical' parameters, just to set the mood. (ie, my recent PBEM's have been ME's between Canucks and SS/Canuck vs Heer... ostensibly around the time of Operation Goodwood.) I don't intend to limit anyone's force choices, but it does create a bit of a 'historical imperative' for the action. (even if force makeups are wrong, it does create a bit of immersion)

I have yet to run into a King or Jagtiger in any of my PBEM's (maybe I'm just lucky, but I also have a bit of dialogue with my opponents beforehand as well.)

Victory generally shouldn't come down to the difference between having two tungsten or six tungsten rounds. (although if it did, it would probably be an exciting action...)