Bias in CMBO?

[Blackcat]

A chum of mine against whom I have been playing PBEM for about a year insists that the game is biased against the German side.

This is contrary to my experience (having been beaten as the Allied and Axis player in equal measure). However, I cannot convince him that his theory is false.

Does anybody have any convincing objective evidence I can use?

Cheers

[Guy w/gun]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!

Now I know how some of the vet posters feel.

[Echo]

Of course. When I'm playing, I always win. Doesnt matter which side I pick. (Even the Poles!)

[Clubfoot]

Why don't you whip his ass as the Germans a coupla times?

[Diceman]

Well, when you can't win, its always easy to blame your equipment. If you can't blame the equipment, its easy to blame the system. There is no bias. If your friend can't appreciate his unit's and equipment's strengths and weaknesses, well that's his problem when his Panther gets blown up.

[Andreas]

The game is always biased against me when I lose. Even when I win I feel I have to make an extra effort to overcome the bias. And I am German, so your friend must be right I feel biased against. BTS has to fix it or somefink.

Seriously though - does your friend play both sides or only Germans? Why does he feel it is biased, he could after all just be a crappy player?

[The Commissar]

Make your friend play a few games as the Canadians or the Polish forces. He'll be beging to return to playing as the German forces within a week!

[Gyrene]

Oh no...Not again

Tell your friend to suck it up and learn how to play better, this argument is probably the oldest in this board and has been debated and flamed to death.

Gyrene

[aka_tom_w]

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

A chum of mine against whom I have been playing PBEM for about a year insists that the game is biased against the German side.

This is contrary to my experience (having been beaten as the Allied and Axis player in equal measure). However, I cannot convince him that his theory is false.

Does anybody have any convincing objective evidence I can use?

Cheers<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

We have all had the same problem with our old board game/wargame buddies who seem to universally feel the german tanks are unpowered, under-armoured, under represented or someway just not up to their usual "unbertank" performance in OTHER wargames.

It is VERY difficult to make others believe that ALL the other wargames had it WRONG all along and that ALL the stats and historical data prove that the tanks and units in CMBO are ALL modeled without ANY bias.

The First thing my friends asked is :

"Where was it made? Who designed it?"

Answer:

"A couple of guys on the East coast of the USA".

Reply:

"Well there you have it, all the German units are under modeled and look at that DAMN US. .50 cal HMG it kills tanks and light half tracks!. Clearly it is bias in favour of the yanks as it was designed by yanks!"

Now no amount of pseudo-grog sophistry would placate these nay sayers so I just gave up.

(I did, I just gave up on them, screw 'em!) Its much more fun to play TCP/IP versus some other CMBO fanatic (and there are now Thousands of them out there!) then to continue to argue with your friend about the greatness and FAIRNESS of this evenly balanced and historical accurate simulation.

Give up on your frinds and play other TCP/IP games with other "believers" in the CMBO phenomenon!

Happy Gaming

-tom w

[ 10-11-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[ 10-11-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[Commissar]

Tell your friend that he should stop reading overly biased histories and autobiographies like, "Germans: Our Racial Superiors and Overlords."

But seriously, the problem with CM is that it may model German/Allied equipment too accurately for certain players. You'll hear all sort of excuses for poor strategy and tactics.

[General Panic]

I find that CM is extremely BIASed against inept players. They never win at all!

[JunoReactor]

A mg42 or .50 doesnt have any bias.

[russellmz]

someone put tournament stats up before. if i recall correctly:

almost 50-50 with newbie players between allied and germans

MUCH higher proportion german wins when experienced guys played experienced guys

60-70%? im not sure.

so much for the bias against germans...

[Lanzfeld]

The only German equipment I think is not simulated correctly is the 88 gun on the tiger tank. I have done many tests in the "Last Defense" battle and find that the 88 on the tiger tank just plain misses too much at short ranges (600-800 meters) compared to the Allied 76mm gun on the hellcat. Just my observation.

[PJungnitsch]

The 88's at range, the variable Panther/Kingtiger turret rotation speed are a few things that come to mind. No doubt there is a few things on the Allied side as well though and at any rate the point system is designed to even out the play balance. More effective weapons equals greater cost.

However from the grog side of things it will be interesting what changes take place in CM2.

[Commissar]

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

The only German equipment I think is not simulated correctly is the 88 gun on the tiger tank. I have done many tests in the "Last Defense" battle and find that the 88 on the tiger tank just plain misses too much at short ranges (600-800 meters) compared to the Allied 76mm gun on the hellcat. Just my observation.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What really gets me is how sometimes my elite Tiger crews can't seem to hit the side of a barn despite the fact they are totally still, in a hull down position, and with the intiative while an ordinary regular allied crew, on the move, without the intiative, can hit and destroy my Tiger with the first or second shot. It's not even a case where the Tiger crew was surprised or anything, they just kept missing even when they have all the advantages. Oh well. Crap sometimes happens.

[ 10-11-2001: Message edited by: Commissar ]

[Iron Chef Sakai]

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

The 88's at range, the variable Panther/Kingtiger turret rotation speed are a few things that come to mind. No doubt there is a few things on the Allied side as well though and at any rate the point system is designed to even out the play balance. More effective weapons equals greater cost.

However from the grog side of things it will be interesting what changes take place in CM2. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

this is a simulation game aiming for realism, wich it captures like not other game i've played, in any case when a game is aiming for realism, play balance should be a non factor, i can't say i've played enough to judge the accuracy on the 88 thus far, i usaly go with the 75mm since most maps are medium to small, just from my knowledge that the 88's main advantage in battle was that it could out range it's opponents and knock them out on a regualar basis from those ranges, thought the german high velocity 75 was'nt too far behind, you may want to chewck the experince on your tank crews, that could be a factor, or anti tank crews, the 88 was the best gun of the war, i assume that cmbo follows though on that since this game as far as i can see has been modeled great

[Blackcat]

"We have all had the same problem with our old board game/wargame buddies who seem to universally feel the german tanks are unpowered, under-armoured, under represented or someway just not up to their usual "unbertank" performance in OTHER wargames." And with that aka_tom_w neatly enacpsulates my problem.

Thanks one and all to those who have posted helpful replies.

[Pascal DI FOLCO]

Some players just perform better with a specific army - in the case of your friends it's with the Germans, and I must admit I also have an easier time with them, but it's just a matter of tactics & preferences!

The game is not biased - ie there is no evidence that German units are better in the game than their counterpart, nor Allied being weaker !

Lastly there's the issue of GAME balance : in real life there was 10 Sherms for each Tiger/Panther, not in CM !

[Warmaker]

I don't know. For me, whether it is against AI or a good 'ol human player my Panthers always get ounumbered 6-1 in armor. Anyways, that leads to the fun and tension!

Sure some players complain about the gamey German SMG, Big Cats and such. Big deal. The Allies get lots of .50cals and IMO their biggest and best asset: Artillery. Lots of artillery. So much of it that 99% Axis players can only dream of having that much on call.

At least that this gets me ready to face off against the Russians in CMBB. The Russians did love artillery after all...

[Tero]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

that ALL the stats and historical data prove that the tanks and units in CMBO are ALL modeled without ANY bias.

All the technical stuff seems to be in line.

By and large the game is OK, should I venture to say even great. Anyways the best game in the market. (No, I have not been assimilated. )

But there are some vehicles which seem to culminate the undelying tech-spec and TacAI currents which would seem to point towards pro-Allied bias, like the M5 light tank and any of the Allied AC's with 37mm or 2prd gun. Going up against them with a PzKw-IV is more of a hazard than going up against a Chaffee.

There are these precious Kodak-moments when the illusion is shattered by a convergence when the planets line up during an eclipse and as a result a 37mm gun gets a frontal penetration and KO's a Tiger at 750 meters.

Technically it may be possible but it just plain feels wrong. OK, I know: for the player all the games are cumulative but for the game engine each game is unique. But in all fairness all the battles were cumulative to the men who went through them. And all the sources I have read indicate that the M5 light tank was ill-suited to go deliberately against a Tiger, frontally even more so.

Also, there is a definitive bias against non-turreted tanks and AT vehicles. Low silhouette does not count when the terrain tile size designed to suit the turreted tanks (?) prevents effective hull down positioning by the player. The Allies are not much affected by this because their inventory is predominantly turreted vehicles.

Then there are the bunkers and pillboxes, which are only available to the Germans. When playing as Germans I usually opt for plain AT guns or plain HMG's. This is because the bunkers and pillboxes get spotted and killed way too easily. And they give out sound contacts which reveal their location too accurately (this neat "feature" won me a PBEM game once when playing as English against the Germans).

this evenly balanced and historical accurate simulation.

With all the approximations and abstractions I'd rather call it a tactical level wargame than a combat simulation.

As for evenly balanced..... lets just say the designers say the key to realism is playing with green troops. How many of the players opt to choose green vs veterans or elite in a QB ?

[Vanir Ausf B]

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

Also, there is a definitive bias against non-turreted tanks and AT vehicles. Low silhouette does not count when the terrain tile size designed to suit the turreted tanks (?) prevents effective hull down positioning by the player. The Allies are not much affected by this because their inventory is predominantly turreted vehicles.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The exact opposite is true. Turretless vehicles are more effective in CM than in real life because they can all rotate in place, partially negating the penalty of having no turret.

Also, the German TDs with highly sloped frontal armor (Hetzer and JPz IV/70, mainly) are underpriced for their effectiveness.

To me, this seems to "culminate the undelying tech-spec and TacAI currents" which would seem to point towards pro-German bias

[ 10-12-2001: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

[aka_tom_w]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

The exact opposite is true. Turretless vehicles are more effective in CM than in real life because they can all rotate in place, partially negating the penalty of having no turret.

Also, the German TDs with highly sloped frontal armor (Hetzer and JPz IV/70, mainly) are underpriced for their effectiveness.

To me, this seems to "culminate the undelying tech-spec and TacAI currents" which would seem to point towards pro-German bias

[ 10-12-2001: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I concur.

especially with:

"The exact opposite is true. Turretless vehicles are more effective in CM than in real life because they can all rotate in place, partially negating the penalty of having no turret.

Also, the German TDs with highly sloped frontal armor (Hetzer and JPz IV/70, mainly) are underpriced for their effectiveness"

and I agree with those that suggest the 88mm is perhaps less than is historically accurate when refering to accuracy at long range. AND of course Superior german sighting optics are not modeled....

BUT the game is still largely well balanced and technically historical accurate (mostly )

-tom w

[Tero]

Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

The exact opposite is true. Turretless vehicles are more effective in CM than in real life because they can all rotate in place, partially negating the penalty of having no turret.

Yes. Only I think the rotation was done to compensate for no veering to the side while on the move. Or was it the fact that Tiger was used IRL like a Stug to compensate for slow turret, I forget.

Anyway, you still can not make them take a hull down position in the same way the turret tanks.

Also, the German TDs with highly sloped frontal armor (Hetzer and JPz IV/70, mainly) are underpriced for their effectiveness.

That's 2 out of how many thin skinned or non-sloped armour models in the game ?

To me, this seems to "culminate the undelying tech-spec and TacAI currents" which would seem to point towards pro-German bias

Only if the hull down sloped armour TD defeats a 37mm round at 1000 meters in 100% of the cases.

[JasonC]

Challenge your naive friend, he gets the Allies. Defend with the Germans and pick the "infantry" force type. Max out the artillery category and add TRPs for the guns, and if you like some AT mines. Buy as much cheap infantry - only types with lots of automatic weapons - as you think the attackers can afford. If you picked SMG types, add some HMG teams for ranged fire. Regardless, add schreck teams for the forward platoons. Spend everything else on towed guns, concentrating on the cheaper varieties - PAK, 20mm Flak, Puppchens, Infantry guns.

Place the TRPs and AT mines along some crestline (mines at gaps that allow vehicle movement, naturally), with the infantry and schrecks behind the crest, so the longest LOS to most of them is short, under 100 meters wherever possible. Keep the squads in command radius. You can use "split squad" to create secondary foxholes farther back if desired. A few halfsquads (or extra LMGs) can spot ahead for you to see what is coming. Keep at least one platoon with high short-range firepower in reserve in a covered area, preferably able to move to the other positions by a covered route. Place the HMGs and all of the guns farther back on the forward slope of the next ridge to the rear, hidden from beyond the first ridge but able to see "your" side of it. FOs go back there too. Weapons HQs and company HQs can be in the second lineto provide leadership bonuses for the guns.

Hide everyone. Wait. When the enemy reaches the crest, kill the units that come over with the nearest infantry platoon, and by unhiding only enough guns to take them out, and of the lightest type that can do so. When he makes a big push, drop the TRP arty on him and open up with all guns at once. Done correctly, you will fight only those portions of his force that get over the crest, with as much of your force as you need to kill them. And if he sends everyone over at once to "break the line" together, then the area fire effect of the mines, artillery, and HE being thrown by the guns, will murder him. If he searches behind the crest with indirect arty, just play "dodge ball" using your secondary positions, returning as soon as the fire lifts. You short range infantry firepower, schrecks, and fausts, will chew him up cheaply, and the horde of cheap guns with KO anything remaining. Use the reserve to counterattack enemy infantry broken by your artillery fire, to prevent rally.

After you've beaten him with this infantry and gun reverse slope system, goad him with the comment - "geez, you can't even beat the freaking infantry, and you think the Germans are worse?" Then add Hetzers to your force (combined arms). Site them near the edges of the map looking inward, with their forward-facing near side sheltered by a building or woods they are peeping out behind. Cross their fire in the middle of the map. They will bounce all short 75 rounds from the front and KO any vanilla tanks or light armor he sends. Relocate carefully after successful engagements but never move them ahead of your infantry line - stay well behind it. Keep schrecks on the center flank of each to bag any vehicles that try to get flank shots by coming around that way. Use infantry with automatics to prevent enemy zooks or PIATs from getting close to the side closer to the enemy.

Taunt him that he can't even beat Hezters, let alone the big cats. When he manages to crack that, then the next time out buy Tiger Is. Place them near your own edge of the map and reasonably centered, but out of immediate LOS of anything. Wait until he starts probing your infantry defense, and then charge up and waste things. Shoot the immediate front clear of enemy armor, then reverse out of LOS again and reposition the tanks to different locations, without revealing them again yet. Wait for his next probe at the infantry line, and repeat.

When he has learned to deal with all of the above, point out to him that previously he did not understand the system of German tactics at all, and was just expecting the unit type to do all of his work for him. That in the real deal, the Germans fought better even in the first half of the war, when their tanks were worse than the enemy ones, not better, and that this was because the real basis of their effectiveness was better tactics, not technological magic; fighting smarter, not leaning on a crutch of technical armor specs. And that the real effectiveness of the better late war German tanks came from combining both.

Only after that entire process should you let him play the Germans again...