sightreader Posted September 24, 2001 Share Posted September 24, 2001 We had a problem in all tank fights with the Germans (or whoever had the superior armor) camping along the side of the board to prevent getting flanked. We suggest turning the square field diagonally and starting opposing tank forces in opposite corners. Unless the German start zone is good high ground, it makes the battle much more interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foobar Posted September 24, 2001 Share Posted September 24, 2001 Great idea, I plan on trying one of these right now. People use that trick (myself included) to keep infatry from being flank as well... You should get an award, in my opinion. Thats the first original idea that has come up on the forum in months! For sightreader. The Foobar's Cross for meritous thinking endeavors beyond the ability of lurkers and sycophants alike. ......*.... ......+.... ...<+>... *---O---* .....<+>... ......+.... ......*.... [ 09-23-2001: Message edited by: *Captain Foobar* ] [ 09-23-2001: Message edited by: *Captain Foobar* ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foobar Posted September 24, 2001 Share Posted September 24, 2001 Its supposed to look that way..screw you guys.... (sigh) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Johnson-- Posted September 24, 2001 Share Posted September 24, 2001 Interesting, i'll do some experimenting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sightreader Posted September 24, 2001 Author Share Posted September 24, 2001 Why thank you, kind sir, for the Foobar's Cross. It sure beats getting a Purple Heart. I hope this idea comes in handy and rejuvenates the quality vs quantity Tank Fight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Equinox Posted September 24, 2001 Share Posted September 24, 2001 Use the Code tags, your drawing will work right then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rifle1860 Posted September 24, 2001 Share Posted September 24, 2001 Thanks for the idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaka Posted September 24, 2001 Share Posted September 24, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by sightreader: ...camping along the side of the board to prevent getting flanked. We suggest turning the square field diagonally and starting opposing tank forces in opposite corners...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> yes,yes a very good idea to implement in human us human pre-made scenarios... and... Why not make the CM QB map for ALL battles (not only Tank battles) like this ? Probably the area/battle points ratio would have to be greater then currently is in order to prevent easy enemy position guessing and the consequent early HE bombardments. Even with this system a guy can stay near the map edge, but the other flank would be much more exposed then in a square map situation... The only downside I can think at the moment would be the map size/area increase (for a given "x" pts battle) compared to what we got now (it would be heavier on the computer). Also not being completely lunatic, I think it would be a nice development for CM3 and on Wait... I'm no programer, I'm a buyer, so that is not for me think/decide ! Now, go and tell me why am I wrong... [ 09-24-2001: Message edited by: Tanaka ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sightreader Posted September 24, 2001 Author Share Posted September 24, 2001 Thank you guys for your generous compliments! I tried playing a few like this against the computer. Assuming a bunch of Shermans against a few Ubers, it's critical for the Shermans to get to the wide middle before the Ubers can gun them down. Once they start converging, the Shermans can edge camp on their way in and the Ubers are pivoting all over the place just to get front shots. Hard to get the computer to play the Shermans right unless you start them close enough to the middle to get there quickly. I don't know if this tactical situation is more realistic or not, but it's certainly more interesting than the traditional square board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWB Posted September 24, 2001 Share Posted September 24, 2001 I replied to this post in the Tips & Tricks, but I will repeat here. I have messed with this concept a couple of times, and it does work beautifully. Especially if you don't start everything jammed into the corner, but give each side 1/3rd of the map to work with. There is, however, one difficulty: CM's terrain tile system does not work too well on a slant, especially regarding roads and elevations. Aside from that, it is a great concept. WWB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted September 24, 2001 Share Posted September 24, 2001 I've often wondered what the effect of a circular map would be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sightreader Posted September 24, 2001 Author Share Posted September 24, 2001 Yes indeed, there is some speculation about circular maps. I think it would be ideal, although, of course, impossible to implement in this game. I didn't know there were sighting bugs when playing diagonally; I've only played this way twice and didn't notice. Ideally, I think it's best if the map fans out just a bit in front of the defensive position. If this is not centered on the board, it could look a tad like the Superman logo or a circle that had too much to eat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckeye Posted September 25, 2001 Share Posted September 25, 2001 The second round of the Panther 76 Tournament on the Rugged Defense Ladder site is currently underway, and it used a diagonal map. It was interesting to play (both my games are completed). I worried about getting hit with an early arty barrage when attacking, and all my forces were grouped closely, but I think that's too risky as an attacking strategy in a Tournament (and possibly in real life). In any case, it does make for an interesting battle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gyrene Posted September 25, 2001 Share Posted September 25, 2001 To complement the Foobar Cross awarded here, I'd like to also award all the previous posters with the Anti-Eurowarrior Nice Guy Award , for gracefully accepting input from a new forum member and not once telling him to "Do A Search" or shooting his idea down solely based on his member number. Gentlemen, I applaud you all. Gyrene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cauldron Posted September 25, 2001 Share Posted September 25, 2001 In battles why not make it such that board edges are immaterial?? That is, all VC ar in areas where board edges make little difference. In operations it is the game engine that is a fault not the design. eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sightreader Posted September 25, 2001 Author Share Posted September 25, 2001 Yes, I must say that people have been very forgiving of my newbie mistakes (i.e. posting to 3 forums because I didn't know which was the right one) and have been very constructive in commentary. I didn't think of that artillery barrage with a restricted start zone: that gives me nightmares (after all, I had pure tank fights in mind). I'm not quite sure what the post about putting victory locations away from the edges refers to - I had small battles (4 vs 4 tank fights) in mind, where the victory locations mattered far less than a board small enough for a quick game (45 min or less) but big enough for flanking manuevers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sightreader Posted September 25, 2001 Author Share Posted September 25, 2001 Some folks fooling with this say that the edge hugging problem still exists, but is a bit harder to set up with the diagonal boards. If the tactical importance of board geometry is less than the tactical importance of terrain, then I'd say the experiment was a success. It looks like the consensus is to start about 1/3 the way up the diamond so you don't get pinned starting in the corner. I am concerned about reports that the diagonal board brings out irregularities in the implementation of elevation and roads when approached from a funny angle. Does anyone have a good idea of what these problems are? Thanks, Sightreader sightreader@home.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts