CAL Request: Rule Suggestion

[Col Deadmarsh]

I think that since the CAL system tries to make it fair for both sides by limiting SMG squads and having rules which restrict sides from taking heavy tanks, there should also be a rule suggestion for attack/defend scenarios where the attacker is given the -10% handicap.

This will even things out a little for the defender who always seems to be at a disadvantage, even when blessed with a good map. Using this rule would cut down the attack/defend rate to about 3 to 1 I would imagine (Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.)

Whatever the adjusted ratio is, the end result is a fairer game for both sides. There could even be a rule or suggestion to say that 10% of those points being taken away from the attacker have to be used by the defense in fortifications. I think a lot of people on defense are scared to use their points on these because they can't see the map beforehand. It seems this would be a good solution to both problems. What do all you CAL players think?

[WWB]

Uh, the attack-defend ratio is 1.5-1 last time I checked (i.e. 1500 pts for attacker vs. 1000 points for the defender).

WWB

[Mr. Johnson--]

If you want to get picky you could play best 2 out of three with -10%, normal, and -10% again, then have the defender attack same way, best 2 out of 3.

[Col Deadmarsh]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by wwb_99:

Uh, the attack-defend ratio is 1.5-1 last time I checked (i.e. 1500 pts for attacker vs. 1000 points for the defender).

WWB<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Okay, I must've been on shrooms at the time I wrote that. Still, when playing, it seems a little high and I think that the 10% would even it out. If 10% seems too much to take away from the attacker, it could be stated that the defender has to use a certain amount of points for fortifications. Just a thought since it seems that everyone's always complaining that it's too hard to win on defense.

[WWB]

Well, I am of the school that thinks the problem with winning on defense is not the points ratio but the maps. The random maps and especially random flag placement really hurt defenders.

As many great generals have noted, the key to defensive warfare is to pick which ground to defend.

Also note that most real attacks took place with far greater than 1.5 to 1 odds. 3 to 1 was the normal rule of thumb, and if you really wanted to make sure the breakthru would happen in a timeley manner 5 to 1 or better was a good idea.

My suggestion for balance in QB defenses is actually a bit more radical. Play Assault type scenarios and take the 10% away from the defender. Because the flags are farther back, assaults give the defender a much better chance. And the 10% loss puts the point scale close to the current Attack-type ratio.

WWB