Is "Buy your own" realistic?

[dalem]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Heidman:

QBs are fun, but you jsut can't beat a scenario for human vs. human play.

...

The only thing that ASL has that I REALLY miss from CM is a more robust and varied victory model. It is very hard for scenario designers to create interesting victory conditions. This contributes to the "even-steven" nature of most scenarios, since you can not tweak the VC conditions much, you have to keep the sides even to give both players a chance. I miss winning (or losing) ASL scenarios on the strength of a conscript half-squad holding out in the cellar of the last victory hex after surviving that final close combat attack...

Jeff Heidman<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow Jeff - I can't help but find amusing the fact that the things you love about ASL are exactly the things I've always hated.

-dale

[Eric Alkema]

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

playing "what if" and exploring and creating tactics.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The "what if" scenario I'd like to explore is "what if I could manage to not get my hat handed to me"

[Eric Alkema]

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

Another thing, you assume that the computer necessarily picks "historically accurate" force mixes when you choose the option for the computer to pick forces for you. I am not so sure it does as it is a random pick.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I always assumed that it was not totally random, and that rarity influenced the result.

[Vanir Ausf B]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Eric Alkema:

I always assumed that it was not totally random, and that rarity influenced the result.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm pretty sure there is some rarity factored in. For example, Panthers show up much more frequently than Tigers, despite costing more. However, you do still tend to get one of this and one of that and two of those. The forces I pick for my own QBs are more historically correct than computer pick for this reason, though this will vary greatly from person to person.

[ 07-05-2001: Message edited by: Vanir Ausf B ]

[Moon]

Jeff, play around with the preferences for scenarios a little more. You CAN create some interesting victory conditions by giving one side a point bonus as it is, to recreate the situation you have mentioned above.

[heckler_rider]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Buy your own isn’t realistic, but it seems to add a lot of fun to the game for some folks. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually if two grogs are playing, buy your own can be the most realistic. Although, when I play the AI, I sometimes buy what if units.

When I play RI (real intelligence ), I always try and buy a histrocally accurate mix. It just gives you a better sense of pride when you crush an opponent with a historically accurate mix.

Never had a King Tiger against a human....

[ 07-05-2001: Message edited by: olebooya ]

[Michael Dorosh]

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

You might've missed the thread a while back where somebody (can't remember who ) gave the following (I renamed the variables to suit my own preference but the info is the same):

Cp = total points of player casualties (units captured count double their casualty value)

Ce = total points of enemy casualties (units captured count double their casualty value)

F= total value of flags

Fp = point value of flags controlled by player

Fe = point value of flags controlled by enemy

A = player score

E = enemy score

Units are worth BPV except spotters which are 30

( Ce + Fp )

--------------- = A

( Cp + Ce + F )

or Player score =

(Enemy casualties + Player flags)

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

(Player casualties + Enemy casualties + Total flags)

Exit scenarios:

- exited like it should: player gets (cost * 2.7) points

- not exited like it should: opponent gets (cost * 2.7) points

- killed: opponent gets (cost * (2.7 + 1.0)) points

- captured: opponent gets (cost * (2.7 + 2.0)) points

For flamethrower teams and trucks insert 2.3 instead of 2.7.

[ 07-05-2001: Message edited by: Offwhite ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So how does this apply to units that do not suffer 100 percent casualties?

I have asked this repeatedly and no one is providing any answers.

If your squad is slated to exit, and takes 2 casualties but still exits - what then?

[not another gamer]

the short 75/panther 76 rules are great to go by for BYO.

http://www.rugged-defense.nl/cm/Fionn3.htm

Not much of a suprise but interesting is were one person builds both forces and his opponent gets to decide which side he plays.

I would love to see more battles/scenarios were one side is overmatched and is gonna 'loose'. But, if they can 'loose' by taking out a large number of opposing units or causing them to spend more than X turns he or she wins.

[Conscript Bagger]

Good questions, Michael - I haven't done any testing with those point values to find out.

[Doug Beman]

First off, regardless of whether historical battles were or were not usually "balanced," I would prefer to play battles that were at least CLOSE to balanced. There's only so many times I can play and either be totally overmatched, in terms of combat capability given me, or else simply march all over the other side (who here remembers playing the final scenario in CC3 as the Soviets? Was it REALLY that much fun to drive 6 or 7 IS2 tanks and 3 or 4 platoons of veteran SMG troops over those 2 immobile Panther tanks?)

I purchase my own units because I try to build a somewhat historical and capable force. My experience with the AI picking troops has been about 60/40, good/bad. I once started a QB (thankfully vs the AI so I could quit) and received a force of (veteran) 2 MG bunkers, 1x88, 1x150mm IG, 1xHQ and 2 squads, and 2 trucks with which to defend a town (in the middle of thick fog)against a (green) infantry company w/ HW support, backed up by at least a platoon of armor and a FO. I played about 4 turns and quit. Some may have fun doing this, and some may even be able to achieve victory. I do not have fun, and cannot achieve victory, and would rather look for a battle more entertaining than futile.

Another time I recieved a force of 2 mortar HTs, 4 HTs w/ 20mm cannon, 2 platoons and 2 PS teams, to defend against a platoon of Shermans, a platoon of Stuarts, and 2 Priests backed up by a company of infantry. Again, I quit out in hopes of finding a battle I'd at least enjoy losing.

DjB