junk2drive Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 "and so are the participating units." Are you playing without FOW? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiavarm Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Originally posted by junk2drive: "and so are the participating units." Are you playing without FOW? Sorry, but what is "FOW"? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blue division Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 To give my opinion - and it is one of many... Quick battles: are good for learning Combat Mission are not so good for reality they can be one sided meeting engagements on them are hopeless difficult to get the right balance are different nearly every time - can be pretty exciting Scenarios: not so good for learning sometimes - they are less open ended are more balanced - so can be quite plodding if players are evenly matched allow you to play meeting engagements fairly and evenly with no advantages allow advantages to players if you cheat and play against the computer before playign by email anyway those are my thoughts. i'm sure somebody disagrees with them out there. As someone else has said, it is down to what floats your boat. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junk2drive Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Fog Of War, none, full, extreme? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slysniper Posted February 18, 2005 Author Share Posted February 18, 2005 Bengal6, I like playing with what you could call weak units, its fun to see what you can do when you are outclassed as far as units, to play better with less, a real thrill if you succeed. If you can get both sides to play from a no knowledge situation, it can be fun. But many seem to think its wrong to play with knowledge of the board and units. Most real battles, the defending commander has a lot of knowledge of his terrian, and both sides have done everything they possably can to have a idea what they are up against. Dont want surprises in real life. [ February 18, 2005, 12:48 PM: Message edited by: slysniper ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiavarm Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 Originally posted by junk2drive: Fog Of War, none, full, extreme? If you played the scenario before the unit placement could change but not the units( order of battle). Right? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slysniper Posted February 18, 2005 Author Share Posted February 18, 2005 Paul au, You mentioned that you enjoy the Qbs because of all the different matchup's you get. It seems just the opposite to me, most of the time I can quess what the opponent will have because of the settings, most players I have met do not want experiments in QBs, they are playing for wins. Thus always trying to get the most they can for the points. If I came across someone that really mixed it up, that would be more fun, because I would like to do that with my units also. So far I only get that result by creation of fictional scenario's 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junk2drive Posted February 18, 2005 Share Posted February 18, 2005 On the screen where you pick Axis or Allies it has dropdowns for Fog of War, Computer Experience Bonus, Computer Force Balance, etc. Are you choosing FOW = none? That allows both sides to see every unit on the map. Otherwise you should only see the enemy units that you have contact with. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bengal6 Posted February 20, 2005 Share Posted February 20, 2005 Originally posted by slysniper: Most real battles, the defending commander has a lot of knowledge of his terrian, and both sides have done everything they possably can to have a idea what they are up against. Dont want surprises in real life. Agreed Sly, this is reflected in scernarios, during the set up, surveying the terrain and likely approach/position of the nme, allows you to use the terrain to the best advantage. Your second point regarding what the nme has in terms of force make up, is also represented by the briefing (which can make or break a scernario, hence why I only use certain authors' work). A good scernario will reflect realistically/historically what info about the nme force (if any) is available, and all improtantly will have clearly defined objectives. It's a good subject for a thread and shows the two options with their merits and challenges. Indeed I'm tempted to try QBs more in PBEM, especially if porting over a good map. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V Posted February 20, 2005 Share Posted February 20, 2005 Originally posted by simovitch: To me QB's just seem like "Combat Mission Beyond Thunderdome" two tanks enter... one tank leaves... IMHO LOL 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pavlov Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 I always play scenarios vs AI and QB vs human for reasons similar to those mentioned by others. Furthermore, when playing PBEM games I like use the AUTOPICK units feature. I know most CM'ers out there don't seem to like this very much, but I think it makes the game more challenging and interesting when you don't get to choose your units. It also helps avoid the unrealistic all-monster-AFV syndrome. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 If you haven't tried it I really really suggest you putter around in the map editor. Make yourself a map with logical flag placement & setup areas (for meeting engagements, or attacks from one side or another), then give that map a test-drive in a QB. There's nothing quite like playing the SAME map as 1941 light tank assault, 1943 winter combined arms probe, and 1945 heavy tanks ME in dense fog! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slysniper Posted February 24, 2005 Author Share Posted February 24, 2005 Auto pick sounds interesting, I have not played with that tool yet, might have to try that one out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.