Balanced Periods?

[GreenAsJade]

From a QB force selection point of view, what are the most balanced times?

What I mean is, what year/month combinations are the ones where the available forces to each side are the most balanced?

(The opposite of 1941 in CMBB, when KVs come on line and almost nothing can touch them, for example)

Thanks!

GaJ.

[...................................]

Ah, here we have the nub of the QB problem for CMAK. In terms of armour, the Brits have been crippled by having all their cruiser series designated as 'burns easily' for no good reason. In CMAK the Italian M11s and M13s will beat them one on one because the Italians usually take many more hits to knock out. Of course the Panzers have an even easier time. Therefore the Brits will be picking Matildas, which are ridiculously cheap and virtually unstoppable, and early war QBs involving armour tend to be very unbalanced in favour of one side or the other.

As we get to mid'42 there is a better match up between long barreled PzIVs and Grants/Shermans, but as Stugs and Tigers start to appear the advantage lies squarely with the Germans. This continues until the Tiger killers such as 17pdr equipped units appear.

So IMO for armour there is no 'balanced time' at least until 1944. But hey, who said war was fair! If you are looking for a 'fair' armour battle, then you'll need house rules. For example try a '43 battle with a no Tiger purchase rule. Unfortunately if you want to play a '42 or less battle, the armour situation will be so unbalanced as to detract from the game, even with house rules.

[GreenAsJade]

Thanks PP! Thanks also for your comments in CMAKdb - they are very helpful.

I went for '45

GaJ.

[Carl Puppchen]

Are you talking about meeting engagements? If the Germans are on the defense then the 88 makes for some difficult times for the allies anywhere in the desert up to the time when the allies have some tanks capable of chucking 75mm HE, about the time of the Grant. But I agree that the Matlida is damn near unstoppable in a QB (it is pretty crazy to pick an 88mm in a QB because if the initial siting zone doesn't have a view to the flags or enemy likely course of attack than those points are wasted). Of course the Allies can counter with the 75mm free french gun or the 25 pounder on defense.

[...................................]

Yes indeed, plus another problem with 88s in a QB aside from their doubtful setup is their cost. If the Allied player has on-map mortars, or guns, on overwatch (which should be pretty common) then the 88 will be spotted and targetted almost immediately. Considering that 88s are 2-3 times more expensive than Matildas then an allied player should be quite happy to exchange them one for one. He'd have to be pretty dumb to allow an 88 to survive and inflict damage in reasonable excess of its cost.

Thanks for the comments GAJ, I meant to finish commenting every British AFV FWIW on CMAKdb but arrived at the Shermans and couldn't quite face 9 lots of cutting and pasting. Good to see people are still using folke's site

[junk2drive]

I use the db's all the time, especially with making a scenario.

I look forward to the comments and miss them when the are absent. I don't know enough to write them myself, but do throw something in when I can.

Thanks PP and the others from me too.

[GreenAsJade]

Ever since I started I've really only played scenarios. I like them better, but finally it's getting hard to find new ones to play blind that have a reasonable chance of being balanced.

So I'm new to the whole force selection thing. Are there "house rules" specifically to help ensure a balanced game?

Ta.