jshandorf Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 Just be warned.. If you play any ladder person and they pick the Allies count on them to pick the British with the following units... British Paras. Church VIIs. Wasps. And plenty of those really cheap 4.2 inc mortars... It just gets old pretty fast if you ask me... especially if you like to pick historical loadouts, like I do now. Hell, when I play the Amis I usually pick Vanilla American rifles and lots of Shermans... Yeah they suck... but it's more fun that way. Jeff [ February 07, 2002, 05:15 PM: Message edited by: jshandorf ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 Originally posted by jshandorf: Just be warned.. If you play any ladder person and they pick the Allies count on them to pick the British with the following units... British Paras. Church VIIs. Wasps. And plenty of those really cheap 4.2 inc mortars... Wrong. First of all, it's Churchill VIII, VII. Then, the 95mm Cromwells are more popular with both infantry players like Swamp (they don't want a sitting duck that ruin their force robustness, they want switch strike-and-retreat) and the real armor players (they want to rush from cover to cover). As for Paras, it's not our fault that normal rifle squads are just underpowered in CMBO, especially considering ammunition. It is a fair deal to allow two choices to Allied players when Axis has plenty. It also becomes SOP amoung many THers to say which infantry type exactly they take, because there is no real influence on the opponent's choices, except for SMG troops, which are usually excluded (via month) or very limited. Big mortars are just good - flexible, cheap and fairly powerful, in reality and CMBO, period. Noone needs to be ashamed of that. And besides, the real big stuff have plenty of fans, too, as has 105mm or 5.5" VT. You forgot the 3" mortars, they are just too tempting... It just gets old pretty fast if you ask me... especially if you like to pick historical loadouts, like I do now. Hell, when I play the Amis I usually pick Vanilla American rifles and lots of Shermans... Yeah they suck... but it's more fun that way. In what way does always taking rifle and Shermans get less old than always taking <whatever else>? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xerxes Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 British Paras. Church VIIs. Wasps. And plenty of those really cheap 4.2 inc mortars... Don't forget: - 3" onboard mortars - Cromwell VIIIs with their 95mm gun I know what you mean jeff. It's funny when you play a brit scenario and you have to make do with the more normal: - 25lb FOs (they're awful) - brit rifles (they're maybe more awful) - bren carriers (what the heck are these good for? They can't carry a full squad and have no firepower) - white scout cars (fast, paper thin, one weak mg) - cromwell IV, V, and VI (actually these are pretty good) Funny thing is, it's a lot more fun playing the "normal" brits. Your tactics and strategy better be good. -marc [ February 07, 2002, 05:33 PM: Message edited by: xerxes ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 [edited/delete because I think we should keep this thread as a tactics discussion, and not unit selection/gamey/pricing discussion of which we have plenty. Tactics count] [ February 07, 2002, 05:54 PM: Message edited by: redwolf ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xerxes Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 agreed, tactics are interesting, unit selection is boring. -marc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col Deadmarsh Posted February 8, 2002 Author Share Posted February 8, 2002 Originally posted by redwolf: [edited/delete because I think we should keep this thread as a tactics discussion, and not unit selection/gamey/pricing discussion of which we have plenty. Tactics count]I don't have a problem discussing unit selection as long as the tactics involved are discussed too. After all, the two go hand in hand. Going back to these "everyone takes these units because they're the best" theory...I believe that there is a solution to every problem. Therefore, if you notice that all players playing British are taking the same units and invariably using the same tactics which bring out the strengths in these units, then that can be countered by taking a certain unit selection and employing a certain tactic yourself. Knowing what your enemy is taking and having a rough idea of what he's capable with using these units can give you an advantage. For instance, let's say you are the Germans, your opponent is the British and you are playing in heavy woods. If you are seeing a lot of Wasps in these scenarios, then your counter to that might be to buy 20mm halftracks which are cheap and will get rid of the Wasps at the lowest cost to you. If you are the British and you know that your opponent will need to flank you on one side to get to your Wasps who are sitting in front of the one major flag on the board, then you can set a trap on that flank which will take advantage of this. In short, knowing what to look for from your enemy should bring you an advantage when you choose your own units. Although some units are of more value than others, I don't believe there is any force selection in CM which is "foolproof." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 Originally posted by Colonel_Deadmarsh: I don't have a problem discussing unit selection as long as the tactics involved are discussed too. After all, the two go hand in hand. Unfortunately, what we are really discussing here is the pricing system (and some ammo load choices in CMBO), at least for M8 HMC, 3" mortar, british 95mm (given the HC charge capabilities), Hetzer, infantry guns, non-rifle squads and big mortar FOs. This is this-game-only strategy and inherintly boring to discuss. The Wasp is more interesting, since people buy it because it is so fast. It also needs to come very near the enemy which is not easy, so we can discuss its value and countermeasures on a level that is above this-game-only. In short, knowing what to look for from your enemy should bring you an advantage when you choose your own units. Although some units are of more value than others, I don't believe there is any force selection in CM which is "foolproof.Being predictable is death. See Black Hawk Down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skelley Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 I have played swamp 18-20 times, I forget exactly how many times. He is without a doubt the best player I've ever played. I've managed to beat him twice in that time but that was a long time ago. He is a master at dodging arty and making his arty count. Usually half of the game I think I have him but then he applies the pressure and I fold like a house of cards. I've come close to ending his streak but he always manages to win. He knows how to use his infantry and easily "swamps" any opponent he plays. I've learned alot from him but he is always setting the curve so it is tough to get ahead of it. My hat is off to the master Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skelley Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 This is in response to Col. Deadmarsh. "There's 2 ladders at Tournament House. Some of us, like myself, play on the CAL ladder there. It's a more realistic unit selection that prevents "working the system." The ladder Swamp is on is the reguar ladder over there where anything goes." While there are 2 ladders, I would not say that the regular ladder is an anything goes ladder. In every game we play on that ladder we agree on certain terms before the game. Such as no SMGs, no force mixing, short 75, panther 76. We on that ladder look for fair fights, maybe not historic OOBs but fair as far as firepower and things like that. When I first started playing there it was pretty much a free for all but people got tired of the germans winning because of there superior firepower so we decided to change it. Maybe you haven't been to TH in a while so you may not know how it is there now. As far as my games go I do not allow SMGs or force mixing and try to play short 75 to avoid the rare but deadly IV70s. At TH the game u play is of your decision. It is not true to say us THers are game mechanics or that we manipulate the system flaws to achieve victory. I am willing to play anybody with whatever params you would like and may the best man win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xerxes Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 The top TH players are certainly extremely skilled, but please, most of the them are force selection game mechanics (which isn't a dig, that's just what most TH players like). How many computer pick or scenarios are played there? (subtracting the ones I've played). 2%, 3%? -marc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holien Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 I play scenarios and I must admit you might be right on Percentages of TH players playing choose your own forces. I prefer at the moment the playing of scenarios. I play them double blind and it is a real blast. Playing Casey Jones Railyard a the moment and it is real nerve racking not knowing what or how many points you are up against. I have been given units that I would not choose and I am trying to use them to my best ability. The WBW Tourney has been one of my gaming high points. Serious fun and serious action. H Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xerxes Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 I totally agree Holien. The tension when you are pretty clueless about the enemy force and disposition and when you have to make do with what central command has given you makes for a great game. We have a lot of Scenario gamers over at BoB. -marc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 Originally posted by xerxes: The top TH players are certainly extremely skilled, but please, most of the them are force selection game mechanics (which isn't a dig, that's just what most TH players like). How many computer pick or scenarios are played there? (subtracting the ones I've played). 2%, 3%? This is true, however keep in mind that the computer selected forces are very bad, worse than the terrain generator. You simply do not get forces that have the ability to fight a wide range of enemy forces. And you replce the problem of cherry-picking the bargins with a problem of having your points wasted for expensive stuff you cannot use. In special, there is no guarantee that you get sufficient AT asserts while not having Fionn rules. And you get a lot of engineers *and* German Volksgrenadier. 550 points in British engineers are no match for 550 points in SMG squads. You also get the SdKfz 7/1 and 7/2, which are banned for a good reason. As for scenarios, normal scenarios are not as balanced as a quickbattle with one map reject each and your own force selection. People begin to solve the problem by having a third party generator a terrain repeadently until it looks symmetric and then place competive forces under loose specs by the player on it (e.g. "give me an infantry-heavy force with a few guns", or "I want real tanks, no thin crap please"). Obviously, you need a quite good person doing the setup, since he needs both historical TO&E knowledge and at the same time much know what exactly the minimum requirements for self-defense are, and what units are bargins or expensive, and balance them out. So, that takes some time, in fact I am justing waiting for Swamp to generate such a map for a PBEM. Maybe we should start placing maps on the web with a small CGI that gives out the passwords exactly once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thin Red Line Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 I may be unlucky, but as a profane in the art of picking units it seems that each time i ingenuously choose a unit and I'm happy with it in the battle i read a post in this forum stating that its use is gamey : german soft AA vehicules , Cromwell 95mm, 3'inch brits onboard mortar... Is there a weapon at the same time 1)historically common, 2)well modelled 3)fair to use 4) efficient :confused: Just curious Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 Originally posted by Thin Red Line: I may be unlucky, but as a profane in the art of picking units it seems that each time i ingenuously choose a unit and I'm happy with it in the battle i read a post in this forum stating that its use is gamey : german soft AA vehicules , Cromwell 95mm, 3'inch brits onboard mortar... Is there a weapon at the same time 1)historically common, 2)well modelled 3)fair to use 4) efficient The problem is that "gamey" is too wide a term, people has too wide opinions. Generally banned are "broken" units, that is the AA halftracks. "Considerably underpriced" or otherwise "extremly effective because not stoppable due to game mechanics problems" may be limited, like M8 HMC, SMG squads, Hetzer. If you want a game that is free of this discussion, just say: - exactly which infantry both side take (e.g. SS rifle 44 vs US rifle 44) - only real tanks with guns that shoot AP, not HC (and maybe require a turret) - no SP artillery, but open-top TDs allowed (again, if it fires AP, its OK) - no flak units and no airplaces (careful, can include all 20mm vehicles) - no gun cheaper than [x] points - no M3A1 and M5A1 Thanks leaves plenty of choice and gets rid of most problems. Fionn rules can go on top of that. Why the hell are we at a unit selection discussion again? It help very little, guys! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xerxes Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 Scenarios aren't as balanced as a ME? Well, yes, of course, they couldn't possibly be. But perfect balance is only achieved if both players are "good" (or both are "poor") force pickers. Otherwise the QB ME is balanced only right up until the first move occurs. That's not a battle balanced in my book. Not to mention that against a Swamp, the midrange CM player will probably pick some AT assets. Oops, points down the drain from the get-go and the rest of the game is an exercise in UNbalance. And so what if the scenario isn't perfectly balanced? Does that make it less fun? Not to mention, players strategy and tactics far outway "balance" in a double-blind scenario. The knowledge and skill in avoiding thw wrath of Jabos is worth infinitely more than having an extra Panther on your side. Go peruse the BoB game histories, check particular scenarios and you'll find there don't appear to be many clearly unbalanced scenarios. Somehow I think if Swamp played scenarios he'd still be winning at least 90% of his games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maple Tree Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 What does the acronym TO&E stand for ? and there is another one like it with the letter "A" in it. What does it mean as well ? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Equinox Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 Table of Organization and Equipment, IIRC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 Originally posted by Holien: I play scenarios and I must admit you might be right on Percentages of TH players playing choose your own forces. I prefer at the moment the playing of scenarios. I play them double blind and it is a real blast. Playing Casey Jones Railyard a the moment and it is real nerve racking not knowing what or how many points you are up against. I have been given units that I would not choose and I am trying to use them to my best ability. The WBW Tourney has been one of my gaming high points. Serious fun and serious action. HI've played Casey Jones Railyard and it is a GOOD one, I played first time as the Allies against the AXIS AI and it is HARD. Want a good Scenario to test your Allied unit Tactics and Skills??? pick Casey Jones Railyard and play against the German AI as though it is a REAL person and you will be very entertained by the way the scenario plays out! -tom w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvio Manuel Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 Originally posted by redwolf: Redwolf, what do you think is wrong w/ the M8HMC and the Hetzer- too underpriced? Why would you say that there should be no M3A1 & M5A1 (methinks you mean the halftracks)? Too cheap relative to the German 250/1 and 251/1 transports? [ February 08, 2002, 02:32 PM: Message edited by: Silvio Manuel ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silvio Manuel Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 I've added a new topic for the OT discussion on force-purchasing ideas: Topic: Buying guide: Ladder play vs. Historical I don't know how to make a proper link though, sorry about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Leader Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 Hey, an idea! Why don't want o' youse guys who knows this Swamp invite him over here to make a post about the tactics he uses in HIS OWN words? I would love to hear what he has to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlowMotion Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 I don't know whether it's this same Swamp, but there seems to be an interesting looking new scenario called Rocky Fields by Swamp at Scenario Depot... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commissar Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 My current theory states that to play CM truly well like the TH top rankers do, you not only have to have a good mastery of picking the right units for the job (as many suggest to be the only reason TH'ers like swamp succeed), but you also have to become very, VERY good at thinking ahead. I do not have mastery of this skill yet (or I would be up there). I believe it requires a good deal of practice to form. You have to play many, many games. People like swamp, skelley, Ghost, all play several games a day. Im mentally (and sometimes physically) exhausted after one harrowing TCP/IP match most of the time. In any case, this thinking ahead allows the best use of artillery, avoiding trouble spots, and formulating a loose but efficient plan about how you will use your men to capture and hold the objectives and/or destroy the enemy. This thinking ahead emphasises excellent analysis of the terrain you do battle on. The best players go for hills with a commanding view, not open patches of ground with a major VL on it. They also seem to have almost psychic powers, because the top players seem to know where and when you will advance to a given position. You know they guessed right when amazingly precise arty fire demolishes your carefully planned formations. I guess the only real way to get better is to practice *shrug* Oh, and BTW, swamp is registered on this board if Im not mistaken. I guess he just doesn't want to make an appearence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combat Opinion Staff Posted February 8, 2002 Share Posted February 8, 2002 Thanks for the praise everyone. It's been a while since I haven't bought armor, unless it was an infantry game. Anything with a big HE is great like the Cromwell VI. I don't know whether it's this same Swamp, but there seems to be an interesting looking new scenario called Rocky Fields by Swamp at Scenario Depot...Yep, that's my scenario. Swamp [ February 08, 2002, 05:21 PM: Message edited by: Combat Opinion Staff ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts