Michael Dorosh Posted March 11, 2002 Share Posted March 11, 2002 In addition to random force mixes, troop types, etc., how about random sizes for generating QBs? Also, the ability to set the likelihood of differing sizes. Ie you as the human player pick your force size, etc., then the option of picking the enemy point total, with the ability of setting percentages to certain ranges. ie 500-1000 pts 1000-2000 pts 2000-3000 pts etc. If you wanted an even game and were picking 1000 points yourself, you could simply type in "1000" points for the enemy total, but if you wanted a surprise, you could designate 500-1000 points - 25% 1000-2000 points - 50% 2000-3000 points - 25% Then there would be a likelihood of 50 percent the enemy force would be picked from a point total somewhere in the 1000-2000 point range, 25 percent change their force would be smaller, and 25 percent change they would be larger. Someone with more time can fool around with the numbers and ranges, but I think it would be a neat feature, especilly if one wanted to generate "campaign" type battles, in which play balance is not the main focus of the contests. It would also address the problem of 'piece counting' between two human opponents, if you are not sure whether or not your opponent got 1399 points in a 1500 point QB or 1650 points. [ March 11, 2002, 12:35 PM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted March 11, 2002 Share Posted March 11, 2002 I do recall mention of an "attrition algorythm" you could call it. Select 1000 points worth of men for example, I suppose you can then select the attrition feature and a set percentage will be deleted from your total. Depending on who disappears the feature can be pretty traumatic. You could find yourself mismatched randomly. As it is CMBO QBs already have a + or - force feature for either you or the enemy. Select enemy Assault and +50% for the Enemy and you WILL find yourself at a disadvantage! Is that what you're talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted March 11, 2002 Share Posted March 11, 2002 As far as I know having the computer pick your forced doesn't result in an "over-pick" but can result in an "under-pick" by some factor. I guess this was bad in earlier releases but BTS has shored it up some. Personally I am still not happy with it since if you play a QB at 1000 points or under and have the computer pick your forces the German players hardly gets any schrecks let alone one. On may occasions I have gotten no AT support and only a HT with a few hollow charges... Very dissapointing. Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted March 12, 2002 Author Share Posted March 12, 2002 Not really what I was getting at - I mean if you have a company, say, of infantry, you should be able to have a random game where you are opposed by anything from a platoon to an entire battalion - before the application of the casualty algorithm, with the option of skewing the "likely" enemy force from almost always an even match, to almost never. It would be a tool for generating campaign style games for those wanting to do such a thing...as it is you know for sure that your enemy will have the same amount of points (or 50% plus/minus), with no surprise as to force size (just composition). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thermopylae Posted March 12, 2002 Share Posted March 12, 2002 I liked my "no argument historical random battle generator" proposal for CMBB. Players enter the size and type of conflict they'd like, the region, year, and preferre doppossing forces...and woosh a force within a company (give or take, above or under) or less of the initial size that ticks to historical OOBs is created, with some attrittion. Thus "Bn size, combined arms, heer vs guards, central russia, June 1943" could be selected, and a force would be created for each side to suit the conditions. you might get 2 veteran heer coys with a HMG platoon and AT guns versus an overstrengh russian regual guards BN with an attached T-34 platoon. Or you could get an attack that really was one to one (or less!) odds...it'd certainly get you out of the ok, theres 8 platoons, in this size game thats all he can ahve mentality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Crowley Posted March 12, 2002 Share Posted March 12, 2002 Michael Excellent idea and IMO quite an important one. The force ratio's in CMBO QB's seem about right most of the time but, as you say, there is no allowance for the surprise factor of encountering a numerically larger or smaller foe. As a keen QB'er I am all in favour of anything that will enhance and diversify the QB experience (unbiased force selection, good random maps etc.)which is somewhat confined in its current incarnation. However, aside from purely gameplay advantages, I think your idea would be essential to being able to generate historically accurate ratios (in QB's) in the latter war years on the Eastern Front. Certainly by the end of 1944/ begining of 1945 German ground forces were outnumbered something like 15 to 1. Even at the local level presented by CM, the current (CMBO) ratios would be completely false (unless that is something BTS has already factored-in. Wouldn,t surprise me :cool: ) If BTS can get something like that built in to QB,s (plus random mixed experience) then I really fear for my career, my wife, my kids, my friends ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nabla Posted March 12, 2002 Share Posted March 12, 2002 Yes, please. The (Possibly) Unbalanced Tournament Scoring System Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts