CMBB Infantry Too Brittle?

[Tarquelne]

In my mind, true play balance is by definition a contest in which matched players of ANY equal skill will have a 50-50% chance to win a game.

My impression is that CMBB does not pass the above test.

Guys, assuming that all-caps "ANY" is really the focal point of his statement, he saying pretty much the same thing Steve did at the top of page 3.

These battles *are* balanced, or at least can be just as much as CMBO. The difference is that the skills required to win in certain battles might be unbalanced and more difficult to master.

So two "newbie" players in a scenario where one side needs to use a "more difficult to master" skill aren't going to be playing a "balanced" scenario, in that the odds shouldn't be computed as 50-50.

Ok, so that means, by B'sP.'s definition, CMBB doesn't have "true" balance on a scenario by scenario basis. Live with it.

[WWB]

Originally posted by Lt. Kije:

[QB]Well, the wargamer in me is glumly content with the new order of things. "I suppose I'd go to ground too, were I to hear the zip of lead passing by me. It's clearly up to me to learn how to deal with this."

Andreas above has a very valid point. To that I add that the Civil War saw closed order fighting. While marching into fire was suicidal, at least several thousand of your closest buddies were shoulder to shoulder wiht you. Kind of like a big human wave. Similar things happened early in the first world war. But when a man is alone under fire he tends to run rather than advance.

You have support weapons with gads of ammo. MGs, mortars, etc. Use them. The other key in CMBB, much more than in CMBO, is advancing some half squads to spot the enemy, or at least draw fire making finding them alot easier.

I do agree with you here. The average attack in CMBB needs a bit more time. I would bump up the standard to 35+ for a QB attack, as pushing much faster ends up being suicidal for the attacker.

WWB