Is Fionn Kelly going to make a balance force rulz for CMBB ?

[Cubes]

Just wondering if Fionn has/is making another set of Balance Force Selection Rulz again for CMBB ?

http://www.rugged-defense.nl/cm/Fionn/FionnKellyBFRules.htm

Geoff

[Poobear]

not if he gets himself banned again.

[Battlefront.com]

Dunno, but Rarity will take care of most problems all on its own. Also, if you purchase a platoon of tanks you will get a slight discount on the overal price.

Steve

[Claymore]

Hey Steve!

Any chance you can respond to the "Breaking Target Lock" thread?

I mean...don't you get tired of all these softballs?

Cheers

MRD

[Guest Mike]

Rarity won't solve all the problems by a long shot if it's like the version I saw in a Beta Demo.

Rarity will penalise you by charging more points for RARE vehicles and equipment - not for EFFECTIVE ones.

So I imagine Panthers won't have any rarity factor in 1944 for example, and will slaughter T34/76's quite nicely thank you - just like they do Shermans.

IMO the basic points values, allowable force mixes and that sort of thing will determine whether or not there needs to be a "balanced forces rule" or not.

[Tarquelne]

So I imagine Panthers won't have any rarity factor in 1944 for example, and will slaughter T34/76's quite nicely thank you - just like they do Shermans.

...wondering how much a common-Panther will cost compared to a common-T34....

[Andrew H.]

Originally posted by Mike:

Rarity won't solve all the problems by a long shot if it's like the version I saw in a Beta Demo.

Rarity will penalise you by charging more points for RARE vehicles and equipment - not for EFFECTIVE ones.

So I imagine Panthers won't have any rarity factor in 1944 for example, and will slaughter T34/76's quite nicely thank you - just like they do Shermans.

IMO the basic points values, allowable force mixes and that sort of thing will determine whether or not there needs to be a "balanced forces rule" or not.

IIRC, Fionn's rules were designed to make games more historical by preventing every battle from being a "Jumbo vs. King Tiger" game. That's because, without the rules, players felt the need to purchase the most effective AFV in their respective inventory out of fear that the opponent would do the same thing. Which led to ahistorical battles in which very common tanks - Pz IVs, Sherm 75s, StuGs - never appeared. Fionn's rules didn't prevent gamey purchases like, say, 10 75mm HMCs.

So the rarity factor will largely prevent the ahistorical results you saw in CMBO QBs.

I suppose the soviets will deal with the Panthers in '44 by using a variety of vehicles such as the T-34/85 and the IS-2. It will, of course, be very interesting to see how much the various vehicles cost, though.

[WWB]

Read Fionns preamble. His rules are not designed to create historical forces. They are designed to create a perfectly level playing field so superior tactics will prove the winner. Personally, I say it takes alot of fun out of the game, but others like them.

Rarity addresses a different issue--keeping the forces historically flavored while OTOH not outright banning more estoric units. There will be times when the germans can purchase Tigers at -5%. There will also be times in 41 when the germans have to stop T34s with 38ts. But the really cool thing is you never know how the pricing will turn out until the game is played.

WWB

[ParaBellum]

As much as I consider Fionn's rules a great help to balance CM QBs I never played with any of his rules in the last 100+ PBEMs I played.

My advice: find opponents you like to play against and stick to them.

If I have to negotiate every PBEM for a week, it's a good sign to me to look for another opponent...

[tools4fools]

Originally posted by ParaBellum:

As much as I consider Fionn's rules a great help to balance CM QBs I never played with any of his rules in the last 100+ PBEMs I played.

My advice: find opponents you like to play against and stick to them.

If I have to negotiate every PBEM for a week, it's a good sign to me to look for another opponent...

As long as 500mm Gefechtshülsen are included I would give it a try...even if those were really rare...

Cheers

Marcus

****

[Gyrene]

Find yourself a group of people you can trust and you will need no set of rules to get in the way of your playing and your fun.

There's a lot to be learned and enjoyed from playing an out classed and doomed-to-lose CM side. WWII wasn't about even sides and fairness, it was about doing your best with what you got.

If you want even go play chess, in the mean time if you want a balanced setting in which to challenge an unknown opponent then stick with scenarios like the excellent Der Kessel ones.

Gyrene

[Battlefront.com]

Rarity won't solve all the problems by a long shot if it's like the version I saw in a Beta Demo.

Er... Mike, there was no Rarity involved in the Demo (it isn't a Beta Demo either ) so you can't possibly judge it. And WWB is correct. Fionn's rules were to prevent uncommon matchups not prevent unbalanced matchups. There is a big difference. Rarity is designed to prevent uncommon, not unbalanced. Real war is not about balancing, but about availability. Hence the focus of Rarity.

Steve

[Nabla]

Originally posted by Steve:

And WWB is correct. Fionn's rules were to prevent uncommon matchups not prevent unbalanced matchups. There is a big difference. Rarity is designed to prevent uncommon, not unbalanced. Real war is not about balancing, but about availability. Hence the focus of Rarity.

And let me just add (=advertise), possible unbalance is really what you want in a war game. Therefore, to enjoy it to the fullest, get yourself involved in a tournament (run by TB155) which uses our Mutha Beautiful balancing scoring system. And lo and behold, unbalance becomes a joy instead of a sorrow!

[ September 12, 2002, 03:47 AM: Message edited by: Nabla ]

[desim8]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

originally posted by mike:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Rarity won't solve all the problems by a long shot if it's like the version I saw in a Beta Demo.

Er... Mike, there was no Rarity involved in the Demo (it isn't a Beta Demo either )

Steve</font>

[Battlefront.com]

desim8,

r.. Steve, he means the beta version of CMBB that he saw demoed(?) in one of those preview sesions.

DOH! Yeah, I am sure that is what he meant. When I see Beta Demo in caps I think something different than a Beta that has been demoed. Plus, I keep forgetting that a Kiwi bribed his way into the Beta test program and so this is possible Man, do you know how many of those funny pieces of paper it took to buy a good sandwitch around here?

But again, Rarity is designed to greatly reduce unhistorical unit use. Balance should come "naturally" from that since in real war both sides strove for at least parity on the battlefield. What needs to be avoided is Cherry Picking rare, but superior, stuff that is not all that expensive compared to the common, not as good, stuff. The 75/76 rules were designed for that purpose, not to have the Americans unrealistically hobbled in the name of balance.

Steve