Sivodsi Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 I've just been checking out what sides can get in 'small' battle sizes, Syrain, Republican Guard, heavy combined, excellent; vs US mix heavy infantry, excellent. The Syrians are very predictable. You usually get the 3X T90 + 3 X FO (no ammo, why is that?), but you might also get 8 X BMP2K, or 5X BMP2, or 3 X BMP2 + 3 X FO (again, no ammo). But this could be pitted against US forces of 4 X M1A2 SEP and 4X M1132 Strykers, or 8 X Stryker, or 4 X Stryker + 4 X Bradley :eek: Syrians are obviously at huge disadvantage. Does anybody bother with QBs any more? If anybody still plays QBs could they advise on any combination of forces that is more likely to lead to a reasonably balanced mix of forces? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Churchmoor Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 QBs are no go for me at least. Force mixtures and balance are usually way off and for me unplayable. Number uno thing I'm really looking forvard to in the Normandy-game are better, more cmx1-like, QBs. Glad there are so many talented scenario makers around. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bahger Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 I've just been checking out what sides can get in 'small' battle sizes, Syrain, Republican Guard, heavy combined, excellent; vs US mix heavy infantry, excellent. The Syrians are very predictable. You usually get the 3X T90 + 3 X FO (no ammo, why is that?), but you might also get 8 X BMP2K, or 5X BMP2, or 3 X BMP2 + 3 X FO (again, no ammo). But this could be pitted against US forces of 4 X M1A2 SEP and 4X M1132 Strykers, or 8 X Stryker, or 4 X Stryker + 4 X Bradley :eek: Syrians are obviously at huge disadvantage. Does anybody bother with QBs any more? If anybody still plays QBs could they advise on any combination of forces that is more likely to lead to a reasonably balanced mix of forces? Mark Ezra is your man. He's overhauling the QBs for 1.11. Certainly the scenarios are often asymmetrical, which some might say reflects reality, but for gameplay purposes I tend not to regard a QB as truly "won", playing as the US, unless I've played it well enough to achieve all objectives with minimal casualties. More than one toasted vehicle with KIAs is enough to ruin my day, as it would any r/l commander in this situation. Your point is well made, though, a well-balanced user-made scenario from a knowledgeable designer is a better challenge than most QBs. The TF Narwick campaign is very good, as are the two "Tactical Vignettes" (but I cannot remember if they come as stock or if I d/l-ed them). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Field Marshal Blücher Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 The two Tactical Vignettes are stock. I only play Scenarios or Campaigns, as I can't play without a context for my actions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkEzra Posted November 22, 2008 Share Posted November 22, 2008 I've just been checking out what sides can get in 'small' battle sizes, Syrain, Republican Guard, heavy combined, excellent; vs US mix heavy infantry, excellent. The Syrians are very predictable. You usually get the 3X T90 + 3 X FO (no ammo, why is that?), but you might also get 8 X BMP2K, or 5X BMP2, or 3 X BMP2 + 3 X FO (again, no ammo). But this could be pitted against US forces of 4 X M1A2 SEP and 4X M1132 Strykers, or 8 X Stryker, or 4 X Stryker + 4 X Bradley :eek: Syrians are obviously at huge disadvantage. Does anybody bother with QBs any more? If anybody still plays QBs could they advise on any combination of forces that is more likely to lead to a reasonably balanced mix of forces? The reason your FO's don't have arty is due to force selection size (the same as CMx1) Occasionally a "Small" setting will get arty but generally no. I play a lot of QB small...especially as play testing. A good way to influence the number of Blue units is to reduce them by 10-20%. Another thing you might try: make Blue the Syrians, increase their units by 10-20% and make Red the US. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sivodsi Posted November 23, 2008 Author Share Posted November 23, 2008 The reason your FO's don't have arty is due to force selection size (the same as CMx1) Occasionally a "Small" setting will get arty but generally no. I play a lot of QB small...especially as play testing. A good way to influence the number of Blue units is to reduce them by 10-20%. Another thing you might try: make Blue the Syrians, increase their units by 10-20% and make Red the US. Thanks for the advice, I'll give it a go. Thanks also for giving the reason the FOs don't have any ammo. It begs the question as to why they are available to be picked in the first place. I thought that the current QB system was designed specifically to result in more realistic forces. I'm no expert, but I would be surprised if a platoon of T90s were coupled with three UAZ loads of FOs (with or without ammo). :confused: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taki Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 Yesterday i´ve tryed the QBG Mark Erza uploaded on CMMmods. Its great. Never enjoyed Cmx2 in MP that much. Keep up the good work. Greetz Taki 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkEzra Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 Yesterday i´ve tryed the QBG Mark Erza uploaded on CMMmods. Its great. Never enjoyed Cmx2 in MP that much. Keep up the good work. Greetz Taki Thanks. Mishga played a huge role in QBG...a real team effort... I am working now on a revision of the QBG Maps. I have concentrated on adding more visual imagery to the maps , improving/adding AI pathing, and cleaning up bone head errors I made in the original maps... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CogNative Posted November 23, 2008 Share Posted November 23, 2008 Great tip Mark and thanks to all the QBG. Your advice worked as you said. FO with something to go boom in QB! A revision of the QBG Maps... Is there any change the naming methodology? Sivodsi..."why they are available to be picked.." good question. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkEzra Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 Great tip Mark and thanks to all the QBG. Your advice worked as you said. FO with something to go boom in QB! A revision of the QBG Maps... Is there any change the naming methodology? Sivodsi..."why they are available to be picked.." good question. Sorry: There could be no change in naming convention due to he need to over-write existing QB Map files. In fact I will be removing all QBG maps from CMMODS so that older versions are not overwriting the newer versions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bahger Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 Yesterday i´ve tryed the QBG Mark Erza uploaded on CMMmods. Its great. Never enjoyed Cmx2 in MP that much. Keep up the good work. Greetz Taki Could someone give me a link or a name to search for this at CMMods, please? I'm doing QBs in both single- and multiplayer and would appreciate playing a well-tested battle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CogNative Posted November 24, 2008 Share Posted November 24, 2008 http://www.cmmods.com/ Down right now. The older QBG Maps were great so the newer versions will be a real treat. Thanks QBG. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.