LibyanRebel Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 One of the most improved, if more frustrating components of CMBN is the improved artillery control system, and the scope it offers, yet this seems to barely warrant a mention against complaints that one or two infantry ment do this or that, or a support weapon mis behaves. The new artillery is more effective, and yet that brings into question the "gameyness" or not of prep artillery in QB assaults, for both attacker and defender. I have a regular on line game every weekend (several in fact ) with my mate in Aus, we started playing Squad leader by Avalon Hill on monthers dining table when we were 11, and are still at it thirty years on. hence the competition is fierce. We both accept that attacker can do a preparatory strike but what about the defender. Why was this included. Is it based on fore knoweldge of the attackers LUP or start line? On some of the maps, the start area is small, making a nice gamey accurate pre art strike a gamer winner.? or a risky waste of precious artillery assets? Overall i love the new version for realism, give or take the odd glitch. But i cant work this one out. any thoughts out there? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 There's a 57-post thread: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=99136&highlight=preplanned+gamey I found it by searching the forum for "preplanned gamey". Search is your friend. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 Easy to have arty arrive as a reinforcement in turn 2. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 Easy to have arty arrive as a reinforcement in turn 2. Not in QBs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarquelne Posted August 21, 2011 Share Posted August 21, 2011 My rule of thumb is no pre-planned for defender, or for either in a ME. Arty is always problematical on a small map, even when attacking. "Small" being found in the ratio between the size of the set-up area and the # of points the opponent gets. It's probably rarely if ever a problem on the large maps. The QB system in general seems much "looser" than in CMx1. I seem to remember point allowances for various types of units, for example. OTOH, I think that made balanced QBs easier to achieve. OTOtherH, more freedom can be nice. I've been having trouble matching map to forces for a given balanced QB type, but the arty and force mixes haven't been the problem. 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.