View Full Version : PBEM Game ready
k, was off-line for a couple of week thanks to the superior tech infrastructure shared by Bell and Sprint. :(
If the following parameters are acceptable I 'd like to invite another challenge.
Searching 70% *
Hitting 100%
Rout/rally 100%
Troop Quality XXX
Tank Toughness 100%
Infantry toughness 100%
Artillery vs hard 100%
Artillery vs soft 70% *
Battle points to be decided
Max Air 2 *
Max formations XXX
C&C On
True Troop/Rarity Off
Reduced Squads
meeting engagement on custom map
visibility 28
weather 2
turns 40
It's not cast in stone except for those marked with an asterisk. Basically I'm trying to find the best mix of preferences for optimum playability. I've been consulting and experimenting...feedback is welcome.
Perhaps if we get a consensus on preferences a tournament would be possible...? Blitzkreig has some excellent articles that elaborate on various realism factors in SPWaW. Please take the time to read their stuff so there is some common ground here.
Thoughts?
Some thoughts about your proposed settings which I like very much. But I will share some of the conclusions I have arrived at after MUCH experimentation with actual pbem - not vs AI.
1. 70% spotting. This may be a touch radical for some forces. As you know, some forces "see" better than others. For the better nations, 70% is probably ok. I haven't tried it. But I was thinking about this yesterday and came to the conclusion that if a particular "good" nation has spotting ability of 100% and this is based upon a quality of say 75%, a flat 70% spotting for that Nation will still provide an advantage over another nation with lesser generous ratings. So in the case of Germany vs Soviet (e.g.), it may be better to set Germany at 70% and Soviet at 80%. My theory is that would be a more even playing field and more balanced. Of course, my idea is based upon some notion of trying to level the playing field.
2. I whole-heartedly endorse the reduction of artillery effectiveness vs soft targets. However, I would raise the same issue with respect to a "gifted" nation versus a "have-not" nation. 70% of good artillery is still a whole lot better than 70% of bad artillery. I have extensively tested artillery vs soft targets with as little as 50%. The artillery still works fine - suppresses well but does not provide the equivilent of nuclear holocaust. lol. Interestingly, the small bore artillery still works at 50-60%.
3. Visibility at 28 must be to avoid the increased visibility that occurs at 29 hexes. That's ok but it seems like in a strange sort of way, it limits some interesting tactical changes dictated by longer visibility.
4. I wholeheartedly endorse turning off "Rarity" which is bizarre - making it impossible to seek a particular sort of battle beforehand. I have had battles without the opportunity to purchase infantry and/or MMG. This feature puts too much control over the game into the vagaries of rolls of the dice.
5. Custom maps. I favor these but they are often too cluttered and provide very little in the way of visibility, even from hilltop to hilltop. So lately, I have been working on opening up LOS in maps so as to have visibility exceed the distance of killing shots. It changes the entire game. In some cases, IMO, for the better.
6. Play a couple of pbem battles with early year nations - for example, Japan, USMC, Soviet where there is a very limited amount of on-board artillery available. For my own preference, I prefer to control the availability of large-bore on-board artillery. This artillery would not be this close to the battle area anyway and it is the big stuff, on-board, fed by ammo supply that messes up the game and necessitates the artifical percentage limits often used to control artillery gaminess. Controlling on-board ammo supply works well as a means to control large artillery - it makes it far more expensive to purchase and use if one cannot provide a never-ending supply of ammo for it.
7. Another thing that should be controlled is landmines. Occasionally, a player will build an entire wall of them much like the AI does - this will ruin a battle very quickly. I have one going now and 25 turns or so into it, I am still clearing landmines. Very boring and tedious. So it appears that one must be prepared to either suffer for a large number of turns or press the old F9 key and find another battle.
8. Consider turning off the "Historic Ratings" and "National Characteristics" settings and using human intelligence to rate nations and eliminate the bias built into the game. In this way, it is possible to get good battles between nations which are otherwise unplayable. This really works!
I was glad to see someone thinking similar thoughts about pbem.
Thanks for your insights redleg, much appreciated.
From what I gather most of your points focus on national characteristics and historic ratings disparities. So if your point eight were agreed to (and I do but I only speak for myself) then your concerns in points 1 & 2 would be moot.
On your point (3) regarding visibility...my objection to a higher value is that you can set a unit in the woods and even though you may have another wood hex in front of your location it is still "seen". It almost makes it pointless to have wood hexes. Of course the weather value also comes into play here.
I favor custom maps because random maps are too hokey. But I'm learning to edit maps and am more than willing to work toward providing maps which are not too cluttered and which provide better LOS.
I'm not sure I'm in agreement on the artillery issue. The reason... I kind of enjoy the logistical challenge of locating artillery on-board and TRYING to resupply them, either though movement (in the case of ammo dumps) or with ammo trucks. As well on-board artillery provides a rear line objective for commando/special forces/airborne or front line troop penetration. I think it would be tough to convince others to forego on-board artillery. Since I never use off-board artillery I'm all for limiting that factor to zero.
As to land-mines and other such obstacles I've not played enough games to get caught up in a battle such as you described...more often than not my minefields end up being well behind my front line :)
I do like to a buy a few though for protecting rear echelon units or strategic points subject to commando/special forces incursions.
So really, if all are agreed on toggling "Historic Ratings" and "National Characteristics" OFF then that would go a long way toward achieving your ideal (which I share) of "trying to level the playing field".
Anybody else out there with some thoughts on all this?
Interesting thread.
Lonewolf, I've got the River Crossing deployed, but am having a hard time getting ahold of you.
Let me know when you are in contact again.
Kaz
Hi Kaz,
MSN has been doing some tech work past two or three days. They shut it down entirely for a couple of hours on Monday. S/B Ok now so go ahead and send the zip.
You can also use weyrich@sprint.ca
Hi,
There are some rules that could make the game better and safer...
For example always set AIR to 0 to avoid extended recon/replay...this will quickly ruin any game...
Also say NO to infiltrators in ME because in this kind of games the infiltrators are both unrealistic and could be used for extended recon.
There must be a limit towards the cheap fast utility vehicles, fast recon AC and the motorcycles... always be sceptical when you confront an
opponent with a lot of motorcycles/fast AC.
If the agreed arty points are between 10%-15%, arty works fine.
The element of artillery/counter-artillery is a factor that makes the game more interesting, because you play two games at the same time...one game concerning your ground forces and one game concerning your artillery/counter-artillery...think it more as the AIR supremacy factor...who will eventually gain the artillery supremacy in the game??
There are a lot of tactical decisions to take into account:
Where should I put the zeroed arty hexes?
When and which is the best sequences to give up my arty position to my enemy?
How will I execute the arty relocation doctrine "hit and run"?
What will be my supply strategy?
How would I split my arty allocation targets between ground support and counter-artillery?
I find the artillery factor very interesting and decisive in a battle and I think that by mastering the art of artillery a player will considerably improves his tactics.
BTW I prefer arty in SPH2H because it is more lethal than arty in SPWAW.
Pyros
I think a lot of your points would be more related to strategy. Much of what is viewed as "realistic" can be found at blitzkreig.org
Permit me to comment.
...AIR to 0 to avoid extended recon/replay...this will quickly ruin any game...
Most games I've been playing at 2. Forces the opponent to spend on AA. Plus he would be wise to spend for air formations. Ruins it if you want to try an airdrop. These things are usually prearranged. That one might take some discussion prior to a competition/tournament. At most you get to take out a tank or two and get some air intel. And it's fun.
...NO to infiltrators in ME because in this kind of games the infiltrators are both unrealistic and could be used for extended recon.
IMO more points on a chancy endeavor...but fun. These dewds are also integral to some of the nations infantry formations. That's pushing a point deep into the game.
...cheap fast utility vehicles, fast recon AC and the motorcycles... always be sceptical when you confront anopponent with a lot of motorcycles/fast AC.
More points spent for dubious gains. And also deep into the game. Money spent on too many/unrealistic scouts formations is less spent on solid infantry. :smoke:
Anyway, it's interesting stuff but what I'm drifting toward are competitions\tournaments which are not based on a process of elimination. Aggregate wins and losses agains multiple opponents would decide the winner. Since SP permits 10 PBEM slots 11 ppl can play each other at once. Each of the ten games would utilize the same map. Five of the games give you first move, five games you get second move, nationality reversed. That way we can leave National Characteristics ON.
I want to find a general consensus on preferences to try and get level playing field prior discussing deeper issues...the next being to have a map acceptable to 11 players. Remember, you end up playing on the same map ten times. This will probably prove to be a sticking point. A possible solution is to reduce the pool of players. Of course if we had fifteen ppl chances are that the pools would be allocated into two seven game competitions. I thought that Multiplayer H2H would be the game of choice in a run off. Two or three best of one pool vs two or three best of the other on a long weekend. :confused:
Your points on artillery
If the agreed arty points are between 10%-15%, arty works fine.
That I picked up on at Blitzkreig...and I've generally found a consensus on that point. But it's an honor thing. In a competition I think maybe all the .rec files be saved somewhere for review.
At times I forget to discuss that factor and arty comes in round in round out...I grin and bear it and keep my forward forces moving...in reverse if need be. That's why the Artillery Effectiveness is generally accepted by most players at 70%-80%. You'll suffer supression but at least the hexes won't be littered with crosses.
I agree, artillery can make or break a game.
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.