vahauser
Posts: 1644
Joined: 10/1/2002
From: Texas
Status: offline
|
Erwin,
Mines
I understand your reasoning regarding mines OFF. I just don't think that your reasoning helps the computer. What you are saying is that the computer can buy more units since the computer isn't spending those points on mines. Agreed. But I think that the points spent on mines is more dangerous than those same points spent on extra units. Also, there is no guarantee that the computer will spend those 'extra' points on useful units (like forts), but might instead waste them on units like snipers and knee mortars.
Further, mines will definitely slow down any assault. It is true that once the minebelt is pierced a player’s troops will have better maneuverability, but the minebelt will still be there, channeling the assault. And friendly units retreating onto the minebelt are in serious danger. Plus, piercing the minebelt is going to take several turns, turns that the computer can use to bombard a largely static assault force as it tries to clear the minebelt.
In addition, Assault Missions occur around 20% of the time (1 in 5 missions are Assault Missions). This means that buying lots of assault engineers might not be cost effective for the other 80% of the missions in the campaign. I personally spend around 20-25% of my initial core points on assault units (engineers, assault guns, etc.) based on mission percentages. So, if I build a core of say 2500 points, then 600 points or so will be assault units (for instance, a reduced strength Sturm company if I’m playing the Germans).
You are correct in one respect, though. Choosing to play a WW2 Long Campaign or Generated Campaign renders the computer entirely predictable. You know ahead of time how the computer is going to prepare its defenses. This is one of many reasons that choosing a WW2 Long Campaign ranks a 10+ (and a Generated Campaign ranks a 9) on the ‘Rig List’.
Stacking
Let’s say that somebody plays using unlimited stacking (like most players do). This allows serious abuses in WW2 Long Campaigns and Generated Campaigns because the player knows how the computer is going to operate. Not the same in a custom designed campaign (like Wild Bill’s Long Long Road) because the battles are not predictable. For instance, in a WW2 Long Campaign or Generated Campaign the player knows that the computer will never conduct an airstrike during a ‘pre-game’ bombardment, or any kind of ‘pre-game’ bombardment at all, unless the computer is conducting an Assault Mission. But in a custom designed campaign this is not true. So the player can take advantage of unlimited stacking to a much greater extent in a WW2 Long Campaign or Generated Campaign.
But where to rank unlimited stacking? Is it a bigger advantage than USMC artillery and its 0.1 delay? I don’t think so because whether a player stacks or not, having ‘instant’ artillery means ‘instant’ ability to disrupt whatever the computer is doing. And since whatever the computer is doing is perfectly predictable in a WW2 Long Campaign or Generated Campaign, then USMC artillery is predictably overwhelming. Most players don’t stack 200 units in a hex simply because it is too difficult and tedious to select individual units out of such an enormous stack. And moving means that huge stacks will have to spread out into smaller stacks. So, in practice, I suspect that most all players tend to operate in manageable stacks just because its easier to sort through stacks that way (manageable being say 8-12 units maximum because that is just about the limit that the eye can pick out individual units in a stack).
Also, rapid maneuvers pretty much eliminate large stacks because units moving near full speed have no extra movement for stacking. So, large stacks means slow moving or static positions. At the start of a battle, this can still be a big advantage for the human player, since he can pile into a single important road junction his entire force. But once the battle begins, those huge piles will thin out simply because of the way people play and the way the game mechanics work. So unlimited stacking is mainly an advantage during deployment and the first turn. After that, the large stacks will thin out during the course of play.
Further, unlimited stacking is not very useful on defense. Large stacks during Delay and Defend missions don’t help the player very much at all and are probably a liability most of the time.
Don’t misunderstand me. I do believe that unlimited stacking gives the human a definite advantage against the computer, especially during Meeting Engagements, Advance and Assault Missions (i.e., 60% of the time).
When I play against the computer, my personal stacking rule is 3 units per hex any time, 4 units per hex under special circumstances (I typically allow commanders to go into any hex they want), and up to 6 units per hex on rare occasions, like when 3 trucks unload in a hex (which must be reduced to 4 units or less as soon as possible, the same turn if possible). This works pretty well and fits with what I’ve learned about maximum combat densities during WW2.
I would rate unlimited stacking (which actually works out to a practical maximum of around 8-12 units per hex for reasons stated above), as around a 3 to 5 on the ‘Rig List’ depending on the kind of battle being fought.
Here is a revised list:
Choosing to play a WW2 Long Campaign (10+, the most overwhelming advantage a player can rig for himself)
Choosing to employ mines and barbed wire and dragons teeth (10)
Choosing to play a Generated Campaign (9, almost as overwhelming as a WW2 Long Campaign)
Choosing the US Army or USMC (5, American artillery)
Choosing to employ airstrikes (4 or 5 depending on nation and year)
Choosing to employ ‘unlimited’ stacking (3-5, depending of the type of battle being fought)
Choosing the Germans or Soviets or British (3 or 4, depending on nation and year)
Choosing to employ on-board artillery larger than 82mm mortars (2-4, depending on size of artillery)
Choosing to employ commando special operations (2-4, depending on nation and year)
Choosing to employ airborne operations (2-4, depending on nation and year)
Choosing to employ Rarity OFF (1-4, depending on the kind of campaign being played)
Choosing to play with C&C OFF (2)
Choosing to play with AutoRally ON (1 or 2, depending on the size of your core)
Choosing to use reinforcements during play (1 or 2, depending on nation and year)
Choosing to play with Op-Fire Confirm ON (1)
Choosing Reduced Ammo ON (1, only if playing a WW2 Long Campaign or Generated Campaign)
Choosing Reduced Squads ON (1, only if playing a WW2 Long Campaign or Generated Campaign)
_____________________________
|
Printable Version
RE: Rigging The Game - 
?? . . . . I just tend to have a strange sense of humor, that's all. (Sorry if this is considered a hijack, please return to your regularly scheduled program).
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread