Help to understand "mirror" game setup

[ramagel]

[RedDevil]

that's pretty much the Gist of it..

Some players however, don't like to play them simultaneously
(they prefer 1 at a time, starting the mirror after the end of the 1st battle)
And
others don't like exact setup copies (they want the same settings but a new map and kit)
Ask your OPP which he prefers

you'll find all sorts of diversity here, just takes a few games to find those most compatible to you.

[ramagel]

Thanks - I think I'm finding that out. :)

To me, "mirror" can only mean exactly the same forces on exactly the same map under exactly the same conditions.

Any other variation is simply "let's play on the same map more than once with different forces" or "let's use the same forces on a different map". Neither of these actually 'mirror' anthing, do they, or am I missing the point?

Maybe folks use 'mirror' to mean different things, when the other alternatives should be given different names.

Thanks for the clarification that more clarification is good!

Lewis

[raz_atoth]

Actually for many people-me included-mirror games doesn't necessarily mean the same map or the same force kit,but rather the same parameters.You could for example agree to play a probe in june '41 with medium hills/trees on a rural map with two different maps(but generated from the same above parameters) where you will take the axis in one game and the allied in the other.

[Mike Abberton]

For mirror games using the same settings but different maps and kit, the idea, I think, is to balance potential Nationality bias by playing from both sides, but still allow for different playing styles (armor/infantry balance, towed guns vs self-propelled, choosing more green/regular troops or less veteran troops, etc.) with individual kit choices.

Some players get around the potential map variability of QBs, by loading the same pre-existing map for both QBs of the mirror.

[GreenHornet]

I think you may be taking the word "mirror" too literal when it comes to CM battles.

If you're looking for all parameters, troops and map the be exactly the same, you can do this with scenarios where each person gets a chance to play each side. However, most people don't enjoy playing mirrored scenarios because it ruins the element of surprise.

For mirrored QBs, most CMer's ( myself included ) simply mean two battles set up with the same battle parameters such as raz_atoth has previously stated.

[ramagel]

Thanks GreenHornet. You are right: I take everthing literally, and therein lies the source of my confusion on this issue.

I think I shall ignore the word 'mirror' in future and just ask my opponents what parameters they want to play!

[OWL]

Personally, i think the "best" result you get when you play on the same map and with the same parameters. However let the selection of the units free so you will be surprised by your opponent using a massive armored attack force in a quick flanking manoeuvre while using self a heavy infantry force sneaking through the wooded area's of the map. Using different maps will never be creating the same conditions, because every map is different and will give one of the players a better position.

OWL

[MGK(FGM)]

For me "mirror" games are good way to have balanced ladder result in unbalanced periods in CM. It is also possible to play 2 games and add "small" points from both games and then register it as one 2 times bigger game.
With Ramagel we are playing just for fun so our "mirror" games are Romanian armour attack against Soviet infantry(no rarity) in 1943 and almost all rest is set to random :) including AI purchase :) so it is broken mirror game :) but should be fun