WaW/H2H question.

[seabolt]

I have to agree with the old dogs on this topic, Command and Control is one of the best reasons play WAW/H2H and I rarely played with out it.

Oldrocky never got back with me, but I've invested a couple of hours refreshing my memory in solitaire play. I really approve of how it changes the tone of the game, but oy, setting flags and waypoints for a large force turns things into work. The interface starts to feel as old as it is.

The effects on low quality troops that you allude to is exactly the reason why. C&C really highlights how a small group of elite troops can run rings around hordes of inferior troops. If you're interested in trying to simulation history (as opposed to just a fair fight in a PBEM match) I must say C&C helps a lot in that regard.

I can certainly see that, but the inverse of your statement raises an interesting point: How do you set up a fair PBEM game? I would hazard that the default unit costs are for C&C off; thus, the player with a higher leader rating would hold an advantage. Do you weigh point allotments accordingly? (Eg, Player 1 is Germany with Leader Rating 65 and Player 2 is the Soviets with Leader Rating 50. To make things equatable, Player 1 gets only 2,000 points to Player 2's 2,300? 2,600? More?)

Also, I suppose you'd need a cap on recon units and company 0 units. Something like 20% of points in recon units and a minimum of 9 subordinate units per company 0s?

It seems like a clever gamist (*cough**cough*) could work the system pretty easily.

-- 30 --