Good reason for strict purchase limits

[weapon2010]

The issue is eachplayer needs to have their own groundrules they are comfortable with.And if the player does not want to play by those parameters then don't play them.

Not to long ago, the CS ladder started up thread that displays different member's REO's.

Since ground rule issues appear to be increasing, it sounds like it would save alot of miscommunication and ill-feelings if you guys started one of your own.

Here is the link to the CS Personal REO's thread, to give you some ideas.

https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards...?tid=61755

What would really help if the combined arms setting from cm1 comes back to cmx2 in the form of an upgrade.The combined arms setting maxed out each category to about 35% of purchase.So combined arms with rarity on strict solves alot of these issues.

[Weasel]

Yeah, it did even things out that is for sure.

[eltorrente]

If the Combat Force setting is set to "Mix", that should imply that there will be mixed forces, right? If it's set to "Armor Only", then I'd expect to see a mass of tanks. Picking a force that is armor only when the setting is on "Mix" is pretty gamey. Yes, the game allows it, but damn it's lame.

I've played several PBEM games with people who aren't friends that I know personally - just random people I've hooked up to play, both here and at the Battlefront forums.

I've honestly never had any ground rules, and no "issues" with my opponent picking crazy forces. I just got lucky, I guess.

Something about buying only units that can kill anything, at any range - and being invulnerable to anything, at any range from the front, just seems really lame to me. I would honestly be embarrassed to be known as the guy who will pull something like that anytime you don't expressly forbid it beforehand.

I think most people actually like to play realistically and enjoy fighting a battle that actually could have happened in real life. Infantry manuevering and sneaking around, fighting it out for strategic spots on the map, half-tracks rushing troops and AT guns around - that's when the fighting is really fun.

If I had nothing but, say, 5 Tigers though, the planning phase would be like, "o.k., I'm gonna put this Tiger here and watch this area, this one will sit here, etc." Then I watch the movie and wait for some squad or tank to get spotted and blam they're dead. It doesn't sound like it would be much fun for me or my opponents. I'd get the Win though.. WooHoo!

A part of this "issue" that should be mentioned is how many hours of planning and analyzing is spent in a typical game. Since I know my opponent is investing so much of his/her time, I don't want to waste it - and want them to have a good time.

[rampantone]

Yep agreed eltorrente, anyway you try to spin it purchasing mass tanks and scamming your opponent with a "Well we agreed on no Tigers but you didn't say I couldn't spam Panthers" is lame and an exploitation of the games flexible QB purchase system.

It's funny Weapon42 how you are offering remedies to the problem talking about systems from CMx1 yet previous posts from you and your opponents clearly show all you're interested in is exploiting the lack of a balance system to make sure you gain a win as easily as possible.

Whatever toots your horn man, but don't scam people in to setting up a ladder game with you and then bring an iron wall of tanks and say "sorry for your luck, you didn't specify it in the rules" lol come on man.

[Compass Rose]

How come QB are so popular with CMx2?

Are the stock scenarios that bad, or do you guys enjoy knowing that the enemy does not know exactly what forces you have and where their setup locations are?

[weapon2010]

Yep agreed eltorrente, anyway you try to spin it purchasing mass tanks and scamming your opponent with a "Well we agreed on no Tigers but you didn't say I couldn't spam Panthers" is lame and an exploitation of the games flexible QB purchase system.

It's funny Weapon42 how you are offering remedies to the problem talking about systems from CMx1 yet previous posts from you and your opponents clearly show all you're interested in is exploiting the lack of a balance system to make sure you gain a win as easily as possible.

Whatever toots your horn man, but don't scam people in to setting up a ladder game with you and then bring an iron wall of tanks and say "sorry for your luck, you didn't specify it in the rules" lol come on man.

"Purchasing mass tanks and scamming my opponent"

Never have done that its all discussed up front, so thats incorrect.

"Well we agreed on no Tigers but you didn't say I couldn't spam Panthers" is lame and an exploitation of the games flexible QB purchase system. "

I do not agree

"It's funny Weapon42 how you are offering remedies to the problem talking about systems from CMx1 yet previous posts from you and your opponents clearly show all you're interested in is exploiting the lack of a balance system to make sure you gain a win as easily as possible."

All im interested in is playing the game, not exploiting anything , I do enjoy exploiting weak defenses and poor attack plans though, I have to admit that,lol.And to make sure I gain a win as easily as possible would imply that Im interested in an all armor attack against
infantry on a flat open map just to gain a ladder victory which Im not.

So another falsehood.

Again for the record if anyone wishes a mirror game under any groundrules dicussed, thats fine by me.I dont know what could be more fair than that.

As far as a mix implying a mixed battle.I agree with you to a certain extent.But guys like Eltorrente and rampantone will say when they are loosing,"you didnt mix it up enough", oh you bought crack infantry?thats lame, regular and below is realistic.It never ends,lol.

[Weasel]

If the Combat Force setting is set to "Mix", that should imply that there will be mixed forces, right? If it's set to "Armor Only", then I'd expect to see a mass of tanks. Picking a force that is armor only when the setting is on "Mix" is pretty gamey. Yes, the game allows it, but damn it's lame.

I've played several PBEM games with people who aren't friends that I know personally - just random people I've hooked up to play, both here and at the Battlefront forums.

I've honestly never had any ground rules, and no "issues" with my opponent picking crazy forces. I just got lucky, I guess.

Something about buying only units that can kill anything, at any range - and being invulnerable to anything, at any range from the front, just seems really lame to me. I would honestly be embarrassed to be known as the guy who will pull something like that anytime you don't expressly forbid it beforehand.

I think most people actually like to play realistically and enjoy fighting a battle that actually could have happened in real life. Infantry manuevering and sneaking around, fighting it out for strategic spots on the map, half-tracks rushing troops and AT guns around - that's when the fighting is really fun.

If I had nothing but, say, 5 Tigers though, the planning phase would be like, "o.k., I'm gonna put this Tiger here and watch this area, this one will sit here, etc." Then I watch the movie and wait for some squad or tank to get spotted and blam they're dead. It doesn't sound like it would be much fun for me or my opponents. I'd get the Win though.. WooHoo!

A part of this "issue" that should be mentioned is how many hours of planning and analyzing is spent in a typical game. Since I know my opponent is investing so much of his/her time, I don't want to waste it - and want them to have a good time.

This is a good post.

---

How come QB are so popular with CMx2?

Are the stock scenarios that bad, or do you guys enjoy knowing that the enemy does not know exactly what forces you have and where their setup locations are?

I like scenarios, but some can be dogs of course. The problem I have with them is once you play them you know everything about them.

[Barre]

You can fence all day about rules off course down to the colour of the troops socks.

Look, if you take 5 Tigers in a CMFI game, it is like a automatic win button, there can be no discussion about that, no matter what happens it all comes down to the Tigers rolling up and blasting everything, there are no battle or defense plans involved there.

If you played so many games as you claim you are well aware of that.
And that is the last i will say about that.

[Weasel]

Just on the 5 Tiger thing, I am playing Lazy Gun and I let the CPU buy my force as I was stumped on it, of course it bought me two Tigers. Well those two Tigers have stopped LG cold, he is safe in the woods but as soon as I see a glacis plate he can kiss his tank goodbye. I actually feel sorry for him and am thinking of just calling the game a draw, even though I have the 3 star objective.

[weapon2010]

You can fence all day about rules off course down to the colour of the troops socks.

Look, if you take 5 Tigers in a CMFI game, it is like a automatic win button, there can be no discussion about that, no matter what happens it all comes down to the Tigers rolling up and blasting everything, there are no battle or defense plans involved there.

If you played so many games as you claim you are well aware of that.
And that is the last i will say about that.

Im not done, ill go on and on as long as you guys wanna keep the debate going.This is almost as fun as a qb.


'Look, if you take 5 Tigers in a CMFI game, it is like a automatic win"

Not true,depends on many factors

size of the map
terrain
weather
crew expereince
how you use them?

" there are no battle or defense plans involved there"

Yes there are

"And that is the last i will say about that."

ok