PBEM Secure Suggestion

Have a suggestion or some feedback? Dont keep it to yourself - share it!

Moderators: AlexS, Run5 Staff, SSG Staff

Postby Nickel » Sun Feb 15, 2004 2:12 pm

I have been critical of the balance within scenarios in KP. I think that the suggestion to include bidding is an excellent idea to achieve play balance. The ability to bid VPs as well as adding supply, replacements and dice is a very clean way to level the battlefield between opponents of differing skill. It is elegant because it can take the onus off the game, interms of balance for any scenario, and gives it over to the players. At least, IMO it will be hard for anyone to complain about how a scenario is scored especially if they agreed to the conditions before starting. Hopefully this can be included in BiN. I would think that this might even be a good marketing aspect for the game.
"Never in Driblets, but in Mass"
User avatar
Nickel
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: WI- USA

Postby Robjess » Sun Feb 15, 2004 2:15 pm

You can currently 'even up' a scenario if you think its unbalanced by giving one of the sides + Supplies, Replacements, Die Rolls ect at the moment as it stands.
User avatar
Robjess
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5126
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 5:33 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby Pawlock » Sun Feb 15, 2004 2:26 pm

All said and done on balance, I would never knowingly give someone an advantage unless it was purely for fun.

Also given the choice I would rather lose or win to someone on an even playing field.

Bidding to my mind will only come into play, where it is common knowlege from many games that it is indeed unbalanced.
Pawlock
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Bristol, England

Postby Nickel » Sun Feb 15, 2004 2:29 pm

Rob,
Quite true, but IMO some of the scenarios are too unbalanced, in terms of VPs, to overcome with the availiable options. I looked at the TAO tourney results. Victory seems to go disproportionately to the Allies or are you suggesting that the more skilled players just happened to get the Allies? Furthermore I have seen an incredibly good Allies defense. I would be surprised if anyone can beat it with the Germans. Have you played Germans against JSS?
"Never in Driblets, but in Mass"
User avatar
Nickel
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: WI- USA

Postby Robjess » Sun Feb 15, 2004 2:35 pm

No, and I know we have had this debate before Nickel :)

I agree that the Historical TAO scenario is bias slightly to the Allies. Hence why we made the On To Antwerp! Variant to try and address that for players who wanted a bit more of a challange as the Allies - esp when two quite equal players are playing.

But, I still stand by my guns and declare that balance comes down to who you are playing also. I know there are plenty of players out there who give me a run for my money in TAO even when I am the Allies. They are better TAO players then me.. so I may choose them out and play them at TAO so that that game is then balanced.

On the other hand, I am playing a game of TAO as the Germans where on Turn 8 I reached the Meuse and activated the British. I never thought I would be able to do that.. and I dont consider my opponent to be a poor or bad player. Maybe a little less experianced at the TAO scenario but no slouch at all.. the fact that I also think I have played very well so far and probably had some luck along the way hasnt hurt things.
User avatar
Robjess
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5126
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 5:33 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby Pawlock » Sun Feb 15, 2004 2:39 pm

Nickel wrote:Rob,
Quite true, but IMO some of the scenarios are too unbalanced, in terms of VPs, to overcome with the availiable options. I looked at the TAO tourney results. Victory seems to go disproportionately to the Allies or are you suggesting that the more skilled players just happened to get the Allies? Furthermore I have seen an incredibly good Allies defense. I would be surprised if anyone can beat it with the Germans. Have you played Germans against JSS?


Do I read this correct, you say JSS plays an extremly good Allied defence in TAO3, so it must be unbalanced. Credit where credits due, perhaps he does exactly as you say plays an extremly good defence. He should not be penalized for being good.

Maybe I misread you?
Pawlock
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Bristol, England

Postby Nickel » Sun Feb 15, 2004 2:54 pm

Pawlock,
It is interesting to see the kinds of conclusions that people can infer from other people's comments. JSS's defense is excellent and certainly credit where credit is due. Do you believe that if someone finds a virtually unbeatable defense that this defends the position of balance within a game? I do not pretend to know all the reasons why TAO is set up the way it is, but one would hope that the people who worked on this were striving for balance. Certainly many of the comments in support of how the changes were made indicated that much was done to support balance. It appears that it may not have worked out quite this way. BTW Rob, I looked through Matrix Threads prior to the loss of data and the archives at Wacht am Rhein related to the dice issue and the only one who disagreed that 2 dice was Berger. ref May archives. If there is other data supports this view I would be most interested to see it. In fact, your comments seemed to support having it at the time.
"Never in Driblets, but in Mass"
User avatar
Nickel
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: WI- USA

Postby Brubaker » Sun Feb 15, 2004 2:58 pm

My reading of this comment is that Nickel is saying the Allied defense has an advanatge already, so if a player like JSS commanads it, the advantage is intensified. Just my take.

I agree the Allied side 'seems; slightly favored in the current version of the files. Perhaps you guys should lobby SSG for a change in a future patch? If so though I think you would need to be very specific about what it is you think that is unbalanced and how a suggested change would affect this. I commend you if you do so.

Brubaker
User avatar
Brubaker
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1769
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 10:57 am

Postby Pawlock » Sun Feb 15, 2004 3:10 pm

Balance should never be decided on premise that one person is unbeatable at a particular scenario, but rather the general results between the greater mass of players.

To do so penalizes somebody who invents a great strategy.

It pains me to think, if ever I was to come up with such a strategy( wont happen), that was unbeatable, I would be penalized because it must be unbalanced.
Pawlock
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:29 pm
Location: Bristol, England

Postby Twinkle » Sun Feb 15, 2004 3:38 pm

I'd say that the balance in TAO3 is pretty fair, maybe a slight advantage to the allied side, by the large part of perceived unbalance almost always come from unbalanced skill of the players, and that's probably something that we should not strive to take away...

To many axis TAO3 players just look at the 'Combat Adviser' and try to make the greatest number of high-odds attacks, instead of doing some really necessary movements. Agreed, that the 'Combat Adviser' (which I don't really like) is a most useful help, and I use it myself all the time... But to tell the truth, the 'Combat Advisor' makes most of my opponents to do silly movements (doing what's perceived to be an excellent attack, and most of the time it is, but only for that particular turn) which only makes it easier for me to win in the long run, even if they are extremely pleased and happy for a couple of turns.

Just my worthless point of view...
/twinkle

That's like the guy who took a bomb on a air flight as the chance of two bombs being on the same air craft was much less, or the soldier who hide in a shell hole as he knew the chance of two shells falling on the same spot was much less.....


Regarding the second statement in the quote above... actually you do exactly that, and I might even explain why if I feel inclined to do that some day in a far away future...
User avatar
Twinkle
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 2366
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 9:57 pm
Location: Sweden

Postby Robjess » Sun Feb 15, 2004 3:48 pm

Edited..

Nickel I think that the 2 Die rules are pretty good as they stand..
Last edited by Robjess on Sun Feb 15, 2004 4:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Robjess
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5126
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 5:33 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby Brubaker » Sun Feb 15, 2004 3:51 pm

Maybe the Combat Advisor would be better named as the Tactical Combat Advisor or similar simply to remove doubt about its use. Even better would be to implement a Strategic Combat Advisor which could recommend some of the 'bigger picture' moves.

Useless of course to experts like us :wink: but may help the uninitiated.
User avatar
Brubaker
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1769
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 10:57 am

Postby Nickel » Sun Feb 15, 2004 11:34 pm

IMO, one needs to have a battle plan. The advisor is an excellent tool, but should not be the basis for a plan. I suspect that it is not too difficult to present weakness based on the advisor output (to the opponent). An opponent who would manuver his forces based on where he gets only the best odds will soon find he has arrived in a position from which victory can not be achieved. The tactics of manever and overwhelming force being applied to local areas is a far more effective strategy.
"Never in Driblets, but in Mass"
User avatar
Nickel
Sergeant
Sergeant
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: WI- USA

Postby Robjess » Mon Feb 16, 2004 4:34 pm

Nickel very very true words!

I am playing a game at the moment of TAO, I think its against Fairfax, as the Germans I had just taken Bastogne and was then deciding where to head next. Normally I would sweep up North West, but after clicking the Combat Advisor on I noticed I could get an overrun if I heading further south.. so I did.. and of course I rolled a 1 with a *-* and we all know what that means to overruns.

The next turn the 101st arrived and started to close my north west corridor.. I felt I made a poor tactical move in chasing that overrun.

So yes, they are wise words.
User avatar
Robjess
Chief of Staff
Chief of Staff
 
Posts: 5126
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 5:33 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Postby Joel137 » Mon Feb 16, 2004 4:38 pm

Twinkle, does your PI know you have that many games going on at once?
User avatar
Joel137
Colonel
Colonel
 
Posts: 1412
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 2:19 am
Location: Brookings, South Dakota

Previous

Return to Feedback/Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron