Ranked Allies vs. Allies / Axis vs. Axis?

Tigga
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2446
Joined: Tue 5 Jul 2011 02:46
Contact:

Re: Ranked Allies vs. Allies / Axis vs. Axis?

Postby Tigga » Sat 6 May 2017 14:31

Razzmann wrote:If the enemy playes the same deck and opens with the same units, why not place the 222 a bit behind the initial engagement zone, waiting for the enemy's.

What advantage does this give you? As far as I can tell unless you have other units that can also fire, it's absolutely zero.

Razzmann wrote:If the enemy playes the same deck and opens with the same units, why not place the 222 a bit behind the initial engagement zone, waiting for the enemy's. Also due to asymmetrical maps you will not have the ideal 1vs1 engagements of units, one side will nearly always have a position where they can attack/defend better/worse than the opponent.

Well, now you're giving up ground so as to avoid a 50-50 dice roll.

In the early phases of this game you will often have cases where a single unit, say the SPW 222, will be your only armour in an area. The other guy may do as well - they're very cost effective anti infantry and anti-halftrack. There's no advantage or disadvantage to either side in this confrontation unless fire from other units is coming in, and they would have to be other armour, an AT gun or a plane. It's a fairly high chance none of them will be available at the meeting.

For US armoured this might be Stuart vs Stuart. For 17SS this might be Stug vs Stug. For 12 SS Panzer it might be Firefly vs Firefly. The bigger the unit, the more problematic it is.

So you have two options:
1) Roll the dice. If you win you gain a bunch of ground and can deploy your next set of forces further up. If you lose the other guy does that. Do you feel lucky?
2) Retreat - you give the other guy free ground if he decides to attack. You will continue to retreat until you can find a place where you have backup or can force him too close to some unscouted trees.

In non-mirror matches there's always somebody with local superiority. The SPW 222 would retreat from a Stuart. It would attack halftracks. There's much less dice rolling here, it's more resource allocation and strategy. Terrain and positioning becomes more important as more units hit the battlefield, but SD has a lot fewer units than Wargame, so you often have times where local superiority can be achieved using one unit. Choosing not to enter the 50-50 fights does put you at a disadvantage, and the only reason you'd want to avoid them is if you're confident you're quite a bit better than the other guy, or you're already winning.
Last edited by Tigga on Sat 6 May 2017 15:00, edited 4 times in total.

User avatar
Operation Ivy
Master Sergeant
Posts: 154
Joined: Wed 5 Oct 2016 00:56
Contact:

Re: Ranked Allies vs. Allies / Axis vs. Axis?

Postby Operation Ivy » Sat 6 May 2017 14:37

Razzmann wrote:Which is a big part of nearly all engagements in SD.
If the enemy playes the same deck and opens with the same units, why not place the 222 a bit behind the initial engagement zone, waiting for the enemy's. Also due to asymmetrical maps you will not have the ideal 1vs1 engagements of units, one side will nearly always have a position where they can attack/defend better/worse than the opponent.
And in mirror matches, especially when playing the same deck, I'd say skill is a bigger factor than in other matches, whereas if it is purely Axis vs Allies ome side might have a single deck that effectively counters nearly every other deck the other side has to offer.


Why not eliminate asymmetrical maps as well then?.

Also saying that you want mirror matches because you are worried about a division dominating is wierd to me...i mean isn't the point of balancing exactly to prevent that?. You don't seem to have a lot of trust into eugen/flx (?) in that regard, which might be due to your extensive experience with them :D.
Obviously not every division will be as good as the next when it comes to certain ranked match ups (1v1/2v2 and so on) but i do hope that we will get a decent pool of competitively viable divisions on both sides.

In short: Using mirror matches to prevent balancing issues is a cheap way to handle things and will only hurt the player base and game itself.

User avatar
Fade2Gray
General
Posts: 8659
Joined: Wed 1 May 2013 23:30
Location: IED proof in Iraq
Contact:

Re: Ranked Allies vs. Allies / Axis vs. Axis?

Postby Fade2Gray » Sat 6 May 2017 15:01

Operation Ivy wrote:
Fade2Gray wrote:How?



Tigga wrote:Things also go down to luck more. Two SPW 222s meet in the woods. They have the same stats, same vet. It's early game, and the winner will be able to roam the flank securing a large amount of land. Who wins? Well... it's whoever rolls dice better. Same gun, same range, same accuracy, same pen, same armour. The winner is just down to luck. If the units are different you can position them in places to maximise your chances of winning, or avoid fights where you are likely to lose. When the units are the same and there's no advantage to positioning its just a roll of the dice.


This seems... flawed.

If you know you are facing the exact same stuff vehicle wise, wouldn't positioning be even more important?
Image
Image
Think you have what it takes to enlist into the military? You sure about that?

Tigga
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2446
Joined: Tue 5 Jul 2011 02:46
Contact:

Re: Ranked Allies vs. Allies / Axis vs. Axis?

Postby Tigga » Sat 6 May 2017 15:40

Fade2Gray wrote:If you know you are facing the exact same stuff vehicle wise, wouldn't positioning be even more important?

Positioning mostly matters when:
1) There's more than one significant unit (not the case)
2) You're unseen (not the case)
3) Close-up engagements with slow rotating vehicles (not the case).
4) One side might choose to retreat if it's not going well (AP rounds, one pen can kill, not hp based, so not the case)

User avatar
D-M
Posts: 8794
Joined: Sat 23 Jul 2011 11:10
Contact:

Re: Ranked Allies vs. Allies / Axis vs. Axis?

Postby D-M » Sat 6 May 2017 17:31

Fade2Gray wrote:
Operation Ivy wrote:
Fade2Gray wrote:How?



Tigga wrote:Things also go down to luck more. Two SPW 222s meet in the woods. They have the same stats, same vet. It's early game, and the winner will be able to roam the flank securing a large amount of land. Who wins? Well... it's whoever rolls dice better. Same gun, same range, same accuracy, same pen, same armour. The winner is just down to luck. If the units are different you can position them in places to maximise your chances of winning, or avoid fights where you are likely to lose. When the units are the same and there's no advantage to positioning its just a roll of the dice.


This seems... flawed.


Stupid is the word you are looking for. That whole reasoning is, he is just spining it as basically being a game where there is no tactical choice, no choices in the deck, decision to make. Just a game where you take each of your unit, put them face to face with your oponent's and just watch them go. This is stupid beyond belief.
Image

Tigga
Lieutenant Colonel
Posts: 2446
Joined: Tue 5 Jul 2011 02:46
Contact:

Re: Ranked Allies vs. Allies / Axis vs. Axis?

Postby Tigga » Sat 6 May 2017 18:36

D-M wrote:Stupid is the word you are looking for. That whole reasoning is, he is just spining it as basically being a game where there is no tactical choice, no choices in the deck, decision to make. Just a game where you take each of your unit, put them face to face with your oponent's and just watch them go. This is stupid beyond belief.

That's because that's what the game moves toward when you have mirror matches.

User avatar
D-M
Posts: 8794
Joined: Sat 23 Jul 2011 11:10
Contact:

Re: Ranked Allies vs. Allies / Axis vs. Axis?

Postby D-M » Sat 6 May 2017 19:47

Tigga wrote:
D-M wrote:Stupid is the word you are looking for. That whole reasoning is, he is just spining it as basically being a game where there is no tactical choice, no choices in the deck, decision to make. Just a game where you take each of your unit, put them face to face with your oponent's and just watch them go. This is stupid beyond belief.

That's because that's what the game moves toward when you have mirror matches.


no more than any regular matches. :roll:
Image

User avatar
Operation Ivy
Master Sergeant
Posts: 154
Joined: Wed 5 Oct 2016 00:56
Contact:

Re: Ranked Allies vs. Allies / Axis vs. Axis?

Postby Operation Ivy » Sat 6 May 2017 20:41

D-M wrote:no more than any regular matches. :roll:


As he has showed you...yes more than in regular matches because you don't have the options to try to decide the engagement in your favor like you have in a non mirror match up.

Considering that Eugen completely ignores the topic... i guess we will get mirror matches anyway. Definitely a "no go" for me and i would probably refund it in that case.

User avatar
Fade2Gray
General
Posts: 8659
Joined: Wed 1 May 2013 23:30
Location: IED proof in Iraq
Contact:

Re: Ranked Allies vs. Allies / Axis vs. Axis?

Postby Fade2Gray » Sat 6 May 2017 20:44

D-M wrote:
Tigga wrote:
D-M wrote:Stupid is the word you are looking for. That whole reasoning is, he is just spining it as basically being a game where there is no tactical choice, no choices in the deck, decision to make. Just a game where you take each of your unit, put them face to face with your oponent's and just watch them go. This is stupid beyond belief.

That's because that's what the game moves toward when you have mirror matches.


no more than any regular matches. :roll:

Yeah, I'm with DM on this, this doesn't hold water very well for me. It seems like you are arguing that both sides will always pick the same coalition/division/whatever, and will end up using the exact units, and the maps are symmetrical, etc etc. Yeah, sometimes identical units will face off, but I don't see RNG being a more significant factor in the grand scale of things.

Operation Ivy wrote:As he has showed you...

Did he now?

Operation Ivy wrote:yes more than in regular matches because you don't have the options to try to decide the engagement in your favor like you have in a non mirror match up.

Considering that Eugen completely ignores the topic... i guess we will get mirror matches anyway. Definitely a "no go" for me and i would probably refund it in that case.

So what you are telling me is that both sides will always use the exact same coalition/divisions/whatever and will always have the same exact teams, opening unit selection, etc? Sounds to me like mirror matches is not the problem.
Image
Image
Think you have what it takes to enlist into the military? You sure about that?

User avatar
Operation Ivy
Master Sergeant
Posts: 154
Joined: Wed 5 Oct 2016 00:56
Contact:

Re: Ranked Allies vs. Allies / Axis vs. Axis?

Postby Operation Ivy » Sat 6 May 2017 21:27

Fade2Gray wrote:always use the exact same coalition/divisions/whatever and will always have the same exact teams, opening unit selection, etc? Sounds to me like mirror matches is not the problem.


Stop nitpicking. You don't even need to have the exact same division and opening unit selection etc. because you find so many copied units in several decks, especially on axis side.

in 3 out 4 division you have panzer grenadiers as your bread and butter infantry. Your recon units are also basically identical across all divisions. It gets better the further the game progresses but it is still an issue.
Also some divisions get straight up better units than others. The 2e Blindée for example gets the scouting m8 as the 2nd us armor but it costs 15 pts more and has 1 less vet.

I would be way less up on the fence about mirror matches if the divisions were more diverse. I also think that it complicates balancing a lot when you also need to balance the divisions between themselves on one side.

Return to “General Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests