Unfortunately has not found, where it was told, that for fight Assault, the best parity points 1 (defender) - 1,75 (attacker).
------------------------------------------------------------
There is other way.
Player 1 takes how many wants points, and Player 2 receives so much how many will give WinSP (automatically pays off).
------------------------------------------------------------
At is it correct ?
That seems correct. Just from playing with it the ratios for seems the defender gets 40% (5:2 ratio) of the points for the attacker. The odds aren't much worse than with advances (2:1 ratio), but you can get defensive obstacles and fortifications which make assaults more difficult.
I remember veterans SP wrote, that for equal commanders on skill the best parity points is 1 / 1.75.
So it or not? :chin:
--------------------------------------------
Now in WinSP:
Assault: 1 -- 2,5
Aduanced: 1 -- 2,0
I'm not a veteran but I've played a couple of assault/defend battles recently and in both cases my opponent and I have mirrored the game so if the points are unfair we both have to deal with it. For example we are playing a beach assault game: USMC 11,000 points Japan 6000 points. We both play the Japanese and the USMC in 2 games simultaneously. Therefore if one side gets an unfair advantage, we both get that unfair advantage.
The 1.75-1 ratio is one that Vesku and I came up with as we found that the assaulting player always took the flags at 2-1 by attrition alone. The 1.75 actually made the attacker think a bit more. The points were:
ME 1:1
Adv 1.35 (or 1.4) -1
ASST 1.75 -1
BTW - the pts above were for ww2, in modern post 80s even a 2-1 is death for the attacker.
Weasel Wrote:BTW - the pts above were for ww2, in modern post 80s even a 2-1 is death for the attacker.
In MBT the ratio depends on the nations involved. TI and cluster bombs should also be taken into consideration.
For a long time did not try
Assault.
Thanks
all for the help!
This was discussed a little while ago too I think. In my considerable experience a 2:1 ratio for assaults is far too little for ww2 games. Defending against an assault becomes quite easy and attacking very hard (if the defender knows his bussiness).
Odds of 2.5:1 are a minimum and best is a 3:1 ratio for a ww2 assault/defend game.
If playing modern MBT games or extensive city fights the attacker will certainly need the higher points ratio.
Narwan
Narwan Wrote:This was discussed a little while ago too I think. In my considerable experience a 2:1 ratio for assaults is far too little for ww2 games. Defending against an assault becomes quite easy and attacking very hard (if the defender knows his bussiness).
Odds of 2.5:1 are a minimum and best is a 3:1 ratio for a ww2 assault/defend game.
If playing modern MBT games or extensive city fights the attacker will certainly need the higher points ratio.
What our little mirrored armageddon suggested to me is that the correct point ratio is *highly* mutable depending on the skill level of the defender in using his artillery correctly.
It would be nice if there were one ballpark-correct answer, but there's a world of difference between assaulting someone of your skill and someone of a more ordinary ability. I think for most opponents, 1.75:1 isn't that off the mark. For a rare few, 3:1 is closer to right no matter how talented the offensive commander is. There's only so much panache that you can put into cramming units through a breach ...
-- 30 --