TI what is it good for?

[Ramm]

Hi all,

I don't have much expeirence on this forum.(I spend most of my lesiure time playing, because this game is so addictive to me)
I would like to apoligize in advance for breaking any unwritten rules when posting. Thanks :-D

THE POLL:

(A) Do you feel that TI affects your enjoyment of SPMBT when playing soviet technolgy against western technolgy or vice versa during 1980-1994?(YES - NO)
(B) In what way and to what extent would you describe your play expeirence being affected?
(C) Any other comments you would like to add?

1. [A] Yes, although I do not use PBEM.
[b] When I have TI agaisnt an AI that does not have TI, it feels like I'm a Turkish machine gunner in the film "Gallipoli". The carnage of my opponent is so easy it horrifies my sense of fair play.
On the other hand when the AI and my position is reversed, I feel like I'm one of the CIA soldiers in the film "Predater". Where I lose powerfull units to an unseen and devious alien hunter, where at every corner my 'state of the art' eastern bloc assets can and do fall victem at no warning to the "predater". I am thus afraid to even move my units outside of spawn, lest the "predater" be drawn to them by the scent of their fear.
[C] In case your wondering I always play with at least 10,000 points + half of support points on assualt and all of support points on defend. On average half of my units are afv's the other half are leg class units.

The reason I did this poll was just to see where other wargamers stood on the matter
I seriously doubt Mobhack will even consider the possibility of making any changes. Although I admit no changes may be needed, after reading many other posts I'm paranoid that this may be dismissed out of hand.

[pdoktar]

Thermal Imaging is really effective in real life too. When I was riding an BMP-1 with experimental turret from LAV-25 fitted to it, american thermals give us a distinct advantage of seeing even single soldiers through forest and underbrush from a few hundred meters out waiting for us in an ambush. It nothing like the old infrared or nightvision devices. Some things are really lit up on it.

And if you think TI gives a massive advantage, you can see that it costs quite a lot in the cost calculator too. If you have no TI and opponent have, you must drag him into close quarters ambush. You´ll have more units than him for a given set of points. In 1980, Soviet armor is quite tough against usually used 105mm ammo. Only TOW can kill you instantly. However wen 120mm comes to the scene you´ll be in a distinct disadvantage against 120+TI.

And for the poll: Yes TI affects my gameplaying, but in a good way, since I´ve used to its characteristics. for example missile teams with TI cost usually 100+ points.. if you plaster one out with an artillery barrage or inf-mmgs you can bet it feels good. The point equivalent of 4 infatry squads wiped out in an instance from the enemy arsenal. Usually my thermal fitted vehicles are tanks and FO units, maybe a few missile teams carefully hidden because of their vulnerability to anykind of fire.

[Ramm]

It would be greatly appreiacted if a webmaster could put this post in the equipment section


as for pdokar, Thanks for responding to my post. I look forward to trying your tactics.

[RecruitMonty]

Answer: Blowing stuff up.

[Marcello]

My opinion on the matter is that the game should represent reality to the best our understanding of it and game limitations. And as far is known TI is indeed a huge advantage. Balance is to be achieved by pricing and scenario setup rather than tweaking code on the basis of a misguided sense of fairness. This, mind you, comes from somebody who is accustomed to play as the iraqis against the US in 1991. Even in such loopsided engagements it is possible to achieve at least draw if numbers, terrain etc are carefully exploited.

[Suhiir]

I know personally I'd LOVE to see TI capability available at ranges (and costs) less then 40 hexes. There's no reason/need for a 40 hex range on infantry squads, MMG's, Inf AT (LAAW, SMAW, RPG, etc) weapons yet if you want TI capability you're currently "stuck" with a 40 hex range/cost.

I suspect this is one of those issues where no change is practical because it's buried in the code and would require going thru every unit in every OOB to implement.

As to changing my game play.
Definitely !

[narwan]

NATO TI vs WP non TI can be a problem in games where the parameters (points and map size) are chosen to fit the (much more expensive) NATO force (which happens all the time). That means that if you can buy enough TI equipment to cover your entire front line adequately and with some to spare you've either got far too many points or a map that's much too small.

Under such circumstances the numerical advantage of the WP accounts for far less than it should. WP forces weren't supposed to blindly throw themselves at enemy strong points. A specific setup should allow for manouvre to play a significant part.
And compensate the WP by giving them plenty of air points (more than NATO as they employed far more aircraft and helicopters for CCS).

Narwan

[Ramm]

Originally Posted by narwan

NATO TI vs WP non TI can be a problem in games where the parameters (points and map size) are chosen to fit the (much more expensive) NATO force (which happens all the time). That means that if you can buy enough TI equipment to cover your entire front line adequately and with some to spare you've either got far too many points or a map that's much too small.

Under such circumstances the numerical advantage of the WP accounts for far less than it should. WP forces weren't supposed to blindly throw themselves at enemy strong points. A specific setup should allow for manouvre to play a significant part.
And compensate the WP by giving them plenty of air points (more than NATO as they employed far more aircraft and helicopters for CCS).

Narwan

I see what you are saying but it was either Don or Andy that said under no circumstances would the map and unit limit be getting bigger, so TI will always be king. For me I only use the 80x100 and I never have even reached the limit for core. But for a pro I could see how these two things could be a grave disappointment.

Andrew

[Double_Deuce]

Originally Posted by Ramm

I see what you are saying but it was either Don or Andy that said under no circumstances would the map and unit limit be getting bigger, so TI will always be king. For me I only use the 80x100 and I never have even reached the limit for core. But for a pro I could see how these two things could be a grave disappointment.

Many maps, unless you are in the desert (or steppes for Russia) usually have enough rolling terrain and trees to allow for reducing the TI advantage somewhat. Using wingmen and overwatch helps as well. Some players have a bad tendency to advance too quickly, poking around to see what shoots at them. Playing with BTR equipped forces will generally break you of that habit pretty quickly.

[narwan]

For modern games I'd rarely play on anything but a very large map (max size or at least close to it) and with enough terrain features to break LOS considerably. It doesn't have to be close terrain everywhere but remember that 5 or 6 tanks with TI (vis 40 each) can cover the entire max map size in completely clear terrain. There's little fun in that if your on the other side (I play PBEM mostly, rarely against the AI anymore). Those are indeed ideal conditions for TI so assume the enemy has some brains and will choose to fight in terrain and under conditions which if not favorable to them, at least aren't suicidal.

Narwan