Jump to content


Matchmaker vs. Real life


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
14 replies to this topic

Saga #1 Posted Nov 02 2011 - 15:58

    Captain

  • Players
  • 31763 battles
  • 1,267
  • [-LEG-] -LEG-
  • Member since:
    04-21-2011
Wow.  How did the Axis and Allies deal with their Matchmaker?  Oh wait.

lord_farquad #2 Posted Nov 02 2011 - 16:05

    Head of eSports

  • Administrator
  • 15343 battles
  • 1,720
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    04-05-2011

View PostSaga, on Nov 02 2011 - 15:58, said:

Wow.  How did the Axis and Allies deal with their Matchmaker?  Oh wait.


lol, I agree... we should pit M4's against Tigers, and see what the MM whining looks like then  :Smile-playing:

Fattty #3 Posted Nov 02 2011 - 16:09

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 12770 battles
  • 4,179
  • Member since:
    01-20-2011

View PostSaga, on Nov 02 2011 - 15:58, said:

Wow.  How did the Axis and Allies deal with their Matchmaker?  Oh wait.

The Germans stole the MM in the early 30's and hid it in Hamburg until late 1942, when they transported it to Normandy because the farther the MM is from Russians the better. The Allies found it a few days after D-Day and tweaked it to lower the matchmaking value of their Shermans. Japan had designed and built a prototype matchmaker, but they had to use all their fuel to fly their airplanes, and therefore disbanded the project in late 1943.

frostys #4 Posted Nov 02 2011 - 16:12

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 7839 battles
  • 531
  • Member since:
    04-01-2011

View Postlord_farquad, on Nov 02 2011 - 16:05, said:

lol, I agree... we should pit M4's against Tigers, and see what the MM whining looks like then  :Smile-playing:

4-6 M4 or T-34 for every Tiger? And that would probably be the minimum ratio for it to be close to acurate to production numbers.

StumpBeefbroth #5 Posted Nov 02 2011 - 16:16

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 20723 battles
  • 907
  • Member since:
    10-29-2010
I just laugh at guys that defend the MM by comparing it to a real war. :P

sweenytodd #6 Posted Nov 02 2011 - 16:16

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 9121 battles
  • 1,076
  • [PARAX] PARAX
  • Member since:
    07-30-2010

View Postfrostys, on Nov 02 2011 - 16:12, said:

4-6 M4 or T-34 for every Tiger? And that would probably be the minimum ratio for it to be close to acurate to production numbers.

the RL ratio only works if you use all the RL stats, i think in game it'd be a max of 3:1

lord_farquad #7 Posted Nov 02 2011 - 16:20

    Head of eSports

  • Administrator
  • 15343 battles
  • 1,720
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    04-05-2011

View Postsweenytodd, on Nov 02 2011 - 16:16, said:

the RL ratio only works if you use all the RL stats, i think in game it'd be a max of 3:1


yeah, otherwise we'd have to be able to engage at 5km+, since the tiger's true strength was being able to hit the enemy outside of their operational range. And Germans would have radios, where as no one else would.

Jovialmadness #8 Posted Nov 02 2011 - 16:25

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 18590 battles
  • 4,465
  • [VPG-S] VPG-S
  • Member since:
    10-08-2010

View Postlord_farquad, on Nov 02 2011 - 16:20, said:

yeah, otherwise we'd have to be able to engage at 5km+, since the tiger's true strength was being able to hit the enemy outside of their operational range. And Germans would have radios, where as no one else would.

Except you forget one thing.  A radio is cool and all but it only helps you so much.  Especially considering the fairly accurate radio conversation that a German tank commander may have had with his unit..

Platoon Commander:  "tiger's 2 and 3, engage the enemy by the road now!
Tiger Commander 2:  "those 15 tanks sir?"
Platoon Commander:  "affirmative.  For the fatherland!!!!"
Tiger Commander to his crew:  "that bitch has lost his mind"

lord_farquad #9 Posted Nov 02 2011 - 16:29

    Head of eSports

  • Administrator
  • 15343 battles
  • 1,720
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    04-05-2011

View PostJovialmadness, on Nov 02 2011 - 16:25, said:

Except you forget one thing.  A radio is cool and all but it only helps you so much.  Especially considering the fairly accurate radio conversation that a German tank commander may have had with his unit..

Platoon Commander:  "tiger's 2 and 3, engage the enemy by the road now!
Tiger Commander 2:  "those 15 tanks sir?"
Platoon Commander:  "affirmative.  For the fatherland!!!!"
Tiger Commander to his crew:  "that bitch has lost his mind"


you forgot....

Sherman Tank commander: what the heck hit us... it killed all 15 tanks in seconds, and we didn't even see them :(

frostys #10 Posted Nov 02 2011 - 16:31

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 7839 battles
  • 531
  • Member since:
    04-01-2011

View Postlord_farquad, on Nov 02 2011 - 16:20, said:

yeah, otherwise we'd have to be able to engage at 5km+, since the tiger's true strength was being able to hit the enemy outside of their operational range. And Germans would have radios, where as no one else would.

Crackshoot once in a blue moon and real operation range is kinda different. Tigers would also have transmission breakdown, sproket failure and lack of supplies at random depending on wich front we choose to fight. Remember history, no matter how good the tigers were, the army with "bad" t-34 still rolled them all the way to Berlin. Everybody always says the German had the beast weapon, best training and all of that. It's real but at the same time, there were other problem you would need to simulate to have a balanced game if you were to go with more realistic tanks.

Unless you want the side with more german tank to always win by a landslide...

Jovialmadness #11 Posted Nov 02 2011 - 16:35

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 18590 battles
  • 4,465
  • [VPG-S] VPG-S
  • Member since:
    10-08-2010

View Postlord_farquad, on Nov 02 2011 - 16:29, said:

you forgot....

Sherman Tank commander: what the heck hit us... it killed all 15 tanks in seconds, and we didn't even see them :(

Na I studied some standard tactics the Sherman tank crews utilized.

Say 5 shermans were going down a road and a single tiger fired on them.  Most likely two would be knocked out statistically before the location of the tiger could be roughly located.  The third would be knocked out while the three began engagement.  The fourth would be knocked out in close proximity to the tiger and the fifth would be behind the tiger taking the kill shot.

It was a war of attrition the American industry could easily handle.  The crews on the other hand naturally didn't like the um war of attrition :Smile_honoring:

FrodoTSolo #12 Posted Nov 02 2011 - 16:38

    Captain

  • Players
  • 25977 battles
  • 1,560
  • Member since:
    06-02-2011

View PostSaga, on Nov 02 2011 - 15:58, said:

Wow.  How did the Axis and Allies deal with their Matchmaker?  Oh wait.
Normally a die off at the start of the game on who wants which nationality.  Of course there is a bidding system as well in which if you want to play a specific side you give the opposing team some extra points to upgrade a unit or whatnot.  Oh... were you not talking about the boardgame, my bad!

hemispheres #13 Posted Nov 02 2011 - 16:40

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 11498 battles
  • 60
  • [SIMP] SIMP
  • Member since:
    02-12-2011

View PostSaga, on Nov 02 2011 - 15:58, said:

Wow.  How did the Axis and Allies deal with their Matchmaker?  Oh wait.

They hid behind bushes.

lord_farquad #14 Posted Nov 02 2011 - 16:41

    Head of eSports

  • Administrator
  • 15343 battles
  • 1,720
  • [WGA-A] WGA-A
  • Member since:
    04-05-2011

View PostJovialmadness, on Nov 02 2011 - 16:35, said:

Na I studied some standard tactics the Sherman tank crews utilized.

Say 5 shermans were going down a road and a single tiger fired on them.  Most likely two would be knocked out statistically before the location of the tiger could be roughly located.  The third would be knocked out while the three began engagement.  The fourth would be knocked out in close proximity to the tiger and the fifth would be behind the tiger taking the kill shot.

It was a war of attrition the American industry could easily handle.  The crews on the other hand naturally didn't like the um war of attrition :Smile_honoring:


Well, you should probably note I was being sarcastic  <_<

also, if you follow the loss ratios, it was about 5.74-6.84 (depending on if you use total, or average).

Sadukar09 #15 Posted Nov 02 2011 - 17:17

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 19445 battles
  • 3,299
  • [-G-] -G-
  • Member since:
    02-20-2011
Topic split from original. Please keep on topic.
|Sadukar09|