History Vs. Balance


Why does everyone think Balance is more important than history? Are you really playing a Real Time Sim if your choice of player has been watered down so they don't beat the pants off of every enemy? Can you really call it Historical Strategy if one country's units have been beefed up so they can compete for "world domination"? Let's take a look...


Let's say we are playing Alexander the Great. How realistic is it that it should be simple for you to FAIL to conquer the known world? When I read the history books I don't read about a general who struggled and fought from behind and won the battles because his will was greater, no, I read about unmatched training and armies. When I read about Temujin, who would become Genghis Khan, I don't read about his prowess at outsmarting his foe. Like the German Blitzkrieg of World War II, Khan's armies were like a blunt force instrument. They just hit you so hard that you couldn't stand against them. Taking any of these three countries and turning the game into a matter a military genius instead of military prowess automatically removes the historical accuracy of the game, thus you are playing a strategy game based on historical places and people, not historically accurate battles. In all three situations, the game should be pretty boring, because it should be relatively simple to reproduce the results of history. Is that a game you would want to play?

Let's say you are playing a colonization war game. You are the American's driving the Indians across the plains as you systematically usurp all of their lands. Their bows and shields are no match for the weapons of Gunpowder. SO, you load this game up, and the first village you scout has 120 natives in it, all hunter/warriors, armed with a spear, a shield, and a hatchet for after they've thrown their spear at you. Your basic starting units all have muskets, basic armour, and a sword. You take four musket units in the numbers are 240 muskets to 120 warriors. Your muskets have a slow reload time, they are untrained, and you're routed by the enemy warriors as less than 20% are taken out with your initial and second round of musket fire. they're on you and that's the end since they are much more highly trained with their hatchets. Are you shrugging that you should have brought a bigger army, or are you pissed that a bunch hatchets buried your musket troops with almost no effort? They toned your muskets down and beefed up the native stats to "balance" the game. We all know that the muskets should tear the natives apart. We know it because historically it's true. We know it because logic tells us Guns Vs. Swords starting at 200 yards range equals a bunch of dead guys with swords in their hands still about 50 yards shy of the gunmen.

We may not like it, but you just can't have a game play out like that. Countries are balanced for their overall army, not just one unit versus one unit. It's really not looked upon as though you are going to fight many battles with one unit of Crossbows against two units of Longbows. It is expected that their will be cavalry, swordsmen, and spears in their as well. It is expected their will two or three lines marching towards each other just like in the feudal days. In history versus balance, you have to play the balance card to issue challenge to the players. Don't pick apart the fact that one unit doesn't measure up to what you know they were while another is stronger. Change the stats and you'll see devastating results. At first you'll kind of laugh at how those long bows rip to shreds the opposing army. After that, though, it'll start to lose its enjoyment because now it's too easy.

Example:

Play the expanded scenario mod and use the use the Timurids. Edit the descr_strat_unit.txt file and remove the "can_run_amok" line from the elephant units. I promise, you'll stop training any unit other than elephants. It's pointless to use anything else. Line 'em up in a straight line across the map and rush your enemy. They'll break every time.

Now beef up your Longbows to where you think they should be in comparison of the other bow units ingame. It won't take long for you to realize that all you need are 12-15 Longbows. Their AP along with the added strength you gave their arrows will cut down any army from such a distance their own bows never get a chance to take aim at you. You'll marvel at all the dead bodies and how you didn't eve have to engage them, and then you'll turn the game off. No challenge, no fun, no interest.


Balance sucks because someone always loses. Their's a unit we enjoy the history of that has to be changed for the balance of army Vs. army. You just have to learn how to use them effectively. Unless you are a master editor who really understands combat balance, and I've played quite a few of the Rome and Medieval Mods so i can tell you, someone or something is always out of balance, it just doesn't pay to start messing around with single units. There's always unit or a move, or a tactic that is "overpowered". That's every combat game from strategy to fighters to jedi knights. You either learn to live with it, or you just stop playing. In the battle of Balance Vs. Historical Accuracy, balance always wins, even though there is always SOMETHING that could be improved upon.