CWB rules, past their use by?

[RTW Fan]

I am pretty much sick of the archer/heavy cav spam of cwb. I rarely play these rules any more, especially when the archer war is just monotonous and all battle descend into a skirmish... oh and the complete op of archers compared to price. And than there is the fact that the rules have been so overplayed that really good players generally decide their games on faction advantage.

The rules I play now are no chariots(except for scythes), max 4 archer/slinger types(take that archer spammers), max 2 heavy cav types(Romans get no heavy cav, oh and virgins and axemen count as heavy), Persians and scythians get max 6 HA and 8 archer types in total but no cantabrian circle, and as much artillery as you want to bring(which I have found is much more useful than I had thought after playing for 2 years).

[KittySN]

"Really good players" generally decide their games based upon giving an opponent the faction advantage or handicapping with weaker units for challenge, and then beating them regardless to the fact. Though there exists the passing fancy, pwn'ing people who can't micro fast or simply aren't theoretically skilled is quite boring, hence the existence of clans and the "in-crowd"--familiar names who are invited for quality matches. Though we may hate to admit it, we enjoy losing to someone who can outmaneuver and outthink us, or simply keep up. A quality skirmish is like poetry; some will love it and others hate it. Good luck retiring CWB for your rules. Every few months someone drifts through, inquires and suggests change. If you’re not an influential individual, likely hosting a reputable tourney, reflecting the taste of peer review in terms of faction balance, you don’t even have your foot in the door and nobody’s going to dignify you with an answer, except perhaps an insult. I'm an exception because I was bored and felt like wasting two minutes.

[caesar_37th]

Faction balance, CWB is still best at it.

[RTW Fan]

"Really good players" generally decide their games based upon giving an opponent the faction advantage or handicapping with weaker units for challenge, and then beating them regardless to the fact. Though there exists the passing fancy, pwn'ing people who can't micro fast or simply aren't theoretically skilled is quite boring, hence the existence of clans and the "in-crowd"--familiar names who are invited for quality matches. Though we may hate to admit it, we enjoy losing to someone who can outmaneuver and outthink us, or simply keep up. A quality skirmish is like poetry; some will love it and others hate it. Good luck retiring CWB for your rules. Every few months someone drifts through, inquires and suggests change. If you’re not an influential individual, likely hosting a reputable tourney, reflecting the taste of peer review in terms of faction balance, you don’t even have your foot in the door and nobody’s going to dignify you with an answer, except perhaps an insult. I'm an exception because I was bored and felt like wasting two minutes.

Hey Kitty, I was not attempting to proselytise anyone. I am just bored of cwb archer spam.Just the rules I have tended to begin playing by.

[TheFoolOnTheHill]

Cwb is by no means perfect but it works good and makes sence

[Van Daan]

Well, there would be practically no faction that could beat Parthia or Scythia, so most matches would be huge skirmish fights. Doesn't exactly solve the problem you've outlined.

[RTW Fan]

Well, there would be practically no faction that could beat Parthia or Scythia, so most matches would be huge skirmish fights. Doesn't exactly solve the problem you've outlined.

Sure, Rome could probably flog Scythia without the virgins. It would being the legendary testudo into play. It would be interesting against Parthia. With only two catas, what will eventuate.

[The Despondent Mind]

CWB ruined the joy of RTW for me.

[DarthLazy]

Too bad.

[KittySN]

So don't use CWB if you don't like it. I've only used it in maybe half of all my battles. Just write what you want to play.

As one who joins many "random's" seeks, it's better than 99% of the things I usually see--this thread's proposal included.

I mean... it's okay for ingenuity’s sake, but crap for faction balance! I presume you play on "large" or "huge" scale...

[TwoKnives]

CWB rules are not perfect but they have their good and bad points. I'm sorry to say this, but your rules are unreasonable as Parthia or Scythia with only two units of heavy cavalry in play would most certainly lose. You may reply that other factions wouldn't have more than two units of heavy cavalry too, but Light Lancers, or Equites or Long Shield would destroy Arab Cavalry or other Light Cavalry that Parthia or Scythia (except Virgins that are Heavy Cav in your rules) might use. You also allow artillery witch puts Gauls and Dacians in more disadvantage, and you haven't banned Elephants or given them some kind of restriction. If you really want to balance the CWB rules, then should propose rules like these:

1. Max 4 Melee Chariots (they are still considered as cavalry)
2. Gaul, Spain and Dacia can use up to 2k more denarii when put against the "civilized" factions and Brittania
3. Insert all CWB rules here

[RTW Fan]

CWB rules are not perfect but they have their good and bad points. I'm sorry to say this, but your rules are unreasonable as Parthia or Scythia with only two units of heavy cavalry in play would most certainly lose. You may reply that other factions wouldn't have more than two units of heavy cavalry too, but Light Lancers, or Equites or Long Shield would destroy Arab Cavalry or other Light Cavalry that Parthia or Scythia (except Virgins that are Heavy Cav in your rules) might use. You also allow artillery witch puts Gauls and Dacians in more disadvantage, and you haven't banned Elephants or given them some kind of restriction. If you really want to balance the CWB rules, then should propose rules like these:

1. Max 4 Melee Chariots (they are still considered as cavalry)
2. Gaul, Spain and Dacia can use up to 2k more denarii when put against the "civilized" factions and Brittania
3. Insert all CWB rules here

Oh look, I doubt that others will play by these rules for any number of rules, they are just the rules that I have taken to playing by.

Scythia and Parthia would have a massive cav advantage, especially in light cav. Persian HA and Scythian noble archers, many units of them... And catas to play around with testudo and hammer weakened units.

Why would you ban elephants? Expensive money wasters, and if artillery can be well used, than why not? Maybe onagers are a bit much, but the rest are alright.

[TwoKnives]

Scythia and Parthia would have a massive cav advantage, especially in light cav. Persian HA and Scythian noble archers, many units of them... And catas to play around with testudo and hammer weakened units.

A swarm of Equites or Light Lancers or Greek cav could still beat them if used correctly. They are cheap and you can upgrade them to the max (3 chevrons, gold/gold).

Why would you ban elephants? Expensive money wasters, and if artillery can be well used, than why not? Maybe onagers are a bit much, but the rest are alright.

Are you really sure? If used correctly they can kill an entire army single-handed, otherwise CWB wouldn't have them banned. And yes Onagers are not a bit too much; they ARE too much. At least you could have restricted them a little bit.

Overall, your rules are interesting at a first glance, but they still remain unreasonable up to some extent. Don't get me wrong, I'm not one of those overly conservative RTW veterans, pros or experienced players that are like "CWB, 15k GRASSY FLATLANDS AND NOTHING ELSE!!!!!!", actually I don't like the fact that the CWB are overused, but they are a good basis for every other rule that has a purpose of balancing the factions to the max. Your rules, if mixed with mine and retouched here and there a bit, would surpass the CWB, if we only would be well-known among the RTW MP community.

[caesar_37th]

Very few players only play cwb and refuse to do anything special.

[RTW Fan]

A swarm of Equites or Light Lancers or Greek cav could still beat them if used correctly. They are cheap and you can upgrade them to the max (3 chevrons, gold/gold).

Greeks and Romans do not get much cav, hence no swarm.

Are you really sure? If used correctly they can kill an entire army single-handed, otherwise CWB wouldn't have them banned. And yes Onagers are not a bit too much; they ARE too much. At least you could have restricted them a little bit.

Yes I am sure that elephants are practically useless. A good player might be able to protect them until the decisive moment, but that would be tactical superiority. They were banned in cwb to discourage rubbish armies.

Overall, your rules are interesting at a first glance, but they still remain unreasonable up to some extent. Don't get me wrong, I'm not one of those overly conservative RTW veterans, pros or experienced players that are like "CWB, 15k GRASSY FLATLANDS AND NOTHING ELSE!!!!!!", actually I don't like the fact that the CWB are overused, but they are a good basis for every other rule that has a purpose of balancing the factions to the max. Your rules, if mixed with mine and retouched here and there a bit, would surpass the CWB, if we only would be well-known among the RTW MP community.

I do not know these conservative RTW players that only play GF. All I wanted was a general discussion on the state of cwb heavy cav/archer spam. I have begun to prefer to play by faction specific rule sets whose only general rule is that they limit hc/a spam.

[|Sith| Max]

I am pretty much sick of the archer/heavy cav spam of cwb. I rarely play these rules any more, especially when the archer war is just monotonous and all battle descend into a skirmish... oh and the complete op of archers compared to price. And than there is the fact that the rules have been so overplayed that really good players generally decide their games on faction advantage.

The rules I play now are no chariots(except for scythes), max 4 archer/slinger types(take that archer spammers), max 2 heavy cav types(Romans get no heavy cav, oh and virgins and axemen count as heavy), Persians and scythians get max 6 HA and 8 archer types in total but no cantabrian circle, and as much artillery as you want to bring(which I have found is much more useful than I had thought after playing for 2 years).

Instead of thinking up rubbish alternatives, go play TWPL. it is like CWB but it has Max 6 cav, Max 6 arch, and chariot archers count as both cav and archers.

"Really good players" generally decide their games based upon giving an opponent the faction advantage or handicapping with weaker units for challenge, and then beating them regardless to the fact. Though there exists the passing fancy, pwn'ing people who can't micro fast or simply aren't theoretically skilled is quite boring, hence the existence of clans and the "in-crowd"--familiar names who are invited for quality matches. Though we may hate to admit it, we enjoy losing to someone who can outmaneuver and outthink us, or simply keep up. A quality skirmish is like poetry; some will love it and others hate it. Good luck retiring CWB for your rules. Every few months someone drifts through, inquires and suggests change. If you’re not an influential individual, likely hosting a reputable tourney, reflecting the taste of peer review in terms of faction balance, you don’t even have your foot in the door and nobody’s going to dignify you with an answer, except perhaps an insult. I'm an exception because I was bored and felt like wasting two minutes.

You would have to be a veteran clanny from 2004 that is in good standing with everyone in order to convince people to stop using CWB. The rules work fine, it is just that few people understand they can also use a Rush army or a Balanced army. Ofcourse as two scythia fans we are both guilty of that 10 ranged unit archer spam, ofcourse, but both of us can appreciate a got microfest with inf and cav. Nothing like a nice heroic victory in a Germania vs Seleucids.

Faction balance, CWB is still best at it.

Yeah.

Cwb is by no means perfect but it works good and makes sence

Forget the idea of ever getting perfect rules. That falls onto the makers philosophy of gameplay. most new people dislike the skirmishing aspect of CWB, but since they dont know about TWPL they just claim they are the first to invent it. those gits.

Well, there would be practically no faction that could beat Parthia or Scythia, so most matches would be huge skirmish fights. Doesn't exactly solve the problem you've outlined.

Why dont people just ask their opponents not to play skirmish for that battle. God.

So don't use CWB if you don't like it. I've only used it in maybe half of all my battles. Just write what you want to play.

As one who joins many "random's" seeks, it's better than 99% of the things I usually see--this thread's proposal included.

I mean... it's okay for ingenuity’s sake, but crap for faction balance! I presume you play on "large" or "huge" scale...

I'll drink to this post. Still one of the brighter ones in the RTW community eh belle?

Hey KittyBelle, I was not attempting to proselytise anyone. I am just bored of cwb archer spam.Just the rules I have tended to begin playing by.

Fixed that for you. as i previously suggested, ask your opponent for a nice Rome V Rome or the likes, or play TWPL. as ides from that, Skirmish is as much a part of CWB as Rush, Balanced and Attrition armies.

Sure, Rome could probably flog Scythia without the virgins. It would being the legendary testudo into play. It would be interesting against Parthia. With only two catas, what will eventuate.

You lost me at Testudo.

Why would you ban elephants? Expensive money wasters, and if artillery can be well used, than why not? Maybe onagers are a bit much, but the rest are alright.

The original reason was to "Protect noobs from their own mental problems" if i am citing my elders correctly.

Overall, your rules are interesting at a first glance, but they still remain unreasonable up to some extent. Don't get me wrong, I'm not one of those overly conservative RTW veterans, pros or experienced players that are like "CWB, 15k GRASSY FLATLANDS AND NOTHING ELSE!!!!!!", actually I don't like the fact that the CWB are overused, but they are a good basis for every other rule that has a purpose of balancing the factions to the max. Your rules, if mixed with mine and retouched here and there a bit, would surpass the CWB, if we only would be well-known among the RTW MP community.

There are quite good reasons to say CWB 15K grassy and nothing else. For one it is the format used by the best of the best, the best of the rest and the rest of the best. Even if there were better rules, the legitimate respected competitions all use CWB and TWPL. Playing against clans that use CWB is equal to a seal of quality. I respect other rulesets, but the players that use them are usually a bunch of dimwits.

I was originally trained for classical tournaments on the CWB and TWPL rulesets, but decided to use my skills to train new players instead, and i've done that since 2007 now. In all that time i have never seen a ruleset that was more universally played by the status quo. It simply has the monopoly on skill, since it would take a very famous and respected clannie to create a new one, but that group is fully content with CWB. Arguments like "Tired of the missile spam" which is but one out of four aspects of the cwb game, is not going to convince them. It just tells them you do not have the will to learn how to counter it, or the tact to ask for a melee fight.

The irrefutable proof that CWB and TWPL spawned the best talents in our community would be the achieved results of the RTW clannies that went to Shogun 2. If i am not mistaken it was the lady with the purple text above you, belle, that was number 1 on shogun for quite a long time. I've known her on rome for a while and she will probably admit that there are people better than her on there. I am not saying she is not a great player, considering that ive practically played games with her on Rome from the beginning of her career there till the end of it, and seen the progress she has made since her days in HELL clan till the point when she went to STW2. I am saying that if a RTW grown player like her (Whom i would rate more than worthy to be one of the top 100 players there) can up the best STW2 players consistently, you have to consider what the people in the top 20 can do. We reach these levels because we practice against the best, and the best are found in CWB. There is no other ruleset that is used by dozens of clans and offers more than 300 skilled opponents, and i have never regretted only playing it, cause it sure as ing hell beats the spartan spamming crap i had to put up with when i was a wee clanless back when the game was released.

So in summary i hate to disappoint you but CWB is to RTW what Soccer is to Europe. It is practiced on a high level, has a long history and they will beat you with bicycle chains if you diss it.

I do not know these conservative RTW players that only play GF. All I wanted was a general discussion on the state of cwb heavy cav/archer spam. I have begun to prefer to play by faction specific rule sets whose only general rule is that they limit hc/a spam.

Yeah, but contemplate the fact that you started a general discussion on the state of CWB on a board that most clannies do not go to. the only place that the discussion might have success is a multiclanboard like the current CCC or the older RCC forums, but CCC is worse than mos eisley spaceport, and i guarantee you that you'd learn a lot of new cursewords if you did.

[RTW Fan]

You lost me at Testudo.

.

I have used it to victory. I know, I know, I know. It is slow, dysfunctional, leads to isolation and immobility and demolition from heavy cavalry and generally sux 99.9% of the time in cwb, but it can work if used intelligently against Scythians when their hc is limited to 2 units.

I know that I really should not have mentioned it, it provokes anti-noob repulsion tendencies, but still...

As for the other stuff, I already knew about TWPL. I am just sick of playing with hc/archer spam. I know the dynamics of the game favour this unless you play high k, but I do not enjoy the skirmish, the ones that I win or not, I enjoy bold manouvring and unconventional tactics that lead to chain routs and the interplay of the morale capability.

Edit:

So in summary i hate to disappoint you but CWB is to RTW what Soccer is to Europe. It is practiced on a high level, has a long history and they will beat you with bicycle chains if you diss it.


Yeah, but contemplate the fact that you started a general discussion on the state of CWB on a board that most clannies do not go to. the only place that the discussion might have success is a multiclanboard like the current CCC or the older RCC forums, but CCC is worse than mos eisley spaceport, and i guarantee you that you'd learn a lot of new cursewords if you did.

lol yes I have felt the lash of the bike chain.

As for the 2nd part, I was just throwing it out here. TBH the simplicity of cwb would make them much easier to explain any day of the week... Just the rules I tend to play by now, that is all.

[Servius Valerius Corvus]

A swarm of Equites or Light Lancers or Greek cav could still beat them if used correctly. They are cheap and you can upgrade them to the max (3 chevrons, gold/gold).

That is the exact problem with R:TW Vinilla Imbalances tact on with the communities insistence that spamming upgrades equates to skill which it doesn't at all.

As soon as CWB players started using 4 urbans/4 preats with 3/3 each and just point and click and walk away to grab a drink and let the clear exploitation of upgrades with elite type units do the fight for them. So the micromanaging argument that was also stated somewhere here is quite invalid as it doesn't take much micro skill to manage 7,8,9 units upgraded to 3/3 compared to 20 with maybe at most one or two upgrades at most and not every unit is an elite type unit but a balance.

[Sir Dave]

That is the exact problem with R:TW Vinilla Imbalances tact on with the communities insistence that spamming upgrades equates to skill which it doesn't at all.

As soon as CWB players started using 4 urbans/4 preats with 3/3 each and just point and click and walk away to grab a drink and let the clear exploitation of upgrades with elite type units do the fight for them. So the micromanaging argument that was also stated somewhere here is quite invalid as it doesn't take much micro skill to manage 7,8,9 units upgraded to 3/3 compared to 20 with maybe at most one or two upgrades at most and not every unit is an elite type unit but a balance.

Your experience of cwb games is alien to me. Cwb allows for 8 cavalry and 8 foot archers (if available), which at cwb money are the most useful units. If you have any sense, you play to the rules strengths

[Servius Valerius Corvus]

Your experience of cwb games is alien to me. Cwb allows for 8 cavalry and 8 foot archers (if available), which at cwb money are the most useful units. If you have any sense, you play to the rules strengths

Since last I played was 2006-7 and the rules varied from the current status quo. Seems spamming has become more acceptable.


Not to mention anything above 12.5k was frowned upon and the major clans would consider you a novice to play with such spam. But then again that was the days of BI and archers became more prevalent and ergo transitioned to rome.