Picking Generals - The Points System

Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 7:29 pm

For awhile, some veterans of the A&A community were picking generals for each side, based on a "points" system. Where each side would have a total of points to spend on generals, with the costs as follows:

8
Nimitz

6

5

4

3

2

1

Not sure who authored the point system, but interesting all the same. I got ripped off, 1?? !!!! lol

Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 7:39 pm

Using the same points scale this would be overall general strength by country

USA

------------------------25
BRITIAN

----------------16
JAPAN

-------------13
GERMANY

----------10
RUSSIA

---------09

Posted: Sun Dec 30, 2007 11:42 pm

the scale looks pretty reasonable, i might bump the Japanese generals up 0.5 each, but I do understand why whomever made the list didn't do it that way... and i got ripped off on the points system too.... don't make me bring my paper tanks

Posted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:05 am

I'll take paper tanks over communist purge any day Smile

Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:57 am

I don't quite agree with this point system. bombs are overrated Imho, especially the weakest type(carpet bomb). well, double bombs are devastating, but a single bomb on anything other than infantry or really fragile vehicles(arty mechs and tankettes) perhaps won't do much unless combined with a pincer move or something along those lines. that's to say that the difference between 0 and 1 or 2 and 3 bombs is really not very noticeable. also Rokossovski(the best Russian general Imho) deserves a lot more than a lousy 2!!! and how come all the non US/Brit bomb generals are of the same level? not to mention that Blitzkrieg is a very powerful OP at the mid and late game, very underrated too!

Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 10:10 am

the point system must have been before my time I never seen it used in that way .. interesting

Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:55 pm

the points system was being used by triple threat for awhile when val was working on his mod.. can only assume that it was a trial of attempting to balance the random general selection.

ya and it's not perfect, but makes more sense in 4v4 play than in other formats. roko/mikawa vs rommel/rundsdedt wouldn't be a good matchup as well as many other combinations..

how would you write it??

Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2009 4:33 pm

actually Roko/Miki wouldn't be a bad combination at all, neither for a 2v2 nor a 4v4. Rus+Jap have very strong early game(commandos/morts/heavies+snipers/morts/mechs) and with 2 eco gens you can really get the early game going fast. later they can pump out more arties than other generals(excluding only Ike perhaps, mainly due to the superior US eco and of course land lease that he shares with Miki). especially Roko with his 200/arty!

personally I would divide it into 5 instead of 8.
5: Nimitz
4: Ike with perhaps Arny+Monty+Wavell
3: Miki+Patton+other bombs
4: Roko+Chui+Wingate+Mountbatten
5: Rommel+Kess+Konev+Zhuky

you can argue that Konev>Zhuky(most likely true), Mountbatten>Wingate(arguable but you can argue it), etc but I think that those differences aren't big enough to require more than 5 scales.

oh and this was with a 4v4 in mind, for 1v1 it's obviously very different(personally I'll rank Roko first for 1v1s, perhaps Ike too but only in 700-800 and more games) but than again, most 1v1s are played with matching generals so it won't matter anyway...

Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 2:39 pm

well said.. why Chuikov lower than the other bombs?

as for the roko/mikawa vs rommel/rundsdedt I meant it was a bad matchup for Germany, vs two infantry spamming generals.

Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:48 pm

I put Chuikov lower than other bomb generals for 2 reasons:
1. I claim that Roko is superior or at least equal to Chuikov as far as Russian generals go.
2. being a Russian general it already suffers from all the Russian disadvantages(mainly mid game), and the bomb itself doesn't cover them.

compare Chuikov to Roko, 1 has bomb which is useful in the early game(but you got Snipers anyway) and for double bombs(assuming your team has an even number of bombs), otherwise it won't make much of a difference. Roko on the other hand can rush very effectively(Rapid Deployment to pump out Snipers/Mortars) or become a hardcore powerhouse in the late game with its 200$ arties(cheapest of all generals)!

Posted: Wed May 16, 2012 10:08 pm

How does this work? I don't understand.