I know I will not be heard much with this but I would like to mention the problem I have encountered.
With the addition of base attack bonus to maneuvers, and the nerf on size bonus, we're going to see some situations I think are ridiculous like a fighter overrunning an elephant...(fighter lvl 20 CMB +20 before str vs elephant's CMB of +20).
Not that it will not happen each time but chances that it will be happen often. And overrun with a horse won't work. A heavy warhorse (cmb +8) will have a difficult time to overrun a 20th lvl medium wizard (CMB +10 with str 10). For me these actions are a pure contest of strength and not of combat ability.
Umm... A 20th level Fighter under 3.5 should EASILY be able to Bullrush an Elephant.
(remember all the STR boosts they'd have, Enlarged, BASHING Shields, and Imp. BR +4 instead of PF's +2)
An Elephant is just not a Level Appropraite challenge for 20th level characters. More like the Elephant GOD.
The Horse scenario is problematic.
I've suggested that the Mounted Combat Feats allowing using the Rider's BAB if stronger than the Mounts.
It's not about if it's an appropriate challenge or not.
It's about some kind of logic and little realism.
I can understand that a character powered by a lot of magic effects can be special, but a "normal" not buffed by magic high level character should not be able to overrun an elephant just because of its base attack bonus.
OK, well without any buffs,
that Fighter would only have about a 20% chance of Success. (to move it 5')
(CMB cancels out, leaving DC15, -2 for Elephant Size Advantage)
Is this such a big problem?
I really don't see characters taking 20% chance-of-success actions very often.
(especially when 2 attacks would likely drop the Elephant)
(Since the Elephant is probably due for a bonus Feat under Pathfinder, I would probably give it Defensive Maneuvers or Imp BR/OverRun (which may be 1 Feat), kindof like Dwarves have Stability. PF is obviously a "power upgrade", so it's absurd to pull a MM creature out and expect the EXACT same balance. There will be a PF Bestiary with pretty much all the core creatures released, updated to PF and with appropriate CRs.)
If you really feel this stretches the "realism" of a Magic Fantasy world,
why not just cap Fighters at 10th or 15th level, if attacking 4+ times in 6 seconds stretches believability?
I think it is, especially if someone riding the elephant tries to overrun the fighter and gets overruned with his mount instead...
You don't get "overruned" if you fail an Over Run, you just end the Move Action.
I just don't think the chances here are that much different than 3.5.
Different, sure, but not that much. Both Elephant and 20th level Fighter could hypothetically Bullrush each other in 3.5. CMB's purpose (or reducing to one roll, however) isn't about matching the "accuracy" of a 2 roll system, it's smoothing gameplay and a "gamist" approach to Melee Balance.
Would you prefer higher Size Bonuses than the current Beta?
I could certainly get behind that, especially alongside other proposed changes to CMB.
I think maybe 2 per Tier, instead of 4 per Tier is a good compromise, though 4 does seem more "realistic".
Like I said, if you think scaling the Fighter to 20th level somehow "matching" Casters is un-realistic, than JUST CAP THEM. Pathfinder APs only go to 16th level, after all, right? Nothing forces anyone to play until the top levels, just as a Wizard isn't forced to use Evocation Spells. Low-level games are much more gritty and realistic than high-level games. I don't see a problem with that, it just means the system can accomodate two divergent style of games.