Personally, I believe the whole question of "gaminess" and things being "gamey" is getting way out of hand.
The last time I checked, Combat Mission, while admittedly a very realistic simulation is still a "game".
As desktop or laptop commanders, we are given (or choose) certain assets with which we are expected to achieve certain results. Not to make the absolute most of these assets in any given situation just seems silly to me.
I played an operation not too long ago as the Germans. My orders were very explicit: defend to the last man!
Now, if the last man happened to be the commander of a MMG Carrier, and my defense hinged on having him charge that thin-skinned TD in the possible but-oh-so-next-to-impossible hope of knocking him out, do I hesitate? Hell no.
And when my opponent does the same to me do I scream "Gamey"? I think not. I admire his brass and say a silent prayer for his brave, dead lads or laugh my ass off and chalk up another one to this incredible "game" when the impossible happens and he kicks my ass. That's just what makes this "game" so damn much fun! Anything can happen and sometimes it even does.
And what exactly is the difference between a gamey tactic in CM and one that is rare, unusual and unexpected in the real world?
Did the crew members of abandoned tanks ever charge enemy tanks on foot? I was never there and I dont' recall ever reading anything like that but I'll bet anybody that they probably did. And it probably happened more than once. (This, however, is something I usually try to avoid, as crewmen by and large make suck-ass infantry, and also because I will soon be involved in the CMMC, wherein surviving armor crewmen will be a very valuable commodity.)
But I'll bet Patton would've charged that Hummel with those carriers if he didn't have anything else and felt the situation warranted it.
Just my lousy, know-nothing two cents, and all resemblances to any smilies living or dead is purely coincidental...