ACCUSED OF GAMEY TACTICS??

[Fionn]

Ok, How about this then..

Most games which come out have certain "loopholes". E.g. a crew can be used to spot enemy fire, hunt down zooks etc...

How about people organising a list of possible gamey tactics and discussing them and then creating a "rulebook" with the official ruling on whether or not something is gamey or not. I'd host this at CombatHQ. Anyone interested in working on this can say so here and if enough interest is shown I'll get something rolling.

Then, for tournament games and PBEM games players could choose to play by these rules or not?

FWIW I don't think using crews against zooks is gamey. IF the crew is in good enough shape to charge the zook crew then let it. The risks usually outweight the gains but sometimes it can be worth it.

SS Panzerleader, crews were NOT intended for combat. They have pistols PURELY for self-defence. A couple of pistols is worth virtually nothing in a close-in fight so don't rely on your crews for combat.

Once you play operations you'll stop doing crew-led charges or you'll lose the operation. It's that simple.

Crews ARE worth more than infantry. So, losing 3 crewmen hurts more than losing 3 infantry PLUS the crew only have pistols which are crap weapons and basically will inflict very few casualties. Their offensive power is low, their vulnerability is high, their cost is high and the opportunity cost in losing them in operations is high.

------------------

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

[Fionn]

Actually, forget what I wrote above.

After reading the rest of the panzerfaust thread and schrodi's re-appearance, Major Tom's judgements (after he almost started a fight with W583 which I had to defuse just yesterday) etc I think I'm even more right about this forum degenerating.

Far too many people with unreasonable attitudes, very little knowledge AND an unwillingness to be corrected have come on here since the beta demo's release.

There's nothing wrong with not knowing facts etc BUT there is a lot wrong with being so pig-headed you keep arguing when the other person is just trying to get some facts straight.

This damn board is just a huge, pointless waste of my time nowadays with an endless list of people unwilling to listen to an argument and respond with "evidence" to back up their claims. It's all about them "feeling that this should happen" and having no proof to back it up and then acting like two year olds when asked to provide any evidence. "No, you provide evidence."

If any of you have any issues to discuss contact me by email. I'll respond to everything I get but I don't feel like being a target for malcontents anymore. I'm taking a break for a while. I've said this before when morons got personally abusive on here but let myself be talked out of it. Not this time.

------------------

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

[Huron]

Fionn, with the risk of rubbing salt into your wounds, I really think you should have started a new thread with that last post. I haven't seen anything like what you describe on this thread.

Regards /Huron

[This message has been edited by Huron (edited 12-09-99).]

[SS_PanzerLeader]

Thanks for the input Steve

I'd like to start by mentiong the fat I had no idea of the crew values< you backed up some good advice from Sten. Upon realizing the value of the crews I will try extra hard to keep them alive- usually i find them quite use full staying behind near a vict loc I already control - out of harms way, if this isnt acceptable please let me know guys.

As far as this particular incident goes IMHO they were dead anyhow -so I would've lost the points if I stayed or tried to escape (although I never considered the point factor just the fact they were about to be toast).

Fionn, I'm really at aloss here to what you are referring to in regards to this post, I'm sorry if I've offended you just wanted to clear some things up - I tend to take offense when someone questions my honor. i hadn't seen you post anything on this thread until that statement. You have along with Steve and Sten pointed out there value and the dangers of using them in scenarios which I will definitely take into account for anything other than a 'do or Die situation'.

SS_PanzerLeader..out

[not here]

Fionn must have had a day like mine yesterday. You can only take so many angry trouble calls until it affects you on some level. But I don't think this thread is a problem- now for my .02:

As an armored crewman I was trained in infantry tactics FIRST, and rather extensively so. The drill sergeant would ask: "Trooper, why I am I training tankers to be infantry?" "Because if anything happens to this vehicle you ARE infantry!".

Then they issued me a .45, a submachine gun, and grenades. The drill sergeant (at Fort Knox in the late seventies, armor had basic and advanced combined, 16 weeks with the same beloved Drill from beginning to end)never failed to remind us that our obligation for losing the taxpayers' M60 was to contribute to the ground war in any other way we could.

Now I have few illusions about what 4 or less guys could do with pistols and grease guns. But the intent was there, and assuming you found yourself in relatively good shape after the tank got whacked, it would be highly reasonable to do something about a hostile within 40 meters. Granted you would need some time to collect your wits and gear and clean out your shorts. But if an infantry officer happened by and you were sitting by the side of the road with your thumb in a dark place, I think you would be "drafted" into some kind of conmbat role pretty quickly. How effectively is up to the dice...

CM represents total war on a local basis and I say use every asset you've got, KEEPING in mind the risk/benefit associated with committing a low-capability, high point value crew.

[Guest Scott Clinton]

nt

[This message has been edited by Scott Clinton (edited 12-09-99).]

[Major Tom]

Fionn, hey, I never claimed to be innocent of transgressions myself (did I? If so sorry!). Just, that after so much, uhh, stuff, happening on a lot of these posts things are showing signs of degenerating. I didn't mean to single anyone out, as all heated arguments, ESPECIALLY mine, are not needed, let alone make anyone happy. Just because you (you as in me, or anyone) make a stupid mistake, and learn from your faults to try and stop it happening to others, does this make me a hypocrite? (even if it was just minutes after?) Possibly so. That doesn't make me loose all credibility, does it? But, also notice my quick retraction and appology, even though it was brought upon by your diplomacy. I thank you for this. I wish everyone, including myself, had someone ready to hit you (you as in not YOU personally, but everyone) over the head with the reality stick. surely my post could have been more peaceful, but, I really thought that the Charlton Heston/Homer Simpson quote at the end really emphasized my point! I am sorry if things are getting too hot around here, partially to my incitements. So, in order to salvage possible future PBEM opponents I am shutting up now on all contraversal arguments. My opinion is definitely not needed.

[Fionn]

Damn, I have to break my word now since I want something made clear but want it made clear in public.

*sigh*

I've asked people to post here to this thread but they haven't done so yet.

My post wasn;'t in response to ANYTHING in this thread. it was in response to Schrodi popping up again and being abusive (without repercussions I might add) and Howardb's continuing unwillingness to see a request for evidence as being reasonable and becoming quite agressive and "in my face" as it were.

I've gone into this in some detail on the "how constructive are forum messages thread" which is the topic type I will restrict myself to on this bulletin board until things change as regards protection against malicious posters.

Major Tom,

Yes I found your ability to come on there and give out about my exasperation after you almost started a completely unwarranted fight due to a misunderstanding with a non-native English speaker which I had to resolve before it brewed up somewhat inappropriate (shall we say ).

HOWEVER, you have to remember that the only reason I commented was cause I was so upset due to Schrodi, AGAIN, getting away with hurling abuse at me with absolutely no justification and no penalty.

I certainly don't want to stifle discussion (even though I'm not going to be taking part in any game discussions on this forum from now on until my concerns are addressed and some level of protection is implemented), even controversial discussion.

I like discussing things but one thing I find difficult to swallow are people who are unreasonable. E.g. "I have an opinion." So I say, "Well do you have any evidence backing that up?".. They say "No, but I've seen some guy doing something similar with something which looked similar THEREFORE I want a change." I say "Umm, can you PROVE that with some references etc? Just your opinion won't do."

They say "LIsten I don't care who the hell you are eetc etc etc.."

THAT kind of aggressive and ill-informed putting forth of arguments leads to arguments. If people would just realise they NEED to have evidence and references which can be checked then things'd be better but many people don't realise the burden of proof is on them and become abusive when challenged, seemingly believing that shouting constitutes proof.

Well, it's not my problem any longer since I'm not going to post until something is done to protect people from being abused and bullied on this forum.

My advice to you all would be that the BEST form of policing would be a form of self-policing where forum member simply agree on what is and isn't acceptable.

So, Tom, no hard feelings. I shouldn't have mentioned you but I'd just had a very rough time of it. Sorry.

------------------

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

[Major Tom]

Thank's Fionn, it is much appreciated.

I still don't think it is that much fun to be involved in nasty arguments though. It's best to keep neutral, except if you are Belgium, then you just get attacked anyway. :-P

[Guest titan]

I reckon what you can use in the game should be allowed ,if crew's are effective well so be it.However there is nothing wrong with having big penalties for useing these like steve said. if you lose em it'll cost ya

------------------

AUCK

New Zealand

Superpower waiting to happen

[Dale H]

Now, let me see... I'm tooling along in my halftrack (no helpful combat units along)when it takes a 'shreck up the kazoo; I (we) bail out & I...:

(complete the following)

a) ...am mad as hell & I'm (we're) going to shoot those krauts with my trusty 45

or

...am scared poopless (drawers already filled) & I (we) run like hell for the nearest cover.

From everything I've ever read, anybody who chooses a) ought to have their head examined or be given the silver star (posthumously, of course). The shreck team enjoys the advantage of suprise & cover & are probably as well armed as I (we) are or have accompanying or supporting combat units to help out.

Be Real...

Thanks for listening,

Kilroy, out

[Maus]

I am posting this here because I could find nowhere else to post it that hasn't already been locked up.

Anyone who posts some sort of personal attack automatically looks childish. Personally I thought this was so obvious I did not respond. This was my mistake. Now for the record I don't care who your are or what your beef is with the other person there is never justification to verbally and personally attack that person. I have this feeling that I am not alone in this opinion.

Online culture is interesting to me in the fact that some people act in a way that they would never act in person. This is regretable. I guess as an online community we are still going through growing pains.

I post this only because I fear the collapse of a good forum that used to be filled with interesting discussions, populated by interesting people. It used to seem as though this forum was just a big group of friendly people gathered to discuss items of mutual interest and maybe knock back a pint or two Keeping with this analogy I realize that not everyones personality is going to mesh and therfore I suggest we all just use the smile and nod technique. ....You know what I'm talking about.

I thank those of you now who have posted things that have enlightened me, entertained me or made me giggle and smile.

'nough of the warm, fuzzy, touchy, feely stuff ..... (puffing chest up) who wants to talk semantics?

cheers,

maus

[Harold Jones]

If I am playing a game and the game allows me to use the freshly bailed out crew of a vehicle as a combat effective unit, then I would be foolish to not use it to destroy the offending schrek team. The person I am playing against might call it a gamey thing, but to me it is just using all of the tools available for job. Now if my opponent and I had agreed beforehand that crews would be treated as combat inefective and I used the crew as a combat unit then my opponent could rightfully call me on it. Fortunately, it sounds as if CM will handle this issue by making the crews too fragile and or expensive vp wise to use in this manner.

[This message has been edited by Harold Jones (edited 12-09-99).]

[Maus]

Crap! *double post*

[This message has been edited by Maus (edited 12-09-99).]

[not here]

Dale H.: It's after you've run for cover and found it that the crew issue gets interesting.

You have at least the same armament as the schreck team (though SS's original dilemma was with a bazooka and a pinned MG)and theoretically more people. 4 pistols against two- another Friday night at the crack house, happens here all the time.

I think it quite likely that you WOULD be mad as hell at the schreckmeister, and once calmed down you might do the math above. You don't know what a 16 year old Volksgrenadier with dreams of glory might be up to with HIS pistol, and doing nothing would be downright stupid in close proximity to an armed enemy.

These hypothetical anecdotes really prove nothing. Both BTS and Fionn have conceded that SS's move was not gamey (though a poor strategy for a campaign). I believe there is historical precedent for crews continuing to fight in some capacity on foot, and will try to find some. I wonder if the friendly AI ever has the crews fire at targets of opportunity?

Come to think of it, that stunt old Sgt. York pulled with his Springfield in WWI was kind of gamey.

[Guest ChrisC1009]

Everyone here should read the book Combat on the Eastern Front by Ray Lucas. It details a battle by a STUG III platoon leader named Hugo Primozic.

In the heat of combat, Primozic's Stug throws track. Enemy T-34's are all around the STUG, but undaunted Primozic and his crew dismount to repair the track. In doing so, they thwart an enemy infantry assault and manage to destroy some Russian tanks as well.

If the crews are stable and able to fight, I say let them.

[Dale H]

not here,

I agree that if it is a ShootOut at the OK Corral then have at it. I was only trying to make the point that there is a wide gulf between what the sim can do & what happens in real life. There may have been rare instances in WW2 where unarmed or lightly armed crews took on the whole opposing army but I think these are events of bezerkish type behavior (call them heroic, if you like). Most people would honor their own instincts for self preservation or only act if a buddy was in distress. I may be wrong about this & I apologize if I stepped on anybody's toes. I think we should all lighten up a little & accept that the sim has limitations (it is too coarse due to processor & memory limits to cover these kinds of detail). I only speak as a non-grognard who wants to enjoy the game for what it is.

Kilroy, out

[howardb]

I've just been catching up on some posts and seen some small revolutions happening around this forum. Sadly I've seen that Fionn has decided to leave us because he think's people has treated him unfairly.. well. Sadly because he obviously know's a lot about ww2 like I have mentioned earlier.

I have on no occasions been rude to anyone (or in their face) on this board simply stating my opinions on things and been called several (personal) things. My "crime" is that I've disagreed with someone, something I should think I'm entitled too if that is my beliefs. I've also said that if someone says something I disagree with even if it's Steve I'll tell them I disagree and I see nothing wrong in that, afterall I consider this board very democratic. Now all of you think about this hard, has the people that feels stepped on behaved exemplary all the time themselves! (no ? mark because we're finished with this.. at least I am).

[OSCAR]

>Well, it's not my problem any longer since I'm not going to post until something is done to protect people from being abused and bullied on this forum.

Well, what goes around comes around, Fionn.

------------------

The HPS freak

[Guest John Maragoudakis]

Dog Rules:

1. The dog is not allowed in the house.

2. Okay, the dog is allowed in the house, but only in certain rooms.

3. The dog is allowed in all rooms, but has to stay off the furniture.

4. The dog can get on the old furniture only.

5. Fine, the dog is allowed on all the furniture, but is not allowed to sleep with the humans on the bed.

6. Okay, the dog is allowed on the bed, but only by invitation.

7. The dog can sleep on the bed whenever he wants, but not under the covers.

8. The dog can sleep under the covers by invitation only.

9. The dog can sleep under the covers every night.

10. Humans must ask permission to sleep under the covers with the dog.

More dog jokes at:

http://members.aol.com/MuffinTush/Pages/Humor.html

[This message has been edited by John Maragoudakis (edited 12-10-99).]

[dumbo]

Hmm I just read this and the mild hullabaloo surrounding it.

To be honest I havent seen ANY bad behaviour on this board at all. Maybe I have been on the net too long but this place is the most civilised by far that I know of. Other boards I lurk in tend to have 90% of the posts that read like this.

"FREE XXX SERVICE!"

"DeWd!, rAwkZ!, w00t!"

"Clinton is to blame for (insert topic of your choice here)."

"Q3 or UT? Which is the best game ever?"

"Wargames cause, mass killings, gun ownership, devil worship, the rise of the Nazi/communist party."

[This message has been edited by dumbo (edited 12-10-99).]

[fatherof4]

Pretty brave OSCAR. You've decided to break your word and start posting again just to kick Fionn when he's down.

Sad. Very Sad.

fo4

[not here]

For the record, I'm not that concerned about the crew issue though I do have an opinion on it. I certainly don't take offense easily.

Now somebody please close this thread, the flies are getting in.

>Well, what goes around comes around

Gotcha last? Sheesh.

[Aacooper]

CM is the one wargame where if it's possible to do in the game, it's not gamey. The only unethical thing is playing a "blind" PBEM game with prior knowledge. The second time through the scenario, you should know everything about both sides' forces, reinforcement turns, etc... You should know because your opponent probably does as well.

My $0.02 is that in the absence of other non-verbal and verbal clues people use in person and on the phone, written messages can easily be taken the wrong way. PLUS, since your online persona is made up of what you write and what others write about you, when someone maliciously attacks it's hard not to respond (even if 3rd parties wish the attacker would go away). When nonsense goes on, and you're not directly involved, it's a choice between sticking up for the aggrieved party, or not adding fuel to the fire. Some posters want a fire. I'm glad this board is relatively polite, and I hope Fionn will return (on his own time) to continue to educate us on CM and WW2.

[howardb]

I certainly hope Fionn will return too. I might disagree with some of his ways to make a point (sometimes a little personal) but I do miss him already and nobody's perfect. I must also add that one of the posts against him was totally below the belt, I wanted to tell the person that posted it that but mysteriously I didn't feel like it at the time LOL. I won't beg for his return but I do hope he'll return because we're all friends here (more or less) and I think deep inside that Fionn knows I got nothing against him. There aren't that many WW2 freaks in our family the least we can do is stick together. I know he's still reading this board so I'm hoping he'll read this and come and shine on our board again.