Jump to content

What is the most "gamey" sin you've ever comitted? We won't judge you. I promise.


Recommended Posts

Ok. I'll go first. "Forgive me, Father..."

 

The Russian soldier held his hands "hohe". Instead of waiting for the Little White Flag, I ran him over with a transport truck.

 

Is this "gamey" behaviour? Does it make me a bad person?

Edited by BLSTK
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Gamey is whatever killed your guys. Fair game is whatever kills your opponent's guys

BTW, "committed" has two "m's" in it.   Having seemingly erred twice, does this count as one sin or two? Who, then, will spank me?   As this is Combat Mission, you could argue that one is a sin of

I likely have committed every type possible, when some real post are added pointing some out, I can second them.   But I also find what some call gamey,not really gamey in my book or that of other p

BTW, "committed" has two "m's" in it.

 

Having seemingly erred twice, does this count as one sin or two? Who, then, will spank me?

 

As this is Combat Mission, you could argue that one is a sin of Omission, while t'other would be one of Commission. And why is it that "Omission" only has one "m" in it? Or even the word "Mission", for that matter?

Edited by BLSTK
Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps I could have made better use of the Editing Stage during the writing of this thread.

 

I will be the first to Admit (with a single letter "m") that the only thing I use more freely than words is ammo. If you thought fuel was cheap, try talking.

 

Thank you for your indulgence. We now return you to your regular program.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I likely have committed every type possible, when some real post are added pointing some out, I can second them.

 

But I also find what some call gamey,not really gamey in my book or that of other players either. (So who is to say what is gamey or Not) Who is the game god that makes the verdict.

 

For example, some say edge of map hugging is gamey ( I don't see it that way, It is part of the playing field, if you let someone beat you because of them using the edge, that is your fault, calling it gamey play does not remove the fact you did not cover it correctly.)

 

Or here is another. He had a tank crewman in a objective zone and that was all he had to deny me points at the end of the game for that zone (again some would call that gamey, referring to the fact that would mean nothing in RL and that guy would never do such a thing) I see it as a game piece proving you did not take the objective and do proper mopping up procedures in time.

 

There is always more than one view on things.

 

Now don't take me wrong as that I do not think there is gamey actions that should not be done, no , there is some I would never do. (But who is the person that has the power to draw the line in the sand of right or wrong)

Link to post
Share on other sites

gamey seems to me as slysniper noted to be an issue of definition.  There are many ways to play CM and if two players have different views then inevitably those differences will result in accusations of "gamey" play.  In reality they are simply issues of communication.

 

I for one hate playing for VLs.  It blows my sense of immersion to be focusing my attack because a building has a green base rather than the building has some tactical value.  Then again I don't really care what the AAR screen says. :-P

Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW and FWIW, my own definition of gamey is the successful use of a tactic in the game that would not work in real life. In other words, it is the exploitation of some fault or weakness in the game's coding. If such a flaw is discovered, it should be reported to the developers as a bug. Honorable players should not use that tactic until the flaw is corrected. But if you are a lowdown, conniving, no-holds-barred kind of evil critter, by all means be as gamey as you can get away with. I don't care since I assume the worst and won't play against any of you anyway.

 

:lol:

 

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

Watching the action down at ground level, and then unintentionally pinpointing unseen enemy positions by sound. Unfortunately it is a tough design choice made by BF. If they keep it you can 'cheat' your way to enemy positions (multiplayer mostly affected?). If they remove it and make the sound source position "global" unless spotted at the time of shooting, I think it will detract a good deal from immersion.

 

Also area firing against the AI, since it doesn't have the capability.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I must confess, I've done all of the above at some point. At the time I thought myself clever until I realized the limitations of my AI opponent.

 

Versus a human being, however, the rules of engagement would have to be spelled out. Lawyers called. Papers signed.

 

On second thought, I'll take my chances against a (sometimes) beatable opponent who can't sue my pants off.

 

Pants which, BTW, I may or may not be wearing anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Next to the category of 'gamey' is the category of 'looks ridiculous'. And the main example of that is driving your forces in single file up the edge of the map, as I've seen a newbie opponent do once. 

As it turned out, his men were trapped against the edge and he suffered a disaster, so that 'gamey' move wasn't necessarily an unfair advantage for him. But it made the battle look extremely silly. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, surrendering pTruppen are just as vulnerable to bullet tracks intersecting their tender pixels as any other kind of pTruppe. You just can't order your men to shoot them directly. So you can area fire in their location, or at a target beyond (ground floor of a house, maybe) and those attempting to surrender will tend to get in the way of a streak of light sooner or later.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I once bought an incredibly gamey force: loads of mortars during an infantry-only ME, various calibers, dropped most of them (pre-planned) five minutes into the game on every reasonable approach to the VL. I don't think even twenty of his men made it within LoS of the VL. It was pretty lopsided.

Link to post
Share on other sites

/In the original Combat Mission you could gun down POWs as I recall! On the other hand, certainly for the Russian Front perhaps that was realistic. Perhaps a little too realistic :rolleyes:

 

My confession deals with this.  My opponent had a guy surrendering close ish to mine after a failed push.  The problem was I could not get close enough to finish his surrender and his guys were too far away to convince him to get back into the fight.  I brought a tank gun to bear and ordered some area fire to remove the intelligence leak.

 

Back in CMBN 1.1 I had a member of a squad run off as the rest of his buddies were loading up in a truck.  He just kept going and going and the truck kept waiting an waiting.  Eventually I told my opponent were he was and asked him to take him out.  Shortly after that the truck go going again :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...