Von Brizee Posted September 1, 2000 Share Posted September 1, 2000 I have heard people complain about using bazooka/schreck/PIAT teams as scouts and that it is gamey. I do not see why. In meeting engagements, I will sometimes load them up in a Kubel and dump them off in a forward position to try and nail a tank. The only way I can hurt my enemy this way is if he tries to advance vehicles without any infantry support with them, which I see as being daring or stupid. I will rarely throw a tank into the unknown, instead I will march ahead with a half team to ferret out dangerous things for the tank to blast them at long range. If my enemy decides to race his vehicles ahead to the objective, why is it gamey for me to race a Kubel with a schreck in it up into the woods near the objective and try and pick one off and haul ass back into the kubel after? ------------------ Weak men are the enemy of all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted September 1, 2000 Share Posted September 1, 2000 You two men, take a bazooka and a radio, advandance deep into enemy lines without any support and radio back all troop movements. Oh and if you see any tanks take them out. I know you will surely both die soon afterwards cause you have no support, but hey you may get a tank and help win the war. YEAH SURE, thats not gamey, highly realistic wartime move that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raze Posted September 1, 2000 Share Posted September 1, 2000 I tried that and my men flat out refused (actually implied my mother and father weren't married). ------------------ Hey look, the bleeding stopped. Uh oh. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teamski Posted September 1, 2000 Share Posted September 1, 2000 Just like in the army comics..... This was all covered before. Search under "gamey"...... ------------------ "The Lieutenant brought his map out and the old woman pointed to the coastal town of Ravenoville........" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Von Brizee Posted September 1, 2000 Author Share Posted September 1, 2000 I race many support units into forward positions near the flags in meeting engagements. They are slow, thus I put them in vehicles and send them up there. The infantry platoons follow. MG42's and Panzerschrecks in forward positions slow the enemy down considerably. The forward AT teams don't die if you keep them hidden. I put a hide order after every move order for them. I put them somewhere in cover where an enemy platoon is unlikely to go. If I have a good shot on an enemy vehicle, I take it. I give them a target order and some pause commands so they start ditching right when the turn ends.............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CavScout Posted September 1, 2000 Share Posted September 1, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KiwiJoe: You two men, take a bazooka and a radio, advandance deep into enemy lines without any support and radio back all troop movements. Oh and if you see any tanks take them out. I know you will surely both die soon afterwards cause you have no support, but hey you may get a tank and help win the war. YEAH SURE, thats not gamey, highly realistic wartime move that one.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sounds like a recon mission to me... While the two man bazooka team may not be the best choice, the two man one is. Recon is best performed with "the fewer, the better" in mind. Cav Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted September 1, 2000 Share Posted September 1, 2000 Exactly CavScout... its a recon mission. You dont go on recon lugging around a bazooka and ammo. Snipers and half-teams would be a better idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CavScout Posted September 2, 2000 Share Posted September 2, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KiwiJoe: Exactly CavScout... its a recon mission. You dont go on recon lugging around a bazooka and ammo. Snipers and half-teams would be a better idea.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I agree, losing the bazooka would be bad... but I suppose another question is how did the bazooka get close enough to kill an enemy tank? Was the tank out without infantry support? That's not exactly smart either... Cav Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Formerly Babra Posted September 2, 2000 Share Posted September 2, 2000 I look at it this way. As long as I'm sending up a scout, why not give him a PIAT? There's some law or something? ------------------ Sounds like 100% weapons-grade bolonium to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted September 2, 2000 Share Posted September 2, 2000 Being methodical, predictable and boring, I won't give anything away by saying that I only use half-teams for the job. That at least has a semblance of realism, and it won't necessarily cost me the points for the AT team, who are most likely to get killed immediately when they find something larger than a dead doormouse on their 'recon' mission. A half-team can fight back, and thereby at least temporarily fix OPFOR and they may even have the chance to take out some guys. Works fine for me, so no reason to resort to wasteful and stupid tactics. ------------------ Andreas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted September 2, 2000 Share Posted September 2, 2000 Formerly Babra wrote: > As long as I'm sending up a scout, why not give him a PIAT? Because someone trying to avoid the enemy using stealth will not want to be lugging around heavy AT equipment. Germanboy wrote: > Being methodical, predictable and boring, I won't give anything away by saying that I only use half-teams for the job. I have to say, these are the kind of words spoken by people who win. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Formerly Babra Posted September 2, 2000 Share Posted September 2, 2000 I disagree that they are dead meat if they use the PIAT. Maybe that's true of zooks and schrecks, but I so seldom play those armies I wouldn't know. I sat in a village with a lone PIAT team and spent its entire ammunition load over three turns, destroying one armoured car and damaging two or three Tigers. The team then slipped away into the woods and survived the game undetected. Besides, I don't feel obligated to do just what my opponent expects me to. ------------------ Sounds like 100% weapons-grade bolonium to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted September 2, 2000 Share Posted September 2, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken: I have to say, these are the kind of words spoken by people who win. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You are too kind sir. Let me just say I got a really good laugh out of your spider. Nice work. I was thinking about Clint Eastwood coming in for air support when I saw it ('Tarantula' was his first movie role, he was the pilot). ------------------ Andreas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted September 2, 2000 Share Posted September 2, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Formerly Babra: I sat in a village with a lone PIAT team and spent its entire ammunition load over three turns, destroying one armoured car and damaging two or three Tigers. The team then slipped away into the woods and survived the game undetected.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You are obviously playing opponents who are (to quote myself yet again) tactically incapable and criminally inept. Have you tried that against someone who plays well? Be that as it may, as you point out, the PIAT is a different beast, b/c it has no backblast. I do use LATWs in unsupported ambush positions, but that is a bit different from using them for scouting. ------------------ Andreas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Formerly Babra Posted September 2, 2000 Share Posted September 2, 2000 Okay, so it's bad practice. So is leading with tanks. That doesn't make it gamey. Are we going to legislate against stupidity now? EDIT: Something "gamey" occurs when a player exploits a FLAW or a LIMITATION in the game engine to his advantage. Gamey is massing 1,000 .50 cals because they are certain to kill a King Tiger. In an ideal game, if something is possible in real life it ought to be possible in the game. No one EVER crossed a minefield on pogo sticks, but that doesn't make it impossible. Not particularly wise, but certainly not impossible. ------------------ Sounds like 100% weapons-grade bolonium to me. [This message has been edited by Formerly Babra (edited 09-01-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
82nd Airborne Posted September 2, 2000 Share Posted September 2, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KiwiJoe: You two men, take a bazooka and a radio, advandance deep into enemy lines without any support and radio back all troop movements. Oh and if you see any tanks take them out. I know you will surely both die soon afterwards cause you have no support, but hey you may get a tank and help win the war. YEAH SURE, thats not gamey, highly realistic wartime move that one.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well if this game was dealing with "deep behind enemy lines" as opposed to max 3000m,then you'd have a valid point. Considering the "coziness" of these engagements, sending troops out front really doesn't constitute "deep" behind enemy lines. IMHO anyway. Cheers ------------------ What you see depends mainly upon what you look for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted September 2, 2000 Share Posted September 2, 2000 Germanboy wrote: > Let me just say I got a really good laugh out of your spider. Had to dig the bloody thing out of my wardrobe first. Took a mugshot so I'll recognise it if it comes back. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorak Posted September 2, 2000 Share Posted September 2, 2000 I have to agree with both sides on this one. Putting your zooks and shrecks in a foward position is not gamey. Bad tactics in a lot of cases.. But not gamey. Trying to get your teams in position for an ambush is a good idea. And considering that these teams will only sit there and stare at the enemy as they are being shot at, makes it really easy to counter. A good recon force I have found is a zook or shreck team along with a half-squad for support. At lest they have a chance at escape if they are spotted (or get rushed by the crew of the tank they just killed). Just my .02 Lorak ------------------ Proud commander of the CCT's Chinchilla Commando Teams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Von Brizee Posted September 2, 2000 Author Share Posted September 2, 2000 I was just posting this because I was doing a PBEM and I put 2 schreck teams in forward positions on a hill in some woods. I killed a Greyhound, 2 Shermans, and a halftrack with them. He cried "Gamey" and ended the game right there. I was just wondering what the people here have to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorak Posted September 2, 2000 Share Posted September 2, 2000 Von Brizee, Your topic doesn't reflect what you actualy did. Using AT teams to set up an ambush where you feel certain some armor will be comming isn't gamey.. It also isn't using them to run around the map as scouts either. I still think it is a tactic that can get your AT teams killed real quick against someone that uses combined arms. But not gamey. All it takes to counter is one or two infantry units(even half units) to scout foward for your armor. A lesson I'm sure the person you had a PBEM game with will learn sooner or later. Lorak ------------------ Proud commander of the CCT's Chinchilla Commando Teams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted September 2, 2000 Share Posted September 2, 2000 Von Brizee wrote: > He cried "Gamey" and ended the game right there. I have to side with you here. You may be using bad or unrealistic tactics, but the fact is they worked. You're not utilising a flaw in the game, you're simply doing something you wouldn't get away with in reality. If your opponent had half a clue, he could easily counteract your bad tactics. =) David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEF BUNGIS Posted September 2, 2000 Share Posted September 2, 2000 I did the same thing. Sent out a King Tiger thinking it was invulnerable. And lo and behold it got whacked by a forward deployed bazooka team. It was a lessoneds learned, no tank is invulnerable. Was it gamey? Not any more gamey than me sending a KT to the objective without infantry support. ------------------ The counter-revolution, people smilling through their tears. Who can give them back their lives, and all those wasted years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OberGrupenStompinFeuhrer! Posted September 2, 2000 Share Posted September 2, 2000 I don't reckon sticking AT teams out for recon is gamey. They're gonna die if you are playing me, my lads will sniff 'em out and "eliminate" them. I figure if you scout with AT teams, you expect your opponent to scout with armour. In that case you probably deserve each other. I reckon these things rarely matter in CM, because overall "realistic" tactics will produce the win. There will be instances where a lone AT team, a jeep rush or an obvious edge hugging advance gets lucky, but it won't be enough to win consistently IMHO. The old half squad, now *thats* a tool for sniffing out ambushes, eh Lorak? :^) OGSF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mirage2k Posted September 2, 2000 Share Posted September 2, 2000 I agree with Formerly Babra. Stupidity is not gamey. It's great actually...if you're talking about your opponent. -Andrew ------------------ VOTE BLAH FOR PRESIDENT! Throw me a frickin' smiley, people! Your one-stop-shop for gaming news is www.SiegersPost.com ! Hit it! BLAH IN 2000! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OberGrupenStompinFeuhrer! Posted September 2, 2000 Share Posted September 2, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Von Brizee: I was just posting this because I was doing a PBEM and I put 2 schreck teams in forward positions on a hill in some woods. I killed a Greyhound, 2 Shermans, and a halftrack with them. He cried "Gamey" and ended the game right there. I was just wondering what the people here have to say. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You posted this while I was typing my other reply. I think I remember a couple of early PBEMs I played where my armour was killed in a similar situation. I learned to screen my armour with infantry. Sounds like you weren't scouting with AT teams though, but had set up ambushes. Whatever, it worked for you that time, against that opponent. Do it against someone who protects their armour with infantry, and you might decide it's too expensive a tactic to make a habit of. I can imagine your opponent being upset, but I wouldn't quit a game because I was punished for playing badly. One has to take their lumps, learn from them and do better next time. Still, he must have been spitting chips... :^) OGSF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts