Comments on whether or not this is gamey

[Croda]

Hey, I just started a pbem with somone and purchased flak guns because I had never used them before and they were fairly cheap. Well when I saw them, I realized that they were your typical looking immobile anti-air flak guns. So what I did with them was line a ridge with these flak cannons...beautifully interlocked FOV, with great range. They'll chew up any infantry that come within sight. Now maybe I'm wrong, but I have a feeling that the Germans rarely if ever deployed this manner of weapon into an infantry surpressing position, and certainly not with that express purpose.

Now should this be considered a gamey tactic? To be truthful, I had no idea what I was getting when I seleceted them (sure I had an idea, but not exactly). I suppose I can argue that he could have air support and this gives me the chance to shoot them down, but that wasn't really my intent. So the question is this: Is using equipment in a manner that isn't in the spirit of how that equipment was actually used a gamey technique? If so, I'll not use that again. If not, then maybe this is a great, cheap way to hammer infantry. Either way, I can't stop now, but I'd like to hear people's opinions.

[paullus]

I would not consider this gamey, since AA guns are relatively easy to suppress and vulnerable to direct fire (especially from armor and artillery).

On the defense, I also find that they redress some of lack of numbers the defender usually deals with (especially against hordes of Allied infantry).

I like to put one or two in flanking positions, to catch infantry in a crossfire, or defend against a flanking attack. A single Quad 20mm can hold several squads at bay until I can move up some reserves to plug a hole.

Never expect them to live long, as the computer or PBEM opponents love to drop artillery on them, and since you can't move them very quickly, they usually buy the farm.

I expect that German troops, especially in Normandy, pressed their AA guns (88mm and below), into direct service against allied attacks.

[Guest barrold713]

This might leave a bit of a gamey aftertaste, but I will leave it to the better informed around here to more conclusively say whether this sort of deployment is completely ahistorical.

I would say however that the soon to be arriving mortar and artillery shells will rapidly turn that line of fairly fragile equipment into a junkpile and make the point better than any comment on history. (<--included to ensure spirit of comment is correctly conveyed)

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

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb discussing what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote"

- Ben Franklin

[Henri]

AA guns were used as antitank weapons in WW2, particularly the well-known 88, which was the most deadly AT gun available. It is true that once their effectiveness against tanks was recognized, specific mounts for AT work were designed for 88s used in this fashion.

Whether or not they were used often against infantry I am not sure, despite what the move "Private Ryan" suggests. I would presume that quad 20 mm guns would have been particularly effective against soft-skinned vehicles, assumning they could survive very long in the direct line of fire, but I really am not sure.

Unless your opponent complains, I would not worry about it.

Henri

[Mannheim Tanker]

I might call it "ahistorical" if there's no basis in the historical record to support their use in this role. I wouldn't call it "gamey" because it doesn't (at least at first glance) exploit anything inherent in the game engine (IE there's nothing stopping you from doing it in real life...except that they were needed for AA defense).

Not knowing much about AA guns, I can't comment on whether this tactic violates any laws of physics that would prevent you from doing it in real life (eg the Borg-like spotting issue discussed in the "Monster Recon" thread). Perhaps they weren't accurate enough to aim at troops and cause the level of damage simulated in CM.

I'm sure there are some Grogs out there that can comment on their real-world capabilities - not to be confused with real-world deployment.

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

"The real groundbreaker of CM isn't the 3D modeling, it's the 'holy crap! what the heck was THAT' factor." - Dalem

[Croda]

That scene from Private Ryan was exactly what I was hoping for. I saw how that gun made sloppy joe of that squad and thought I'd try it myself. A friend of mine grabbed the motorized one (can't remember the name right now) and trained that on some of my infantry, and it was cery effective. I'm very curious to see how it works out. Considering their spacing, he'll need to use a lot of artty to get them all.

[Keith]

This is a legitimate use of the weapons. AA guns of all calibar were used in an anti-infantry role when necessary.

[Croda]

Tanker - thanks for the opinion. I think you pretty much defined my use of the word "gamey": ahistorical. The question isn't whether or not a unit can accomplish the desired task, but whether or not logic and tactics dictate that said unit would ever be used for the task. Meaning, I can move 6 bazooka teams around and train them all to fire on infantry, probably doing decent damage, but that wouldn't have ever happened I'm sure. To me, gamey is doing something unrealistic with your units, whether it exploits a whole in the coding logic or not. It ruins my fun to know I'm not keeping with the "spirit of the game." That's why I was unsure on this one. Is it conceivable that this type of unit would be deployed in such a manner? I suppose it could have happened, but I enjoy the game more if I feel that I'm leading my troops in a manner and context that is historically accurate.

Sorry for that long-winded definition of gamey. Suppose that belonged in the other thread.

[Jarmo]

Yeah, a bit ahistoric, maybe. But not gamey.

And not very effective either, unless you're expecting a load of

armored cars in your way. Against infantry, you'd be better off

with a bunch of 75mm infantry guns.

[Mannheim Tanker]

Jarmo's right...those 75mm IG's can be deadly if set up for a proper ambush.

[dalem]

Think of yourself as the local commander: you are expecting an infantry attack on you position, and maybe it's cloudy that day, so you Kubelwagen your way over to your local air defense commander and say "I think it would be a fine idea if you deployed your guns on that ridge."

Historically, local commanders use anything they can beg, borrow, or steal, in every war.

-dale

[Slapdragon]

Most German units historically included AA weapons, since the huge Luftwaffe ground organization provided them and air attack was a constant threat. Lining a ridge with them is one way they were used (as AA walls, not in ground defense), that and placing them at bridges and road junctions. There is certainly evidence that at least last ditch defense used AAA and AA weapons, and the US regularly used its quad .50 AA tracks in anti-infantry rolls.

I don't think you have a problem unless you bought like 20 of them. The most you could have is barrold's "Gamey" aftertaste because they would not have been placed along a ridge in a ground defense but covering road ways, unless you assumed the allied unit has just "happened" on an AA wall.

On the subject of an AA wall, AA units were used to defend point targets, but they were also placed along in and out bound air lanes used by the allies to force bombers to redirect in a big cat and mouse game.

[CavScout]

I don't think it is "gamey" as the results of using them in this way don't get you un-realistic results.

Cav

[Jagdwyrm]

I dont see anything wrong with it and i believe they were used in the anti-infantry role 20mm,37mm etc...and we all know the large calibers were used against armor.Im using some right now in a game...It was day time and Im on defense ...well they have a possible dual role ...if an FB shows up they can do thier primary job if not...well they can get in the war and help me out with the advancing enemy.

[ScoutPL]

The only thing ahistorical about your scenario is the number of guns and their deployment. A platoon of AA usually numbers 4 or 5 and a platoon is all that would normally support a battalion of armor or infantry. They would be spread out where they could accomplish their primary mission of air defense and be used in a secondary ground role. The 82nd used to have towed Vulcan cannon(a six barreled, 20mm gatling gun) that they used for air defense. They were air droppable and were the main antiair weapon until the Stinger came along (late 80's). We used to integrate them into our anti-armor defenses all the time. Imagine that 20mm gatling gun working out on BMPs and BRDMs! Awesome! They were easy to dig in but once they were in place they stayed. Like I said, use of any of the games's weapon systems in a ground role within the CM battlespace is supportable by history/praticality. Its just a questions of numbers and availability.

[Guest *Captain Foobar*]

We need to draw the lines clearly.

I dont think anyone could call you gamey for that. It may be irregular historically speaking, but big deal. I think you will get punished hard enough in the game to discourage you from doing it. Those AA gunners run like hell if you even raise your voice at them.

[Guest KwazyDog]

Ive just finished reading an auto biography called 'To Young to be a Hero' by Rick Holz. He describes a situation very similar when on they went on the defence.

He descibes his company being marched to the front (Eastern Front, around 43 I think) and being ordered to dig in some 1/2 km behind the front lines during the night. He thought this as odd as they could support front lines from where they were, but realised by morning that the guys up front were being used as bait. The Russians attacked the area they thought was lightly defended and routed the first line of troops.

As the Russian advanced in what they thought was a break through, they reach the second line. The German soldiers are ordered to open fire and as soon as they do several 20mm AA guns from behind open up on the advance troops with great effect. The advance was halted at great loss to the Russians.

Thus, no Croda, I dont think it was 'gamey'. To be truely historical I think you need to take a couple of things into consideration. Firstly I would say no more than 2-4 guns would be a reasonable amount to support 1-3 companies. Secondly, I think it would really only be 100% fair to use them when playing on the defence. If used in say a meeting engagement and you use a static weapon that in reality the enemy would see you moving into place, this does give you a small advantage over you opponent unless he does the same.

Finially, its worth keeping in mind that these guns are very easily taken out if your oppenent has any sort of HE weapons. Tanks and even better (tanks are more vulnerable when on attack) mortars will take out these guns very easily. I think you will find that they are great for 2-3 minuts until the enemy works out their fields of fire and will take them out faily quickly unless well defended.

Anyways, just some thoughts

[This message has been edited by KwazyDog (edited 10-02-2000).]

[pathfinder]

The others seem to have discussed this to a great degree. IMHO, not necessarily "gamey" but maybe not histoical if ya bought a whole bunch. One account I read years ago (about the 1st Special Service Force) was, during the breakout from Anzio, that unit ran into several AA guns (20mm & 37 mm IIRC) along a highway that ran north to Rome, that tore them up a bit. So, they were used in an anti-infantry role, if only thru need or accident.

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

unca pathy will show ya the path,

if only he could find it himself!

[Bullethead]

The Germans used big flak (not just 20mm, but 88s and above) as anti-personnel weapons many times. See MacDonald's "Company Commander" for a few examples of this.

American troops (and I assume Russians as well) absolutely HATED facing flak guns because of their nasty airbursts. The primary mission of a flak gun was to shoot shells the explode in mid-air, so they usually had a whole bunch of time-fuzed HE available. And they had to have a high rate of fire to fill the sky with fragments, and a high muzzle velocity to get the shells up to bomber altitude quickly.

These attributes made them deadly in the anti-personnel role. The high velocity made for flat trajectories and good accuracy. The guns had highly accurate fuze setting machines built-in, and there were guys in the crew with tripod-mounted rangefinders to help them set the fuzes correctly.

Combined with the high rate of fire, flak guns could and did blanket advancing troops with massive amounts of fragments. They'd set the fuzes to burst the shells just short of the target, so the fragments would continue into it in an expanding cone, like a charge of Napoleanic cannister, only more powerful and a lot more of it.

So NO, it is not gamey to site flak guns as anti-personnel weapons. It has draw-backs, such as lack of mobility and vulnerability to arty, but it's a very realistic tactic.

Only problem is, CM doesn't model mechanical time fuzes, so all you get is ground burst HE. This really reduces the potential effectiveness of using flak guns this way

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

-Bullethead

Visit the brand new Raider Operations message board at www.delphi.com/raiderops

Main site www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

[Slapdragon]

McDonald, if you have not read it, is one of the best first person historical accounts from the US side of Company level combat.

[OGSF]

In this game we get to buy our units, distributing our points as we see fit. If you buy too much of one thing, you don't get enough of something else. I have no problem if one of my opponents does this sort of thing. If he buys ten bazookas he hasn't got any mortars or machine guns, for example, and my infantry will kill his bazooka teams.

If my opponent buys 10 AA guns for ground defence, that's okay, I'll mortar them or kill them with medium to heavy armour.

Bottom line, I let real world tactics take care of imbalances in my opponents line up. If I am unsuccessful, that's my poor play - not a signal to cry "gamey"!

Don't sweat it Croda, as others have pointed out here, I expect your opponents arty / mortar / armour will resolve the issue. :^)

OberGrupenStompinFeuhrer

[Wayne]

Not ahistorical or gamey. AA units used extensively in Normandy and in Western Germany to suppliment the ground defense. There was something like 4 or 5 flak divisions used to fill in the gaps in the Normandy defenses. They were used to defend StLo. There were many other times they were used to hold up or suppress the Allied advance.

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

Blessed be the Lord my strength who teaches my hands to war and my fingers to fight.

[ahauschild]

I agree with non-gamey. If you purchased based on historical numbers. I have no problem with 2 to 4 Flaks of whatever caliper being used for ground defense. How you set them up on the map is up to you. If you would purchase like 10 or 20 of them, then i would have to say, this is a bit gamey. I rather see somebody using 4 flak, then another damn puma. 20mm Flak was plentyfull and most all half way decent german orginazations had some of them because of the constand aircraft threads. Am sure they used them in many roles.

[Holdit]

British paratroopers trying to break through to the Arnhem bridge from their drop zones suffered serious casualties from at least one German light flak gun used in an anti-personnel role. If I remember correctly, it was on the southern side of the river, firing across at them.

[Croda]

Well thanks to everyone for the input. I agree with you that the use is not gamey or ahistorical, though I'm still not thrilled with my delpoyment of them or their use in this particular situation, ( I have 7 deployed in a line overlooking a town in a meeting engagement ) but too late to worry about that now. A lesson learned for next time. Besides, 2 have already taken out a halftrack!