Please disarm all crews

[Clubfoot]

Insta-infantry?...?...what?

Tankers fled ground combat so they could fight on at another time...in a tank.

I demand forthwith the inclusion of miniature atomic backpack demolitions for all tankers immediately. If there tank happens to be bogged and immobile, they can charge the Siegfried line on foot, and immolate themselves and everyone within a quarter of a mile.

I am no fool!

Clubfoot.

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Clubfoot:

I demand forthwith the inclusion of miniature atomic backpack demolitions for all tankers immediately. If there tank happens to be bogged and immobile, they can charge the Siegfried line on foot, and immolate themselves and everyone within a quarter of a mile.

I am no fool!

Clubfoot.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

IMO you should only be allowed to have that if you build up sufficient resources in your power plant, after mining enough crystals.

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

Andreas

Der Kessel

Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission.

[tss]

Jarmo wrote:

I think I remember there were several cases where the crew decided to risk it,

and succesfully used whatever AT weapon they had brought along.

And there were cases where tank crews dismounted from intact vehicles to attack enemy tanks with close-defence infantry weapons. (e.g., when an immobilized ISU-152, which blocked the advance along Portinhoikka road, was captured on 26 June '44).

Another interesting case (~2 July '44) was an unknown Soviet tank commander who got out of his T-34-85 after the first hit and seconds before the next hit blew the tank up (a picture of the tank can be seen at http://www.hkkk.fi/~yrjola/war/finland/ ). The TC run to forest and escaped. This happened behind Finnish front lines since the tank had driven through the defence because the AT gunners had mistakenly identified it as a Finnish vehicle.

About 30 minutes after the tank kill the lone TC stumbled onto a Finnish camp. He then decided to attack, run through it and killed one officer with his pistol. He almost escaped to forest again but was shot few meters before reaching cover.

Not saying it was common though, and if it was allowed in CM, it would become the norm.

So not allowing crew heroics is the right way.

Agreed.

- Tommi

[Guest Patrik]

I far as I see it crew don't bail out to fight but to survive. They will of course use what weapons they have and would probably follow the orders that they get, but who is going to give that order.

Infantry platoon HQs has a platoon to look after; company HQs got a company and so on...

The crew probably has some order to stay alive for the next combat or should have at least.

So I say let the AI run all crews...

And we will have no more crews assaulting enemy positions.

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

Ooops! You had troops there?

[Tiger]

My view is that crews have already been nuetered enough in the b24 patch. If you can not "defend" against these crews then you have no defense. It is up to the owner to use his forces as he sees fit. Many times I will use crew from tanks as scouts in a limitied fashion, and this is a risk that I take, not my opponent. Alot of times I move them to the rear immediately rather than risk the points loss. I seriously doubt that there's a horde of crews charging your defensive positions that lose the battle for you. If there is then you need to go back to school on tactics.

"One of my favorite replays was seeing a tank get shot by a nearby at-team, watching as the bailed crew jump out and run into the same building as the at-team, then proceeded to shoot it out".

Make crews automatically run away by the AI? Give me a break.

john

[This message has been edited by Tiger (edited 01-02-2001).]

[Jarmo]

Actually I feel the crews are already too weak. I mean, the "low" status means they don't even

have full clips in their weapons! I want my ammo back!

And for the record, I almost never use them anyway. Except for guard duty. And maybe as

a last line defense in desperate situations.

[Guest Patrik]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tiger:

Make crews automatically run away by the AI? Give me a break.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I never said that the AI should make them all run away, just that they are so very out of command that ordering them around isn't really an option, unless they get in the way of a commander ordering something drastic in that case they would end up doing the same thing as the rest of the troops around them, this could be handled by the AI.

[David Aitken]

tss wrote:

> ...and then the one-legged Finnish tanker wiped out a platoon of veteran Russians with his bare hands...

Oh no, the Finnish brigade has arrived! tss, best not give people any unusual ideas about what the average bailed crew can achieve. =)

[Tiger]

This is what you wrote above Patrick: "So I say let the AI run all crews..."

It's not your decision on how your opponent should or should not use their own troops, especially when this particular aspect has been fixed a couple of times now, though not to the satisfaction of a few who wouldn't know which end of the rifle a bullet shoots out of anyway. What's the point of having bailed crews at all if you just want to make them useless/run away anyway. If someone can patch together 1-4 crew remains to try and take a position, let him. The loss he will suffer in points is not worth it. If you can not stop these crews, then you don't really control that spot/flag in the first place, now do you? As I see it, bitchin about "crew hordes" causing you to lose a battle is just sour grapes.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I think it's time to get off the porch and run with the big dogs, don't you?? If you were a soldier, Patton woulda slapped you by now.

-tailz<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

john

[This message has been edited by Tiger (edited 01-02-2001).]

[Polar]

This is a silly arguement either way.

To play such a game, you have to suspend a LOT of characteristic actions of independant units anyway.

Maybe I should be angry when an opponent does a Wasp rush on my fortified possition... since that is CLEARLY suicide on his part and Wasp commanders wouldn't do something that obviously stupid of his own accord.

He does because if one manages to make it close enough to set the place on fire, his approaching troops get a distinct advantge.

Did this happen in real life? No... but it can be a VERY useful tactic in CMBO when the terrain allows it.

The thing about the crew rush is this... If you want the ability to rush a tank in a potential suicide mission in hopes of breaking the opponents line, you have to allow crew rushes.

If you want to start talking "imagine your best friends head just got pasted to the wall by an 88" crap, then just look at some of the crazy stuff people do with MOUNTED armor.

Essentially, you need to take away all command or 90% of the command you have over any particular unit if you want "realism".

If the tank crews had direct contact with the commanding officer after their tanks were taken out, maybe we WOULD have seen more direct use of unassed tank crews.

It's the nature of the beast, most (if not all) of the micromanaging after turn one is essentially "unrealistic".

Joe

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

"I had no shoes and I cried, then I met a man who had no socks." - Fred Mertz

[Lah]

Babra,

I had a couple people scout with crews, so I explained it was gamey, politely. They had no idea it was a 'gamey' tactic and stopped doing it straight away.

Also don't forget to tell them that it will bring their victory and morale ratio down sacrificing crew

[Wilhammer]

Excepting some fanatics, a crew forced out of a vehicle (or a gun position) should not be combat effective, but should be armed for self defense.

I'd say the best thing to do is to give them low combat "staying" power. Make them more prone to the algorithm that forces units to break off combat.

It is reasonable to have them abanodon armed, run to the nearest cover, and then try to survive.

It is not reasonable to have them form ad hoc infantry units and assault positions.

[aka_tom_w]

At the risk of sounding infamitory and pissing off the majority of "realism" players here, I would like to suggest that I think I read somewhere on this forum that the Allies had SO many new tanks (sherms) coming in the ETO after D-Day and they were loosing tank crews SO fast that fresh infantry in the ETO were asked to volunteer to be tankers. Those who did received a Crash course in how the Sherm worked and were basically sent into combat for on the job training, hense the need for more new Sherms and new tank crews.

SO, at least for the Allied side I would like to attempt to dispell the suggestion that tank crews were HIGHLY trained and valuable because they were "tankers", to the contary, Most were green and were nothing more than infantry men who "volunteered" to sit in a tank.

SO I suggest that the way the game is now, is FINE, when they bail, they are largely ineefective, BUT they should be slightly effective, and they are with their pistols, they CAN for instance go out and get revenge and shoot with their pistols that pesky unsuported anti-tank team that shot their vehicle out from under them. No problem their right?

Given the way the game is coded right now, using them as canon fodder is still discouraged, BUT it can be an effective way to win, if you are playing to win.

This has been a hotly contested issue for some time. I like the game FINE the way it is right now.

I post this to remind people here that at least in the case of the Americans, tankers were INFANTRY before they became tankers and the U.S. had more Sherms than crews anyway so they were being crewed by volunteer infantry men anyway, disppeling the idea the tank crews are highly trained specialized units.

Just my opinion..

I know most others here disagree, BUT I would say I am posting in favour of LEAVING the game just the way it is now with respect to crews.

Lightly armed with pistols and brittle (!) in combat. OH!, and Lets not forget they have ALSO been coded to have only VERY short range spotting ability making them largely useless for that "gamey" recon role as well.

Thanks

-tom w

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-02-2001).]

[Tiger]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>...a crew forced out of a vehicle (or a gun position) should not be combat effective, but should be armed for self defense.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's how it is now. Crews bail with very bad morale & only have their sidearms with low ammo. So what needs "fixing"?

Using bailed tank crews as scouts is not gamey, simply because to lose them thus would cost you victory points anyway. Its their owner's risk to take. It's only "gamey" because some people would rather have their opponents do their work for them.

If using crews as they are in patch b24 other than to run them to your edge is gamey, you might as well take crews out of the game altogether.

john

[Hiram Sedai]

In one of my many games vs the AI, I once had a crew from a dead panzer actually save another tank. He was kneeling next to his tank and started shooting at the bazooka guy that was trying to kill my other tank. I wouldn't have tried on purpose, but a crew can be an effective deterrent sometimes.

In my PBEM games, I have at least a platoon of Crew guys after losing huge quantities of armor, so I have them hide. Creative? Perhaps not, but its easier on my conscience somehow.

Formerly Forever Funkadelic Barbara, you know how to spell my last name in case you think I'm gamey too and want to put my name on that list.

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

Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. - Blaise Pascal

[Jeff Duquette]

It’s amazing how often this topic is discussed amongst various wargame forums. I would say it is a big time exception that a tank crew would continue to fight following destruction of their vehicle. When the tank is hit and it's time to get out (assuming you are not blown out by a brew-up--a popular way of involuntarily leaving a tank), you're not thinking about getting a weapon, ammo, grenades, maps, helmet and other things necessary for executing infantry skills in taking hex B1242 for your mouse-wielding human master. It's more like, last one out of the tank may be a French fry and getting out is all you are thinking about.

I'd say a crew will do the following if they abandon their tank:

1. If not under small arms fire: Get away from it to some form of cover; then watch it blow up if that's what it's gonna do. Then hang-low till the battle's over, moves on or "Top" comes with chow. You lose your ride, you've done your fighting for the day--Let them other bastards have a turn. If after some time, your tank doesn't blow up and the battle does moves on, you return to the vehicle and wait for recovery. After-all it's your house and all your possessions are still on-board.

2. If under small arms fire--tough judgement call: What's more likely to happen? Killed by Small Arms or detonations of ammo from your own vehicle? Tanks attract fire; it ain't a good place to seek cover unless of course there is no other cover around and the tank has already attracted fire.

3. If anyone was wounded from the crew in either 1 or 2, than that'll probably occupy the intact survivors for the rest of the fight...

These is no particular order to the following excerpts...they are all derived from the "Chronicle of the 7th Panzer Kompanie 1st SS-Panzer Division, Leibstandarte" by Ralf Tieman, Copyright 1998, Schiffer publishing ltd.)

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

December 29, 1944 Belgium

"Now the entire American Firepower concentrated on us. We were lucky. I drove into cover behind a haystack in the vicinity of the farm. It was about 150 meters to the forest where the Panther stood. We didn't dare leave our cover until sundown. Our situation was very unpleasant. Cut off from the remaining companies of the panzer regiment without knowing where the American tanks stood, we waited behind the pile of hay for two hours. The radioman couldn't make contact. In the mean time the Panther disappeared from the forests edge. We didn't know if the American were in the village. There were no shots. We only saw burning Panzers to the right of us. The knocked out crews had fled into the forest to the right and took cover on the road to Bra…later that same day…We reached the road connecting Bastogne and Bras near the on-ramp in Wardin. We drove on this road further in the direction of the east (sic. in retreat) and reached the village of Bras. There we met up with the crews of whose Panzers had been knocked out." (Pg 129 "Chronicle of the 7th Panzer Kompanie 1st SS-Panzer Division, Leibstandarte" by Ralf Tieman, Copyright 1998, Schiffer publishing ltd.)

December 30, 1944 Belgium

"In front of me an anti-tank gun knocked out a wagon (sic. panzer). Once again I heard a crack that was very close. "Where did it hit?" I asked myself. It was almost a relief when we finally got hit. The motor was still running. I killed it with the brakes. As the smoke started to clear I saw that my hatch was already gone. What I couldn't see however, was that our cannon had been ripped right off the turret. Now that the motor had fallen silent I could easily recognize the sound of machine-gun bullets hitting our wagon. Now I had to get out, whether I wanted to or not, and I had to make my escape by first going in the direction of the enemy. For the driver there is no other possibility. I couldn't hesitate. The next anti-tank gun round was certainly on the way. I thought to myself: "Pull up your legs, squat on the drivers seat, get up quickly, get out and immediately, let yourself fall down next to the tracks." Somewhere along the line I got snagged. My cloths ripped. I fell hard on the ground. There were machine-gun bullets everywhere. I looked for the first cover under the Panzer and I found three men of my crew who were standing there in shock. But where was Hauptsturmfurher Klingelhofer? I pulled myself on the back of the Panzer just at the same time he climbed out of the loaders hatch. I jumped over to him and asked him if he was wounded or not. As he told me he wasn't, I ran in the direction of the forest. We stayed in the dead angle of our Panzer. On the edge of the tall forest there was a wall made of earth and stone. Behind that wall there were some deep holes where we were going to take a breather…We took off to the east. (Pg 132 "Chronicle of the 7th Panzer Kompanie 1st SS-Panzer Division, Leibstandarte" by Ralf Tieman, Copyright 1998, Schiffer publishing ltd.)

December 31, 1944 Belgium

"Lost in the forest, no one knew which way was forward and which was backwards, and then our Panzer was knocked out too. An American anti-tank gun had hit us from a short distance to the rear. The driver was killed instantly. Clotten still wanted to pull him from the Panzer, but than he was shot in his upper arm. Thanks to the wood on the ground the rest of the crew was able to beat a path back to the command post." (Pg 135 "Chronicle of the 7th Panzer Kompanie 1st SS-Panzer Division, Leibstandarte" by Ralf Tieman, Copyright 1998, Schiffer publishing ltd.)

Feb 23 1943 Russia

"So we drove along like a gigantic target over the brightly lit field of snow until we were about sixty meters away from the village of Bulachi. We saw no further signs of the enemy and our second Panzer (with its Kommandant Gerd Killat) and no. 1 gunner Horst Borgsmuller were behind us in the street. Suddenly a bang. A hit in the right chassis section. I flew out of my open hatch and into the snow. Untersturmfurher Stollmayer flew out of the turret onto the rear of the Panzer and than fell onto the ground behind the Panzer. There sat Sturmbannfurher Hanse as well. Neither man had any big scratches. During my attempt to look for the rest of the crew in the panzer, the Soviets shot at me from the tank's side shields and down. The shot went through my right arm.

Now the panzer started to burn. Sturmbannfurher Hansen called to me: Run away boy! Under infantry fire I trotted back along the tracks left by our Panzer…" (Pg 36 "Chronicle of the 7th Panzer Kompanie 1st SS-Panzer Division, Leibstandarte" by Ralf Tieman, Copyright 1998, Schiffer publishing ltd.)

Feb 27 1943 Russia

"Under protection of our fire the remainder of Platoon Janke pulled back, during which they eliminated an enemy anti-tank gun. Janke's panzer received four hits from an anti-tank gun and was knocked out. Janke left the battlefield on the eastern edge of the village, Platoon Stollmayer opened fire on recognized targets on the western edge of the village and annihilated another anti-tank gun. (Pg 40 "Chronicle of the 7th Panzer Kompanie 1st SS-Panzer Division, Leibstandarte" by Ralf Tieman, Copyright 1998, Schiffer publishing ltd.).

July 12 1943 Russia

"On July 12th, 1943, the day of the big tank battle, I sat once again in some Panzer IV. After we knocked out four or five T-34's, a T-34 wiped us out itself. The hit ripped off the cover of the transmission and the brakes were out. The driver and radioman were lightly wounded by shrapnel. That was the end of Zitadelle for me." That's correct he didn't say…"I picked a rifle up and than joined my infantry comrades because it was my patriotic duty to rid the world of Bolshevik oppression.

(Pg 59 "Chronicle of the 7th Panzer Kompanie 1st SS-Panzer Division, Leibstandarte" by Ralf Tieman, Copyright 1998, Schiffer publishing ltd.).

January 29 1944 Russia

"Only a few meters from the lake our panzer received a hit in the tracks, which finally put an end to our drive in the wrong direction. After a certain sense of relief I made sure that my bones had remained healthy. In a panzer III it is only possible for the driver to get out after going through the turret, so it took me longer to get out. What would await me outside? Were we possibly surrounded by the Russians? Where were my comrades and how am I going to get over the lake, as a former non-swimmer? (Sorry I cant scan the situational map here…suffice it to say that by crossing this lake the panzer crew would be moving away from the enemy). Everything went through my head at once. I was full of fear. Luckily the Russians were not yet in my vicinity. Four dark figures ran into the water, and were already a few meters past the shoreline. Now I only thought about being quick. I jumped from the panzer and into the ice cold water. At first I tried to wade in the weedy coast to the bridge, where I saw my crew running on the ice, that would be my savior. (Pg 83 "Chronicle of the 7th Panzer Kompanie 1st SS-Panzer Division, Leibstandarte" by Ralf Tieman, Copyright 1998, Schiffer publishing ltd.).

Whittmann fled the scene of his crime at Villers-Boccage and eventually ended up at the Panzer Lehr Division HQ.

A lieutenant or Captain does not lead a platoon or company of tanks by running about on the ground waving his hands. These folk would tend to seek out another operational ride in there unit and continue on with the fight.

July 9 1943 Russia

Company commander Ralf Tiemann remembers the attack: After reaching a long basin in the landscape the battalion spread out in a wide wedge formation and began to drive along the backside of the basin. After reaching a hill in the direction of 1200 we discovered a wide area of forest. A few T34's disappeared into the forest as we appeared. We went right for them at high speed and began to attack. As we paused before the forest we received strong fire on our right flank. We had landed right in front of a row of PAK's. My wagon received a hit in the chassis. Immediately we got out due to the danger of an explosion. The radioman was wounded. I changed into the company-troop panzer. I barely had the throat mike and headset on and we received a hit in the turret. The loader was dead. I immediately got out. I stood stunned under a firing Panzer gun and looked for a new lead Panzer. Finally the leader of the 2nd Platoon realized this and got out so that I could get in.

[This message has been edited by Jeff Duquette (edited 01-02-2001).]

[Jarmo]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I know most others here disagree, BUT I would say I am posting in favour of LEAVING the game just the way it is now with respect to crews.

Lightly armed with pistols and brittle (!) in combat. OH!, and Lets not forget they have ALSO been coded to have only VERY short range spotting ability making them largely useless for that "gamey" recon role as well.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That would be fine. Except they are now also LOW in ammo, thus removing

almost all of the little self defense capability they have.

[Guest Germanboy]

Bad bad Jeff, how dare you bring Real Life to this discussion. Now go and sit in a corner

FWIW I have no problems with the way the game is now. It allows for the occasional heroics (taking out an AT team after getting out of the tank), and otherwise crews are useless. I think it is good they are modeled, b/c of operations. The abuse they suffered in the game against FB is not preventable even if they were disarmed. For anything else they are useless, and that is as it should be, IMO.

Tom, your point about tankers and infantry has one slight flaw: how many tankers volunteered to become infantrymen? If I was in the PBI and somebody offered me a chance first to miss the next battle because I will be trained to drive a tank and then to ride into future battles behind a few inches of steel, I know I would be the first to volunteer.

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

Andreas

Der Kessel

Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission.

[Bruno Weiss]

How many times it has to be said:

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"

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

"Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses

open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth."

-Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916)

[Doug Beman]

Tiger,

using vehicle crews as scouts IS gamey because, in reality, crews don't have the "instant-info" capability like they do in the game. In CM, you can instantly see everything the crews can see, regardless of where they are or the environmental conditions. The crew could be in thick fog, on the far side of the map, surrounded by high ridges, and if they see an enemy you, the player, instantly see the enemy as well. This is unrealistic and gamey.

DjB

[Polar]

Agreed!!!!

It is silly... just plain silly... to complain about such a small and improbable occurance simply on the basis that it probably wouldn't happen in real life.

MUCH of what happens in CM wouldn't happen in real life. But that's becuase you are essentially the tactical brain of EVERY unit on you side. There is no room for error (or very little)... THAT is unrealistic.

How often do you think people will encounter some massed crew rush when they themselves are woefully short of ammo? One in a million? Should a major reworking of the game be based on one occurrance that is not only wildly improbable, but essentially ineffective?

Hell, I'll complain that my three weapons companys should have stopped running when that HMG opened up on them in my game last night... shouldn't they have run away??? Then they fix it... and someone complains that they break too easy... so they fix it... and the German player complains that they don't break easy enough... or not enough are dead...

Yadda yadda yadda....

It must be a damn fine game if all we have to discuss is that unassed tank crews are being used as cannon fodder.

Joe

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

"I had no shoes and I cried, then I met a man who had no socks." - Fred Mertz

[Tiger]

Doug, that applies to 90% of all the units in the game. It's all a abstraction forced on us by the inherent nature of "games". The same logic can be applied to your infantry, sharpshooters, mg teams, AT teams, etc. etc.

If I happen to choose to use my crew to look around and risk losing the points if he dies, then it is certainly not gamey, no more than using any other unit would be. Crews have already been greatly hampered in doing this anyways. Why crews and not other units? Because they are crews.

If I send crew remnants ahead with whatever infantry I have left to try and overrun my enemy's position, that is not gamey. It's only gamey if you are looking for an excuse as to why you lost.

As has been mentioned, crews already have had their los greatly reduced, their ammo is low, their morale is bad, and they are brittle. The only thing left would be to remove them from the game entirely.

john

ps~ Germanboy, I've seen a TV interview a German tank commander on the Eastern front and the guy was saying how vulnerable they felt in their tank because you are relying totally on your armor to save you. He went on to say he'd much rather be outside in a ditch where you can get down and hide from incoming fire because you can not see alot of what is going on around you in a tank. He said it was very frightening to be inside a tank.

I imagine infantry pressed into the claustraphobic confines of a tank would feel this even worse.

[This message has been edited by Tiger (edited 01-02-2001).]

[David Aitken]

Jeff Duquette wrote:

> "In front of me an anti-tank gun knocked out a wagon (sic. panzer).

Sorry, pet hate. If this had been translated properly it would read "vehicle". "Panzer" is no more appropriate – it simply means "armoured". PanzerKampfwagen / PzKpfw / Armoured Fighting Vehicle / AFV. "Wagen" does not translate to "wagon", although this seems to be an American favourite. =)

[Doug Beman]

Tiger, my objection to crews as scouts is based on a) the fact that it was NOT SOP IN REAL WAR to use crews this way, and because vehicle crews had NO ability to communicate back to a command unit, not radios or even runners. Once they were out of their vehicle they were just 4 or 5 guys with pistols, and nothing more. Sending them out to "see what's over that hill" is basically sending them off to die.

I sure hope that anybody who would order vehicle crews to run around and play gravel cruncher on a regular basis never commands in real life.

DjB

[aka_tom_w]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Doug Beman:

Tiger, my objection to crews as scouts is based on a) the fact that it was NOT SOP IN REAL WAR to use crews this way, and because vehicle crews had NO ability to communicate back to a command unit, not radios or even runners. Once they were out of their vehicle they were just 4 or 5 guys with pistols, and nothing more. Sending them out to "see what's over that hill" is basically sending them off to die.

I sure hope that anybody who would order vehicle crews to run around and play gravel cruncher on a regular basis never commands in real life.

DjB<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

ok I'll bite.....

I will safely bet that 99% of the people who play this game, have never and WILL never command in Real Life™. But we all REALLY enjoy being Armchair Generals, same as we enjoy being armchair quarterbacks.

I think the game is fine the way it and as this issue had been around so long the only good way to deal with it is to agree with your opponent about what is gamey and what is not and what is objectionable and what is not before you go to battle.

Any one who has ever played me knows I have never and will never complain about the use of any gamey tactic that is clearly NOT cheating (like breaking passwords or changing the game code, or letting me play against you with my fog of war on and your fog of war off, apparently that used to be a problem)

So NO, I expect my opponent do whatever and use whatever has has to try to WIN. As the game stands now the Gamey use of crews is now almost TOTALLY minimized. I support that decision and think players should be able to play within what ever "house rules" they both deem "not objectionable"

I agree completely with Tiger on this one and think you should do whatever you can with what you've got to try to win. But I ALSO fully support gentleman's aggreements before hand on the appropriate use of bailed crews.

Now let get back to playing the game!

And a Damn Fine game it is !!!

-tom w