Jeff Heidman Posted January 11, 2001 Share Posted January 11, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Polar: Well Jeff... you explain to us how we can explain to them that the failure is both in their tactics and their overblown view of German armor without making it a possible afront to them. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Easy. When someone shows up demanding an explanation for how that Sherman took out their KT from the side and demanding a change you can do one of several things: 1. Ask them what should be changed specificaly and why. 2. Tell them why the KT is vulnerable, and how they can avoid it. 3. Point them towards the search function, or the FAQ. 4. If that is too much trouble, ignore them. The thing is, when you attack their motives, not only are you pissing them off, you are not even proving anything. It could be the case that the person in question is true Germanophile, who thinks that alll things Germans are perfect. It could be teh case that the person is jsut mis-informed. In either case, your pointing out that their motives are suspect does not address their argument. Their motives could be compeltely suspect, and yet their argument completely correct. Or vice versa. So claiming that they are Germanophiles might be correct or incorrect, but in any case is irrelevant to their argument anyway, so why bother? Jeff Heidman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trooper Posted January 11, 2001 Share Posted January 11, 2001 I rarely play quick battles, but when playing as German, I will usually buy one or two little items for the sole purpose of defending against marauding 37s.. A towed 50mm AT gun would do well, for example. Or, a halftrack 37m AA gun. Let's see an M8 shrug -that- off. (Better ROF than the M8 too!) Further, I have an extremely defensive mindset. I will keep assets out of the attack in order to ensure I have a good defensive foundation first. (No, this doesn't mean that I forfeit the initiative or underestimate the need to advance!) I just don't like unpleasant surprises. NTM ------------------ The difference between infantrymen and cavalrymen is that cavalrymen get to die faster, for we ride into battle! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Posted January 11, 2001 Share Posted January 11, 2001 Well, assuming it was my post that touched this off: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jeff Heidman: The problem is that as soon as someone, anyone, makes a reference to this supposed pro-German lobby, they are making a reference to motive, and not argument. That is an ad hominem attack, attacking the persons perceived motive instead of their argument, and is never constructive, not to mention it being logically unsound.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You seem to have latched on to the last paragraph of my post. But this is really taking it out of its intended context. If you go back and read the entire post you will see that I addressed both the motive and the argument. If someone had said "I have some data here that says the 37mm is too powerful in CM" or that it was too fast, I would support them. If the M8 cost 50 pts and the Puma 100 I would agree something is not right. You see, its not people questioning the way things are in the game that bugs me, its people questioning it based upon nothing more that their own preconceived notions of how things ought to be. About the pro-German thing. Not much to say that Steve and others have not already. Its not a figment of our collective imaginations. For me its that 9 out of 10 requests for changes to armor in CM involve somehow making German vehicles stronger or Allied ones weaker. The pattern becomes unmistakable. Especially when the requests are backed up by opinion rather than facts, and even more so when they are made by German only players. In such cases I don't think I'm off base in questioning their objectivity. Oh, and Henri: Don't worry. I found your post an interesting read and my comments in no way were directed at you. ------------------ You've never heard music until you've heard the bleating of a gut-shot cesspooler. -Mark IV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted January 11, 2001 Share Posted January 11, 2001 I just remember my first run in with this mentatilty was a temper tantrum with a grown guy at the Skirmishes playing Squad Leader, and that was a long time ago. The thing that I noticed with the German thing is that a newer player will come on the list and say: Hey my KT was killed by a Sherman, change the game! Then someone will come on and say, give us some proof to change the Sherman, and then a small chorus will come on and say, nope, you prove to us why the Sherman should not be changed. These however usually calm down. I am more talking ladder style play where the guy you are playing says: I play Germans, no M18s, no heavy armor, no ..... to tailor a game. Luckily most ladders for CM do not require you play people unlike game club ladders I used to belong to. And Henri is definately not that sort of person. He in fact was showing a great tactical situation were he got hosed by a well run reserve with some great luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GriffinCheng+ Posted January 11, 2001 Share Posted January 11, 2001 Thanks Henri, I think we should start a new one, for the one right now is just a slaughter on my side. BTW, check out my profile and you should see my ICQ#. But I don't open my ICQ regularly, maybe I should put it up in coming weekend and attend Matt's chatroom often. Griffin. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Henri: Sure, we could continue out present pbem game on TCPIP and/or start a new one. Do you have ICQ? It makes it easy to contact people in real time. I don't have my number here, butif you send me an email, I can give it to you (or you can do a search on my email address with ICQ).We can also meet on Matt's chat room, which I check out regularly. Henri<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ------------------ "When you find your PBEM opportents too hard to beat, there is always the AI." "Can't get enough Tank?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Posted January 11, 2001 Author Share Posted January 11, 2001 For anyone interested in this particular battle (Bridgehead at Benicourt), I have posted an AAR of the complete battle on the war-historical usenet forum. Henri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Heidman Posted January 11, 2001 Share Posted January 11, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon: I just remember my first run in with this mentatilty was a temper tantrum with a grown guy at the Skirmishes playing Squad Leader, and that was a long time ago. The thing that I noticed with the German thing is that a newer player will come on the list and say: Hey my KT was killed by a Sherman, change the game! Then someone will come on and say, give us some proof to change the Sherman, and then a small chorus will come on and say, nope, you prove to us why the Sherman should not be changed. These however usually calm down. I am more talking ladder style play where the guy you are playing says: I play Germans, no M18s, no heavy armor, no ..... to tailor a game. B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I hope I run into someone like that some day, just so I can laugh at them. How do they convince anyone to play them? Jeff Heidman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Heidman Posted January 11, 2001 Share Posted January 11, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Vanir: Well, assuming it was my post that touched this off: You seem to have latched on to the last paragraph of my post. But this is really taking it out of its intended context. If you go back and read the entire post you will see that I addressed both the motive and the argument. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> But I was not objecting to addressing the argument, so I did not mention it. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> If someone had said "I have some data here that says the 37mm is too powerful in CM" or that it was too fast, I would support them. If the M8 cost 50 pts and the Puma 100 I would agree something is not right. You see, its not people questioning the way things are in the game that bugs me, its people questioning it based upon nothing more that their own preconceived notions of how things ought to be. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Why should that bug you? Their pre-coceived notions might be correct. They are not wrong simply because they are pre-conceived. And you cannot really know what their pre-conceived notions are anyway. You are making an assumption based on tenuous data. Argue with what they say, not with why you think they are saying it. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> About the pro-German thing. Not much to say that Steve and others have not already. Its not a figment of our collective imaginations. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The extent, especially here on his board, most certainly is. The accusation is amde way out of proportion to the number of times it actually occures. References to PBEM or ladder opponents notwithstanding and not really relevant to this forum. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> For me its that 9 out of 10 requests for changes to armor in CM involve somehow making German vehicles stronger or Allied ones weaker. The pattern becomes unmistakable. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> So? If BTS has really managed to figure something out that no-body else has in the last 60 years, namely that German armor wasn't as great as everyone thought, why should it come as a surprise that the majority of questions are about that? I would say that it was inevitable and to be expected. When someone challenges the conventional wisdom, it is not unusual for that challenge to be questioned. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Especially when the requests are backed up by opinion rather than facts, and even more so when they are made by German only players. In such cases I don't think I'm off base in questioning their objectivity. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Except that you have no idea if they are German only players!!!! You are assuming they are because they are arguing for better German optics, or whatever! I know this happens, because it happens to me, yet I play both sides equally, and the only pro-german bias I have is the belief that there are cases where BTS has down-played the advantages some German armor had. The problem with your attitude is that it stifles meaningful discussion. There are people who will not even post here anymore, knowledgeable people, because of the sometimes reaction of people on this board to any suggestion that a German unit might have been better than portrayed by CM. Not necesarily you in particular, BTW. It is not the case that a belief that a German unit is not accurately portrayed by CM equals someone who has a pro-german bias As far as myself, I have, on more than one occasion, been accused of being pro-German for absolutely no reason other than my position on a subject. Of course, those doing the accusing seem to forget the examples of where I have argued for a positive change in how CM represents Allied units. I have almost never seen someone come in and say "I ONLY play Germans, and I think they should be made stronger". And even if they did, their motives mean absolutely zero when it comes to evaluating the validity of their argument. They could be card carrying memebers of their local chapter of the "UberPanzer" club, and it STILL would not be relevant! My point is that questionng someones motives is bad policy. For one, you are often going to be wrong about what their motives actually are, which inevitably pisses them off to no end (and moves the debate from the issues to another argument like this one), and for two, even if you are correct it has no relevance to the argument. Argumentum ad Hominem is never logical or productive. Jeff Heidman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts