A open debate on "gamey" tactics.

Tread Head · September 22, 2001

Hello,

I am a so-called "newbie" and have a question. First off, the search funtion did not work for me before you preach a sermon at me.

What are the CM "gamey" tactics? :confused: I would hate to offend a PBEM or IP and not know it.

I wonder is there a agreed upon list? It seems IMO that many of you disagree. I have heard of and used the Panzer76 rules and others but is there a "gamey" rule set posted anywhere on the web? I know there are ANYTHING goes games and tournys but, has there been an attempt to catalog and define all the "gamey" rules so that players can decide on a "gamey" rule set pre-game?

There seems to be dozens of "gamey" things one can do. Sure BTS is maybe fixing CMBB but what does that have to do with the price of tea in China? CMBO will not go on the shelf for all of us once CMBB comes out. Maybe BTS will re-nigg and allow a new patch to fix all these concerns in the future.

So, maybe some of you experts can post here with what you consider "gamey" and if no one counter post someone could compile the list and draw up a rule set and post it at one of the many CM sites.

Post away! :confused:

Herr Kruger · September 22, 2001

I'd like to know so that I can avoid these tactics as well.. I read earlier you can drive in reverse to avoid getting bogged down so I will not drive in reverse as a means of advancing my vehicles solely for advancement... ie. I'll drive in reverse if I think the enemy is now behind me

Redwolf · September 22, 2001

Very careful, not to trigger a flamewar.

Clear stuff to avoid is exploiting bugs:

- rushing MGs, especially with SMG squads

- using armed unarmoured vehicles, like

sdkfz 7/1 and 7/2

Also runners, not really bugs:

- masses of Wasp, M8 HMC or Pueppchen or

generally small guns

Fionn rules have nothing to do with gamey.

Seanachai · September 22, 2001

Gamey? You want to know what's Gamey?! You can't handle what's Gamey, Lad!

Your post is wonderful. You've just stood on one toe, balancing like a seal with a conundrum on its nose, and asked all the peoples of the World to define religion.

If you survive the definitions, explanations, disclaimers, rebuttals, and jihads, I imagine we could have you stuffed and mounted as a waypost indicating in which direction madness lies.

Mind, I think pretty much everyone is a useless, gamey, 'unfit for the Peng Challenge Thread' pillock. But you could provide the rule that proves the exceptions...

Tread Head · September 22, 2001

I agree on driving in reverse "Gamey"

Using Sdfz 7/1 & /2, well, may cause debate

Rushing a MG w/ SMG, depends on situation

I think a lot of the "Gamey" rules may not be gamey in some situations, you have to work with what you have, right?

Tread Head · September 22, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Seanachai:

Gamey? You want to know what's Gamey?! You can't handle what's Gamey, Lad!

Your post is wonderful. You've just stood on one toe, balancing like a seal with a conundrum on its nose, and asked all the peoples of the World to define religion.

If you survive the definitions, explanations, disclaimers, rebuttals, and jihads, I imagine we could have you stuffed and mounted as a waypost indicating in which direction madness lies.

Mind, I think pretty much everyone is a useless, gamey, 'unfit for the Peng Challenge Thread' pillock. But you could provide the rule that proves the exceptions...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am not sure if that is a cut-down or a compliment.... Do you speak English? So, did you want to contribute or just poke fun?

Andreas · September 22, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Tread Head:

I am not sure if that is a cut-down or a compliment.... Do you speak English? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Is his post in Suaheli?

If you are worried about gamey playing and being accused of the same, just lay down the groudn-rules before starting the PBEM. Otherwise, find yourself a group of people who are interested in the historical simulation aspect, and play them repeatedly. If you don't mind a gamey game then just go to the ladders where anything goes. Or so I think. Some non-gamey opponents can be found in the Peng thread, but you will have to endure incapacility to write coherently (e.g. Seanachai) and the mad ramblings of a certain Joe, who claims to be a Shaw. Never mind the lawyers, who are revelling in the MBT as an ambulance chaser does in an ER. Where was I, ah yes. Gamey, shmamey... How long is a piece of string?

Slapdragon · September 22, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Tread Head:

I am not sure if that is a cut-down or a compliment.... Do you speak English? So, did you want to contribute or just poke fun?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't sweat Sean. If you want to get a handle on him, just watch the movie Fargo a couple of times, and then remember that he comes from a place in the world that makes Des Moines looks exciting.

Tread Head · September 22, 2001

My good German friend,

I do realize all of what you so smartly wrote. I guess you fail to understand the reason for the post. Not everyone agrees on what is "gamey". I would like to avoid a MID-GAME conflict.

EX: Turn 14.... I know he has a MG in a light building near the middle of the map. I ever so secretly sneak my Sdkfz 7/2 up to a spot a good ways away but with a clear view of the house. I open fire, and before ya know it I have one pissed of PBEM email in my inbox. "that was the most "gamey" move, yata yata yata!" IMO, that is fine, hey if I had a 7/1 in the area Heck yes I would use it, and I think it is not at all "gamey", but my partner quits the game and leave me with a wased couple of weeks in a PBEM.

Ya understand? Do ya sprekekin me Deutch?

Andreas · September 22, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Tread Head:

My good German friend,

I do realize all of what you so smartly wrote. I guess you fail to understand the reason for the post. Not everyone agrees on what is "gamey". I would like to avoid a MID-GAME conflict.

EX: Turn 14.... I know he has a MG in a light building near the middle of the map. I ever so secretly sneak my Sdkfz 7/2 up to a spot a good ways away but with a clear view of the house. I open fire, and before ya know it I have one pissed of PBEM email in my inbox. "that was the most "gamey" move, yata yata yata!" IMO, that is fine, hey if I had a 7/1 in the area Heck yes I would use it, and I think it is not at all "gamey", but my partner quits the game and leave me with a wased couple of weeks in a PBEM.

Ya understand? Do ya sprekekin me Deutch? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh, I fully understand what you are on about - the point Seanachai was making in his usual langorous, pompous, and laboured way was that it should not read 'Not everyone agrees on what is "gamey".' but 'Nobody agrees on what is "gamey". '

In examples like the one you use above, I would say good-bye and good riddance to the other player, and try and find myself a grown-up to play with. Makes it legal, too I.e. in your example someone was POed because he got his butt kicked. Now I get the same angry feeling when it happens to me, but I don't go around yelling 'gamey' if someone has outsmarted me. But that is because the people I play like to preserve some semblance of historical troop usage. Choice of PBEM opponents is a real problem if you care about your reputation and fun.

Now how long was a piece of string again?

SlowMotion · September 22, 2001

So if there's no agreement on what's considered gamey and thus people have to negotiate, has anybody or some web site collected a list of things that might be used as a starting point? I know that Rugged Defense has some rules (Panther76 etc.), but anything else?

and Redwolf: send me the move

Tread Head · September 22, 2001

What about burning empty buildings?

I am not sure....but I do know this,

1. Recon by fire. Did it for real in the Tank core, ya might waste some ammo but heck, it works great once in a while. Many a Jap were found and burnt doing this.

2. Defense. If I can burn a building in some worthless French town to better protect my men, why not? If I have a flammepanzer just siting around why not use it? what about woods? They might light a little easy in CM, but as long as it is not a silly case, burning a possible weak spot in your defense perm. is not Gamey IMO.

Clear Abuse: burning V locations, ... Just pretend it contains something vital to the war effort.

BUT if the bad-guys were hanging out in or near the VL don't think I won't torch it.

So, I say no rules on flames other then not being allowed to torch a empty VL.

[ 09-22-2001: Message edited by: Tread Head ]

Tread Head · September 22, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by SlowMotion:

[QB]So if there's no agreement on what's considered gamey and thus people have to negotiate, has anybody or some web site collected a list of things that might be used as a starting point? I know that Rugged Defense has some rules (Panther76 etc.), but anything else?

QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ahhhh...... this is what I am talking about.

I guess i understand your nick

BTW the other rule set have nothing to do with "gamey" issues, they are just there to prevent Big-Cat Vs. Jumbo fights every game.

D'arcy Montague · September 22, 2001

My buddy was telling me about some tourney house that had it's emphasis on balanced quasi-historical force selection and 'playing in the spirit of the game'.

Such a site may have a blacklist like the one mentioned above. I'll try and find out the address. Personally I would love to swap from RD to something like that.

It surely would make a nice change to not have to send one's frail Tommies up against Germany's seemingly endless supply of vet Pzr gnr motorised squads.

Hell, if anyone thinks they know the ladder that I'm espousing as the untainted grail of CM virtue then please point me in the right direction.

Hmm.. I expect that'll translate rather readily as - 'Go direct to 101 Wiseacre lane'.

Ex Bellator · September 22, 2001

Finally, a mass debate on the forum.

I always thought it was full of *******

D'arcy Montague · September 22, 2001

Oh yeah, Redwolf what is it exactly, about rushing MG's in CM that you find distasteful?

I'm asking, because I haven't witnessed it in play. But, I have heard many accounts of machinegun nests being charged during the war. Most of these were ofcourse within grenade throwing distance.

Andreas · September 22, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Tread Head:

What about burning empty buildings?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Based on reading about the employment of Crocodiles of 79th UK AD in NWE, it is perfectly alright to go around and burn houses down at your leisure. Or Petard them. Or do all sorts of stuff with them - the houses were French, the troops Brits, and the ambulance-chasing lawyer did not have a predecessor in the Churchill-chasing attorney, who would immediately sue Trooper Bill for destruction of property and punitive damages.

They did it all the time IRL, and it is a nice tactic to use. The problem with terrain is that IRL the fire would die down reasonably quickly, while in CMBO it stays for the duration, so (ab)using that in the game is using a game limitation to achieve an ahistorical result. I would therefore say that flaming terrain is not allowed - YMMV.

Scipio · September 22, 2001

What the heck is gamey on rushing an MG???? Are you joking?

Gamey is : to start grumbling about the use of something that wasn't excluded before the match. Extra rules like the Short-75 are extra spice, not anti-gamey.

Do you really believe that a single leader in the human history ever feared that his opponent could see a tactic as 'gamey'??? If the only way to win is an assault of cooks with fieldkitchens and pans, try it. You can even fart in the general directory of the enemy if you expect an opportunity.

wadepm · September 22, 2001

MG's in the game are not as effective against a rush as they would be in real life. The MG's can only target one unit at a time so if you rush them with a couple of squads it is easy to overpower them with a smaller loss than you would expect. Is this something that will be "fixed" in CMBB?

Scipio · September 22, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by wadepm:

MG's in the game are not as effective against a rush as they would be in real life. The MG's can only target one unit at a time so if you rush them with a couple of squads it is easy to overpower them with a smaller loss than you would expect. Is this something that will be "fixed" in CMBB?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Aha - well, that's funny, I had an idea about this. Read my 'Infantry - modeled realitic' threat

FFE · September 22, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Tread Head:

What are the CM "gamey" tactics?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My definition.

Gamey tactics: Simply anything intentionally done to debase intended game engine operands. Do not confuse gamey tactics with incidental combat. It also denotes a departure from reality (historical usage). A sly armchair commander knows how situations in the game react, thus uses this information to wrestle superiority. The common theme revolves on, "Winning at all costs."

Threat level: The game prioritizes certain units in favor of others. Vehicles deem anti-tank teams as high threat. Vehicles will blatantly attempt to eradicate this threat, no matter the range. A player criss-crossing an anti-tank team(s) over open terrain far behind the main fight is using game tactics. He/she knows vehicles become fixated on the anti-tank team(s) and can use this pre-determined knowledge against their opponent. Flame-throwers, forward observers, and mortar can be used similarly.

Over usage: A few unit types are not properly modeled. Over using these units tends to unbalance the point values result.

Those are the two main ones I can think of. Undoubtedly this discussion will lead to a gamut of individual definitions.

[ 09-22-2001: Message edited by: FFE ]

Mark IV · September 22, 2001

There really are not many gamey things you can do with CMBO compared to many other games. As FFE has noted, it boils down to taking advantage of the mechanics of the game to act in an ahistorical or unrealistic manner.

The majority of "gamey" tactics brought up in the last 150 threads on gaminess are just opinions, often wrong, often based on misunderstandings, or just bitterness at having lost a unit or scenario to an unexpected move.

Edge-hugging is one of the most obvious. RL doesn't have a quadrilateral boundary unless you are invading the Osaka airport. Running your troops up one edge of the map means they are safe from fire from 180 degrees that wouldn't exist in RL. So, gamey... until you find people thinking it disallows flank attacks of almost any kind, and any unit within 100m is edge-hugging.

FWIW, I just had a Sherman bog in reverse, in Damp conditions right next to scattered trees. Even if the reverse "bug" is real, there is no way I am not ever going to reverse an AFV in a PBEM, because the solution would be gamier than the problem. If it is real, then I would say that reversing a platoon of tanks through 200m of snow is gamey, but I think some silly behavior has its own reward.

High speed recon was hotly debated and is much ado about nothing. Jeeps and Kubelwagen can be zipped around and through enemy lines for a quick glimpse of the entire enemy position, because they are very difficult to hit and cheap anyway. The argument is that in RL you couldn't get real troops to do that, and the info they would have been able to relay back while doing so wouldn't be nearly as useful as the picture that a CM player gets, thanks to Borg spotting. This is generally the case, though the units will usually be killed. So don't do that.

Attacking or spotting with crews of AFVs, ammoless FOs, etc. is another big bugaboo, and they have been tweaked down in capabilities by BTS until this should no longer be an issue. I would let crews defend themselves in a building or woods in an Alamo situation and that's about it. I try to exit them from the board when it is safe to do so.

Ahistorical unit selection means cherry-picking favorite units from multiple nationalities in unrealistic mixes. At CM level this would be silly, unless you were modeling a conflict right at the edge of major unit boundaries. Also under this heading would be combining TO&Es that never happened in reality, like all FOs or all AA units, or armies of bazookas.

Those are the biggest as I see them, there may be a couple other legitimate ones, and much of the rest are just the sour grapes crowd trying to occupy the VLs on the moral high ground. There are peculiarities in the modeling of certain unit capabilities which have been discussed to death here, but exploiting them won't usually change the outcome of a battle and they are generally somewhat vague anyway.

The so-called invulnerability of Sd Kfz 7/1 or 2, the over/under modeling of MGs, and all the other niggles beaten to death here are matters of opinion, necessarily somewhat abstracted, and while touted by their discoverers as articles of religion, really don't affect a damned thing in the conduct of battle.

Sound tactics against reasonable adults are the best defense against "gamey" tactics.

Slapdragon · September 22, 2001

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Mark IV: