armornut Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 I will draw a lot of fire for this, but I have to ask; why does everyone get all pissy when a KT or a Pershing rolls out? I mean they are a part of the game. I am not to thrilled to see one, but I do not think anyone would be. I realize if there are four in one battle, that is very unrealistic, but one? I do not use the very large tanks often because they are slow, but every now and again I like to try one. This usually ends up in remarks about my playing style. Why? I also really get upset when someone who has mosly infantry gets all teary eyed because he sees a hetzer and a two other tanks (be it stugs or panzers). Why? That is a part of the game. I like to play with less infantry and support them very well. I have been doing pretty good with this as a tactic. I just do not see why it is such a big no no. I do not mean this an angry post, I just have to ask. Armornut I am all for trash talking, but theres no crying in war! [This message has been edited by armornut (edited 02-14-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 Armornut - I agree with you, it is a bit strange if complaints just come like this. Best thing to do when you play somebody you don't know is to establish the ground-rules. If your opponent does not state any, then he will have no reason to complain. If you decide to go for ground-rules, Fionn's 75/76 rule http://www.rugged-defense.nl are the best, I find. Sometimes people make up silly rules to benefit themselves (e.g. I play Allies, so no purchase of tanks more expensive than XXX points - to allow them to buy a good Allied tank yet deny you a, let's say, Panther). Establishing groundrules is a quick way of avoiding this kind of situation you describe. ------------------ Andreas Der Kessel Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission. [This message has been edited by Germanboy (edited 02-14-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armornut Posted February 15, 2001 Author Share Posted February 15, 2001 My thoughts exactly. If you want to play with those rules then say so, but if you say nothing then get into the game and cry you are making a crappy game for both of us! Armornut [This message has been edited by armornut (edited 02-14-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
armornut Posted February 15, 2001 Author Share Posted February 15, 2001 Just add to the fire, I have seen and heard of the big boys getting knocked out by smaller tanks and even flak A LOT. Armornut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photon Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 Last game I smoked a Jumbo76 that was trying to flank my JpzIV with a 50mm AT gun. My opponent was unamused. -Photon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedbump Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 Absolutely, several threads have already referred to this, but my most recent experience: I was excited to find in a scenario sent to me by an opponent, 2 JagdTigers. Figured I could not go wrong. But sure enough by the 3rd turn one had been knocked out and the other was immobile due to AT mines. The ground was wet and I was forced to stick to the road. Both were gone in turn 4 knocked out by a Sherman and a an M-36. Short range takes the advantage of heavy armor away. :-( Speedbump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasoncawley@ameritech.net Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 Why? Because it was not remotely a real consideration for historical commanders, since there were almost none of such types actually deployed over the whole course of the war and all of Europe. Should players specify beforehand what their preferences are in such matters? Sure. And should they seek players who think about the issue the same way they do, whatever way that is? Sure. And should people in any group of those, live and let live toward those with other opinions on it? Sure. But oil and water do not mix, and not everyone can be expected to know beforehand which you are. You want them to state beforehand what they consider reasonable, and that is fine. But I suggest you do likewise. As in, when you embark on a email game, don't wait until half way through it to explain your view on the subject. Anticipate the issue, and explain before any unit selections are made "I play CM with no holds barred, you can take any unit type you like in any quantity you have the points for" or some such. And do not be surprised if some people tell you to play someone else, not them. It just doesn't happen to be their cup of tea. Why might it make for poor games sometimes, as well as being far from history? Because it can create an "escalation dominance" effect, that radically restricts the unit types and force mixes practically available, to any player who wants to remain competitive - or that is what those who think so, fear, at any rate. If everyone takes veterans then there might as well not be any unit quality levels. If everyone takes Pershings and King Tigers then there might as well not be other tank types. If everyone takes an armor heavy force then the light mortars and medium machineguns might as well go home, for all the effect they will have on the outcome. Once, perhaps. Twice, maybe. But it would get old really fast, for some of us. You are right to ask to be told such things ahead of time, and there are certainly others that agree with you on the subject. Fine by me. Play them. But I will steer a wide berth, thank you very much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Five Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 There are those that want realism and those that want to enjoy the game in other ways. Hell I would love to take a Platoon of M1A1's against a company or two of King Tigers but BTS has yet to implement this To me "what if" offers the most re-playability and most enjoyment. My friends and I frequently sqaure off with forces that are historically insane. (A bunch of King Tigers vs a bunch of Pershings) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wwb_99 Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 There is one very simple solution to the ubertank question, without resorting to artifical rules (i.e. Panther/76): CPU picks. While I will be the first to admit sometimes one does get strange and even useless units, it does make for an interesting battle, wihtout cutting off access to some of the really, really cool units in the game. WWB ------------------ Before battle, my digital soldiers turn to me and say, Ave, Caesar! Morituri te salutamus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCP Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 I'm also a fan of the quick battle, with units purchased by the Computer. You end up with some pretty diverse units and have to make do with the best in a situation. I'm thinking in war commanders aren't always able to choose exactly what units they're engagin with, so it seems kinda real to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MantaRay Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 Ya, this using the Fionn 75 and 76 rule is just a cop out because you dont want to have to work for your win. Sadly most people think that if the dont get a total victory, the game isnt worth playing. And this is a ladder specific problem. I know that BTS hampered them enough with their price, and the allotment of points in anything but an armored battle. Now, I guess that if I had 12 KT's in a battle, it would be a little un-nerving, but 1 KT in a 2,000 battle is fine by me. I can either deal with it with smoke, zooks, planes, or lucky shots from my uber-tanks. The constant discussion about their purchase makes me wonder sometimes. I know this gives an unfair advantage to the German commander if you use this rule too. Reson being is that you know no tank has a decent chance of taking out a King Tiger or a Jagdtiger at any range over 500m. That is not play balance IMO. Wanna know a secret about my PBEM games to date? I HAVE NEVER BOUGHT A UBER-TANK. Know why? Because infantry rules the battlefield, and when you lose a big ticket item such as a uber-tank, your morale goes down substantially. Plus, I can buy more tanks such as StuG's and the like that do more good when I take out the uber-tanks, than 1 KT. Will I ever buy one or two? Hell yes, if I am feeling a little bold, or just feel like using them, I will have no qualms about getting someone pissed off because I decided to use what is at my disposal. That way i won't get into the habits that plague a lot of players...same tactics every game. I hope when CM2 is released, no one will bitch about KV's or JSIII's. They are on my list to buy. So in conclusion, if you dont like them....play scenarios that you know don't have them!!! And earth to the dissenters......QB's ARE NOT HISTORICAL IN THE FIRST PLACE. ------------------ When asked, "How many moves do you see ahead?", CAPABLANCA replied: "One move - the best one." Click now for shelter from the Peng thread The Red Army of the Rugged Defense Group Ladder The Red Army Mirror Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 Jason, I may have got hold of the wrong end of the stick here. I too am no fan of the heavy tank/artillery duels in the main but surely some KTs etc were deployed and, if representing a Waffen SS panzer unit, surely it would not be unrealistic to expect Panthers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berlichtingen Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 Originally posted by jasoncawley@ameritech.net: Why? Because it was not remotely a real consideration for historical commanders, since there were almost none of such types actually deployed over the whole course of the war and all of Europe. However, CM does not cover the war in that scope. While they may not be a consideration for the CO of 3rd Battalion, 716th Infantry Division, they very well could be for 1. Abt., 37. SS-PzGr. Rgt. (who in fact did opperate supported by Jagdtigers). The following is not directed at jasoncawley: If you can't handle the big stuff, work on your tactics rather than demand that they not be used. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berlichtingen Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 Originally posted by MantaRay: Wanna know a secret about my PBEM games to date? I HAVE NEVER BOUGHT A UBER-TANK. Know why? Because infantry rules the battlefield... Hehe, I've trashed quite a few uber-tanks with nothing mre than infantry. My personal best is 7 late model Churchills with not a tank or ATG in my force Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pascal DI FOLCO Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 Originally posted by Speedbump: Absolutely, several threads have already referred to this, but my most recent experience: I was excited to find in a scenario sent to me by an opponent, 2 JagdTigers. Figured I could not go wrong. But sure enough by the 3rd turn one had been knocked out and the other was immobile due to AT mines. The ground was wet and I was forced to stick to the road. Both were gone in turn 4 knocked out by a Sherman and a an M-36. Short range takes the advantage of heavy armor away. :-( Speedbump AAARGH ! This one is "A Breezeless Day" !! I'm playing it PBeM just these days, with the Gerries...I toasted puny US armor with JPzVI, but lost an half dozen HT and a StuG on those damn AT mines !! And this ù*$^ wet ground !! BOTH of my JPzVI bogged down !! This scenario is for a fight between Gerries and "The Ground" in fact ... So indeed stay clear of these monsters when sun doesn't shine, they sucks (mud) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olle Petersson Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 Originally posted by Pascal DI FOLCO: So indeed stay clear of these monsters when sun doesn't shine, ...Actually, I've found the best weather to be overcast. When the sun shine there are Allied aircraft that make life miserable for the heavies... Cheers Olle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKpfw 1 Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 Well personaly i agree if it's in the game it can be used. I have seen historical objections bantered around etc, yet I know of several German Kampfgruppe's who operated single & pairs of PzKpfw VI B's in 1945 etc was this common no, but it did become more common as the war dragged on. Best policy is, as it always has been, discuss force structure's pre game; that way their are no misunderstanding's later on. Regards, John Waters ------------------ "We've got the finest tanks in the world. We just love to see the German Royal Tiger come up on the field". Lt.Gen. George S. Patton, Jr. February 1945. [This message has been edited by PzKpfw 1 (edited 02-15-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terence Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 (tiny VOT spoiler ahead) Big, small, who cares. Its fun to try and nail the big tanks with small tanks. Just this morning, playing VOT for the first time, I drilled one of the Panthers through the turret with one of the funny little green tanks the Americans get. (Not the Stuart. The other one.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scipio Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 A simple wisdom: if you move into a battle, be prepared to see the worst possible enemy. If you want to avoid bad surprises, declare your 'extra-rules' BEFORE the battle starts, or keep mum forever. And IMO, tanks - both the large and the small ones - are much to overestimated. One shot can take them out. I've already seen a Panther blown away by a 60mm Mortar shell. ------------------ Keine Gefangenen! Visit my Combat Mission Sound Mods site! Scipiobase Join the Blitzkrieg Wargaming Club Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Tom Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 There is always a decision to be made when purchasing units. One is, "do I want to spend a lot of points on one single unit?" A KT is tough, but not invincible. It is slow, poor turret traversing, etc. resulting in your enemy having a darned good chance in outflanking it and knocking it out. I usually play the Allies, and I have never bought anything more powerful than a Sherman Firefly. I bought a Churchill once, but, didn't take kindly too it. Too slow, and didn't fit with my doctrine. More guns = more possible hits. As many other people say, they like it when their opponent buys an uber tank. It means their forces is more compact, easy to track down, and inflexible.\ Rarely have I ever heard of anyone supporting a KT with sufficient infantry, usually based on the pure fact that they cannot afford enough supporting Infantry! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Eyes Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 The name of the game is combined arms. If your units can't support one another you're in trouble from the start. Heavy and super heavy tanks are at a distinct disadvantage in this regard in CMBO; they bog/immobilize easily. You can try using them cross-country and hope, or you can stick to roads and limit their effectiveness. Very seldom do you find a nice overwatch position 1000m behind the main action for them to perch. Give me vehicles that can get down and dirty with the grunts, like the M8 GMC and the StuG42. They ain't pretty, but they carry a big infantry knocking stick. Also, I think too much ego gets invested in these GAMES and this limits the fun. Were real battles always balanced? I think not! Most of the time they were unbalanced. The trick is to learn how to cope and do the best you can when you find yourself on the short end. The advantage of CM is that it's only a game and you will live to fight another day and another battle. ------------------ It is easy to be brave from a safe distance. -Aesop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Heidman Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 Originally posted by Snake Eyes: Also, I think too much ego gets invested in these GAMES and this limits the fun. Were real battles always balanced? I think not! Most of the time they were unbalanced. The trick is to learn how to cope and do the best you can when you find yourself on the short end. The advantage of CM is that it's only a game and you will live to fight another day and another battle. This is the best point I have heard in a long, long time. What makes this game fun has very little to do with winning or losing. Way too many people get worried about the score, and forget about having fun. Who wants to win 90-10 if they are not having fun? I'll take an interesting scenario where I get beat over a boring scenario that I win any day of the week. Care for a game Snake Eyes? Jeff Heidman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedbump Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 Oh, good...then its okay that I lose all the time!! Speedbump Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Eyes Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 Originally posted by Jeff Heidman: Care for a game Snake Eyes? Jeff Heidman You're on! PBEM is best for me. eMail me a setup. I'll take any side, any type of action, any force mix, any...you get the point. ------------------ It is easy to be brave from a safe distance. -Aesop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snake Eyes Posted February 15, 2001 Share Posted February 15, 2001 Originally posted by Speedbump: Oh, good...then its okay that I lose all the time!! Speedbump I don't think that would happen, but if you're having fun, so what? ------------------ It is easy to be brave from a safe distance. -Aesop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts