Pale Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 Hello, I've come across an interesting situation in a pbem and I'd like to know how other more experinced players on this forum view this particular action. It is a demo pbem in the Valley of Trouble scenario, I am playing as the ami attacker and my opponant is the german defender, now I'm sure everyone on this forum is familiar with the layout of this map with the two large hills dominating each sides setup zone. Quite naturally I set up my artillery spotters on the large hill under cover of tall pines, the rest of the unit placement is irrelevant as you will soon find out. Now my opponant just used the default computer setup, how do I know this you ask? Simple, because he had fog of war off. After the setup was complete and I went to issue orders for my first turn I noticed that all his units were visible to me, so I sent an e-mail telling him he forgot fog of war was off or it was some kind of bug. He then replies with an apalogy saying he left it off to observe the computer and forgot leaving it off when he set the game up. So we start the same map over again this time only with full fog of war. Now to be a gentlemen I set my units up in the exact same manor as before, and I think it was a stupid thing to do. At the start of this new pbem immediatley motar fire starts landing near my spotters even though they are hidden in the pines. Needless to say I suffer casualties from this, now here is what I need to know. Was I being naive about placing my units in the same position as before? It is only logical to put the spotters there and they were hidden from enemy los and to me at least it seems as though he's taking advantage of the previous setup in wich fog of war was disabled. I know a prepitory bombardment is sometimes acceptable but in most occasions I wait for visual contact with the enemy before I start dropping shells and I'm sure most others do too. So do you think his little trick was unacceptable? I'm tempted to call the match off right now or I can play his game and paste every patch of forest and building with my surviving 150 spotter even though I can't see the enemy hidden within. But that's not very much fun though now is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 Now to be a gentlemen I set my units up in the exact same manor as before, and I think it was a stupid thing to do. I don't think anyone here would consider it gamey or unsportsmanlike if you had changed your setup the second time around. It is only logical to put the spotters there and they were hidden from enemy los and to me at least it seems as though he's taking advantage of the previous setup in which fog of war was disabled. IMO, there is no advantage the second time around because he can't be sure you would deploy the same way again, in other words FOW is established again with the new setup. He took a gamble and it paid off. It could have easily resulted with him wasting scarce mortar rounds on a bunch of pine trees. Also, keep in mind that, for all the advantages that hill offers to the Americans, it is a very obvious location to place a spotter. That was my first thought the moment I first saw the scenario. ------------------ "What do you know about surfing, major, you're from God damn New Jersey" [This message has been edited by Kingfish (edited 02-09-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
109 Gustav Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 A good magician never does the same trick twice. You should have put your spotters on the reverse slope of that hill, moving them up when they have something to target. If you had done that, they would have been safe, and you could have had a good laugh, watching him waste his 81mm mortars. It's a mistake to become too predictable, especially in maps like VoT where everyone knows the "right thing" to do. The instinctive thing to do is to put spotters on the hill, so they have good LOS. As you found out, your opponent also knew it was the "right thing to do," so he countered it by shelling an area where he knew you would have valuable units. ------------------ Well my skiff's a twenty dollar boat, And I hope to God she stays afloat. But if somehow my skiff goes down, I'll freeze to death before I drown. And pray my body will be found, Alaska salmon fishing, boys, Alaska salmon fishing. -Commercial fishing in Kodiak, Alaska Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrapGame Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 Pale, What you may be forgetting is that if you think it is a great place for an observer, chances are your human opponent will think so too, and consequently will rain steel upon it. One of the biggest differences between playing a human versus playing the AI is that a human will shell any spot they think appears to be a good hiding place, or ambush spot, etc., while I have not seen the AI shell an area that they aren't sure contains the enemy. Good luck, CMBO only gets better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 I concur with Crapgame (nice nick btw). It is not unusual for me to target suspected areas not knowing for sure that the target is actually there. Given a map with a single high elevation on it, I would take the chance and lob a few rounds of HE on it just as an insurance policy. I don't see where your opponent did anything wrong nor do I believe it would be ungentlemanly for you to change your setup after the first round. Quite the contrary, that is what I would have done. But in any event, since the full FOG was on the second time around, your opponent might have been wasting his ammo had you changed things, and there was no way for him to know that. As the Washington Redskins found out this season, gentlemen seldom win the Superbowl. ------------------ "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) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pale Posted February 9, 2001 Author Share Posted February 9, 2001 Yes perhaps it is silly but I also know the position of his mortars and his 150mm infantry gun! I can mortar those to death if I so desire but I was trying to show some restraint in consideration of the before mentioned FOW woes. I hope you can see that it's not so much an issue about the speculation of enemy positions as it is the abuse of dubiously acquired information. Oh well, maybe I'm just to formal with it all. IMHO valley of trouble is a small map with little room to vary your tactics, maybe you're just spoiled from the large maps that come with the full game. [This message has been edited by Pale (edited 02-09-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted February 9, 2001 Share Posted February 9, 2001 Maybe. I never mess with game demos. You just orta get yerseff the whole enchilada. Yeah I understand what your saying, but what I'm saying is that no, I don't necessarily see things the same. No such code of presumed honor in my book. If you as my opponent made a mistake and botched the original game setup thereby unzipping your fly, I'm personally not about to cut you any slack and not zero in on what I figure is your positions. Though, I'll qualify that statement and say that I would likely presume that you would have changed them around. But on a small map, dunno? I still don't see that it is ungentlemanly. Particularly if as you say, it is a small map with only one large spotting hill. I'd probably shell it from the getgo whether or not there was an initial mistake. That's what ya get for messing around with the demo. Get the game. It's worth every cent. ------------------ "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) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts