Ive won so many games Im getting bored

[The_Capt]

Now Now, it is obvious that Kiwi has been playing in the little leagues prior to bumping into the majors. Perhaps the pool of players in New Zealand is small and limited in tactical prowess.

I think Kiwi has taught us all a good lesson. "If you are winning all the time, you aren't looking hard enough." He is definitly eating it now, having made almost as many losses in about a week as he had in the previous year.

To his credit he is taking it rather well, although the "whoops I forgot about the 150 spotter" is borderline but he lost that one anyway.

So let's all welcome Kiwi into the greater community where all can be pounded upon and be made to feel like totally useless field commanders.

[Soddball]

I agree with the Captain. I have played very few games against human players and nobody has published a list of 'gamey' tactics/techniques.

From time to time (against AI) I mix nationalities - if the guy didn't know it was classed as 'gamey' (by people who are, I might add, choosing to place arbitrary, rigid rules on a system designed to be flexible) then leave him alone. I think he has taken all the ribbing in very good spirit (I know I wouldn't) and even if his first comment was a bit daft, he's opened up many new avenues of gaming.

So welcome KiwiJoe - I hope that I can play you sometime.

[Schugger]

Reichmann, I don't know if gamey is the correct term for using a "nationality mix" and if both opponents have not agreed to restrict their force choice you could hardly criticise him for doing so.

[jshandorf]

What I find interesting is how did Catnip know that the Spotter was a 150mm? As per usual after the end of a game when you choose the "Map" button to view the entire battlefield arty spotters show up as "Artillery Spotter" for a description. In now way can you determine the size from that. That is.. unless Rocket Spotters show up differently and Catnip was just geussing at the size.

Anyway...

Looking at the pictures Catnip sent I am baffled at the tactics the Germans were using. Drving around in open flat fields with no infantry support. ATG guns sitting out in the open. WTF??

Hey, Catnip, anytime you would like a challenging game send me a setup. I don't play with "Rules" but I also don't pull "gamey" manuevers. I DO buy relatively historical units and combinations, but that could be mean alot of things depending on my force selection.

Tah!

Jeff

[Abbott]

When viewing the final map (AAR) push the enter/return on your keyboard. Artillery spotters info. is listed.

[jshandorf]

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

When viewing the final map (AAR) push the enter/return on your keyboard. Artillery spotters info. is listed.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

DOH! You know.. I never thought of that. I use it all the time during the game but not after.

Heeeeey, ABBOTT!

Jeff

[sable-]

I must say I'm mystified by the map and the unit selections. So the German infantry dragged 9! towed guns with no assistance across this hilly tree-less plain in broad daylight, December of 1944(overwhelming allied air superiority) to fight a meeting engagement over a village? Sorry but that's laughable. I grow more fond of random time, weather, and computer picked forces every day.

Sable

[Flipper]

The problem with playing human player's is that everyone want's to buy there force's I prefer random myself.

[Agua]

I was struck by the treeless map as well, but on closer inspection, you can see shaded areas which represent woods or scattered trees, or at least that's my take on it. I believe that for purposes of providing the screen shot, Catnip just hit Shift/T a few times to provide a picture without the trees.

[sable-]

Ahh ... makes a little more sense ... not quite the original "Kansas with hills" that I was seeing.

Sable

[von Lucke]

I believe they agreed to a mixed-force for the Allied player before starting the game.

What I find laughable is the typical "buy as many field pieces as possible" tactic used by Catnip to pound KiwiJoe into submission. You call KiwiJoe a newbie for getting spanked by this technician? I say the on-board big-gun tactic is the mark of the true light-weight.

[Terence]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by von Lucke:

I believe they agreed to a mixed-force for the Allied player before starting the game.

What I find laughable is the typical "buy as many field pieces as possible" tactic used by Catnip to pound KiwiJoe into submission. You call KiwiJoe a newbie for getting spanked by this technician? I say the on-board big-gun tactic is the mark of the true light-weight.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OK, I was wondering about that. Its something I would never do in an ME, but I haven't played that much.

Personally, I wish I could watch some of the movies, clearly it worked in this case but I cant envision it ...

Anyone (Catnip? kiwijoe?) why did this turn out to be such a good and effective plan?

[Incoming]

HEY JAZZA, RETURN OUR FILE SOMETIME THIS WEEK.

[catnip]

Ok, Let me clear a few things up.

First, here are the units I chose for the second game.

5x reg rifle 45 squads

2x reg 81mm spotter American

1x reg 6pdr AT gun (it came with 4t)

3x reg on board 81mm American mortars

1x reg M7 priest

3x reg Cromwell (the one with the 95mm gun)

3x reg M20 scout cars

Only one field gun this time.

I would like to add that in both games Kiwi Joe surrendered because of heavy losses to his support units(tanks, arty, etc). In fact, I don't think Kiwi joe lost one platoon between the two games.

For those of you that question the 6x75mm infantry guns I used in the first game, let me say that I didn't know infantry guns were used by system players or "technicians". My understanding was that SMG squads and king tiger tanks were. In the first game I volunteered to not buy SMG troops so that I could avoid being "gamey". Also, they were not on the restricted unit list for that game. Maybe we need a list to define what a "system" or "technician" player uses?

I let kiwi joe choose the map and settings(I didn't care what map or settings I played on as long as it looked fair on both sides). In both games he sent me the first file.

Jshandorf,

I outlined my objectives in my first posting regarding my tactics. The tanks were behind buildings or hills. The AT guns you see in the corners were on hide with an HQ unit(I moved the HQ unit on the left one so thats why it is not there) that had the stealth bonus.

Also, I won't be taking on any new players. While I met some very nice people on this board, I have also run into some very arrogant ones. These type of people have made me lose interest in the game.

I hope this clears up all the questions.

[Kallimakhos]

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

Also, I won't be taking on any new players. While I met some very nice people on this board, I have also run into some very arrogant ones. These type of people have made me lose interest in the game.

[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Catnip, do not be offended by those few wannabe Peng-posters. From what I understand, you are quite new to this game (finding about hunt/crest just month ago), and yet you beat KiwiJoe (who in anycase is from what I hear (from neutral observers) VERY skilfull) two times in a row fair and square, no question about that. That shows tremendous talent. So please stay with the game, stay with the board, show your magnanimity and send me a setup!

[**YK2**]

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

Catnip, do not be offended by those few wannabe Peng-posters. From what I understand, you are quite new to this game (finding about hunt/crest just month ago), and yet you beat KiwiJoe (who in anycase is from what I hear (from neutral observers) VERY skilfull) two times in a row fair and square, no question about that. That shows tremendous talent. So please stay with the game, stay with the board, show your magnanimity and send me a setup!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You can fool some of the people, some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time..........

BTW..... IPs are logged

:eek:

[Abbott]

Originally posted by Kallimakhos:

Catnip, do not be offended by those few wannabe Peng-posters. From what I understand, you are quite new to this game (finding about hunt/crest just month ago), and yet you beat KiwiJoe (who in anycase is from what I hear (from neutral observers) VERY skilfull) two times in a row fair and square, no question about that. That shows tremendous talent. So please stay with the game, stay with the board, show your magnanimity and send me a setup!

You can fool some of the people, some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time..........

BTW..... IPs are logged-David

BTW, these screenshots from the first game (and the unit choices in the AAT posted by Catnip earlier) are a great example of "the system" at work, for those that are still wondering what it is. The less cover on the map, the better guns are.

Hey Cat, I checked TH. You exist there but it says you have not played any games. Where'd you learned to play? Nice win BTW-Wreck

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

Somebody tossed Joe a ringer. This forum can be a tough room

[Pvt.Tom]

I feel the love in this thread

KiwiJoe seems like a very good sport, he started a fun thread that everone is enjoying, got his butt kicked and isn't running away, not responding, so everyone take it easy.

[Abbott]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pvt.Tom:

I feel the love in this thread

KiwiJoe seems like a very good sport, he started a fun thread that everone is enjoying, got his butt kicked and isn't running away, not responding, so everyone take it easy.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well said.

[KiwiJoe]

Those screen shots fairly much tell the story. There was 2 spots of trees and 3 buildings on my side of the map... nothing else. Facing 9 guns area targeting from the start was a nightmare. I secured the VLs with plently of infantry and didnt lose a man I think.. but lost all my support units. With 9 guns and 4 AFVs over-looking the VLs, and no AT support what so eva, it was over. I dont believe in dragging a game out in a situation like that.

The 2nd game Catnip played VERY well and deserved the win, with or without luck.

I dont mind losing when I learn something... and I did

Oh and i havent just played a bunch of newbies... Im sure several very good players good vouch for the wins Ive had agaisnt them

[Stalins Organ]

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

First, here are the units I chose for the second game.

5x reg rifle 45 squads

2x reg 81mm spotter American

1x reg 6pdr AT gun (it came with 4t)

3x reg on board 81mm American mortars

1x reg M7 priest

3x reg Cromwell (the one with the 95mm gun)

3x reg M20 scout cars

Only one field gun this time.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

An intereting mix, and, in the nicest possible way, seriously gamey IMO.

All those inf support/CS tanks for 5 squads of inf (or is that a typo and it should be platoons??)? And British tanks for American infantry??

2 81mm observers PLUS 3 on-table 81's....

So for about 2 platoons of infantry we've got a couple of squadrons worth of CS, adn a battalion's worth of mortars! Looks a little unbalanced to me, which is why I like using computer chosen forces - at least if it's unbalanced you can't accuse your opponent of playing gamey, eh Isk??!!

[Panzer Leader]

I'm sure she meant platoons - you can't buy squads, and I don't think it's gamey at all. What's the problem?

I guess "mixing forces" is a little on the edge of reason, but other than tha, seems okay by me.

What I hate is when you face an all frenh/british/polish force EXCEPT for a few 50 cals and Bazookas. Arrrgh..

[Stalins Organ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Panzer Leader:

I'm sure she meant platoons - you can't buy squads, and I don't think it's gamey at all. What's the problem?..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

IMO it's an unbalanced force, with far too much heavy equipment and artillery for the amount of infantry, since it does seem to be infantry based......but then that's pretty much par for gamers in my experience (myself included of course - one tries to be competitive after all!! )

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I guess "mixing forces" is a little on the edge of reason, but other than tha, seems okay by me.

What I hate is when you face an all frenh/british/polish force EXCEPT for a few 50 cals and Bazookas. Arrrgh..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well make up your mind - either mixing nationalities is OK, or it isn't - which is it to be?

[KiwiJoe]

We decided mixing forces was ok before purchasing units. It IS gamey if you mix brits and yanks WITHOUT discussing it with the german player 1st.

If Im playing allies and german player doesnt want me to mix then I ask them to choose from 1 service branch to make it fair.

[Panzer Leader]

Well, I guess since you are going to pin me down, I would have to say that generally yes, mixing forces is a little gamey, but I would give someone the benefit of the doubt if they only mixed tanks with infantry.

That is reasonable (still a little unrealistic, but not as bad as mixing troops or support or artillery) Especially saince so many branches/forces GET no armour.

However, I don't mind a gamey opponent (I don't consider myself gamey, though WINDOWPAENE might disagree ) because I think you can beat ANY opponent with the right strategy.

90 field guns is pretty gay though. Ask for hills and trees, that'll stop 'em cold.