But is it ethical?

[ScottDT]

I was playing a 1000pt QB the other day in which I was the Soviet commander. The mission was a meeting engagement. After about 20 turns, our forces were somewhat stalemated along a road, with my forces controlling the southern side, while the Germans had the Northern. After trying everything I could to dislodge them from their side, I decided to send one of my lend-lease halftracks around the flank of the Germans and shoot them up from the rear, hoping to break their morale and force them to displace. Now I knew this was a long shot and a suicide mission to boot for the men involved. Yet I did it anyway. In a real world combat situation, would that be ethical? To send men to die for only a long shot success of questionable value? :confused:

BTW: They did flank the enemy, shot up a few troops and were then killed with a panzerfaust, achieving nothing as far as I could tell.

[Canuck]

Originally posted by scottdt:

would that be ethical?

No. You ought to courtmartial yourself immediately.

Maybe have yourself drawn and quartered.

[notalex]

Northern. After trying everything I could to dislodge them from their side, I decided to send one of my lend-lease halftracks around the flank of the Germans and shoot them up from the rear, hoping to break their morale and force them to displace. Now I knew this was a long shot and a suicide mission to boot for the men involved. Yet I did it anyway. In a real world combat situation, would that be ethical? To send men to die for only a long shot success of questionable value?

I hope you're not losing too much sleep over this. They are just pixels, after all.

It's Situational Ethics. Can you pull back and regroup (not really applicable in CMBB, unless playing a campaign or with something like the Biltong rules)? Must you punch through the enemy line at any cost (including your own possible execution if you fail)? Is it really a suicide mission or do you think you might have the drop on them?

If you further want to rationalize it, pretend that one of your sergeants saw a dim chance at outflanking the enemy and perished in the attempt.

Ordinary men do extraordinary things in wartime. The American pilots who divebombed the Japanese fleet at Midway knew they were going to their deaths as surely as any kamikaze, but they did it anyway, without a lot of sentimental blubbering about FDR or the flag.

The whole point about military training is (apart from smartly marching about) to learn that the survival of the team is what ultimately matters.

It's completely counter-intuitive to charge a machine-gun nest; but if the choice if a 5% chance of living through it or a 100% certainty of annihilation, and with it, your buddies, then the 5% looks almost attractive.

[Quintus]

Hmmm... Ethics....

Well, CMBB is Eastern front, so in the main it's two totalitarian regimes whaling the bejazus out of one another.

Find someone from the nearest penal unit and give them the job.

To paraphrase "Beyond the fringe" :

"Ivanov, we need a pointless and futile gesture at this stage in the war..."

'Da Tovaritch Commisar'

"Take a Half track..."

'Da'

"Drive it up that road..."

'Da'

"Take a look..."

'Da'

"Don't come back..."

'Spasibya!'

[Treeburst155]

Great post, Notalex.

Treeburst155 out.

[Wendigo]

I think that it is up to you. In the eastern front we saw many kinds of leaders. If it turns your stomach don't do it.

Me: "Sergeant, [snigger] take that halftrack and surprise the enemy from the rear. We need a diversion."

Sergeant: "Tavaritsch commander, you're not doing this to satisfy your bloodlust again, are you?"

Me: "[innocent face] Never! How dare you? Now go before I find something else for you to do.. we have that minefield on our left.."

Sergeant: " ..on my way..!"

Oh, BTW "drawn and quartered"? I understand the quartered part, but how are you drawn?

[Caesar]

This really just highlights a limitation in the CMBX games. You don't have to consider the long term consequences. As a result you throw everything into the current battle without consideration of the fact that you would in reality require that HT the next day.

Oh, BTW "drawn and quartered"? I understand the quartered part, but how are you drawn?

It comes from a medieval punishment Hung, drawn and quartered. The victim was hung until nearly dead (taking care not to break their neck) then drawn by horses through the village (without the benefit of a cart) and was then placed on a table and had their limbs hacked off (quartered). Finally their head was chopped off. Kind of makes you appreciate the 'cruel and unusual punishment' (or similar) clause doesn't it.

[MG-42]

LOL..you know you've been totally sucked into CM:BB when you start losing sleep over the ethical issues of sending your "pixel platoon" on a suicidal mission...my only hope is that you awarded them a postumous award!!

[Ant]

{quote]then drawn by horses through the village (without the benefit of a cart)

[Hortlund]

heh "is it ethical"

We are talking about war here, remember.

[mididoctors]

Originally posted by notalex:

The whole point about military training is (apart from smartly marching about) to learn that the survival of the team is what ultimately matters.

.[/QB]

No its the other way round isn't it? ...... the group marching is part of a well honed practice of stripping a recruit of his/hers individuality thus.. if we can get them to perform humiliating routines in sync like mindless circus seals we can get them to do anything (including going to their death)..why do modern armies still instill group mentatility with drill? .. however I do agree that the US divebomber crews at midway were brave men.

Boris

london

[Nidan1]

Originally posted by mididoctors:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by notalex:

The whole point about military training is (apart from smartly marching about) to learn that the survival of the team is what ultimately matters.

.

No its the other way round isn't it? ...... the group marching is part of a well honed practice of stripping a recruit of his/hers individuality thus.. if we can get them to perform humiliating routines in sync like mindless circus seals we can get them to do anything (including going to their death)..why do modern armies still instill group mentatility with drill? .. however I do agree that the US divebomber crews at midway were brave men.

Boris

london[/QB]</font>

[Lou2000]

Originally posted by Wendigo:

Oh, BTW "drawn and quartered"? I understand the quartered part, but how are you drawn?

Phrases and meanings !

Origin

In use at least until Tudor times in the UK. The victim is first hung by the neck but taken from the scaffold while still alive. The entrails and genitals are then removed and the torso hacked into four quarters.

At some point in the above process .... youd die ! :eek:

Lou2000

[Splinty]

Originally posted by mididoctors:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by notalex:

The whole point about military training is (apart from smartly marching about) to learn that the survival of the team is what ultimately matters.

.

No its the other way round isn't it? ...... the group marching is part of a well honed practice of stripping a recruit of his/hers individuality thus.. if we can get them to perform humiliating routines in sync like mindless circus seals we can get them to do anything (including going to their death)..why do modern armies still instill group mentatility with drill? .. however I do agree that the US divebomber crews at midway were brave men.

Boris

london[/QB]</font>

[Ubertracker]

Originally posted by Lou2000:

The victim is first hung by the neck but taken from the scaffold while still alive. The entrails and genitals are then removed and the torso hacked into four quarters.

Ah, lest we forget William Wallace. It's the only reason I bought MTW: to punish the Brits over and over for their treatment of the lad.

But as for the thread: you do what you need to win. You can't shoot prisoners, firebomb a city, or march people into death camps in CMBB - all you can do is direct your little virtual soldiers in a battle - so don't lose too much sleep over it.

[Cpt.Kloss]

Scottdt,

As russian commander if there is such need you are supposed to waste all your people. It is nothing wrong. If you want WWII russian approach think about them as you are thinking about ammo. What may worry your superior is lose of valuable equipement.

Worrying about this and not executing your orders will lead you to suicidal head shot - not to waste time of any martial court.

[murpes]

Originally posted by MG-42:

LOL..you know you've been totally sucked into CM:BB when you start losing sleep over the ethical issues of sending your "pixel platoon" on a suicidal mission...my only hope is that you awarded them a postumous award!!

I heard that the next engine will refuse to load another scenario until you type a letter home to each family.

[JasonC]

It is worse than unethical - it is gamey! (lol)

No, more seriously, it is usually a mistake. There are nearly suicidal things that it does make sense to order your guys to do, when there is a chance of success, a ton at stake, no other way etc. Like close assaulting a tank. That is heroic rather than simply suicidal.

But often, you are just throwing away a useful unit because you don't see how to use it better, or because you think you have to use everything. And that is dumb as well as wrong. Yes, a halftrack can seem "expendible", but are you better off with a dead one and two revealed enemies, or with a live one hosing the enemy with its MG from range? Almost always the second.

Keeping your units alive is a good idea. It is better in VP terms. It preserves options that may not be apparent immediately, but turn up only later. A ragged out platoon that withdraws and rallies can make a difference late in the day, when enemies are low on ammo and morale effects have passed, while a dead one from pressing home will only use up a bit of enemy ammo. Every bit of light armor becomes important after the big AFVs duke it out and only one side has any left.

If you are about to order something suicidal, ask yourself (1) can it succeed? (2) will it make a truly vital difference if it does? Unless the answer is yes on both, you can probably do the job another way, and you will probably have better uses for that unit later in the day. Make the enemy work to kill your guys, don't give it to him.

[Navare]

Originally posted by notalex:

Minor correction needed, it was the Torpedo Bomber crews who suffered the grevious losses at Midway. Though I am not diminishing the bravery of the Dive Bomber Pilots either.

Torpedo 3 (USS Yorktown) 9 out of 13 shotdown

Torpedo 6 (USS Enterprise) 10 out of 14 shotdown

Torpedo 8 (USS Hornet) 15 out of 15 shotdown (one survivor out of 30 men Ens. George Gay)

[Silvio Manuel]

scottdt,

IS that "HNTV's Saul Riley..." bit your sig? If so, I think you get the Blue Ribbon for longest sig ever...

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by scottdt:

[QB]In a real world combat situation, would that be ethical? To send men to die for only a long shot success of questionable value? :confused:

Depends on how important your mission is. A critical mission may require hard gambles

[mididoctors]

Originally posted by Splinty:

[i was active duty Army (U.S.) for 10 years, and if anything I'd say I'm far from stripped of my individuality. Basic training just taught me that there's a time to subordinate myself to the needs of my peers. I'd say off duty G.I.s (or Marines,Airmen, or Sailors, or Cops for that matter) are some of the most indivualistic people I've ever met.[/QB]

Sorry no offence intended....I stand corrected

"most individualistic" hmmmm not sure what that realy means?

Anyway yes an off duty service personal are entitled to not being ridiculed as an automoton

As for CMBB..... if you find your self sacraficing troops recklessly you are usually not playing well/losing..there are times to take risks

force conservation is a serious consideration in any battle.

Boris

london

[Firefly]

Originally posted by Ubertracker:

Ah, lest we forget William Wallace. It's the only reason I bought MTW: to punish the Brits over and over for their treatment of the lad.

You should have bought a dictionary instead so you could check up the words British, Scottish and English.

[Ace Pilot]

Originally posted by mididoctors:

...force conservation is a serious consideration in any battle.

Boris

london[/QB]

This brings up an interesting point, and perhaps the one scottdt was originally trying to make. And that is, do people play CMBB with a goal of trying to maximize the final score at any cost, or are there other overriding considerations? Let me pose a hypothetical that might better illustrate my point.

Which of the following two outcomes would you consider a greater victory:

A. Winning the scenario by a score of 75-25 while suffering 100 casualties, or;

B. Winning the same scenario by a score of 70-30 while suffering no casualties?

Opinions? Comments?

Ace

[mididoctors]

Originally posted by JasonC:

But often, you are just throwing away a useful unit because you don't see how to use it better, or because you think you have to use everything. And that is dumb as well as wrong. Yes, a halftrack can seem "expendible", but are you better off with a dead one and two revealed enemies, or with a live one hosing the enemy with its MG from range? Almost always the second.

If you are about to order something suicidal, ask yourself (1) can it succeed? (2) will it make a truly vital difference if it does? Unless the answer is yes on both, you can probably do the job another way, and you will probably have better uses for that unit later in the day. Make the enemy work to kill your guys, don't give it to him.

Amen to that ....... lazy tactical thinking (ie CMBB orders) is a fast track to defeat.....

Recon in force is often costly..spliting a single squad squad may be all thats needed... less is more..I would like to see single scouts modeled even if abstactly via a command such as [scout location] and a drag arrow like LOS order.... still more wishlist stuff I guess..as with assualt and advance this command would be limited to units of higher experience or in command ......some may claim advance models this activity (hmmmm)

movement prior to contact is often the cause of unwanted casulties when you find your force exposed to ambush/prepared TRP fire.

conversley there are tactical reasons for moving in large numbers to overwhelm such fire anf suppress destroy its source on exposure....... CMBB battles are in my experience a Tactical puzzle that needs solving... what works in one Battle is not the answer to all battles [assualt on the moon is a good example of this tactical puzzle design].... meeting engagement QB/fixed point style battles tend to vier towards a favoured tactic/style of play of the player who picks his fav force structure.... while this may be all fine and good and obviously enjoyable for those who favour thiis play style, it is not what I am looking for in the game..... I am sure the structure both of the CMBB community and the game itself can accomadate both ladder and realist style players....

the strength of ladder play is that it bears replay even if you are just regigging the same game somewhat..where as scenario(puzzle)play is somewhat jaded once you have the solution (spoilers?).

the new CM game engine should have a large number of play options available to accomadate a wide range of prefered playing styles including the removal of luck factors such as bogging or even degrees of implementation? (tall order?)

Boris

london