Jump to content

Question on "gamey" game play


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

In the end I just decided to keep it open ... If it's allowed BY the game ... it's allowed IN the game. That way there could be no complaints about who used what tactics.

Go figure. In CMBO you had the gamey jeep recon bug which was fixed and the mighty flak wagon bug which lingered to the end. Along the way, BTS has raised the cost on using crews as scouts/cannon fodder, deprived trucks and kubelwagons of their sighting powers, rendered flak trucks vulnerable to HE, what's left? Ah, the human shield prisoner trick. Never tried it!

Seriously, any others? Systemic anomalies like Borg Spotting or ephemeral bugs (unhittable AT guns) don't count.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by moneymaxx:

I hope that I'm not the one against who you never want to play again. If I did something 'gamey' please, at least, tell me.

Yes you are!I had a perfect nice shiny tank,just waiting to kill your tank,but instead,you blowed mine up!Now how is that not gamey? tongue.gif:D

joke............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

There's just one thing that I find gamey, and it's destroying buildings to gain LOS.

I hardly think this is the way it happened in real life: "Hmm, this field gun is hard to maneuver, and our troops need heavy support just a couple of blocks ahead of us. So maybe we'll just demolish the buildings in front of us to get a clear view!".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by jiggles:

Any time you get to spend 30 minutes thinking about the things your little polygon men are going to do in the next 60 seconds of their lives is "gamey".

30 minutes????? I've got 26 ladder pbems going and average about 3 mins per file.Don't overdo the micromanagent or you'll just do your head in!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Bone_Vulture:

There's just one thing that I find gamey, and it's destroying buildings to gain LOS.

I hardly think this is the way it happened in real life: "Hmm, this field gun is hard to maneuver, and our troops need heavy support just a couple of blocks ahead of us. So maybe we'll just demolish the buildings in front of us to get a clear view!".

Erm--don't forget the resultant dust cloud will obscure LOS too for a good few turns before it decides to dissipate...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those wishing to fully understand "gameyness" need to make distinctions, where possible, between gamey, unrealistic, and un-historical practices. IMO these things are intertwined but I honestly don't think there are any tactics that give an advantage to one player over the other. But there are tactics that give an advantage to one nationality over the other and this is normal.

Just a couple things may seem "gamey" or otherwise detract from realistic play IMHO.

1. bringing towed guns (without transport) to a meeting engagement. (some may also argue that attackers should bring guns embarked to a battle)

2. using "unrestricted" division type in an effort to maximize points/firepower. An example of this is purchasing Guards/Airborne SMG/Infantry pioneer at the same time in companies or less).

3. using flamethrowers to burn buildings before enemy infantry can arrive and thus limit approaches to a defensive position. (this one is also iffy since now it seems in CMBB that infantry can_enter_burning_buildings) Not sure about it but BFC may have allowed this to prevent gamey tactics but in the end it seems unrealistic for infantry to fight from or pass through burning structures.

All this being said the following practices can be followed: Always use rarity. Always use EFOW. Always use units from a single division type. No more than 1 coy per battalion of SMG troops.

-Sarge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Sarge Saunders:

Just a couple things may seem "gamey" or otherwise detract from realistic play IMHO.

1. bringing towed guns (without transport) to a meeting engagement. (some may also argue that attackers should bring guns embarked to a battle)

-Sarge

That is the first time that I hear somebody calling this gamey, an opponent who chooses to buy guns without transport depends a lot on his luck to find initial setup positions. So he trades mobility for the possibility of an ambush position.

Since I use this tactic I would like to know how many transport units I should buy to not be considered gamey, e.g. one per gun or one for every two guns etc.. Are Stugs considered to be transport units? I think in CMBB they can tow guns but in CMBO they can't. On the subject of bringing guns embarked into battle, does this refer only to attackers?

I hope somebody can clarify this for me, because I don't want to be gamey at all :( (I normally buy some transport units, more or less 1 transport unit for 3 guns plus Stugs).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by nevermind:

questions, questions.

So,i ask you,all of you,any of you,answer any/all of these questions,please.

Okay, nevermind, here are my opinions about your original questions:

1. What rules do most people go by? I don't think there is any set of rules which will eliminate all the possible actions which may be considered gamey. The question of "rules" reminds me of the knife fight scene in "Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid". Paul Newman starts talking about setting rules, kicks Harvey in the groin, and clubs him. Watch out for people who want to set "rules", they may have something up their sleeve. :D

2. Is it the duty of the poster to state what his/her rules on gamey play is, or is it up to the challenge taker? I've not used the Opponent Finder forums, but it seems to me if you post you should specify what you consider gamey play, so the challenge taker knows ahead of time. Of course, you may end up with no challenge takers, too.

3. If at the end of a game, someone just leaves, is that a sign that they dont approve of your play? It may be that, or maybe they are just rude. Either way, it's no big loss if you don't play that person again, unless you enjoy humiliating yourself. If you do enjoy that, may I refer you to the Peng/MBT of the forum. tongue.gif

4. Is it customary to click "look at map" and say your "good games"? If you enjoyed the give and take with your opponent, I think that's a great idea. That's one of my favorite things about the PBEMs, getting to know some people I would never have met without CM. If you didn't enjoy it, I think it's still appropriate, even if you're a bit less than 100% sincere. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sarge Saunders,

I dont understand number 2.Are you trying to tell me that different division types never ever fought together in the same battle,ever?I have no knowledge of this,but i find it very hard to believe,especially for the germans toward the end of the war.

moneymaxx,

I dont see it as that big of a deal,but,it does make sense that they should have some sort of transport.Otherwise,you would be implying that the crew pushed/pulled it all the way to the ME.An example of reasons why its ok to bring towed guns to battles without transports is,once i bought HTs with the 37mm cannon on it,and the flamethrower HT thinking they could tow guns,turns out they cant.I have no idea why,but they cant,so people make mistakes and it can result in someone viewing it as gamey.

Can StuGs tow guns in BB?Which ones,or is it all of them?I never knew this but hope that it is true.

Dave H,

Man,where were you when i first did this post a few weeks ago?Thank you for answering my questions!Will it be okay if i just address all my questions to you in the future,as it seems you are the only one able to understand and answer them? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by moneymaxx:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sarge Saunders:

Just a couple things may seem "gamey" or otherwise detract from realistic play IMHO.

1. bringing towed guns (without transport) to a meeting engagement. (some may also argue that attackers should bring guns embarked to a battle)

-Sarge

That is the first time that I hear somebody calling this gamey, an opponent who chooses to buy guns without transport depends a lot on his luck to find initial setup positions. So he trades mobility for the possibility of an ambush position.

Since I use this tactic I would like to know how many transport units I should buy to not be considered gamey, e.g. one per gun or one for every two guns etc.. Are Stugs considered to be transport units? I think in CMBB they can tow guns but in CMBO they can't. On the subject of bringing guns embarked into battle, does this refer only to attackers?

I hope somebody can clarify this for me, because I don't want to be gamey at all :( (I normally buy some transport units, more or less 1 transport unit for 3 guns plus Stugs). </font>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by nevermind:

Sarge Saunders,

I dont understand number 2.Are you trying to tell me that different division types never ever fought together in the same battle,ever?I have no knowledge of this,but i find it very hard to believe,especially for the germans toward the end of the war.

Well, in a historical sense, almost anything could have happened in this regard. I guess I am thinking at the CM level, battalion(s) and below, this was not very common. My point is that people mixing force type are not really trying to play a "what if?" so much as a pick-and-choose. Sure German Fallschirmjaeger did fight along side panzers at times. But the "pick-and-choose" types will play this way always because Fallschirmjaeger sqauds are awesome! and you can't be without armor. My example was people mixing soviet airborne SMG (ultra-high firepower) with Guards infantry (more ammo) with infantry pioneer (cheap) instead of just playing all Guards or something.

disclaimer: I don't want to come of as a CM snob or anything. I have long-time opponents who I play an "anything goes" style with and it is fun. But I also have played opponents using the more or less "historical" OOB approach.

-Sarge

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Holien:

Play scenarios,

Why waste time on QB's when there are scenarios.

It defeats the whole gamey issue.

:D

Hear, hear.

I always specify 'scenarios only' when looking for opponents and have never had any trouble.

It has the added benefit of your being able to blame it on an unbalanced scenario if you lose. No need to go calling people names :cool: .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sarge Saunders,

Ahh,i see what you mean.The reason i asked was,i often play attack/defend engagements from 1000-2000 points,i am often the germans.What i tend to do on defense is buy a coy of vet rifle squads(for example),and then points permiting,i will either buy a platoon or two of regular recon squads,or i will buy a coy of green recon,in almost ever case i use the recons as my forward screen.Now you can do the math and see that if i buy arty,support elements,and some AFVs,i couldnt afford the "awesome" infantry that you mentioned.Also since i am using recon in a recon role,i would hope that this would not be viewed as gamey.I would also hope that using a coy of green or reg recon as a forward screen or forward elements,with vets holding the objectives would not be viewed as gamey,but instead smart.I know that is the way i would do it in real life.Gain info and weaken them with your green or reg recon,and then it would be very difficult for them to take the objectives from my vets.What do you think of this?

[ March 24, 2003, 04:42 PM: Message edited by: nevermind ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by nevermind:

I know that is the way i would do it in real life.Gain info and weaken them with your green or reg recon,and then it would be very difficult for them to take the objectives from my vets.What do you think of this?

Sounds reasonable and definately NOT gamey. :cool:

On a side note, I used to use my weaker troops (green or regular without good HQ bonuses) to screen and as cannon fodder. Then I'd always have my best unit (maybe vet or regular with +2 bravery/+2 combat) as a reserve to commit when things got dicey somewhere in my screen.

But with experience I found that leading (cautiously) with better troops meant things did not get as dicey (as often) with forward elements and I could commit a reserve against unforseen enemy movements instead of rushing to help out crappy troops that are not up to the fight.

Know what I mean?

-Sarge

[ March 24, 2003, 04:53 PM: Message edited by: Sarge Saunders ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Sarge Saunders:

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

I know that is the way i would do it in real life.Gain info and weaken them with your green or reg recon,and then it would be very difficult for them to take the objectives from my vets.What do you think of this?

Sounds reasonable and definately NOT gamey. :cool:

On a side note, I used to use my weaker troops (green or regular without good HQ bonuses) to screen and as cannon fodder. Then I'd always have my best unit (maybe vet or regular with +2 bravery/+2 combat) as a reserve to commit when things got dicey somewhere in my screen.

But with experience I found that leading (cautiously) with better troops meant things did not get as dicey (as often) with forward elements and I could commit a reserve against unforseen enemy movements instead of rushing to help out crappy troops that are not up to the fight.

Know what I mean?

-Sarge </font>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...