Use of mortars at night [and TRPs]

[General Tacticus]

Originally posted by athkatla:

Come on guys, don't get so serious, if it's in the game, it's in the game

LOL I can't help it - I'm just too uptight

I certainly didn't want to start a fight

I guess that is a problem (feature ?) of the QB vs Scenario's - anything goes...Or to be even more uptight and elitist - one's more of a game, the other a wargame (as opposed to a game about war..)

And, yeah, you're right - using artillery is gamey Direct fire only - at 10 paces - none of this cowardly tactics stuff !!

[Wicky]

What about having a fighter bomber appear in turn 1 or 2? Gamey or a fair represention of reality...

[ August 10, 2002, 06:36 PM: Message edited by: Wicky ]

[athkatla]

Originally posted by Wicky:

What about having a fighter bomber appear in turn 1 or 2? Gamey or a fair represention of reality...

If the game allows you to do it...........why not! I really don't understand this "gamey" concept, oh I know everyone is entitled to their opinion, but like I never seen anyone in say Championship Manager saying, "oh you can't play that £3,000,000 substitute, it's gamey, cos he's better than any of my players and he might win the game for you". I have never really come across this "gamey"concept anywhere else in any games I have played, and I've been playing a helluva long time. Anyway, that's my 2 cents worth, I don't care what tactics or equipment anyone uses against me, it's a game, I enjoy it, win or lose, and I lose mainly, end of story

[YankeeDog]

athkatla -

Some people like to play CM in a way that simulate what is historically likely. People who play this way generally frown upon ahistorical force compositions, and also tactics that wouldn't really work IRL but do in CM due to limitiations of the model and the nature of the game.

The "TRP arty barrage on round 1" issue that Gen. Splatton notes is just one example. as he mentions, IRL, a defender (or a commander advancing into a Meeting Engagement) usually wouldn't know exactly when an attack was going to come, so targeting an Arty barrage at a likely assembly point would usually be a waste of shells IRL.

(A little side note - in a way, this tactic was used IRL - likely transit/assembly points like crossroads were often zeroed in and one or two shells dropped on them every once in a while in the hopes of catching enemy units there. This is rather different than firing a whole barrage because you know due to the nature of the game that a large enemy force is coming in, though)

Most players agree to at least a few of the 'gamey' prohibitions. For example, I would guess most players prohibit Flakwagens due to the unarmored vehicle targeting bug that makes a moving flakwagen virtually invulnerable to a tank. Some of players go to the lengths of acutally enforcing completely historical TO&Es and so on, but most of us fall somewhere in the middle.

It seems that you fall more towards the 'anything goes' end of the spectrum. Bully for you. Have fun.

Cheers,

YD

[General Tacticus]

Originally posted by Wicky:

What about having a fighter bomber appear in turn 1 or 2? Gamey or a fair represention of reality...

Fair representation, in my book.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy a good "no holds barred brawl", too...just sometimes I want to play CM as a historical recreation....Ah, as I said earlier, I'm probably just too uptight

[Psyched]

I just don't get it. Then again, as my wife points out, I don't get a lot of things.

As I had mentioned in a previous post, CMBB will allow the ability to commence prep arty barrages at the beginning of Turn One immediately after setup. This represents pre-first turn communication and coordination between the spotter and the battery. This apparently occurs without even having direct LOS to the enemy. Would anyone care to explain to me how First-Turn Arty barrages are considered "gamey" in CMBO but is essentially a built-in feature of CMBB? (And I'm sure that someone will )

And as far as this whole "gamey" question goes, all sides have valid points because "gamey" is a general term that cannot encompass all the different meanings. For example, taking advantage of a software glitch or being grossly ahistorical can reasonably be considered not within the spirit of the game.

But what annoys me is when Player A starts screaming "gamey" just because Player B plays differently than he does. In many instances, it's as though Player A doesn't want to have to deal with different contingencies. He wants to be assured that Player B will act only in one or two predictable ways, and therefore is much easier to defeat. IRL, soldiers and their officers are often unpredictable and unconventional, and this can lead to victory. It's like the US military in Viet Nam politely asking the enemy not to do anything "gamey" (like attack the embassy or set bamboo booby traps) and stick to historical, conventional tactics please, or we just won't fight you anymore .

An example in CMBO are those who whine incessantly about flag-rushing being gamey (oh no, here we go again! :eek: ).

Player A in the above example would want certain assurances that once he captured a VL flag, Player B promises not to rush it at game end. This allows Player A to not have to prepare for that possibility, and therefore he is free to divert units to another VL where he can continue to beat the tar out of Player B. IRL, would Player A leave such a vitally strategic location (a VL) so thinly defended? He would only if the enemy "promised" to attack it only in a predictable manner! As repeated many times, the game-end randomizer feature (available now and in CMBB) generally eliminates this debate.

My whole point is that there are different kinds of "gameyness". The ones that are essentially designed to intimidate everyone into playing only a certain way are rubbish and I refuse to bow down to them. I guess it's up to each individual player to decide if a cry of "GAMEY" falls into this category or not.

[Cpl Carrot]

The difference being I believe, is that in CMBB the attacker is doing the pre planned bombardment and in CMBO the defender is.

My observations are that the defender has lots more options to hide than the attacker has.

My 2 cents

[Nidan1]

Hasn't it been said that most CMBO battles, even MEs are imminent affairs. Ive read threads about scouting and recon being a waste of time because time to contact is measured in minutes.

We have to assume then that some artillery prep has been planned for, especially on the allied side, where historically artillery shells were abundant. In CMBB I think arty will be more devastating and available, considering then Russians lavish use of it later in the war. "Gameyness" is the nature of the simulation, there will always be situations that are not completely "historically realistic". As individual players we have our preferences, and the choice to decide what is gamey or not.

MY TWO PFENNIGS

[Louie the Toad]

Let's add this to the mix. I started a meeting engagement pbem just before this thread was created. The AI gave us both random everything except we knew the forces would be primarily infantry.

Lucky me -- I get two mortar spotters with 200 rounds each. I also get 3 on map mortars. Even luckier me -- when I look at the randomly generated map:

1. I have the high ground with some nice areas for the 2 spotters to see a great amount of the map. And of course they can estimate to the places they cannot see.

2. And here's the best part. The enemy has only about five areas where he can hide, and I cannot see him on set up. One is behind a steep hill with a road running over the hill and then on to a village with a large VL flag. Another is tall pines, not too far from the road and hill and at an angle that would help support his attack on the VL.

Since this was an AI generated battle, I had no TRPs. I decided to target both of the areas described above as soon as I could. I had not seen any evidence of the enemy.

What would you say about this?

Lucky, lucky Toad

[Nidan1]

I would say that you were doing the smart thing.

If you can disrupt your opponent's likely areas of assembly with a few well placed mortar rounds, you are able to disrupt his plans early on and put him at a disadvantage.

The entire game setup gives you that opportunity.

[Holien]

"You Jammy Bstrd" Is what I would say.

I would then put you on my list to play again and hope that I would have the same luck as you so I could do the same to you!!!

H

[Lt. Rags]

I understand some of the "gamey" concerns, but really... It "is" just a game. Maybe I put a trip-wire with pots and pans out in the woods. Hear the pans... call in the boomers. I don't know. The only real gamey thing I've got is deep recon w/jeep.

But... If you don't gather at known rally points on turn one, you don't get surprised... If you keep sniper and half-squads out on your flanks, they kill the jeeps and give no real info or may lead your opponent to the wrong conclusions.

Aren't you going to be able to drop arty on turn one in CMBB?

I love misinformation. Inflatable tanks and dummy pillboxes should be included!

[Olle Petersson]

Originally posted by YankeeDog:

The "TRP arty barrage on round 1" issue ..., IRL, a defender ... usually wouldn't know exactly when an attack was going to come, so targeting an Arty barrage at a likely assembly point would usually be a waste of shells IRL.

Correct. But SOP included the use of a sustained barrage to "block" a route or two.

A typical British defence would include a "Stonk" firing a sustained barrage throughout the battle.

This is impossible in QBs.

Cheers

Olle