Jump to content

Is this "Gamey" ???


Recommended Posts

Recently, I played a series of heavy-forested battles against my friend. In which, I was the axis. I took as many as 7 platoons of Volksgrendadier SMG squads for obvious reasons in each battle. The question is, was this gamey of me??? I know that, at least on the Eastern Front, SMGs were distributed almost exclusively when available in large numbers by the Germans and Russians, especially in sieges/ urban fighting. What about the Western Front? I have tried, recently, to avoid "Gamey-ness" whenever possible, and get angry at those who employ it in an obvious manner to their advantage (although it feels great when I beat them :D ) Was this hipocritical of me? Let me know what you think. . .

Forgot to add that the battles I played took place in March 1945. . .

[ February 28, 2002, 10:13 AM: Message edited by: IronChef4 ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahh, you've stumbled upon one of the great debates of our time. Before the BBQ starts up and people start sending you lovely emails pointing out the previous 20 threads on the subject, I just wanted you to know that if you do decide for yourself that they're not gamey, and after all gameyness IS subjective, it's best to buy them by the Company which gives you one squad of regular rifles for every 2 squads of SMG.

It was nice knowing you. I'm glad we got a chance to play. I hope the other forum members don't roast your eSoul too long over the flames...

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by IronChef4:

Recently, I played a series of heavy-forested battles against my friend. In which, I was the axis. I took as many as 7 platoons of Volksgrendadier SMG squads for obvious reasons in each battle. The question is, was this gamey of me??? I know that, at least on the Eastern Front, SMGs were distributed almost exclusively when available in large numbers by the Germans and Russians, especially in sieges/ urban fighting. What about the Western Front? I have tried, recently, to avoid "Gamey-ness" whenever possible, and get angry at those who employ it in an obvious manner to their advantage (although it feels great when I beat them :D ) Was this hipocritical of me? Let me know what you think. . .

Forgot to add that the battles I played took place in March 1945. . .

Your question be "should I feel guilty because of my unit choice?" I say no. IMHO AFAIK FWIW Everything that can be purchased in this game can be matched with something else or by a tactic. For instance, your opponent can easily buy truckloads of arty to dispense with your infantry.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One important thing to do BEFORE you game with anyone is to discuss these things. Make it a habit. Does your opponent want a historical game or do they want a fantasy football type of game where everything is good to go if you have the points for it?

There are different rules at CM specialty websites that have things like rarity rules and "Fionn Kelly armor rules". Take a look at all of the links here:

http://www.combatmission.com/links/lnks.asp

Personally, I like the more historical games, but do delve once and a while in the other type.

So, remember to talk about these things with your opponent before you play. Whether it is over the phone or by email, you will be happier if you get things all laid out -beforehand. smile.gif In terms of email, go ahead and make a generic email and save it where you list all of the things that you want. That way you can cut and paste it each time you play and work out an agreement -beforehand. Your opponent may end up being impressed and grateful. The onus is on each player in my opinion to set things up for their greatest enjoyment.

As to what you wrote, I personally don't think it is gamey because it wasn't discussed beforehand. What do your opponents think you are? A mind reader?

smile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously, it's my own belief that the advantage gained by taking SMG squads is minimal except for low visibility scenarios (such as Thick Fog at night or entirely forested maps). Many people have simply lost to them and try to pin their loss on your purchases. Oh well. The behavior of SMGs will be changed slighly for CMBB, correcting some of the larger problems with them. Including making that "gamey" flag rush you tried versus me more painful for you. ;) But seriously, if we play again, feel free to choose any troops you want. You can even pick the dreaded Flak Wagons.

Pete

Originally posted by IronChef4:

Recently, I played a series of heavy-forested battles against my friend. In which, I was the axis. I took as many as 7 platoons of Volksgrendadier SMG squads for obvious reasons in each battle. The question is, was this gamey of me??? I know that, at least on the Eastern Front, SMGs were distributed almost exclusively when available in large numbers by the Germans and Russians, especially in sieges/ urban fighting. What about the Western Front? I have tried, recently, to avoid "Gamey-ness" whenever possible, and get angry at those who employ it in an obvious manner to their advantage (although it feels great when I beat them :D ) Was this hipocritical of me? Let me know what you think. . .

Forgot to add that the battles I played took place in March 1945. . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by newlife:

...if you do decide for yourself that they're not gamey...it's best to buy [sMG Platoons] by the Company which gives you one squad of regular rifles for every 2 squads of SMG.

Two other ideas to help this problem are:

1) Tell you opponent that you will buy "Volksgrenadier" type infantry only- voluntarily making them a "seperate" infantry branch, just like Heer, SS, Volkssturm, etc. are already organized.

2) buy "Security/Sicherung" infantry. They have 3 SMG's per squad, which is a good compromise between getting the higher close range firepower, and soothing your guilty soul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buy whatever you want to buy.

SMG squads existed, why not use them?

If you backed them by 17 King Tigers, sure that's ahistorical, but to say that you should use a different unit type is absurd. The units are in the game because they existed and fought on the Western Front. For anyone to suggest that they shouldn't be used because they are too effective is ludicrous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the key thing might be to clarify in advance whether historical accuracy matters in the game or not. Some people might get deeply offended if you deviate from the historical realities in the slightest. Others might want to push the games elements as hard as they can be pushed, experimentally trying things out that never could have happened historically.

Or you can do what I do which is focus on pre-made scenarios. In those, the choice of forces is out of your hands and you can both blame the designer if something seems weird. There are hundreds of great scenarios out there. Too many for any one person to play. A good designer will be clear about whether the force mix is historical or fanciful.

I think playing scenarios reduces by a factor of ten the potential for complaints about gamey-ness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Using 7 SMG squads sounds a bit gamey to me, and is IMHO not good force balance. 2 companies of VGs, OTOH are another matter, IMHO the VG batallion is one of the best infantry choices for medium to large battles, and suited for both defense and offense, those VG rifle platoons and HMGs are needed as long range support for the close-in SMG infantry.

apex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...