D
Domfluff
Guest
I do think that pre-planned artillery if you are attacking or especially assaulting is fine - for the latter, that's why you get spotting contacts, after all, and it's a strong incentive to buy fortifications.
D
Darth Panzer
Guest
"
It was great pity, so it was,
That villanous saltpetre should be digg'd
Out of the bowels of the harmless earth,
Which many a good tall fellow had destroy'd
So cowardly; and but for these vile guns
He would himself have been a soldier. "
It was great pity, so it was,
That villanous saltpetre should be digg'd
Out of the bowels of the harmless earth,
Which many a good tall fellow had destroy'd
So cowardly; and but for these vile guns
He would himself have been a soldier. "
- Act I, scene 3, line 59.
Henry IV
"He which hath no stomach to this fight, let him depart." 
Fortifications ( trenches, foxholes) can be used as a 'false' position's as they are easily spotted and attract enemy fire.
I have found myself rushing quite a few times and getting corpses back in return, but I think this has more to do with some scenarios have severe time limits being in place rather than by a gung ho attitude choice. (My personal ARMA 3 career suggests otherwise).
Personal opinion, but I think it hit a critical point with the CMBN CW module where it seemed you were always against the clock for most scenarios even though there was no real narrative reason presented to you in the briefing why you had to rush. Told to clear out a dense 2km x 2km map and you have one hour... not fun. It's at that point you wish you could virtually slap your Brigade Commander within the the game.
Personal opinion, but I think it hit a critical point with the CMBN CW module where it seemed you were always against the clock for most scenarios even though there was no real narrative reason presented to you in the briefing why you had to rush. Told to clear out a dense 2km x 2km map and you have one hour... not fun. It's at that point you wish you could virtually slap your Brigade Commander within the the game.
R
robslion
Guest
I also prefer a lot of tactical consideration and hate unrealistic actions of my opponent, for example as easy to drive with a jeep in suspected enemy lines to find out the enemy positions. (Already happened to me)
I always think about my men and i hate losses ...so i try to be carefully
I always think about my men and i hate losses ...so i try to be carefully
D
Darth Panzer
Guest
I agree Robslion, I always screamed at the computer when I saw my opponent drive a jeep or truck on FAST towards a tree line or down a road, knowing full well that no one in their right mind would do this in reality. One of the biggest turn offs for me is see this type of game play where you are just throwing your men away for the sake of a win.
R
Richtig
Guest
I am pleased this conversation is happening. There is an old adage about people who know the cost of everything and the value of nothing, and there are many players like this. They can tell you the angle of a Panther G's armour on a Tuesday outside Briansk in 1944, but will happily drive infantry in trucks straight at a front line (insert your own favourite gamey tactic here). It isn't that you can't do it, it isn't even that it may sometimes get the result you want (despite BFs best efforts to stop players exerting too much control). The simple fact is some people are enjoying playing it 'properly' and learning even more and getting more reward from that playing style.
In my boardgame days there was a simulation called Korsun Pocket by Jack Radey. In his rules - at the back he had a paragraph for the gamers (rules lawyers we used to call them in boardgames, people who misinterpreted the intention of a rule to gain an advantage), and his paragraph read (I am paraphrasing) - when your opponent next leaves the room, take some of his counters off the map, I said its ok to do this, so you can - his point was if you need to win so badly - cheat - its ok - its just a shame you don't get what winning properly brings.
And even as I say that again I can counteract it by adding every one has paid his dime, we can play how we like. But it is frustrating to play people who don't play like you, and the game can never keep folk in line on its own. Players have the ultimate responsibility. And I guess at the end its up to us all to enjoy it, maybe like any good relationship tho, we should try and ensure our opponent is enjoying it too (as we tear his armies limb from limb).
In my boardgame days there was a simulation called Korsun Pocket by Jack Radey. In his rules - at the back he had a paragraph for the gamers (rules lawyers we used to call them in boardgames, people who misinterpreted the intention of a rule to gain an advantage), and his paragraph read (I am paraphrasing) - when your opponent next leaves the room, take some of his counters off the map, I said its ok to do this, so you can - his point was if you need to win so badly - cheat - its ok - its just a shame you don't get what winning properly brings.
And even as I say that again I can counteract it by adding every one has paid his dime, we can play how we like. But it is frustrating to play people who don't play like you, and the game can never keep folk in line on its own. Players have the ultimate responsibility. And I guess at the end its up to us all to enjoy it, maybe like any good relationship tho, we should try and ensure our opponent is enjoying it too (as we tear his armies limb from limb).
D
Darth Panzer
Guest
That is what I had mentioned at the beginning of my post is to have an actual section where like minded tactical players who want these types of matched can meet discuss and know that the person they are playing are like minded as them. Enjoying the tactical more realistic, ww2 theatre experience where taking your time does matter.