JasonC's writings

[Copper]

A picture conveys a thousand words.

[fluidwill]

Yep and a thousand pictures is whole lotta words

[Lord Bane]

I was not a big fan of the article by Jason C. I think it was very long winded and theoretical. I am a much more direct person and could have summed his whole article up in a couple of sentences too. I personally don't have time to sit and read such stuff. So I browsed it, decided it was junk, and then panned it. I have never considered trying to write out detailed explanations of tactics for CM. My tactics change from game to game depending on the type of battle, enemy forces, troops at my disposal, number of turns available and the terrain at hand. I don't think there is a "Magic Formula" in CM and the best laid plans quickly go out the window when reacting to the enemies moves. I do have a tendency to follow certain tried and true battle drills but I am not a slave to them. I personally think that the whole secret to success in CM is timing. The player who can best orchestrate his forces to work in unison is typically the winner.
Lord Bane (FGM)

[Der Kuenstler]

The player who can best orchestrate his forces to work in unison is typically the winner.

I can see that - the challenge is getting everything (heavy weapons, spotters, guns, etc) in places where they can get LOS to hit something at the right time, which is basically what you are saying I think.

I played McIvan once here - who is way better than me (and most others) at CM - and the big difference I saw between us was his ability to see through the fog of war - he knew almost exactly what I bought and where it would likely be. Me - I'm not that sophisticated yet - I just try to get there in good cover first, see some enemy units and if I have something to hurt them with, start shooting.

But I do like JasonC's writings - he has influenced my play more than any other writer and I win pretty often. I like to read so I don't mind the length.

[kineas]

Jason is a theorist. His essays aren't for everyone. There are Thinkers and Doers among the people and they will never really understand each other. The world needs them both.

Btw this was not a long post. Sometimes he writes so much you need to press the PgDown button for 5 minutes to scroll to the end.

[Rico (FGM)]

I find jason's articles interesting -- but the dry "accountant" style of playing CM is not for me.
Also, I seldom buy into the CM QB concept of making a trip to "Panzer-R-Us' and go shop for the ideal kit. WW2 commanders never had that luxury. "Sorry, Colonel -- we've only been issued PzIIIH's, so we'll refuse the order to go to battle and try and stop that horde of T-34's until they send us some PzIVf2's from the Reich." Most times you play withe cards you're dealt with. That's why I relish the challenge of random-pick battles... and hey, sometimes you lose -- but for me it's about playing the game, not my cherished ladder win-loss ratio.

Personally, I find AAR's much more interesting -- seeing how players solve tactical problems on the battlefield, rather than reading about a theoretical magic formula of how to win at CM.

What would be more helpful than "which are the best units too buy", would be "How to get the best out of each weapon... how best to use it." Some of Jason's articles cover that too.

Different strokes, I guess.