Patience -it's all in the Game

[consume]

I am on your side, and try to play opponents who are like minded; however I do not reproach those who enjoy PzC more as a game and do feel restrained not to do something "ahistoric;" I simply like to avoid playing them.

That's the attitude I was looking for when I joined up. I hope it is representative of the whole. "The game allows it to happen, so it must be realistic" is an argument I would expect to hear from Magic: The Gathering players, not people like us. I played online games briefly many years back and was so soured by the 'trample the history/backstory, just do whatever implausible thing it takes to win' approach that I didn't attempt it again until now. [ie, Steel Panthers quick battles where I purchased a historical infantry bn and a platoon of 37mm PaK and my opponent bought nothing but artillery, engineers, and Matilda heavy tanks that I could not hurt. He called himself a 'better player' for this antic, for 'identifying the best units in the army list'. Yeah, about that.] Anyway, my gaming schedule just cleared right up so I'm up for another if you're willing to give it a go. Have kinda got tired of defending against overwhelming odds so I wouldn't mind being the attacker for once, if that's cool. Still new, so a shorter one might be better.

J

[Aetius]

I thought a simple, subtle rebuke was appropriate but now I think more is needed as everybody can see who is involved here and I am being accused of something which I resent.

Please consider the following, unedited, successive email exchange (Consome starts):

1)
You were right, there is crisis and desperation for everyone in this game. I *might* be able to salvage something from this, after last turn I was about ready to give up [dealing with some serious personal issues in life and extra stress and depression really isn't what I need right now], but for now let's see how things go. If XXX Corps didn't fix at night I would be sooooo messed up right now.

J

2)
I really understand what you mean about extra stress from these games. I sure don't like getting out from work only to see a depressing replay.
But I think things are going your way more than I would like to admit to, so don't worry.

3)
I might be able to pull out 6. FJR and KG Walther, exept there is a problem...the map is too narrow and I can't really move. There is a bridge just off the east side of the map that my guys could easily use, but it is in the impassable area...I think that was put there to confine XXX Corps to it's historical axis of advance, but it wouldn't really stop me from using it. Would you perhaps let me over the bridge at Helmond if I agree not to use any of the KG Walther units until say the morning of the next day? Of course you don't have to if you don't want, but it seems gamey to force my guys to stand still and be wiped out because they cannot cross an invisible line on the ground. If that's no good, is it possible to remove units from the map edge to avoid losing points for their destruction?

Woo, situation in Arnhem is getting pretty hot. Just barely managed to avoid getting part of KG Tettau pinning against the river and was able to turn the tables on the attackers, but wow, was that ever close. Now it is just a matter of chip away until I can find or create a weak spot and try to get in to your supply drop area.

J

4)
Hi Jamie,

I have unblocked the road to Helmond, and it will remain like that for two more turns. After that I will block it again. As for 6FJ, you can try to get them north to the vicinity of Best where, with the help of an engineer unit, you may cross the river to the north. I'll refrain from attacking north of the river, but will pursue you relentlessly from the south.
The game offers a possibility to remove units from the map at the map edge. Nevertheless, in Market garden the map edge is not really the map edge as there are impassable hexes to get there. So there is nothing you can do unless you want to fight your way to the southern edge...
Managed to even things a bit around Wageningen...

Regards,

Rui

5)
OK, what just happened there? At Renkum? Why did my units take losses as though isolated? I thought if you had a unit adjacent they would retreat into the friendly hex...is there something I don't know about?

J

6)
They took losses like that because there was not enough room for your units in the stack they were supposed to retreat to. In my second assault your units were already weakened enough so that they could retreat there without violating the stack limit, so they did.
Tricks of the trade ;)

Rui

7)
Do you really think units would surrender like that because of a *stacking limit*? As if they wouldn't just squeeze through the defending troops, running over their foxholes if they had to? This is not a phalanx where guys stand shoulder-to-shoulder and there is absolutely no room to push through. Stacking limit just reflects normal tactical spacing and especially traffic jams on roads. I still have the save file from last turn, if you agree to replay it without using such a gamey exploit I will pull back in to the woods and let your isolated units go.

J

8)
Hi Jamie,

Well, that thought really had never crossed my mind. I do think it makes sense, as every organization needs a certain room to operate effectively. Can you visualize the situation of your nearly 3000 men encumbering each other, all organization lost and as such being easily subject to capture? Some got away to their partner's position and some don't. Not that hard to believe, I think. This kind of rule is also found on most wargames I know, and in many the penalty is even heavier, like total destruction.

I also think that restraining ones actions for gamey this and gamey that tends to kill the fun in the game in the long run. Eventually an argument will arise because of what one player thinks it is gamey and the other doesn't. Trust me, I've been there. That's why when I play I throw everything at my opponent, including the kitchen sink if I can. He can always throw it back at me.

You may be thinking that the game is going badly for you, but I really don't think that. There were three occasions of strategical importance in this game so far and you won two of them: I couldn't reach the Arnhem bridge and block your flow of reinforcements south; I was repulsed in my early drive to Nijmegen bridge and now will face an almost impossible task to drive you out of your positions; and I managed to destroy most of KG Walther. Everything else is in the balance, though the fate of 1st Airborne looks bleak indeed due to the delays that come ahead. I am actually more delayed than the XXX corps historically was: it was able to reach Nijmegen on the 19th; I don't think I'll be able to do that.

Regards,

Rui

9)
There are a MILLION square meters in a square kilometer. If you think that isn't enough space for 3000 men [actually it was closer to half that], I don't really know what to say to you. Of course proper intervals are a tactical necessity, but do you seriously think that in an emergency soldiers would rather surrender en masse than bunch up a little bit to avoid encirclement? That is insanity. Every game has limitations, this one fewer than most, but it is a sportsmanlike and gentlemanly thing to do not to exploit them in pursuit of victory at any cost. Anyway, I thought a wargaming group would have a better attitude than Starcraft d00dz but I see I was mistaken. Gotta earn more points to get promoted, right? Go ahead and report your "victory" on the ladders if you like, I have no further interest in playing with you.

J
And now the situation that triggered it all:


This is all ridiculous. Particularly after having suggested rules that went against me and were meant to balance the game – for example dropping the quality fatigue modifier in this Alt game, having a home rule of going for the bridges only with the 101st Airborne, refraining to attack the 59th Infantry exposed position, etc.
But even if I agreed to his complain, how could one implement it? How do I know that he didn’t have companies there but battalions? What about when visibility is reduced or it is night and you launch an assault against an enemy hex only to discover later that the enemy troops could not retreat because the hexes behind them were full? It is just not practicable.

Gamey… my definition of a gamey move for the upcoming, and needed, FAQ would be: a successful tactic my opponent uses against me and which I don’t like. Anyway, I don't even mix units of different regiments in a given sector - so much for ahistorical play.

What I can understand from the email exchange was that he thought he was being beaten, started blaming the system instead of his own strategy, and finally found a way out of his mess accusing me of being gamey and a ladder-climber. And I resent both accusations.

I have been abandoned by players more often than what I would like to tell and have not reported all those games, and even when I do I usually refer to the probable end result, often a draw (ex: Grazziani’s Offensive, one of the Bulge games in my record, etc), but not usually a major victory. I would be in the first page of the ladder if I had reported all those games as major victories in the past four years.

Besides, everyone, even an established player, burns up from time to time. I have a Normandy game with an established player that after 3 years is still in turn 77. It stopped on several occasions, once for over six months, but I had no problem at all in continuing after such a long stop. I had not reported it, and had to give him credit as he always was a good friend. I have no regrets as it is going smoothly now. Hell, I have burned up myself once, to my everlasting shame.


So, to try to come back to the subject of the thread, players, particularly new ones, should really be patient about the way these games turn. It takes a very long time to master the system. I, for example, had nothing but defeats in the first six months here. But eventually, if you learn to recognize your mistakes, you will reach a point where you will win more often than you lose.

Don’t be afraid to tell your opponent that you need some time out, or that you feel frustrated. Several veterans I know will understand and try to help you - for example by conducting tutorial games where the most important moves are explained or mistakes pointed. I have done that several times (Bill Cations, Matt Allen and Max Romag come to mind) and am doing it now.

And above all keep an open mind.

{edited for inappropriate language}

[Krak]

It seems to me Aetius you have done nothing wrong at all. I can't see any evidence of 'gamey' play, even anything approaching it. If fact you have been accommodating in my opinion.

[alaric99x]

Gotta earn more points to get promoted, right? Go ahead and report your "victory" on the ladders if you like, I have no further interest in playing with you.

What a whiner he sounds like.

"No further interest in playing with you?" - Don't do me too many favors, I wouldn't know how to repay you.

[FLG]

OK gents, let's try and keep it professional, lets not to get personal.

The truth is Aetius' opponent was new to the game and doesn't have a proper grasp on the mechanics of the game yet.

Aetius has done nothing wrong. There has never been any suggestion that having a unit failing to retreat owing to over stacking is gamey. Overstacking and retreat is a problem we all come across on our learning curve. In the end you will identify such situations and ensure that you leave a suitable path for your units to retreat in good order

Try to learn from this lesson. I can assure you, there are others to learn on the way. I have been playing 3 or 4 years an I am still picking up tips and good game play

[Aetius]

OK gents, let's try and keep it professional, lets not to get personal.

The truth is Aetius' opponent was new to the game and doesn't have a proper grasp on the mechanics of the game yet.

Couldn't agree more. That is why I tried to emphasize the message of this post once and will do it again: You need patience to learn this game, nothing more, nothing less.

There is a reason this thread keeps popping up from time to time; maybe because the advice is so relevant.

[Turner]

It is very easy for a situation like this to get out of hand when it's aired on the forums, doesn't matter which game. This community however is probably among the most mature you'll ever come across for computer games. I'm glad to see nobody is jumping a fight or shooting off heavy language which would pretty much be the norm in other communities.

I agree with what all of you have posted, and there's no need to get upset about it either. Nobody can force opinion or attitude upon another, least of all through a BBS. Let him do as he please. If he wants to leave, that's fine.

[Al]

I can sympathize. I'm nearing 100 PBEM games & there's things I'm still learning, especially in the MC series. One thing I do know is that time honored military maxims apply to the PzC/MC games, which is why they are so good. Referring to the other thread where the same person discussed here complains about the overstacking penalty. One skill that needs to be learned is massing troops at the right time for the attack. Bunch them up too much, too early & one runs the risk of suffering that penalty. It's a hard thing to do in real life and, rightly so, a difficult task to accomplish in PzC.

Also, another good tip is that while on defense, don't have a river at your back!

[Dog Soldier]

It is very easy for a situation like this to get out of hand when it's aired on the forums, doesn't matter which game. This community however is probably among the most mature you'll ever come across for computer games. I'm glad to see nobody is jumping a fight or shooting off heavy language which would pretty much be the norm in other communities.

You are correct. This is just not any community.

Dog Soldier

[consume]

There are no problems understanding the game mechanics. I am just expressing one instance of them that I disagree with. My reasons for doing so are expressed in another post, without foul language, slander, or crying. I simply brought it up because I thought it was a low percentage situation the designers may simply have overlooked. I hope that this heated situation does not prevent people from at least considering the issue in hopes of further perfecting a great game system.

However, it seems clear that the majority of people disagree with me. I accept that. It is hardly an excuse, but the fact that I am undergoing some intense personal stress in my life right now might go some way towards at least explaining my recent actions. I had hoped that a community of like-minded history buffs would be a good place for me to relax and burn off some negative emotions, but in fact it has had the opposite result. Now that I have thoroughly and probably irrevocably destroyed my own credibility, all I can do is apologize for wasting everyone's time.

I won't trouble you again.