Gamey vs. Unorthodox

[Runsilentrundeep]

This is a round-robin opinion thread, let me start by telling why I am posting this.

I have been noticing the term "gamey" thrown around all the time. My definition of the term tends to be a bit different than what I have been seeing in these posts.

My definition of "gamey" is: To execute a plan within a game that would not be possible in the battle/war the game represents. -or- To exploit a bug or flaw in the system to get an advantage.

Sometimes I have seen "gamey" being used for for unorthodox. A good example is the Dirty Tricks thread that was started by Wild Willie. Each one of the tactics told does not seem gamey to me but rather unorthodox.

This in an opinion however, not even a pompous one. [8D]

So I am curious, what do you consider Gamey?

[Nikademus]

Gamey is a hard term to define, if for no other reason that different people all have different ideas on what constitutes it or, even if they agree on the definition, will differ on what specifics qualify as gamey.

For example, some people consider the mass formation of 1 ship TF's "gamey", but other players consider it a valid game-equivilent of "dispersal" or "convoy scatter"

[Bradley7735]

Gamey: Using the 1st turn rule to land or attack at a-historical places. Seaborne invasions at locations that are not bases (you don't take landing losses at non-bases). Night bomber attacks (I think they are still too good, but maybe 1.5 will fix that). Putting corsairs on CVE's.

[Oleg Mastruko]

Gamey: invading bases with transport submarines
Gamey: bombing from way over too high (say over 25000 feet)

Maybe Gayme (jury's still out): using PTs in non coastal hexes

Unorthodox: everything else [:D]

I'd love to see 4E bombing accuracy lowered (especially for night bombing) but it's more akin to feature request or bug report than "gamey complaint".

O.

[Dumgrunt]

What about Makin Island? - Sub Trans.

I'm not sure about this one, but weren't early B29 raids in the upper 20000s?

[Bradley7735]

What about Makin Island? - Sub Trans.

That's kind of a one-off thing. They landed, trashed the place, and left. They didn't occupy the base and require that Japan come back and take it. It's kind of like the Doolittle raid. It's not something that this game can deal with.

And, I think it was Tarawa, not Makin. (I could be wrong)

[ChezDaJez]

Assigning transports to single ship TFs simply to reduce the number of them that can be attacked by air. They also serve to eat ops points on bombardments missions causing the bombardments TFs to abort if too many their. Costly tactics, but effective.

Takes advantage of poorly designed targeting routines that limit air groups from targeting multiple TFs. Targets should be based upon value not TF assignment.

Same with bombardment. A bombardment TF must fight every TF in a port. Operations points are lost each time a TF is engaged. Put enough TFs there and the bombardment is often cancelled due to lack of operations points of ammo. Neither would have been expended to any great degree if those ships were assigned to a single TF.

Chez

[AmiralLaurent]

Sadly invading China, India or Siberia is gamey because of the far too fast speed and ease of the land campains. But not doing any of these means that Japan will lose early.

Stack airfield with B-17s so easily as Wirraways or Lysanders (but of course with better results) is gamey.

[BraveHome]

I rather like Runsilentrundeep's definition of gamey, if we expand the first section slightly:

"To execute a plan within a game that would not be reasonable in the battle/war the game represents (due to RL factors making this unfeasible that are not represented in the game system)."

Several examples of this are given, I'll add one of my own:

To put a sacrificial lamb (like a single PC) in a naval TF near a CV to distract the CV (who is often set to Naval Attack/Port attack as a secondary mission to protect the CV from a major TF incursion such as another CV TF) from Port attacking a target-rich port area by this single PC TF. This is taking advantage of limited game AI, resulting in decisions a RL naval commander would (should?) never make.

[Twotribes]

I dont agree that sending ships out in single ship TF's is gamey. No sane commander would bunch up all his ships in one huge TF and send them out to die if he knew they were going to be attacked by enemy air and had no choice but to sail them anyway.

If using one ship tf is gamey, then sending KB to PI on turn one is gamey becuase it allows ships not historically present ( or even potentially present) to be there , allowing massive air strike on shipping that couldnt have happened EXCEPT by a game mechanic ( the first turn bonus move).

Allowing Japanese troop invasions because of the first turn movement bonus in places the Japanese could NOT have gotten to with out alerting the Allies to an immenient attack is gamey. And sending those transports full of troops to those bases without surface fleets to protect them because the player knows the allied disposition is gamey also.

[kaiser73]

Gamey:

1) evacuating the DEI as Allies since day 1 of the war
2) taking fragments of units out of a base so they can rebuild elsewhere
3) evacuating Singapore from day 1
4) attacking anything other than PH on turn 1 as Japan (naval attacks)
5) making 1-2 ship TF (takes advantage of the targettting routines)
6) putting many 1 ship TF in port to prevent bombardement
7) night bombing in general
8) invading Russia
9) Sub invasions with fragments of units to know exactly what is on the island

[freeboy]

why is taking fragments a no no? fragments in every theatre of ww2 where rebuilt up?
and why cannot the Jap invade PI on t1?

[kaiser73]

ORIGINAL: Twotribes

I dont agree that sending ships out in single ship TF's is gamey. No sane commander would bunch up all his ships in one huge TF and send them out to die if he knew they were going to be attacked by enemy air and had no choice but to sail them anyway.

If using one ship tf is gamey, then sending KB to PI on turn one is gamey becuase it allows ships not historically present ( or even potentially present) to be there , allowing massive air strike on shipping that couldnt have happened EXCEPT by a game mechanic ( the first turn bonus move).

Allowing Japanese troop invasions because of the first turn movement bonus in places the Japanese could NOT have gotten to with out alerting the Allies to an immenient attack is gamey. And sending those transports full of troops to those bases without surface fleets to protect them because the player knows the allied disposition is gamey also.

1 ship TF are gamey. cause it is taking advantage of a flaw of a game: targetting routines.

if you have 30 ships and you make 15-20 TF it is gamey cause you already know bombers will attack only 2-3 TF cause will run out of operation points. in RL it wouldn't have mattered if you had 1 TF or 30 TF as long as the ships are all in the same place (hex).

Btw it is also gamey the rest you said: it is gamey to use KB in PHI on turn 1. and gamey to exploit turn 1 rule to invade places taking advantage of surprise effect.

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: freeboy

why is taking fragments a no no? fragments in every theatre of ww2 where rebuilt up?
and why cannot the Jap invade PI on t1?

because right now you can rebuild even the smallest piece and it wont lose any experience in the process. It'll take time of course, but eventually you will end up with a complete "clone" of the original vs a greener unit.

[Halsey]

1. We don't allow evacs until Sing/Manila are attacked by LCU's
2. Against the AI, yes. In PBEM no.
3. I never pull out of Sing or the DEI or the PI.
4. Agree.
5. What if that's all you've got?[:D]
6. This just causes the single ship TF's to die faster.
7. We only allow manpower attacks with non designated air units.
8. Agree. The Japanese player sould force activate the Russians as soon as possible, then withdraw. This is so the Russians may move it's troops. All of their AC must be put on training.
9. If the scouting/intel reports were a little more accurate, we wouldn't have to do this.[;)]

[Cap Mandrake]

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

ORIGINAL: freeboy

why is taking fragments a no no? fragments in every theatre of ww2 where rebuilt up?
and why cannot the Jap invade PI on t1?

because right now you can rebuild even the smallest piece and it wont lose any experience in the process. It'll take time of course, but eventually you will end up with a complete "clone" of the original vs a greener unit.

wow..that does seem gamey...just send out a couple of dozen guys on a PBY and you have the nucleus of a new unit.

What about hunting the US Carriers on Turn one Scen 15 (because the Jap has unfair intel about position)?

Or what about the Murmansk Convoy option at PH (non-historical).....ie evacuating the harbor and sending the ships in all directions.

[Halsey]

Yeah, but is what isn't being said is, it take almost a year to rebuild the unit. It's not like it happens overnight.[;)]

[Nikademus]

Hunting the carriers i dont consider "Gamey" unless the Allied player had agreed to not make any moves during his turn 1 because one can know where the TF's are by looking at the Turn 1 deployment in a H2H game.

Even though i dont give orders on my Allied turn 1's i always muddle the TF's of my carriers. No opponent has caught one yet. Might happen some day but if it does i'd chalk it up to bad luck in war.

For PH...i never leave the harbor.....only makes it easier to sink the ships. hard to sink ships in a size 10 port

[TIMJOT]

1 ship TF are gamey. cause it is taking advantage of a flaw of a game: targetting routines.

No it doesnt it takes advantage of the reality of just how difficult it was targeting scattered ships. Single ship TFs scattered to the 4 winds is EXACTLY what the Allies did when evacuating shipping from the Philipines, Java and Ceylon. Almost all these ships escaped using this tactic even when the ships in the PI had to sail thru the South China Sea a veritble Japanese Lake to do it. Ships in Java had to sail through KB and several Surface TFs blocking their escape and even though they suffered some losses the majority got thru. The Brits scattered shipping from Colombo and Tricomolee and again the vast majority survived KB strikes.

It is NOT a gamey tactic

[treespider]

Why is night bombing gamey? IRL it happened all the time. Is it gamey because of the night fighter bug I've read about?