Remember when they fired that commander for actually giving a shit about his crew during one of the early COVID waves? Pinnacle of strategic thinking is turning your navy into coffin ships.
There were some legitimate problems with the millennium challenge but it's still funny how it made them look bad and bootlickers get mad if you talk about it
IIRC the marine general who played as Iran was basically trying to find every rules exploit he could think of because nobody would listen to him when he pointed out that the game was broken, but there is a pretty big overlap between the tactics he employed and what successful US resistances have used.
He was doing stuff like using simulated motorcycles to deliver messages by courier to get around the information blockade, and risky mass attacks to overwhelm individual ships.
This was deemed unrealistic, because... I dunno, Americas enemies would never be desperate enough to use unconventional tactics? There was a legitimate complaint in him being able to negate some of the systems by having inside knowledge of their workings, but at the same time you should probably be prepared for your enemies to have some sort of intelligence on you and your tactics.
Yeah its been ages since I looked up the details but that does sound super familiar to what I kinda remember. And of course being the closest to the old school nobility officer corps the navy brass was pissed off about it when it happened.
It was also before the invention of hypersonic missiles, so the outcome would be even worse now. I don’t think Iran has them, but I wouldn’t doubt China or Russia would provide them.
IIRC, the rules they changed were that motorcycle messengers could instantly teleport across the map without being intercepted, and that the fleet of missile motorboats he was using to attack the US navy couldn't actually mount the weapons they were previously allowed to, because the missiles alone were heavier than their actual maximum weight even without an attached launching system.
Supposedly, a computer error also teleported the US fleet directly into motorboat range.
It doesn't really seem like losing a game against Iran rather than the game being extremely flawed.
Which is its own kind of pathetic. Imagine running a simulation and you've not covered basic things like "causality" and "maximum parameter value means you can't go above that number".
I've noted 40k has a rules commentary that has statements like that, and I know some gamer somewhere has had that conversation.
I know I've seen "it doesn't say anywhere that a model removed from play can't act" in the wild, which I feel like is pushing the limits of semantic readability of game rules.
I read a story on 40konline back in the day where someone placed a character on top of another model and then moved the other (much faster) model around. It's pretty wild what shit people will pull.
If I'm doing tabletop rules writing, I try to be clear without getting trapped in the weeds of arguing with that sort of player. :/
Remember when they fired that commander for actually giving a shit about his crew during one of the early COVID waves? Pinnacle of strategic thinking is turning your navy into coffin ships.
Remember when they lost a war game against Iran so they called time out and just changed the rules to make themselves win?
There were some legitimate problems with the millennium challenge but it's still funny how it made them look bad and bootlickers get mad if you talk about it
IIRC the marine general who played as Iran was basically trying to find every rules exploit he could think of because nobody would listen to him when he pointed out that the game was broken, but there is a pretty big overlap between the tactics he employed and what successful US resistances have used.
He was doing stuff like using simulated motorcycles to deliver messages by courier to get around the information blockade, and risky mass attacks to overwhelm individual ships.
This was deemed unrealistic, because... I dunno, Americas enemies would never be desperate enough to use unconventional tactics? There was a legitimate complaint in him being able to negate some of the systems by having inside knowledge of their workings, but at the same time you should probably be prepared for your enemies to have some sort of intelligence on you and your tactics.
Yeah its been ages since I looked up the details but that does sound super familiar to what I kinda remember. And of course being the closest to the old school nobility officer corps the navy brass was pissed off about it when it happened.
deleted by creator
It was also before the invention of hypersonic missiles, so the outcome would be even worse now. I don’t think Iran has them, but I wouldn’t doubt China or Russia would provide them.
Iran has them
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/11/19/iran-unveils-upgraded-hypersonic-missile-as-khamenei-touts-israel-failure
IIRC, the rules they changed were that motorcycle messengers could instantly teleport across the map without being intercepted, and that the fleet of missile motorboats he was using to attack the US navy couldn't actually mount the weapons they were previously allowed to, because the missiles alone were heavier than their actual maximum weight even without an attached launching system.
Supposedly, a computer error also teleported the US fleet directly into motorboat range.
It doesn't really seem like losing a game against Iran rather than the game being extremely flawed.
Which is its own kind of pathetic. Imagine running a simulation and you've not covered basic things like "causality" and "maximum parameter value means you can't go above that number".
I've noted 40k has a rules commentary that has statements like that, and I know some gamer somewhere has had that conversation.
I know I've seen "it doesn't say anywhere that a model removed from play can't act" in the wild, which I feel like is pushing the limits of semantic readability of game rules.
Amazing
"There's no rule that says a
dogmotorcycle messenger can'tplay basketballteleport!"I read a story on 40konline back in the day where someone placed a character on top of another model and then moved the other (much faster) model around. It's pretty wild what shit people will pull.
If I'm doing tabletop rules writing, I try to be clear without getting trapped in the weeds of arguing with that sort of player. :/
At least one edition of D&D has had a "the dead condition doesn't technically say you can't act" prior to an errata.
Hey, it's out-of-the-box thinking like that that had me dual-wielding Thunderhammers in my Space Wolves back in the day.
America's finest strategies being honed on the glitchiest pre-Alpha early access game imaginable.
Skill issue