Link

What’s the US gonna do? Slink away in the middle of the night again?

  • GrouchyGrouse [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    11 months ago

    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.

    • edge [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      11 months ago

      Remember when they lost a war game against Iran so they called time out and just changed the rules to make themselves win?

      • GrouchyGrouse [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        33
        ·
        11 months ago

        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

        • CrushKillDestroySwag@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          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.

          • ProfessorOwl_PhD [any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            11 months ago

            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.

          • GrouchyGrouse [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            11 months ago

            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.

      • Tunnelvision [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        11 months ago

        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.

      • Saeculum [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        11 months ago

        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.

        • nohaybanda [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          30
          ·
          11 months ago

          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”.

          • keepcarrot [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            ·
            11 months ago

            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.

            • GinAndJuche@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              11 months ago

              I know I’ve seen “it doesn’t say anywhere that a model removed from play can’t act” in the wild,

              Amazing

              • keepcarrot [she/her]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                11
                ·
                11 months ago

                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. :/