MG42s... wtf

[Redmarkus5]

I'm not bashing you and I'm not even bashing the game, which is why I didn't quote you in full. My issue is with the marketing and sales claims that the publishers make with respect to this 10 year old title. If it hasn't actually been massively enhanced and if it doesn't really "accurately depict WW2 tactical warfare" then they shouldn't claim that it does.

I own all previous CC titles and have been buying Matrix games of all types for many years. Some are truly great games. I acknowledge the limitations of the CC engine and the dedication of the developers, but these 'new titles' are actually mods, or at best software upgrades, and we should be told this before we buy instead of having to read through the forums trying to deduce whether the complainers are honest players or just Matrix haters. I'm certainly not one of those and every time I post a game issue with any of the Matrix titles it is acknowledged as a genuine issue by the devs. If they want me to stop posting issues, well...

I'm a paying customer and when I look at my bookshelf (mostly filled with game CD cases rather than books) I see thousands of dollars of software sitting there - over 150 titles from the past decade. Respectfully, if a game doesn't live up to the publisher's marketing statements, it's not me who should be apologising for what I say

ORIGINAL: 7A_Woulf


We are taught that we have the right of free speech and as customers we have the right to complain about products if they are crap, complain all you want.

But if you are expecting a tactical simulator, you are screwed if you buy any computer game! Read my entire post, don't just quote the most suiting parts...

2 keywords: "depict", synonyms: "represent", "illustrate" and "give a picture of"
                 "model", synonyms: "representation", "replica" and "reproduction"

I'm a WW II freak, and a reality freak! I could bash tons of details in CC, MoH, the Cross of Iron-games, Advanced Squad Leader and so on, but I don't 'cause they are just games! They give a felling of what happened and an opportunity to re-enact the battles.

Yes, the AI is hopeless as an attacker.
Yes, you have to slowly herd your vehicles to where you want them.
-That's real problems with LSA, and everyone will find their own problems to complain about, and that's fine with me! (Beside the big probs, I personally finds the low points hampering, there is too little ammunition for longer games and the FPs are only 'decent' in my eyes. -You see, I'm not really satisfied either.)

But you must give the developers some creds, they work to give us a good experience from what they got and can do. We can't expect a true simulator, don't even think that's within the scope of the AI and the current CC engine. With some patches (not too many I hope) I believe that LSA can be a great step up from previous CC games, and definitely as a h2h experience; -As CC should be played to come to it's full potential.

Just a final question: -Do you guys bash Microsoft just because you have to spent an hour upgrading and patching when you have installed your OS, or do you curse and accepts that that's the world of PCs and Windows?

[Redmarkus5]

And I do bash Microsoft when things go badly wrong but my overall experience (limited to Windows and MS Office primarily, though I'm a heavy user) has been pretty positive over the years and the core applications (Outlook, Word, PowerPoint, Excel) all perform very well for me, touch wood!

[Redmarkus5]

And finally to the semantics. I'm sorry, but an "accurate depiction" (or an "accurate" illustration, model, etc.) needs to be just that - accurate - or the claim is untrue. If the publisher described this merely as an illustration or a model of WW2 tactics, I would have nothing much to complain about...

[7A_Woulf]

[SkyStrike]

I agree with DasHoff and redmarcus4 on most points. Any MG in this game can kill from outside ground level a team that is lying down in the middle of a 3-story building with just a spray. It is ridiculous.

I have to add that whoever said "ricochets" clearly doesnt understand the penetrating power of the "7.92x57mm Mauser", surely most of it would dig inside the walls etc, and hardly would ricochet in the direction of the middle of the floor.. Also I am sure ricochets lose a lot of it's speed, but still can be lethal. Ive had a slow .45 ricochet directly at me from an iron bar, only missing my head by a feet or so.

[DasHoff]

i just finished a game, where my opponent counter-attacked son bridge... i had my very best AB unit, completely maxed out with full strength squads, and he attacked from best with RINK kampfgruppen (9 squads). despite me having overwhelming superiority of numbers and firepower, dug in, etc, his 2 HMG squads devastated all my squads. I dont mean they just pinned my guys while he manuvered; i mean they killed 3/4 of my force until morale failure, simply by blind firing on trenches and houses. I tried to shoot it out, having 4-5 squads from different locations firing on each MG, but it's useless. he didnt even have to take any land, he merely needed to blind fire until all my squads were dead and i lost due to morale failure

i thought maybe because i had overwhelming force of elite paratroopers id be able to duke it out, instead of just hiding at the back of houses and not daring to dig trenches. i guess i was wrong. and dont call me a noob; i've been playing CC for a long time stricly multiplayer and im quite good. this is game breaking for me, and i'm not going to play the game until it is toned down. that, and the insta-aim mortars. when my opponent attacks, no matter where he attacks from, within a split second my mortar is calibrated and aimed exactly at his troops; it is ridiculous. it just completely takes away the fun of the game

[Redmarkus5]

Of course! Like I say, it's not you I am mad with

[Redmarkus5]

Sounds insane lol

[squadleader_id]

A quick look at the MG42 data values in the weapons data file...the only significant difference from MG42 data used in previous CC releases/builds are the range medium data...in CCLSA it's now twice the value compared to previous builds.
Taking a closer look...looks like all MG's range medium data are also increased twicefold in CCLSA [&:]

From the workbook:
Range Medium = The range in meters that the Medium Range modifer ends.  Range = 0-32767

[kojusoki1]

I agree with DasHoff - I was also amazed that MGs (allied also) were killing enemy infantry even by blind fire (i was just aiming at the location i thought enemy might be hiding and yes, I heard screaming of shot enemy soldiers). I did the same thing with AT/Inf guns before - but well, they have HE shells. In previous versions, i was firing at buildings only to pin down enemy- I wasnt even dreaming about killing them.

So basicly yes, there is something wrong. I didnt checked the .txt files, but if squadleader_id says the only difference is in range, it means that cover values had been changed. And as my oppoenent figured out, when hiding in building you basicly have now only minimum cover (red outline). In stone budiling you have yellow and sometimes green. This means the values or map codding is changed.

To make the long story short: it is completly different when comapring to TLD and other versions and HMGs are far more lethal that they were before.

Reagrding mortars: yes, they are too good now also. For those who will mod the game, do the thing I suggested to TLD/WaR: get rid of medium mortars (they should me immobile anyway) and simply add more mortar support to the campaign map.

[stolidog]

I agree with the comments on the MG's they seem too effective now at longer ranges and against enemy inf in buildings even when you can't see the unit being fired upon yet.

But I respectfully disagree on mortars, based on my experience so far playing, it seems like they have been cut back in accuracy compared to WaR and TLD. Playing maps like Best/Son/Grave, it has taken my US 60 mm mortars several rounds to even kill/wound part of the Flak Gun Crew, and even then it doesnt destroy the gun, and they may get lucky in killing one guy in a team of running inf, but more often than not, a round lands nearby suppressing the team and forcing them to take cover. Whereas before in the previous releases like WaR it took a round or two to destroy an AT gun or kill 3 guys in a squad running in the open even at 350+ meter range.

IMO if they were cut back even more so than they are set now in LSA, it may reduce their effectiveness to the point where about the only thing they would be good for is laying smoke.

[Andrew Williams]

I've had similar experience

[RD Oddball]

RE: mortars - I'd have to ask Steve but I do believe their accuracy was slightly reduced for LSA from what they were in WaR or TLD. Mortar accuracy is a long running debate. I personally prefer them more accurate. It gives them a chance to be the counter for AT guns which, without that threat get more importance on the game battlefield than they should IMO. But having said that I see the virtue in the system as it stands too. It's functional, just different than I'm used to.

[DasHoff]

my friend and I set up an experiment, where i had an MG team in a brick house, and probably 200m away he had a 30 cal mg team, a BAR rifle squad, and a commander in a brick house... all completely spread out; not clumped up. we duked it out by blind fire (at no time could we see each other). he killed like one of my men, whilst my MG made short work of all his guys. it was 6 guys vs 16. it seems to me the allied squads worked perfectly; they had my guys suppressed and pinned hard, but weren't doing that much damage, which is what should happen with blind firing. my MG was the opposite however; even though my guy was suppressed, as soon as he managed to get a burst off he would kill a guy. even when my opponent brough in an airstrike and killed most of the squad, the last 2 guys kept owning new squads he threw into the fight.

i dont have an issue with mortar accuracy (is it based on experience? because the AB mortars seem to be heaps more accurate than the german ones), but i do have an issue with how quickly they can recalibrate and aim without LOS. i mean they aim anywhere on the map instantly

[jomni]

What's the game difficulty for these observations? Wonder if weapons accuracy become more realistic if u play elite? I play elite and am not too bothered. But of course the AI is given accuracy boost because they're Recruit.

[DasHoff]

line. i would imagine this stuff would not matter against the AI. but when you're playing a human opponent who knows how to use it, it is game breaking.

[squadleader_id]

ORIGINAL: jomni

What's the game difficulty for these observations? Wonder if weapons accuracy become more realistic if u play elite? I play elite and am not too bothered. But of course the AI is given accuracy boost because they're Recruit.

The difficulty settings only affect the number and quality of troops available to you...so no direct accuracy boost in the datas.
But on the other hand better quality troops do affect accuracy and proficiency in operating their weapons.

[jomni]

ORIGINAL: DasHoff

line. i would imagine this stuff would not matter against the AI. but when you're playing a human opponent who knows how to use it, it is game breaking.

Why not both of you play Elite and see what happens? Accuracy might just drop but not the devastation effect of the weapons (as what squadleader said).

[DasHoff]

i dont think so. the german troops im up against are all combat training or seen battle anyway; all my AB units are experienced or veterans. there is still quite an experience and morale discrepancy; yet poor winters and buck compton can't seem to get a shot off

[squadleader_id]

ORIGINAL: kojusoki1

So basicly yes, there is something wrong. I didnt checked the .txt files, but if squadleader_id says the only difference is in range, it means that cover values had been changed. And as my oppoenent figured out, when hiding in building you basicly have now only minimum cover (red outline). In stone budiling you have yellow and sometimes green. This means the values or map codding is changed.

To make the long story short: it is completly different when comapring to TLD and other versions and HMGs are far more lethal that they were before.

I only did a quick check on the weapons.txt file yesterday at work. I did some more checking though...and looks like the elements values have been tweaked also.
Protection values are lowered in building elements! Protection values are also lowered for ground and field elements...some set to 0 protection...that's probably why men crawling in the open are now easily picked off from far away [:@]
What were the reason behind the data changes??

LSA elements.txt file compared to TLD:





One other thing...cover inside buildings is also reduced because of LOS issues from wide window elements. That's also probably why you can get LOS through buildings more often in LSA. I've noticed that a lot of LSA buildings (especially those not aligned North-South) are coded with 2 element tiles wide windows...graphicaly the wide windows look great but bad for gameplay [;)]

Wide (2 elements) windows in LSA (top) compared to window coding in CC5 (bottom):