More things to consider

[Dean Robb]

Some thoughts that came to mind whilst dying gloriously defending Corregidor. Nothing earth-shattering, but some items for discussion and consideration for changing (patch 2, of course...don't want to delay patch 1!).

1. Can a close assault be toggle-able? There are times when I have a unit adjacent to a fortification/vehicle that I DON'T want to assault it. Like when my assault % is 10 but my 'to hit' with the flamethrower is 50%. But the unit will always assault instead of engaging normally. Maybe the assault can be a shift-click?

2. Fortification LOS/LOF confusion. Sometimes bunkers and immobilized units will show an enemy unit as being engageable, but when you try to shoot at it you can't (target cursor, but no rounds downrange) and the enemy returns fire - sometimes killing your unit with the fixed field of fire. Usually these are enemy units right on the edge of the LOS. I'd like the enemy units to NOT get the target cursor/color change/etc. that leads one to believe that you can shoot them.

3. Can the number of pre-planned artillery firing points available be increased? In RL there's no limit to them...but more than 10 would be nice .

4. Let's give some consideration to increasing the ammo loads of artillery. After all, one's guns don't travel without their ammo carriers in trail. Historically, the front line troops might run low of bullets but there were usually plenty of projo's for the guns.

5. I think units in the water are getting the benefits of being pinned, ie: harder to hit because of going to ground. Of course, that's silly when "going to ground" means drowning. Also, I'd like to see units in the water, esp. infantry, get a significant modifier making them easier to hit. One cannot hide, and one cannot move quickly through the water thus making you easier to hit. The 'to hit' percentages should reflect this.

6. Maybe when a round hits, but does not kill, a landing craft (NOT amphib) a chance can exist for the troops to take damage? I recall reading that in over-the-beach assaults it was not uncommon for the troops to be massacred whilst packed into the boat like sardines by HE shells and/or MG fire.

7. Could the pentration values for small arms be included in the info window? I'd kinda like to know if my MG can kill that vehicle or not...

8. I've noticed that units, especially bunkers, under fire are taking hits to sides that are not exposed. Example: unit fires on bunker from the rear but the dialogue box says there was a frontal hit.

9. Like to consider upping the lethality of machine guns. I don't know what change to make in the OOB to test it, but I think that MG's are not the man-killers that they were in real life. I don't know if the accuracy needs to be upped, or the warhead bigger, or what to increase their lethality. I liked the way it happened with the MG34 in SP:WW2 - it fired three bursts each time it fired. I thought that did a good job of simulating the increased volume of fire MGs provide.

Comments? Discussion? Sure-fire Lottery Numbers?

[Wild Bill]

Hey Dean,

I'll address one, four, and nine so as to get out of the way.

1. Have you tried turning off all weapons but the FT and then attacking to see what happens? I'd like to know.

4. I like the uncertainty of ammos supply. If you turn the pref button full ammo on, you should be able to resolve this problem also.

9. Agreed. In all the scenarios I design I set any MG team at an experience level of90-100. That won't resolve generated battles, but it does give the machine gun its rightful place in the battles I recreate.

Now I'll step off the podium . Next?

------------------
In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Coordinator, Scenario Design
Matrix Games

[Skandranon]

Sorry to butt in, but I had a few comments as well.

1. With selective attacks on units instead of assaulting, you have to target the unit with the 'T' key and then use the 'C' key to select an individual weapon to fire. If you turn off weapons and try and attack, you'll just assault as per normal - even if the weapon (such as flamethrower) used is turned off.

2. True, I don't think they should get the target cursor or 'fake fire' to attract enemy fire. This can easily be abused to soak reaction fire. All I can say is just to right click and see what they can really see in their cone of sight.

3. Hmm... I'd say LESS would be in order for advance missions, and even fewer (if any) in assault missions. Though more for delay and especially defend would be nice. One would assume if you had time to lay mines and build forts your FO's weren't off indulging in vodka and poker rather than mapping grid targets. In reality, any artillery unit in an area for more than 15 minutes is going to be hastily making plans for quick fire solutions.

4. I think they might be addressing this in an upcoming patch... I'd like to see being able to buy extended ammo versions or reloads for off screen artillery personally.

5. I hadn't thought about this, yeah they should have a substantial penalty for wading through shallow water.

6. I've seen this a lot. It happens all the time - I noticed it most in the infamous Betio scenario. Gruesome what those 13mm guns can do to LVT's.

7. If it can pierce most any armor, it's listed. Generally, to pierce armor it has to be at least a 12.7mm (.50cal) weapon. Maxim, M2HB, etc.

8. Seen this rarely as well. Dunno what to say about it. I have a lot of opinions on bunkers - they should be able to hold troops in many cases, they should VERY often be captured tank turrets or preformed 'mobile/modular' machine guns in the case of the Germans. Some of their more common ones were things like: A steel cylinder with a dome of 4-5cm steel on top that was inserted into the ground and had a slit with a machinegun. Very deadly to infantry and nigh impossible to kill. Or, French S/H 35 turrets or T-34 turrets mounted on an underground concrete bunker. Sometimes Panther or other German MBT turrets were used as well. Think of a tiny, camoflaged Panther turret in the bushes and how hard it would be to kill. The Germs really did use everything they got their paws on

9. Very firmly agreed. As it stands, a squads' rifles do the majority of damage and the MG's are basically filler. This should be almost the opposite until the intro of the assault rifle. Also, MG's in all cases seem to be sorely underranged - the MG34/42 series was considered to be 'very effective' at 2000 yards and 'maximum range' at 3000 to 4000. As it stands, these weapons as MMG's reach only a paltry 1000. With the LMG version only 600! Very inadequate, and increasing their range would also greatly increase accuracy, since the game looks at a weapon's max range and what fraction of it it is firing at to determine what modifier to apply to the to-hit. For instance, weapons become markedly more accurate at under 50% max range.

Hope I made a little sense

Oh, and hello Mr. Wilder, I'd like to take this opportunity to say you've done absolutely fantastic work - love your scenarios. I'd just love to see the library you use for source material.

[Paul Vebber]

We are working on the rifle/MG effectiveness tradeoff.

An experience check determines how many troopers will shoot their rifles in a given attack on a given target. For 75 exp it will be about half.

As to the effective range of MGs, a quote of 4000m for range is talking about using the WWI technique of plunging fire wher you fire teh MG up in the air and the bullets opound a beaten zone about that far off. THis technique was not common in WW2 becasue the troops were more dispersed than WW1.

My SeaBee Combat Handbook vol 1 course I took when I was drilling with the Mobile Inshore Undersea warfare MIUW types lists for the M60 (which actually is a great grandchild of an MG42) a Max range of 3725m meaning the bullets can travel that far. The effective range is given as 1100m (22 hexes). The sight isn't calibrated past that. That also assumes a tripod mount.

A 50.cal is given a max effective range of 1830. We give HMGs in general a 1000m and 50.cals 1500m. LMGs are given similar range to rifles
1) because they can't go in slot one and the game uses teh weapon range in slot one as teh "default" for opfire, so making it longer would not change much)
2) the squad LMG was generally used to fire in support of the squad's fire, so would not commonly be used to engage targets the rest of the squad could not.
3) on a bipod would not have an effective range much more than 600yards anyway.

ASL as a cross reference give most LMGs 14 hex max range (560) MMG's 32 (1280) and 50 cals 40 (1600).

MMGs maybe could use a boost out to 1250, but in general they are in the right ballpark.

[Fabs]

I have tried the technique suggested by Wild Bill only half an hour ago, while playing one of my own scenarios.

I managed to suppress a German HMG 42 in entrenchements enough to sneak a full British Engineers unit right next to it.
I disabled all other weapons bar the Flamethrower and blazed away.

Excellent graphic depiction of the hex being engulfed by an all-consuming fire followed the wonderful "whoosh" sound of the Flamethrower.

As for casualties: zilch. The Jerries probably used the jet of flame to roast a few wurstels!

Anyway, I went back to the unit info screen, disabled the Flamethrower, re-enabled the Stens and grenades and put an end to their impromptu pic-nic with them.

------------------
Fabs

[Skandranon]

"An experience check determines how many troopers will shoot their rifles in a given attack on a given target. For 75 exp it will be about half."

Ahh... I didn't know that. Makes more sense.

"As to the effective range of MGs, a quote of 4000m for range is talking about using the WWI technique of plunging fire wher you fire teh MG up in the air and the bullets opound a beaten zone about that far off. THis technique was not common in WW2 becasue the troops were more dispersed than WW1."

I stand corrected, I never claimed to be an expert. Now that it's presented that way, it makes more sense. Ignore everything I said about them *chuckle*

[This message has been edited by Skandranon (edited 06-10-2000).]

[RobertMc]

I'd like to voice a word of caution about making LMGs (I presume we're primarily talking about German weapons in this thread) much more powerful than they currently are.
LMGs were a weapon of suppression, and really did not make substantially more hits than rifle fire, though they did cause troops to hit the ground and hold tight. Even though the 34 and 42 LMGs put out more bullets, they are weakened by being on bipods and being continually moved along with the rest of the squad.
Take into consideration that LMGs can be easily manhandled, but their lighter weight means than the firing platform will not be as stable as, of course, the MMGs on tripods and with telescopic sights. The LMG 42, for instance, was notorious for being hard to control and thus most troops used it almost as a "single shot" weapon. I have seen pix of LMG gunners using a comrade's shoulder as a support, but this must have been for the sake of either the photographer or for just getting some slugs into the air at a not-too-distant enemy.
Anyway, in my opinion the MMGs (particularly on the heavy Lebel tripod, which was a setup chore in its own right) ought to be strong, but the LMGs have some factors that overstated could swing battles into favor of the Germans, and we all know that simply having a squad support LMG did not win the war.

[Dean Robb]

Originally posted by Wild Bill:
1. Have you tried turning off all weapons but the FT and then attacking to see what happens? I'd like to know.

Yup. Most often, I get the "interrupted assault" result where the firing unit just gets a big, sudden dose of suppression. Probably 85% of the time, that's the result.

4. I like the uncertainty of ammos supply. If you turn the pref button full ammo on, you should be able to resolve this problem also.

Not really. The US 155mm, for example, has
35-40 rounds with full ammo (can't remember which). This would be the load on the prime mover, I do believe. You fire 5 rounds per turn, giving you (assuming your guns don't shoot it all off in counter-battery) 7-8 turns of arty. After that...yer outa luck 'cause with the ammo truck's slow reload, you're in the hurt locker for artillery. Add to that the batteries out of contact (grrrr!) and you get situations where you have no artillery at all by mid-game.

9. Agreed. In all the scenarios I design I set any MG team at an experience level of90-100. That won't resolve generated battles, but it does give the machine gun its rightful place in the battles I recreate.

Just frustrating to see a Ma Deuce catch an enemy platoon in the open, fire all 5 bursts and *MAYBE* kill one guy.

[Dean Robb]

1. With selective attacks on units instead of assaulting, you have to target the unit with the 'T' key and then use the 'C' key to select an individual weapon to fire. If you turn off weapons and try and attack, you'll just assault as per normal - even if the weapon (such as flamethrower) used is turned off.

Which is a big hassle. And the C doesn't always work.

2. True, I don't think they should get the target cursor or 'fake fire' to attract enemy fire. This can easily be abused to soak reaction fire. All I can say is just to right click and see what they can really see in their cone of sight.

Again, extra hassle. SP is already pretty click-intensive so anything that makes the UI more friendly is a Good Thing .

3. Hmm... I'd say LESS would be in order for advance missions, and even fewer (if any) in assault missions.

Nobody attacks without planning. You have to coordinate fires, coordinate with flanking units, set approach lanes, and so on and so on. Priority hexes (TRPs to gunbunnies) are usually planned on the map and the azimuth/elevation/charge pre-figured thus allowing the fast response time. I've done excercises where we had over 50 TRPs set. In any case, during the planning phase of the attack, the FDC will be plotting it's little heart out and coordinating with the manuver element CO.

6. I've seen this a lot. It happens all the time - I noticed it most in the infamous Betio scenario. Gruesome what those 13mm guns can do to LVT's.

In the fixed Betio? Shouldn't be any massacres unless the LVT is killed. I'm talking about hits that DON'T kill the boat...there should be a chance that the rounds go zinging through the interior mauling folks.

7. If it can pierce most any armor, it's listed. Generally, to pierce armor it has to be at least a 12.7mm (.50cal) weapon. Maxim, M2HB, etc.

Welp, in my copy of SPWAW, there are no penetration values listed for the M2. Or any other small arm. Some situations are obvious, but it'd be nice not to waste several turns trying to kill an AFV with the MG if it's not possible. Some light-skinned tanks and AFVs can be killed with a .30; I'd just like to know what the MG will do. And we won't even get into .50 AP rounds vs standard ball...

[Arralen]

To add just my 0,02 EU of thoughts, and a little bit of storytelling ...

I was doing my national service with the "162 Panzergrenadiere" some 10 years ago - we had the MG3, what is a slightly modified version of the MG43 with 7,62mm instead of 7.92mm, 'cause the ammo is much lighter, and turned-down rate of fire (600..800/min instead of 1100/min).
Despite beeing consideably weakend by this changes, it's still a awful weapon.

So I'll give you some comments based on my own experience and of the stories I heard from a friend who fought on the east front...

Originally posted by RobertMc:
I'd like to voice a word of caution about making LMGs (I presume we're primarily talking about German weapons in this thread) much more powerful than they currently are.
LMGs were a weapon of suppression, and really did not make substantially more hits than rifle fire, though they did cause troops to hit the ground and hold tight.

Unless the first salvo is well-placed and gets them by surprise ... than they will go to the ground but never get up again.

Even though the 34 and 42 LMGs put out more bullets, they are weakened by being on bipods and being continually moved along with the rest of the squad.

I can't see in which sense they are weakened?
Maybe because the arc of fire is severely limited when used with bipods? A good point, but on the other hand the LMGs are easily taken around to the best firing spot available. And having a LMG with you on your isn't a bad thing, expect maybe for the poor guy carrying it

Take into consideration that LMGs can be easily manhandled, but their lighter weight means than the firing platform will not be as stable as, of course, the MMGs on tripods and with telescopic sights. The LMG 42, for instance, was notorious for being hard to control and thus most troops used it almost as a "single shot" weapon.

Nevertheless, the MG3 is used up to a range of 1200m (1320yards). Mounted on the tripod the range goes up to 2000m (2400m?? ..can't really recall, as we never dragged that cumbersome boxes from the cellar) - and this with the slightly inferior ammo !

I have seen pix of LMG gunners using a comrade's shoulder as a support, but this must have been for the sake of either the photographer or for just getting some slugs into the air at a not-too-distant enemy.

"Into the air" is correct, but todays Bundeswehr drill says to shoot this way at low aerial threads - but I would recommend to have a closer look what you are shooting at - you might draw it's attention .
Beeing a little creative, this stance could work against snipers etc. in trees, buildings or similar positions as well - as long as they wouldn't have the time to shoot back, or you're shooting from good cover

Then there's the possiblity to handle the MG all by yourself, belt(?) slung over your shoulder .. ever seen "Alien 2" .. think you'll get the idea - most deadly in close encounters (of a violent and short kind).

Last, there are stories 'bout some folks standing 2m tall and weighting ~100 kg, who used the MG43 like an ordenary rifle to mow down incoming soviet hordes at 150m .. tried this with the MG3 (don't tell the officers!!) and found that I was approximatly 25kg to light

Anyway, in my opinion the MMGs (particularly on the heavy Lebel tripod, which was a setup chore in its own right) ought to be strong, ...

After all, I found them pretty correct in the game, but the ranges are too short - as I wrote in another thread, the max. ranges from the OOB IMHO would be correct if they where divided by 2, not by 4 .

At last note 'bout the MG43 in very short terms:

• east front
• russian supply trek (mules)
• narrow pass
• 2 german MG groups with tripods sneaking into 2500m range on a nearby hill, fixing arc of fires on the pods
• deep in the night: supply trek creeping along
• MG open fire into the dark (no tracers!)
• ~1500 rounds each
• slaughterhouse

I thought 'bout doing a scenario with this, but it does not work - area fire isn't efficiently enough to model this encounter
...

Arralen

[This message has been edited by Arralen (edited 06-11-2000).]