The crew served weapons are too darned...

Deutscher Aufklarung · Mon Jul 03, 2000 6:32 am

It seems as if the crew served weapons (i.e., LMG's, MMG's, and HMG's) are too tough for their own good. I can lay down everything I have and they don't seem to die. One might say, "Yes, but they're smaller in number thus the probability of a round hitting them is less [bla bla bla bla])". I'm sure some of you are veterans and you know what I'm talking about. Imagine yourself as a combat infantryman attempting to run like hell with an M60 machine gun and all of the crap that comes with it. Yeah...huh huh...good luck. Now one might say, "The MG42 is lighter, etc., etc." Okay then, let's imagine running like hell with a SAW LMG. It's tough. I was in a recon platoon and it damn near wore me out. The point is is that the weight and manueverability adds to a lack of speed, thus , an individual is an easier target. Let's make the crew served weapons crews more destructible guys.

------------------
"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"

Wild Bill · Post by **Wild Bill** » Mon Jul 03, 2000 6:47 am

The slower speed is already reflected in the support weapons, but I'm sure you have noticed that, DA.

A BAR was plenty heavy enough for me. I'm sure an M-60 or a SAW is much worse.

As to durability, up until now support units had no chance at all. Now they have been made more durable. Perhaps too much so.

Personally, I like them the way they are, but that does not mean I am right and you are wrong.

Hearing the opinions of others, however, would be interesting here.

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

Deutscher Aufklarung · Mon Jul 03, 2000 7:05 am

Hey Wild Bill, thanks for the reply. I agree , any input is good input and therefore, "food for thought". BAR...hmmmm..."old school"...That was my father's assigned weapon in the Korean war. Any way, I was not making overt critisism; rather, it was a contemplative effort on my part to open discussion and attempt to find a plausible solution to the problem. If anyone disagrees please explain, as "any knowledge is good knowledge".

------------------
"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori"

Exnur · Post by **Exnur** » Mon Jul 03, 2000 7:17 am

Well Deutscher, I posted a similar question a few days ago about infantry in general, but no one commented on it. I find stationary MGs aren't that bad. I shoot'em up with PzK Mk1s without any trouble. But on the subject of foot soldiers in general, I think they should be easier to hit when they are running, especially in the open, vs stationary.

Deutscher Aufklarung · Mon Jul 03, 2000 7:22 am

Yes, and remember, the muzzle flash of the MG42, 50. cal, etc. is greater than a small arms weapon; therefore, they are easier targets. In addition, they tend to have tracers. As a result, it's like "murphy's law", (I can't remember exactly how it goes) "If you use a tracer to see them, then they can see you."

Tankhead · Post by **Tankhead** » Mon Jul 03, 2000 7:59 am

Talking about undestructable: The other night I was playing Bordj Toum Bridge 1942 spwawV2.3. Well anyway the Americans had inf-AT M1 Bazoka a Colt.45 2 man squad. Well me and my beloved German Rifle sqad with Kar 98k ri 7.92mm mg34 lmg Gew spr 6r 30/1 now that is a bit of fire power. Well 2 of my squad were sneaking in the bushs came across the bazoka squad. Once discover I use my mmg that were located for good cross fire and used all the shot on both mmg, then I did the assault with my rifle squad, 2 of them 20 man to 2 very suppress Inf AT. Now there's the good part I used everything I had on those 2 fellah's and they were popping my rifle squad with there Colt .45 by the time everybody was out of ammo for that turn I lost 8 man to those two Colt .45. I know the fog of war is involved but that is a bit extreme.

Tankhead

------------------
Rick Cloutier rcclout@telusplanet.net
Coordinator: Tankhead's SPWAW Resources
http:/sites.netscape.net/rcclout

victorhauser · Post by **victorhauser** » Mon Jul 03, 2000 10:36 am

In my campaigns I ALWAYS set the enemy (i.e., the computer) infantry toughness to 250% and I don't have any complaints about the durability of enemy soft targets.

In fact, by now I am so used to fighting with the enemy infantry toughness set to 250%, that when I play with the enemy toughness set to 100% (for instance, in a PBEM game) I find it almost too easy to eliminate enemy soft targets. I would not like to see soft targets made any easier to destroy. If I have a preference at all, I would prefer to see soft targets made more difficult to destroy.

renwor · Post by **renwor** » Mon Jul 03, 2000 4:21 pm

My recent experiences would almost support the "infantry is too tough" statement, with tree bazokas wiping out tiger+4spw+ flampanzer III, sniper wiping out two 105FH crews etc.
But at the same time I had not too much trouble wiping gerrys MGs and infantry, except well "dug in" err.. in cover MGs on normandy beach. I had to crawl next to them through woods ...

So my vote is leave infantry as it is. At the moment it can be both very tough and very easy target, depending on the tactic and overall situation. But thats exactly how we want it to be isn't it?

Regards Renwor

Paul Vebber · Post by **Paul Vebber** » Mon Jul 03, 2000 6:14 pm

If you think the infantry are too tough or too easy, adjust the infantry toughness more to your liking.

The preference settings let you customize many aspects of the game in this way.

Tankhead · Post by **Tankhead** » Mon Jul 03, 2000 7:17 pm

No really what I was asking in my first post is: 2 men in the bushes under heavy attack from multiples hexes with the bazoka out of order and a lot of smoke involved plus a high level of suppression could snipe my squads 1 hexe away from different sides with there Colt .45 to me this example is a bit unreal. What are these guys: Universal soldiers

I would like a explanation on the logic behind this incident. 8 men dead after all that and the bazoka dudes are still alive

Tankhead

------------------
Rick Cloutier rcclout@telusplanet.net
Coordinator: Tankhead's SPWAW Resources
http:/sites.netscape.net/rcclout

Fabs · Post by **Fabs** » Mon Jul 03, 2000 8:08 pm

Maybe the Americans were crack shots with those 45s, and maybe they had Indian blood and were able to stay hidden, while your Germans had to expose themselves because they were attacking!

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