Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl
The game appears to have a built-in "reverse" function. I'm not sure what triggers it. I never though to ask. Perhaps it's a failed morale check.

ORIGINAL: Bil H
Why make that distinction? Any vehicle regardless of task can come under fire and will need to have some capability to react other than just firing back... also, I would like to see it on a per-vehicle basis.. not Platoon. Why reverse the entire Platoon when only one or two vehicles need the action? That just feels wrong to me.

Should it be limited in terms of distance moved?
I would perhaps only allow reverse movement during the reaction phase.. why restrict the distance when that will automatically be restricted by the 20 seconds of reaction time? I wouldn't even reduce the speed in reverse.. if this is indeed a reaction this vehicle is not going to be carefully picking its way backwards but will be going as fast as they can until they are under some sort of cover or at least out of the LOF of the enemy unit.

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

A US TD unit, Battle of the Bulge....

I didn't see anyone; we didn't have any help from anybody. But anyway when we got into Waldbillig I had to go around and pick my gun positions. We usually had the Reconnaissance Company go in ahead and they'd tell you how many enemy were there, they'd say "put your guns over here, put your guns over there" and they would tell us what to do. But we got in there and our Reconnaissance Company - two of their platoons were with these people that had been sent up north and we had one platoon that was supposed to help us but they were in this little town back in Puchenau and they weren't any help to us. But see we still didn't know that we were in a battle, we saw some enemy but we didn't get too excited about the fact that we were chased out of Consdorf but anyway I had to go around and get these guns into position.
As my driver and I drove down this country road shells started landing behind us and man alive…I was an Artillery Officer and I knew what happens when shells start landing around you that somebody is directing the fire. The people that are shooting the guns, they don't see you but they are being guided by someone who does see you and so I said to my driver "if any shell lands in front of us, you stop and go backwards as fast as you can!" The very next shell lit right in front of us. Well it hit quite a ways from us otherwise we'd have been killed because they have about a 50 yard to 75 yard area that they kill everything within that area. Anyway this shell lands right in front of us and I didn't have to tell him to go back. He went back as fast as he could. Well the next shell landed right where we would have been so I'm one of the few people (I think) that have ever been chased by a German 88 and lived to tell about it. We got back and that was my first experience. That's the first time I had ever been shot at, that was the first time that I had ever been in a battle situation when I was going down this country road in Waldbillig when these shells started landing by me.

Same battle..

So you're in Waldbillig and row and row of infantry are coming at you?

They would come at us and so we would shoot directly at them. See that's our secondary role was to shoot at vehicles and their individuals and so those infantrymen as they came at us we were able to get them all because they were in line and the reason they were in line was (and why they kept coming) was because the Germans sent the infantrymen out ahead of their tanks. Hitler would not send out a tank that didn't have soldiers in front of it to protect the tank and so these infantrymen were preparing to protect the tanks so that the tanks could come. I didn't see a tank and I fought them for a week and I never saw a single tank because all we did was shoot infantrymen.

You were saying you had to use your main cannon on them?

On these Tank Destroyers they had a 50-caliber machine gun but they weren't close enough to use them, we used the tank on them and we killed or wounded everybody that came and I didn't see a single German in that town (any soldiers). We kept them out of that town and for three days we were there by ourselves and then the third day some infantry came up and they had dug in behind us. They thought we were going to get wiped out and instead of protecting us we were protecting the infantry. So that was the 4th Infantry Division that came in behind us.

ORIGINAL: Bil H

I must say though that the one thing I like the most about this game is that it has more abstractions... not as tight on the stats as CM is, which is good, seeing as I'm playing a Company CO in the game I don't really care about penetration angles, etc... nor do I care really about reverse speeds, an abstraction in this regard would work well for me.  Pick a percentage of the max speed and stick with that for all vehicles.

Bil 

ORIGINAL: Bil H
Mobius I'm glad you are here to keep our feet on the ground  [;)]  ...just goes to show how one little thing can balloon once the statistics are examined. 
I must say though that the one thing I like the most about this game is that it has more abstractions... not as tight on the stats as CM is, which is good, seeing as I'm playing a Company CO in the game I don't really care about penetration angles, etc... nor do I care really about reverse speeds, an abstraction in this regard would work well for me.  Pick a percentage of the max speed and stick with that for all vehicles.

Is acceleration and deceleration even modelled in this game?  I would say no, not that I'm suggesting they should be (bigger fish to fry) I'm just curious based on your reply.

ORIGINAL: Mobius

ORIGINAL: Bil H
Mobius I'm glad you are here to keep our feet on the ground [;)] ...just goes to show how one little thing can balloon once the statistics are examined.
I must say though that the one thing I like the most about this game is that it has more abstractions... not as tight on the stats as CM is, which is good, seeing as I'm playing a Company CO in the game I don't really care about penetration angles, etc... nor do I care really about reverse speeds, an abstraction in this regard would work well for me. Pick a percentage of the max speed and stick with that for all vehicles.

The 1/2 movement in reverse in PW was meant to be playable. In a miniatures game nobody is going to be able to move a model 13mm as opposed to 25mm. That would be too fiddly.

Is acceleration and deceleration even modelled in this game? I would say no, not that I'm suggesting they should be (bigger fish to fry) I'm just curious based on your reply.

Actually it is. The movement value is about 60-66% of the distance a tank would move if it was moving the entire turn (80 seconds) at its max sustained speed. It assumes there is an acceleration from a stop, full speed movement and then to a breaking stop. But could be a more cautious continuous battle movement too.

ORIGINAL: redwolf

I don't know whether WW2 tanks drove backwards for extended periods the way that some CM gamers travese half the map in reverse to have the front armor still face a potential threat, but I assume not.

It is, however, no question that tanks would reverse short paths out of positions that they just drove in, or drove in before the battle. Engineers are building fortifications for tanks (earth walls to achieve hulldown), there is no other way to get out of them than by backing up. Backing up 10 or 20 meters straight, after driving up those same 10 or 20 meter. It's no question that this is done. People don't sit in their tanks dumb fat and happy while possibly penetrating shots come on and they know for fact the way straight back 20 meters, out of LOS of the enemy, is free (except possibly for some crunchies).

Given that time constraints in the game don't really allow anybody to go backwards for several turns in a row I am convinced that the realism gain from a reverse movement order is much bigger than the realism hit from possible abuse.

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

For those of you that have not driven an armored vehicle..

You can reverse somewhst quickly when backing down a slope. So crawling up slowly, scanning for targets is the drill, and reversing quickly (thanks to gravity) is another benefit when pulling back.

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

ORIGINAL: Yoozername
For those of you that have not driven an armored vehicle..
You can reverse somewhst quickly when backing down a slope. So crawling up slowly, scanning for targets is the drill, and reversing quickly (thanks to gravity) is another benefit when pulling back.

Exactly what good would that do the advancing vehicle if an enemy is waiting in overwatch for a target to emerge into LOS? A moving vehicle is more likely to be spotted than a stationary vehicle. The fire of a stationary vehicle is far more accurate than that of one that is moving. If all other factors are held equal, vehicle quality, crew training, and so on, movement can confer no advantage on the advancing vehicle. On a statistical basis, the maneuver would serve no likely end other than postponing the eventual outcome by reducing the number shots on target in a given time increment.
PoE (aka ivanmoe)

ORIGINAL: Mobius

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

ORIGINAL: Yoozername
For those of you that have not driven an armored vehicle..
You can reverse somewhst quickly when backing down a slope. So crawling up slowly, scanning for targets is the drill, and reversing quickly (thanks to gravity) is another benefit when pulling back.

Exactly what good would that do the advancing vehicle if an enemy is waiting in overwatch for a target to emerge into LOS? A moving vehicle is more likely to be spotted than a stationary vehicle. The fire of a stationary vehicle is far more accurate than that of one that is moving. If all other factors are held equal, vehicle quality, crew training, and so on, movement can confer no advantage on the advancing vehicle. On a statistical basis, the maneuver would serve no likely end other than postponing the eventual outcome by reducing the number shots on target in a given time increment.
PoE (aka ivanmoe)

On a hill defilade the tank commander could at first go turret down, stop the vehicle and see over the hill without the vehicle being seen. That way he gets to sight stationary. Seeing a target he would order the driver to pull up to a hull down position and fire at the target. He could then order reverse to escape any return fire from Defending (Overwatching) tanks.

In the game this would take at least two turns of orders to carry out.

If there were overwatching tanks who would fire first? Its hard to say. If they were close enough and facing right at the hulldown tank then they might get the first shot. If quite a ways away they might not react until too late.

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

Hi Mobius,
Thanks for you comments.

I hate to quote myself, but above in bold print I stated the following:

If all other factors are held equal, vehicle quality, crew training, and so on, movement can confer no advantage on the advancing vehicle.
I worded the statement that way intentionally. No exception is offered for an elevation difference. Were it not so, the elevation difference could just as easily be afforded to the stationary unit. The stationary unit could just as easily be hull-down. In this purified environment no advantage is afforded the cagey or clever. The numbers are what the numbers are.
PoE (aka ivanmoe)

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ ... 019208;p=5

I must say; Dorosh is still obsessed with me after all these years.

I just read that Sherman tankers used reverse extensively; to change direction! They back up a bit and then move forward. Thats how they changed direction from a stand still it seems.

It was in the German vs Allied eqpt report to Eisenhower. The US tankers appreciated the Panther and Tiger chassis ability to turn in place.