light and heavy squad fire"am i useing rubber bullets"?

soldat31 · Post by **soldat31** » Sun Jun 24, 2001 10:33 pm

I don't know if experience is the problem. In the test I was doing, I was using Marines against Japanese. I don't remember the exact Marine exper. numbers but I think they were pretty high.
From what I have experienced, it is not only rifles that are ineffective. As I stated earlier (possibly on another thread) I used flamethrowers and satchel charges repeatedly on a Jap unit that was in the open and not dug in for zero effect. Also, at the range of only 1 hex, a squad of Marines using M1 Carbines and BARS should be able to inflict casualties on an enemy in the open.

Belisarius · Post by **Belisarius** » Sun Jun 24, 2001 11:05 pm

Personally, I like the idea that infantry is less vunerable vs. other infantry when moving up to them. Battlefield visibility really doesn't matter that much, my infantry always end up in a lot of smoke/buildings/woods, where you have to be in at least the adjacent hex to see the enemy, and if they move, I lose them and have to get the recce units running after them. So they (and all other infantry I send after the enemy) are mowed down. I guess I can tweak their spotting ability, but I like to try to play with all settings at 100%.

And one more thing: Onboard artillery/AT pieces. If my unit spots it (e.g. in a fortified hex), then move, they lose sight of the damn piece, even if they still have LOS to the hex! I mean, even if you move, you'll still know where the cannons are, right? I can understand losing sight of enemy infantry - but artillery?

JimY · Post by **JimY** » Sun Jun 24, 2001 11:17 pm

I have been testing both 5.01 and 5.2 on the Japanese invasion of Corregidor scenario. In 5.2, rifles are almost useless against Japanese infantry even in shallow water or clear hexes at 1-4 hex range. MG's are not much better until you get to .50mghb. Artillery is deadly. In 5.01 after setting infantry toughness to 140 and artillery v. soft targets to 140, it seems right. Japanese infantry in shallow water and clear hexes are vulnerable to close range rifles, but not slaughtered. More vulnerable to MG and artillery. The only problem in 5.01 is that the US infantry seems too vulnerable to 4-8 hex range rifle fire when in defensive cover or entrenched. Infantry in rough terrain in 5.01 are tough to kill with any weapon. My non-expert feeling is that defensive benefits need increasing in 5.01 and maybe mg fire could be increased some.

Kerg · Post by **Kerg** » Mon Jun 25, 2001 4:39 am

I concur thta Inf have been tweaked to far. I went to 5.02 in the middle of several combat command PBEM games. Boy what a difference! Inf has become almost usless.

I am going to go back to 5.01 mech as well.

Kerg

Wild Bill · Post by **Wild Bill** » Mon Jun 25, 2001 6:39 am

Well, after spending the day testing in scenarios and test set-ups, I am beginning to think this new build is okay as pertaining to infantry vs infantry.

Casualties are less, true, but it works on both sides. MG fire is effective, Paul, and follows more or less your description.

So I'll go along with this one...Wild Bill

Jasper · Post by **Jasper** » Mon Jun 25, 2001 6:47 am

I have tested the version 5.02 or 5.2.

Try this.

When a group of three are stacked together. If u use MG on one of the unit. The units that got killed are the other two. If u used a cannon on it. The surround got killed but the unit u fired at, nothing happen to him.

I think there is a problem with the upgrading.

Jasper · Post by **Jasper** » Mon Jun 25, 2001 6:52 am

sorry for the last msg.

I forgot to mention I am playing German, using a tank MG and an 88 flak to test.

For Infantry to infantry it works well but try vehicle to infantry. Something is wrong.

sven · Post by **sven** » Mon Jun 25, 2001 7:02 am

Originally posted by Casper:
sorry for the last msg.

I forgot to mention I am playing German, using a tank MG and an 88 flak to test.

For Infantry to infantry it works well but try vehicle to infantry. Something is wrong.

That is really strange. I am using the US apcs to test the effectiveness of direct vehicle fire on infantry. It seems again that if you catch them in the open a .50 cal will eat them up at 2,3,or 4 at a time.

Please try the fix Paul posted if you have not already because it worked for me.

regards,
sven

crazyivan · Post by **crazyivan** » Mon Jun 25, 2001 7:17 am

Pual i agree with you 100% on the mele thing it makes it nail bitting stuff when fighting house to house or jungle fhighting.the lack of hits that are leathel to both my squad and their's(not for the want of trying)makes it easy to close with the enemy and go all out with spades and bayonets.
But i have tried germans,yanks,russians,japs and britts useing both green and exp units in the following conflicts.
1.defending vs oncoming squads sarted firing at 6-10 hexs then almost piont blank they still kept running at me with little lose of troops per squad.this was done on open ground with good visability.
2.attacking the enemy was defending little lose to my men when repeatedly engaged from 6-8 hesx away closed to 2-4 and still small loses as to what i thought would be the norm.

i can understand the tweaking of the hit tables but my opion is it would be nice to tone it up just a wee bit then it would be perfect.
if i want the squads to inflict more damge do i lower the % or raise the % of the computers infantry toughness button.
this game rocks and i don't consider it at all a burden to be of any help i can be,in fact i consider it a joy to be able to share in my own small way to help you over worked kings of wargamming make this game what it is today a BLOODY CRACKER MATE

:p

Paul Vebber · Post by **Paul Vebber** » Mon Jun 25, 2001 8:20 am

The problem that I see is that casualties are not ramping up as range is closed. SInce "hit chance" is not the chance of a kill, but the chance of "incrementing up the kill rating" a notch, there is not a significant ramping up of casualty causing with range.

Small arms works like this - each man in a unit takes an experience check vs D200, less than experience then teh man shoots. Each of these men has an "D100 less than acc chance of "adding his he kill factors to teh effective total"

So this "kill factor" is then passed to the casualty routine. Fire direction is now diced for, it can double the kill factor or reduce it by 1/3 or leave it even.

Cover is then figured based on terrain, in cover, or entrenched, in dirt or pinned or moving. Casualties are then diced for based on killfactor, movement mod, and cover factor. That is then used to dice for casualties.

Each casualty then dices (d200) against experience and against warhead size to "save" itself - large warheads make that hard, (D100 less than 10 for 9+ D(100)less than 90 for small arms - assuming it passes its experience check...both rolls must be made to save...

SO a function of range and accuracy will be added so when range = 2+D10 there is a bonus to the kinf score of 1-4X for small arms with HE kill less than 6 and warhead 1

This will make rifles 1-4 times more effective at ranges averaging ~350 yards and in. This will tend to make SMGS MUCH more dealy...hopefully not too much so...

Try arty vs soft at 80 as the default?

How does that sound?

BryanMelvin · Post by **BryanMelvin** » Mon Jun 25, 2001 8:53 am

With any new Build - be sure to delete the steel.Prf file located in the Save Folder.

This can cause odd things. I have not seen too much difference in rifle fire but have noticed decreased movement occuring for Infantry units more in 5.2 than in 5.1.

crazyivan · Post by **crazyivan** » Mon Jun 25, 2001 9:39 am

thanks for your input Pual i have tried the arty low90% does this make it less effective i take it.
also i have set the ai at 70%infantry toughness but it still takes a lot to achive kills even while they are closing the distance on me and im dug in.
i am playing a defend battle early 1942 june still part of a campaign .we are dug in a town lots of buildings etc.on one part of the town i have 2 9man squads of armd infantry they have for reasons of suppresion been over run and surounded by no less than 15 jap squads 8 of which are eginers.
for the last 6 turns the japs have attacked these 2 units with flame-t sachel-c and all sundry of weapons,there is even 6 of the jap squads in the same hex as my units.
heres the results
1.every thrid or forth turn i get a very lucky reduce suppresion roll and mange to mele which works fine or i just shoot at point blank which does very little as we both are in houses.
the japs own fire at me also supprese there guys in the same hex which is right but they wont mele me ether.
this leads to a frustrating conclusion of two of my units suppresed to the max but not retreating holding up 15+jap units that wont move,apart from on top of me untill i die which at this stage isin't happening.
the funny side of this is trying to highlite my units under a few hundred japs,they have been shot at at least 60-90 times and lost only 3 men between them go rambo

Jasper · Post by **Jasper** » Mon Jun 25, 2001 9:40 am

sven,

Have u try on stack of three?? I am having problem with the kills, I always kill the surrounding but not the unit I target?? Whilst using 88mm, when I target a unit, it didnt kill it but the surrounding unit got the blast.

Or is it something I didnt set properly?

sven · Post by **sven** » Mon Jun 25, 2001 9:48 am

Originally posted by Casper:
sven,

Have u try on stack of three?? I am having problem with the kills, I always kill the surrounding but not the unit I target?? Whilst using 88mm, when I target a unit, it didnt kill it but the surrounding unit got the blast.

Or is it something I didnt set properly?

I am using single stack apcs with standard settings. Try deleting the steel.prf.

I am getting kills slower but still kills.

IKerensky · Post by **IKerensky** » Mon Jun 25, 2001 10:50 am

remember of the Old STeel Panther trick : "if you want to kill man fire at the tank",when there was more chance of achieving a casualties to everyone else than your target in the same hex. I guess the new tweak of small arms must have made the old trick avaliable by changing the proportion. Say if you had 1% luck of direct casualties and 2% of collateral damage you will make twice much more collateral. And stacking more and more unit raise the rate.

crazyivan · Post by **crazyivan** » Mon Jun 25, 2001 11:14 am

Pual just to make things clear in my simple mind does reducing the % on arty vs soft make it easy to kill infantry when infantry vs infantry are shooting at each other and if si which side do i adjust to 80% mine or the ai.sorry about the dum ? im not to clear on this.
also is there away you can still play vs 5.2 and have vs5.1s infantry oobs so i could play with the old firing results.or have you figured a good alturnative that works i cant seam to get a good balance.
many thanks for your hard work and efforts.

crazyivan · Post by **crazyivan** » Mon Jun 25, 2001 11:19 am

Pual just to make things clear in my simple mind does reducing the % on arty vs soft make it easy to kill infantry when infantry vs infantry are shooting at each other and if si which side do i adjust to 80% mine or the ai.sorry about the dum ? im not to clear on this.
also is there away you can still play vs 5.2 and have vs5.1s infantry oobs so i could play with the old firing results.or have you figured a good alturnative that works i cant seam to get a good balance.
many thanks for your hard work and efforts.

Flashfyre · Post by **Flashfyre** » Mon Jun 25, 2001 1:22 pm

It was not my intent to denigrate the efforts you have made to improve this game, Paul. But my concern was, and still is, that to "tweak" the toughness ratings for all infantry of all nations is a big chore. And those settings would be fine as long as I played against the AI. But convincing another human opponent, whether in PBEM, online, or head-to-head that "my" settings are the correct ones is another story. If I set InfToughness to 80%, and my opponent believes that 70% is more accurate, a disagreement ensues and neither of us gets the enjoyment of actually playing the game. Instead, we will send umpteen emails back and forth, each trying to get the other to agree to a "common" setting, or else we both give up and never play a battle.
So until a "universal" value can be arrived at, that all(or most) will accept as "standard", the game has lost some of it's appeal.
I understand the modeling (now) that is used to determine casualties....but I believe that the "tweak" went a bit too far in favor of the "invincible" infantry. However, if a consensus can be reached, I am more than willing to abide by it, and make the changes myself.

Antonius · Post by **Antonius** » Mon Jun 25, 2001 6:20 pm

Originally posted by Paul Vebber:
The problem that I see is that casualties are not ramping up as range is closed. SInce "hit chance" is not the chance of a kill, but the chance of "incrementing up the kill rating" a notch, there is not a significant ramping up of casualty causing with range.

(...)
So a function of range and accuracy will be added so when range = 2+D10 there is a bonus to the kinf score of 1-4X for small arms with HE kill less than 6 and warhead 1

This will make rifles 1-4 times more effective at ranges averaging ~350 yards and in. This will tend to make SMGS MUCH more dealy...hopefully not too much so...

(...)

Paul

Making range much more relevant to rifle effectiveness would indeed be great !

Do you mean that this will be a new feature that we'll get in 5.03 ?

sven · Post by **sven** » Mon Jun 25, 2001 6:33 pm

Originally posted by Antonius:

Paul

Making range much more relevant to rifle effectiveness would indeed be great !

Do you mean that this will be a new feature that we'll get in 5.03 ?

Antonius I think it is a goal of his, but I have noticed it in 5.2 to a limited degree.

5.2 is a change, and as such can be startling. I enjoy it. The steel.prf fix worked like a charm.

sven