Page 1 of 1

Whats wrong with the Shrecks in this version

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 8:45 pm
by kojusoki1
I played quite a few games as German, againts human opponent and I founded out that Shrecks are inacurate like hell. Their stats are the same as they were in the previous versions (max range 160, Accrtacy 85%) but now they cant hit anything. Example: FJ Shreck in 3 lvl building, full command, not under fire, full morale etc.
Enemy tank wasnt moving, staying at 89m away. Medium range them
Two shots missed. Third also (but that last one was under fire).
They didnt have a chance to shot again...

During the whole campaign I wasnt able to hit ANYTHING with a shreck. And believe me, I play CCs a lot, previous versions etc. Its the first time here I encountered this. Do I have that bad luck or is it becouse of the new system how the game calculates the hit (see the thread regarding MGs, just after the release of this version)

RE: Whats wrong with the Shrecks in this version

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 10:35 pm
by emperor peter
89m is quite a long distance I'd say, especially if the team doesn't have much experience.

RE: Whats wrong with the Shrecks in this version

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 12:45 am
by Tejszd
Experience by this time of the WAR for the German troops was an issue.... A bit of bad luck and poor troops most likely....

RE: Whats wrong with the Shrecks in this version

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 9:32 am
by kojusoki1
Well first it was a FJ schreck. So I think they are quite experienced.
Second, in the previous versions of CC, this distance was a certain hit. Take WAR as an example.

Take a look here: tm.asp?m=2521121:

"WARNING - WALL OF TEXT INCOMING.  If you just want to hear about the MG42 issue, skip down a couple paragraphs. :)

On the data file changes:

The terrain protection values changed between LSA and TLD because the meaning of the values (as used by the code) has also changed.

Because of the way the original code worked, you had values in the different data files that were related to each other, but not scaled the same. The values were difficult to compare in a meaningful way, and thus very difficult to balance against each other -- weapon penetration vs. terrain protection being one such case.  Old-style terrain protection values were rather abstract -- lying down in a grass field does not actually have a protection value equivalent to 25mm of steel, last time I checked. :)

Prior to LSA, the combat model in the game had the chance of a hit, from any sort of shot, very high. Much higher than what would be expected under combat conditions. What kept every shot from being a kill was the very high terrain cover and protection values.  Good or lucky shots could bypass terrain protection (hitting the head of a soldier looking out the window, in essence), and since the accuracy of such shots was always high they usually resulted in a KIA. This made the killed to wounded ratio about opposite of what you'd normally expect (most casualties were KIAs, instead of most being wounded).

For LSA I re-did significant parts of combat modeling to get more realistic results. This allowed us to normalized all the values in the various data files that relate to each other, so that they are now using a consistent scale.  Overall, accuracy tends to be a lot lower.  You get a lot of misses.  Since the terrain protection no longer has to compensate for unrealistically high accuracy, it is now on the exact same scale as weapon penetration -- mm of steel equivalent.

Although you see the terrain protection for a stone building change from 40 to 9, that new "9" is now the exact same scale as the weapon penetration values.  Meaning that a stone wall is basically 'safe' from small arms fire that does not directly hit the soldier (i.e. a 'good' shot).

These changes also allowed for blast ratings to be normalized to something consistent with penetration ratings, and with terrain protection.  The result is that blast attacks cause a lot more wounded and a lot less KIA.  Since the blast rating no longer has to be crazy high to get past high terrain protection, it has been scaled to match the integrity (toughness) of the vehicles and guns too.  So a mortar shell will tend to take out the gun crew rather than blow up a towed gun, and mortars shells don't blow up tanks (though technically a direct top hit kill is still possible).


On the MG42:

The issue with the MG42 is actually due to a completely different change.  In previous versions of CC there was no chance for a machine gun to hit more than one soldier.  The way it was modeled previously, the whole burst would either hit one soldier, or hit nobody.  For LSA I added 'beaten zone' modeling.  It works like this: If the gunner is aiming at a soldier and hits him, only the first shot in the burst hits that soldier automatically.  The rest of the shots are counted as 'misses'. If the gunner is area firing all shots are automatically misses.  Each miss has a small chance (based on posture and movement) to hit soldiers near the target area.  Each of these shots also had a small chance to bypass terrain protection (just like aimed shots can, if the shot is good enough) so that being in a stone building does not make you 100% immune to machine gun area fire.

When you deliberately area fire with an MG42 it throws out a lot of bullets.  This high volume of fire was causing a lot of 'beaten zone' hits.  Based on your feedback and some testing I've reduced the chance for a soldier to get hit, and significantly reduced the chance for a stray hit to bypass terrain protection.  The result is that, using area fire, you can empty all 3000-odd rounds from an sMG 42 at a stationary US parachute team in a stone building and typically get about 1-2 casualties.

This change will be in the first update, which will be out 'soonish' (sorry, about as firm a date as I can give).

Steve "

So it seems simply accuracy is way lower then before. Problem is taht shrecks has only 6 rounds so I THINK they should have higher stats to be able to hit anything. Its not a MG

RE: Whats wrong with the Shrecks in this version

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 12:12 pm
by emperor peter
ORIGINAL: kojusoki1

So it seems simply accuracy is way lower then before. Problem is taht shrecks has only 6 rounds so I THINK they should have higher stats to be able to hit anything. Its not a MG

You could have a point. I haven't used Panzerschreck that often. When I did they seemed to work ok.

90m is quite far for a schreck though. But getting closer is hard, I would say this is much more of a problem than accuracy.

Sneaking up to tanks is not so easy in this game. Even when there is cover. Usually you will be spotted before you're set up, even inside a building.
The soldiers modeled in the game are less intelligent than real ones and I find they don't always handle themselves well when ambushing armor.
My experiences:
They set up in the wrong spot
They crawl a little too far forward, exposing themselves
They arrive; set up and then reposition
You give them a sneak order and then they get up and move upright when the order is complete

In general they take too long to get a shot off when they have moved.

RE: Whats wrong with the Shrecks in this version

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 6:33 pm
by Andrew Williams
Haven't had much schreck experience so far but my bazookas seem to be doing as I would expect.


I don't area fire with my AT weapons.

RE: Whats wrong with the Shrecks in this version

Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2011 9:59 am
by kojusoki1
thats true. Bazookas looks fine. I had 2-3 Panthers killed (H2H games) in urban area, but the distance wasnt point blank only.

RE: Whats wrong with the Shrecks in this version

Posted: Sun Jan 23, 2011 4:08 pm
by RD Oddball
We'll have a look at it again Kojusoki1. Thanks for pointing it out.

RE: Whats wrong with the Shrecks in this version

Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 7:13 am
by STIENER
i have to agree that the shreaks Miss allot......i had a shreak miss 5 shots tonite at 80 m. [ and this isnt the 1st time this has happened ] i had to sneak up to 40 m under smoke to kill the firefly...and that was hard.....lost 1 man in the team and was playing the AI. a human opponent wouldnt be as stupid as the AI.

i disagree about the bazooka's....there too powerful in the game VS historical. historically they were useless for killing panthers and tigers. there as good as a shreak in LSA and we all know that the Bazooka was very inferior to the shreak as far as armour penatration is concerned. they seem to be a bit more accurate than the shreak IMO too. the bazooka should be dummed down a bit.

the Piats on the other hand seem right. slow to reload. short range. accuracy crappy, but when they hit there lethal... like the shreak should be.

RE: Whats wrong with the Shrecks in this version

Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 7:24 am
by kojusoki1
Actually when i wrote that bazookas are fine, I meant that they accuracy seems to be OK. But yes, at the moment they are more accurate then Shrecks (bazooka base accuracy taken from 512 table is 95% and Shreck 5% less, what in new formula can be significant).
Panthers were killed from 3lvl buildings so probably it was posssible, They are less powerfull then shrecks.

Anyway - right now, taking a shreck is pointless. yesterday for 12 shots from 2 and 3 lvl buildings at 40-60m i had ONE kill. OK, it was Luftwaffe Schreck, but anyway...

RE: Whats wrong with the Shrecks in this version

Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 2:16 pm
by RD Oddball
Thanks for the extra info guys. We'll look into it.

RE: Whats wrong with the Shrecks in this version

Posted: Fri Jan 28, 2011 2:50 pm
by kojusoki1
hmm I didnt know that once i set PB range to 80, the cost of Shreck rises from 21 to 32 :)
To make them a bit usefull usefull I had to set them to 512 (100% accuracy). Even then i had 1-2 hits (full comand, 3lvl building, no suppression, clear LOS) per 6 shots at 50-60 m


RE: Whats wrong with the Shrecks in this version

Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2011 5:16 am
by STIENER
with the new patch im still finding the shreak very inaccurate and a bit weak. it should perform better than the bazooka. there is know comparison between the 2 weapons historically and so far id rather have a bazooka than a shreak......

actually id rather have a Piat than a shreak in LSA....the Piat works as expected...bad accuracie and range but when you hit it destroys the tank. even when you happen to get a damn hit with a shreak, you dont always get a kill. and as someone stated above a/t teams are spotted way to easily still.

anyone else?

RE: Whats wrong with the Shrecks in this version

Posted: Thu Mar 31, 2011 8:08 pm
by emperor peter
I agree that the schreck should perform better then the bazooka. I like how the PIAT performs.
Also, AT teams don't use their schrecks/bazooka/piat against guns. Within range or not, they shoot their rifle. I don't like this.