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

[crazyivan]

First to all whom have put the effort into this pacth to futher a already awesome game many thanks .

My observation since the pacth so far has to do with infantry fire,both light and heavy.I'm currently playing a campaign using US agianst Japan,early june 1942 and i'm into my thrid battle.using armd infantry and enginers it seams to take forever to kill off jap squads even when they are point blank and rushing me.
this is also the same for the japs at the moment we are facing each other at hex to hex and trading blows like theres no to morrow and inflicting very light casualties.
1.is this becuase we are both green and have not much exp
2.i thought at close range when a enemy jumped up in front of you your return fire was quite powerfull.
3.it seams somehow infantry fire has lost its bite and its causing a lot of shooting to get some where.
4.i had alot of fights where 3-4 full squads not only used all there shots but flamethrowers and sacthel charges as well to only get 2-4 kills on a single hex.
not trying to moan but maybe theres something fishy going on i hope as my units gian exp this will improve, if not it looks like i could be up all nite trying to break through or defend victory hexs with a small amount of infantry. they just wont lie down and die .
any way great game guys thanks for your top efforts keep it up.

[Slind]

Are you using v5.2? Take a look at this:
http://www.matrixgames.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=005805

[Paul Vebber]

There previously were some bugs in the casualty routines that were casuing rifles to be far more effective than they should have been, to the extent that we had many complaints of rifle fire being the prime casualty inflictor in teh game - over MGs.

The other compaint was that terrain was not providing approprate defensive benefits.

There were also complaints that you could never melee becasue whenever you tried to move adjacent you got mowed down by this Roarkes Drift seeming volley fire.

Both things were fixed, and in the case of jungle fighting, the jungle terrain is providing good cover from small arms to the Japanese Troops. What this means is melee is now a much more importan tool, both as the Japanese, and against them, as is appropriate to jungle fighting where it was common for firefights to occur at point blank range and the survivors commenting the only enemy they saw were dead ones...

So it is a goal of the patch to fix the casualty problems and return the balance of arms to "small arms fixes the enemy through suppression so mortars and HMGS can pick them to pieces."

We made a step in that direction, but may ultimatley need to tweak the "baseline" HE vs soft and inf toughness a bit - try that at home and reprt in what settings you feel are "best".

The problem is that you should probaly have different "baselines" in Jungle fighting, than o the Steppes of Russia, or in the Bocage, so a "universal" default" may just be a grail quest and a set of adjusted prefs based on type of battle and theater may be teh better course!

[Figmo]

I agree with crazyivan - it has been tweeked to far.

I'm playing a scenario that I've tested all version of SPWaW in and in 5.2 it's bad.

I have 4 engineer squads shooting Flamethrowers, satchel charges and rifles at 1 Russian squad in a wooden building for two turns - lots of supression but no casualties.

Figmo

[Paul Vebber]

Hmm I just had 10 tries of an engineer in teh open vs a russion squad in a building

5,2,5,1,0,2,2,0,4,2 Were the casualties from the FT.

The firing engineer took 1 casualty form return fire 3 times and 2 casualties once.

Experience plays a omewhat larger role, but so does warhead size, so now expereinced troops can withstand small arms fire better than Green trrops, but artillery is more an equalizer.

Were you moving? were the defenders in cover?

What scenario are you playing Figmo?

Again try dialing inftough done a bit and see if that helps. Let me know what setting "works".

[ June 24, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]

[JimY]

In 5.2 in the corregidor scenario, my US 1903 rifle was useless against Japanese at 1-3 hex range even thought the Japanese were on sand or in shallow water. I reduced infantry toughness to 80% with no difference, except vulnerability to artillery was extreme. I am not an expert, but I thought that melee was rare in WW2, especially compared to the Civil War. 5.2 seems to simulate the Civil War.

[Flashfyre]

We made a step in that direction, but may ultimatley need to tweak the "baseline" HE vs soft and inf toughness a bit - try that at home and reprt in what settings you feel are "best".

Ok, so now instead of being a "fan" who plays the game, I have to be a "tester" to decide on the statistics used? And I'm not working for the company.....

Again try dialing inftough done a bit and see if that helps. Let me know what setting "works".

So am I gonna get paid if I help "tweak" the settings for every nation's infantry, or just do this "out of love for the game"?

Sorry....not enough time or desire to do this

[Halgary]

Originally posted by Flashfyre:


So am I gonna get paid if I help "tweak" the settings for every nation's infantry, or just do this "out of love for the game"?

Sorry....not enough time or desire to do this

Come on, this game is free! That's the least we can do.

I'll start testing right now! If only I weren't married... and wouldn't have a job.

Such a good game, so little time.

[Paul Vebber]

DO you want new games? Or do you want us to constantly tweak with preferences you have as much controll over as we do?

Like I said the "100%" default casualty level is not something that is universal to all battles. As it stands I tested this extenively with a scenario that pitted a low exp Company of Russians with one 122bty in support against an elite German platoon entrenched with a mortar and an MMG.

That seemed what should be about a 50/50 thing for the Russians. At 100% out of 10 AI vs AI runs The Russians won 4 and the Germans 6 and the casualties were averaging 15 or so for Germans (about half casused by arty) and about 100 for the Russians.

The Russians advanced 1000 yards over pretty much open ground.

About half of their casualties are from the MMG and Mortar.

The other scenario I tested on was Paul Saunders Tracto Works, where it was tough to kill SOviets in cover in the factory except at close range with FTs and Demo charges. Running into the streets was very deadly.

No those were too opposite end of the spectrum sort of battles, but both had realistic outcomes.

As to Melee, Melee is very close range combat - this happened a lot in teh jumngle, ITs also an easy way to "mop up" things like mortars that are tough targets to localize.
It would be nice if grenades were more effective, but that is an OOB tweak.

Rilfles are very effective at fixing units, they were not, and are not in the game significant casualty produceers - how insignificant may neeed a bit of tweaking, but at least the cover and artillery are working right now - now its just a matter of 'sliding the scale" something you can do withthe HE vs SOFT and INF toughness dials.

50 m is a big area and just because YOU as omniscient Commander know all, doesn;t necessairly mean your troops do.

We wanted to fix teh problem in teh routine and instead of delaying the patch for 3 or 4 months while we heemed and hawed about where teh 100% default should be we put it out and let you decide.

For a free game that is pretty good.

If over teh next couple of weeks a consensus default "100%" setting is reached, we'll change it to that.

If being part of that effort is too much for some folks, you can choose not to participate...

[ June 24, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]

[steel]

I think that I not update v5.02 yet, I wait when small arms casualties are correct.


Steel

[Warrior]

I, for one, have gone back to the 5.01 mech.exe while leaving the new Oobs.

[Wild Bill]

I've been testing 5.2 this morning Paul. I have not saved any hard data, but my impression so far concurs with the majority here.

I think infantry weapons and small arms fire may have been tweaked a bit too much.

I don't know the numbers here, but it wouldn't take much. Give a little more effectiveness back to the infanty and it should be okay.

If you are going to tweak, you might want to think of increasing MG lethality as opposed to taking it away from the infantry.

I'll continue to test it and give a futher report today.

Wild Bill

[Rover]

Just wanted to add I've started playing the Mega Campaign (first scenario/no options) and have noticed the same lack of hitting ability of infantry and tanks against the entrenched British Artillery. Similar experience to what others have described where units move next to the Art and get very high % chance for a "dice roll" and nothing gets hit. I turned down British infantry and tank toughness to 50% and increased my hitting ability to 150% and still nothing happened. I have noticed in general tank to tank hitting ability seems to
be adjusted to what I consider appropriate with default settings.

Also I noticed when several planes straffed and bombed some AT sites (fast artillery on) it appeared the sites were not destroyed when the planes left the field but on my next turn I checked the two sites and nothing was there or around in the local area. I had great visibility to the area so am quite certain nothing came by and transported them out. My question is with fast artillery on does the game show you something was destroyed if you enter the hex or does it simply leave the the hex empty if the unit was destroyed (no smoking AT gun like if you destroy with tanks/infantry)?

Thanks (by the way... liked the design of the first MC scenario, very effective delay of the British troops)

[Wild Bill]

Flashfyre, my friend!

You've always gone above and beyond. The idea is not to make you a tester per se, but just to get feedback on how you feel the new patch works for you.

I consider that feedback, which is one thing we all want to have the ability and the right to give.

Every time a new patch (or a new game, for that matter) comes out, we are all in a sense testers. We are trying it out, checking to see if it works and what we like and don't like.

We've been doing that since 1.0 and the feedback from all of you has been most helpful in improving the game. Let's not break that line of communication now.

Wild Bill

[Figmo]

Paul,

I'm using "Breakout From Borisov" - I've used this for every version of SPWaW - and some others . And it has never been this bad - IMO.

The settings are default - I can play with them if you like - I'll let you know what I find.

Some of the units were standing still - some moving - 3 of the 4 engineer units didn't move and the Russian squad was attacking me - actually I brought up 4 or 5 rifle squads to help and still no casualties - on one Russian squad - argh!

If you want me to send you a save - I can do that.

Figmo

[Paul Vebber]

I'm 3 turns into it and have taken about 6 and dished out about a dozen infantry casualties.

What is the timestamp on your mech.exe?

[Wild Bill]

Quote:
8) Ricochet incidence reduced somewhat Casualty computation scrubbed, better accounting for leadership fire direction, artillery casualties and protection of units entrenched, incover and in protective terrain. Bottom line is artillery casualties are increased and small arms casualties decreased, and exposure for firing reduced for entrenched troops so firing doesn't strip them of cover as much.
---------------

This is part of the description of the 5.2 patch. I'm not sure I understand the import of it. I do notice that it says small arms casualties are reduced.

In the light of all that is said here, I have a question. Is the AI getting more or better kills than the human player? Is this the problem? Or is it that the AI is having just as bad results as you the human player?

In other words, do you feel that the AI is getting a better casualty result than you are?

An answer to this might be helpful!

Wild Bill

[Paul Vebber]

Those were supposed to be seperate bullets

Remember that no you are about 5 times more likely to suffer casualties when you are moving than when not, and units shot at will "hit the dirt" after being shot at a few times. So it may seem you get a lot more casualties to OPfire, becasue you are moving.

But its a good question WB!

[Paul Vebber]

FYI WB - MG casualties now have much higher chances of comiong in "bunches" depending on experience and Leadership you should see 2-4 casualties if you passboth a leadership and experience check (out of 250) a bad check however can hurt you.

[ June 24, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]

[Alby]

The small amout of testing Ive done this morning involved german rifle squads and FJ troops vs soviet rifle and soviet paras
The FJ and soviet paras are getting good casualities on enemy, but the riflemen seem to just be blazing away.
So maybe experience is playing a good part here, the more experienced troops are getting the better casualties, as it should be.