So what's the point of having bicycle troops? I took a full company of cycling Volksgrenadiers as the backbone of my 3/45 Heer (to keep up with my Tigers), and they seem to be utterly useless. In the purchase screen it said that they were Elite, but it sure doesn't look like it (and I would be amazed if those little boys were considered Elite!). Perhaps it was just P.R.
Anyway, the main problem with bicycle troops seems to be that whenever one of them comes under fire, they are paralyzed. For example, last turn a U.S. Armored Infantry Squad fired a volley at my advancing squad and I couldn't do anything with it afterwards but throw smoke. Now, the squad was Pinned and had 10 Suppression, but I couldn't move them (despite the fact that the movement shadow promised me 2-3 hexes worth of movement) and I couldn't fire back even though they had all their shots left! So I proceeded to fire some smokes, which, surprisingly enough, succeeded after a couple of tries.
Are these bugs or is this how they should function? Is there any way to abandon the bicycles? I have a feeling they would be more useful as normal troops.
And here's the bonus question: M36 Jacksons vs. Late Tigers: open ground, some hills, dreadfully long distances. How to get the upper hand?
Logically thinking, I should have a better Fire Control (Elite crew) and Range Finder, but I lost two Tigers to long-range shots from one lousy Jackson, who appeared out of nowhere and disappeared after destroying my precious Tigers! I thought the fact that we had better armour would compensate for the lower penetration of our guns. However, I'm not even hitting the tanks, let alone destroying anything!
Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
Moderator: MOD_SPWaW
RE: Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
exactly why bicycle Inf no longer exist, at least in the German OOB, in the upcoming spwaw MOD.
and someone had already removed them from the Finnish oob for 8.3 I think.
The Finnish Jaegers used to be on bicycles.
[:D]
Jacksons have very good rangfinder ratings and their gun is quite deadly firing apcr
and someone had already removed them from the Finnish oob for 8.3 I think.
The Finnish Jaegers used to be on bicycles.
[:D]
Jacksons have very good rangfinder ratings and their gun is quite deadly firing apcr
RE: Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
Bicycle troops could have been better represented with normal infantry units used instead of a special class that does not work correctly. Give a normal infantry unit a slightly higher movement rate to cover the bikes, and raise their size by one. Rename them to Bicycle Infantry, and you are done.
Goblin
Goblin
RE: Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
Yo guys,
well, I would agree with Goblin on this one, actually the bike-class should be debugged.
Into Norwegian Oob there are horse units that have a carry capability, we could think of doing something similar for bicycle units.
Almost every WWII Armies used bicycle troops, since Alby was talking about deleting the German ones I would like to add this link
http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/germanhorse/
"In 1943 a new and smaller type of infantry division was introduced in which the reconnaissance battalion was replaced by a shock infantry unit known as the Fusilier battalion. One company of this unit was mounted on bicycles while the rest were horse mounted. It had to serve both as the divisional reconnaissance element and as the reserve battalion for all three infantry regiments, which had been reduced to two battalions each. The Germans experimented with even smaller divisional setups, but this Fusilier battalion was restored in the 1945-type division, with the horses eliminated and the entire battalion (except heavy weapons elements) mounted on bicycles. The employment of divisional reconnaissance battalions adhered to the usual principles of modern cavalry tactics. The units were used aggressively and skillfully for counterreconnaissance, screening, flank protection, and covering withdrawals."
Japanese Imperial Army made an extensive use of bicycle units. I'd like to suggest to try this scenario in order to taste the flavour of using those units:
http://spwaw.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=8829
British Airborne as well as USA Airborne used bicycle units. The Swedish Army too.
Not to mention Italian Bersaglieri elite troops ...
The point is how to use this units.
Actually I would not use them as backbone of my core force. This sounds like using the Italian L3 tankettes as main battle tanks ... just like the Italian Royal Army did in reality ...
I would use these troops as per their historical role, that was reconnaissance, counterreconnaissance, screening, flank protection, and covering withdrawals.
In the above example by Whitmire (bicycle units vs. armoured infantry) I see no problem with his result. After all we are talking about light infantry ... [;)]
Just my two cents guys,
Ciao! [:)]
Mau Fox.
well, I would agree with Goblin on this one, actually the bike-class should be debugged.
Into Norwegian Oob there are horse units that have a carry capability, we could think of doing something similar for bicycle units.
Almost every WWII Armies used bicycle troops, since Alby was talking about deleting the German ones I would like to add this link
http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/germanhorse/
"In 1943 a new and smaller type of infantry division was introduced in which the reconnaissance battalion was replaced by a shock infantry unit known as the Fusilier battalion. One company of this unit was mounted on bicycles while the rest were horse mounted. It had to serve both as the divisional reconnaissance element and as the reserve battalion for all three infantry regiments, which had been reduced to two battalions each. The Germans experimented with even smaller divisional setups, but this Fusilier battalion was restored in the 1945-type division, with the horses eliminated and the entire battalion (except heavy weapons elements) mounted on bicycles. The employment of divisional reconnaissance battalions adhered to the usual principles of modern cavalry tactics. The units were used aggressively and skillfully for counterreconnaissance, screening, flank protection, and covering withdrawals."
Japanese Imperial Army made an extensive use of bicycle units. I'd like to suggest to try this scenario in order to taste the flavour of using those units:
http://spwaw.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=8829
British Airborne as well as USA Airborne used bicycle units. The Swedish Army too.
Not to mention Italian Bersaglieri elite troops ...
The point is how to use this units.
Actually I would not use them as backbone of my core force. This sounds like using the Italian L3 tankettes as main battle tanks ... just like the Italian Royal Army did in reality ...
I would use these troops as per their historical role, that was reconnaissance, counterreconnaissance, screening, flank protection, and covering withdrawals.
In the above example by Whitmire (bicycle units vs. armoured infantry) I see no problem with his result. After all we are talking about light infantry ... [;)]
Just my two cents guys,
Ciao! [:)]
Mau Fox.
RE: Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
ORIGINAL: Goblin
Bicycle troops could have been better represented with normal infantry units used instead of a special class that does not work correctly. Give a normal infantry unit a slightly higher movement rate to cover the bikes, and raise their size by one. Rename them to Bicycle Infantry, and you are done.
Goblin
OK, I can see that, BUT, the issue of motorcycle troops is something else. I bring this up as buying them as part of a core force creates some problems. For the Germans, the MC recon were converted to Panzergrenadiers in 251 Halftracks or Recon Teams in Schwimmwagens or 250 Recon HTs-- the obvious problem is that once you convert from motorcyclists to infantry, their embedded transport disappears.
In the Norway OOB, motorcycles (as transport units) exist. In real life, motorcycle troops did fight dismounted, but their quick escape recon ability is lost when one does this in-game. The motorcycle becomes nothing more than a fast mini-truck, subject to all the nasty supression and vehicle destruction/crew losses that any other transported unit can suffer.
I'm as attached to those Kradschuetzen as Tokyo Boy is to his cavalry and camels, but those units have the same problem, as they also have "built-in" transport. A satisfactory compromise for upgrade purposes has not yet been achieved.
RE: Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
ORIGINAL: KG Erwin
In the Norway OOB, motorcycles (as transport units) exist.
Thanks Gunny. [;)]
I did not check it before posting.
Mau Fox. [:)]
RE: Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
A few more informations about bicycle in WWII and nowadays. [:)]
http://www.combatreform.com/atb.htm
Mau Fox.
http://www.combatreform.com/atb.htm
Mau Fox.
RE: Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
The only thing I can come up with is if Mike designates some units as "quick load", which means they can unload in a hex, fire a couple of rounds, then remount and "skedaddle", all in the same turn. This could apply to motorcyclists, bicycle infantry, and horse-mounted infantry. This would solve the "embedded transport" issue, and give a "shoot and scoot" capability to these units.
Is this a workable compromise, or does it just increase the potential for "gaminess", with players buying whole battalions of Mongol-like raiders?
Is this a workable compromise, or does it just increase the potential for "gaminess", with players buying whole battalions of Mongol-like raiders?
RE: Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
ORIGINAL: KG Erwin
The only thing I can come up with is if Mike designates some units as "quick load", which means they can unload in a hex, fire a couple of rounds, then remount and "skedaddle", all in the same turn. This could apply to motorcyclists, bicycle infantry, and horse-mounted infantry. This would solve the "embedded transport" issue, and give a "shoot and scoot" capability to these units.
Is this a workable compromise, or does it just increase the potential for "gaminess", with players buying whole battalions of Mongol-like raiders?
Actually I would love this compromise ...
Move/dismount/fire-a-couple-of-rounds would be great.
Although I would not allow these units to dismount/fire/mount again in the same turn.
I mean a unit should perform the act of mounting/dismounting once per turn.
And I would apply that to bicycle/motorcycle units only.
Applying these restrictions to horse units would result in losing the flavour of a "charge".
Mau Fox.
RE: Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
WE have horse transport also, The USA has mounted Mountain Inf troops who can mount and dismount men.
(this is in the mod)
The Germans and many other nations used bicycles, I am not debating that. Right now they dont work correctly so I got rid of the German ones.
[:)]
(this is in the mod)
The Germans and many other nations used bicycles, I am not debating that. Right now they dont work correctly so I got rid of the German ones.
[:)]
-
FlashfyreSP
- Posts: 1192
- Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2002 9:39 am
- Location: Combat Information Center
- Contact:
RE: Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
I have a theory on something that might work, but I need to test it first. Stay tuned for more info...
RE: Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
I am hoping you can come up with a solution.
Right now there is a major problem with fire, movement and size. Can you imagine trying to fire a bolt action rifle while riding a bicycle....... and hitting anything close to what you were aiming at.[:D].
While road movement may be high, how good were bicycles cross country speed wise?
While mounted, bicycle troops would be a little larger than walking men but when dismounted the bicycles would all but disappear as targets. At least compared to horses or motorcycles.
I think ([&:]) that using sepertate carrier units is the best aproxamation and that may be the best that we can do with these units. This also goes for calvary, motorcycles and camels. somewhat close maybe all that can be done.
Calvary presents it's own problems with sometimes different weapons mounted and unmounted.
Right now there is a major problem with fire, movement and size. Can you imagine trying to fire a bolt action rifle while riding a bicycle....... and hitting anything close to what you were aiming at.[:D].
While road movement may be high, how good were bicycles cross country speed wise?
While mounted, bicycle troops would be a little larger than walking men but when dismounted the bicycles would all but disappear as targets. At least compared to horses or motorcycles.
I think ([&:]) that using sepertate carrier units is the best aproxamation and that may be the best that we can do with these units. This also goes for calvary, motorcycles and camels. somewhat close maybe all that can be done.
Calvary presents it's own problems with sometimes different weapons mounted and unmounted.
RE: Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
ORIGINAL: 264rifle
I am hoping you can come up with a solution.
Right now there is a major problem with fire, movement and size. Can you imagine trying to fire a bolt action rifle while riding a bicycle....... and hitting anything close to what you were aiming at.[:D].
While road movement may be high, how good were bicycles cross country speed wise?
While mounted, bicycle troops would be a little larger than walking men but when dismounted the bicycles would all but disappear as targets. At least compared to horses or motorcycles.
I think ([&:]) that using sepertate carrier units is the best aproxamation and that may be the best that we can do with these units. This also goes for calvary, motorcycles and camels. somewhat close maybe all that can be done.
Calvary presents it's own problems with sometimes different weapons mounted and unmounted.
That's how I'd like to see it solved too. Bic Inf should be able to dismount and fight on foot. The current form of the Bicyclists is not convenient for a long campaign core force, because having a company of bicycles it creates an athmosphere of chaos like it was schoolchildren's bicycle tour at some woods. For some defined scenarios the bicycles are however good.
Something similar as the cavalry horses might be good, or stance change option (like helicopters), but I know that it would require change in the source code.
Don't be shocked, I AM funny.
-
FlashfyreSP
- Posts: 1192
- Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2002 9:39 am
- Location: Combat Information Center
- Contact:
RE: Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
OK, I've tested a possible solution:
Keeping the unit as Bicycle Infantry is ok, as is adding a Carry Capacity large enough to "load" a squad of regular infantry troops. The unit performs like a transport, with its passenger dismounting if fired upon (even if not hit).
Size is an issue, as the typical squad is Size 1, and that assumes the unit is not necessarily "walking tall", but may be moving in different stances. Mounted on bicycles, however, the unit would be taller and easier to spot due to its high movement speed. Speaking of movement, I found it ineresting that it costs a Bicycle Infantry unit 12 MPs to cross a bridge or enter a shallow water hex. As for "cross-country", 3 MPs to enter Mixed terrain. With a base Speed of 20, that's 6 open ground hexes. So Size 2 seems right; unfortunately, the size can't be changed once the passenger unloads. They remain Size 2.
The question then becomes one of should the basic Bicycle unit be armed or not? It has a Crew, and one that cannot be removed from the vehicle itself without "bailing out". So once the passenger unit has dismounted to fight, the bicycle unit can still move and (potentially) fight as well. I'm inclined to keep it an unarmed unit, after observing how it worked in my test with the bicycle unit carrying a rifle. While it did not engage in OpFire, it was possible for me to use it to "pin" an enemy in order to move the passenger unit closer. The risk was that the bicycle unit could be eliminated rather easily, as I only gave it a crew of 2.
Keeping the unit as Bicycle Infantry is ok, as is adding a Carry Capacity large enough to "load" a squad of regular infantry troops. The unit performs like a transport, with its passenger dismounting if fired upon (even if not hit).
Size is an issue, as the typical squad is Size 1, and that assumes the unit is not necessarily "walking tall", but may be moving in different stances. Mounted on bicycles, however, the unit would be taller and easier to spot due to its high movement speed. Speaking of movement, I found it ineresting that it costs a Bicycle Infantry unit 12 MPs to cross a bridge or enter a shallow water hex. As for "cross-country", 3 MPs to enter Mixed terrain. With a base Speed of 20, that's 6 open ground hexes. So Size 2 seems right; unfortunately, the size can't be changed once the passenger unloads. They remain Size 2.
The question then becomes one of should the basic Bicycle unit be armed or not? It has a Crew, and one that cannot be removed from the vehicle itself without "bailing out". So once the passenger unit has dismounted to fight, the bicycle unit can still move and (potentially) fight as well. I'm inclined to keep it an unarmed unit, after observing how it worked in my test with the bicycle unit carrying a rifle. While it did not engage in OpFire, it was possible for me to use it to "pin" an enemy in order to move the passenger unit closer. The risk was that the bicycle unit could be eliminated rather easily, as I only gave it a crew of 2.
RE: Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
I think ([&:]) that you have hit on one problem with these units (calvary, motorcycle, and bicycle).
Flash, I believe that with your Knowledge of the game and history you have already considered most if not all of the following points. I am setting them out for some of the newer players or less well read (newer to hobby) members to consider.
While moving they would be very hard pressed to use weapons effectivly at range of more than 1 hex (if not range 0) The dismounted unit should have NO penilty. The problem as I see it comes with the (empty) carry unit. Honest players can of course turn off guns or set range to zero. AI can't figure out transport anyway. Gamey players now have a bunch of Cheap "recon by being shot at" units.
Bicycle units should be un-armed. Entire squad lays down bikes and fights as infantry. TOO bad we can't get the bikes to change size. Shooting up bikes laying in the grass or bushes is a really CHEAP KILL.
Horses: Most armies that fought as mounted infantry (not saber charges) told off 1 in 4 or 5 men to be horse holders while rest of squad fought. While I guess they could shoot in an emergency (at the risk of loosing the horses) they tried to hide the horses out of sight (and FIRE ) of the enemy. Even a horse laying down is a much larger target than a bicycle. They might also be considered a valid target in real life?
Motorcycles: While "solo" machines could be layed down the side car units could not. Some armies had sidecar units that mounted machine guns. Most of the time (if not all the time) the machineguns could be dismounted but they often did have the capability to fire when mounted (moving is another story) giving us the same problem ([&:]) as the German halftracks. Since almost all WWII motorcycles had NO REAR SUSPENSION any atempt to fire while moving on anything but the smoothest road would result in bullets covering the entire landscape. Maybe we can just have them fire dismounted as well????
While I know that the game requires a crew to work I think that giving much more that pistols to the "crews" of these units ( maybe you have no choice) is a mistake.
Most armies gave up on motorcycles as transport by the midpoint of the war. the cost of a sidecar unit wasn't that much cheaper than a utility car and was a lot less capeable.
Flash, I believe that with your Knowledge of the game and history you have already considered most if not all of the following points. I am setting them out for some of the newer players or less well read (newer to hobby) members to consider.
While moving they would be very hard pressed to use weapons effectivly at range of more than 1 hex (if not range 0) The dismounted unit should have NO penilty. The problem as I see it comes with the (empty) carry unit. Honest players can of course turn off guns or set range to zero. AI can't figure out transport anyway. Gamey players now have a bunch of Cheap "recon by being shot at" units.
Bicycle units should be un-armed. Entire squad lays down bikes and fights as infantry. TOO bad we can't get the bikes to change size. Shooting up bikes laying in the grass or bushes is a really CHEAP KILL.
Horses: Most armies that fought as mounted infantry (not saber charges) told off 1 in 4 or 5 men to be horse holders while rest of squad fought. While I guess they could shoot in an emergency (at the risk of loosing the horses) they tried to hide the horses out of sight (and FIRE ) of the enemy. Even a horse laying down is a much larger target than a bicycle. They might also be considered a valid target in real life?
Motorcycles: While "solo" machines could be layed down the side car units could not. Some armies had sidecar units that mounted machine guns. Most of the time (if not all the time) the machineguns could be dismounted but they often did have the capability to fire when mounted (moving is another story) giving us the same problem ([&:]) as the German halftracks. Since almost all WWII motorcycles had NO REAR SUSPENSION any atempt to fire while moving on anything but the smoothest road would result in bullets covering the entire landscape. Maybe we can just have them fire dismounted as well????
While I know that the game requires a crew to work I think that giving much more that pistols to the "crews" of these units ( maybe you have no choice) is a mistake.
Most armies gave up on motorcycles as transport by the midpoint of the war. the cost of a sidecar unit wasn't that much cheaper than a utility car and was a lot less capeable.
-
FlashfyreSP
- Posts: 1192
- Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2002 9:39 am
- Location: Combat Information Center
- Contact:
RE: Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
Following up on some points:
1. MG-armed M/Cs - these units can remain as they are. Mounted MGs in a sidecar with a crew of 2 (driver and gunner) are more like regular game vehicles than other M/C units. Small crew means they don't last as long on the field, either. Also, some of these used a flex mount for the MG, allowing the gunner to adjust for the "rough ride" to some extent.
2. "Empty" bicycle/motorcycle units - after unloading, if these units are unarmed, they are simply "targets". Armed, they can engage in "suppression" fire allowing the dismounted squad to advance easier. Either way, the AI shoots at them first, as they are a vehicle-type, apparently. BTW: the cost of the unarmed bicycle/motorcycle transport unit comes out somewhere between 5 and 9 points, depending on the Speed.
3. Horse units - same basic arguments apply here as to the bicycle and motorcycle units. All three become simple transports, although with special movement abilities. Unarmed, they do not allow "firing on the move", which by this time even the cavalry had ceased to practice, favoring the move-and-dismount tactic.
One thing that has also come up in testing is the fragility of the bicycle/motorcycle unit; with a small crew (2) it only takes one or two small arms hits to destroy ALL the transports for the squad. 12 bikes all wiped out with one shot is not realistic. Now, taking into consideration the way the game treats vehicles and crews, it is possible to make the crew of the bicycle/motorcycle equal to the Carry Capacity (e.g. 12), which would allow the unit to survive a bit longer on the field. Perhaps long enough to find cover or wihdraw far enough to be out of the immediate firefight. If the unit has no weapons and no ROF, the crew isn't going to fight back. Of course, we can't suspend it's movement ability to represent the bikes or motorcycles lying on the ground, but if it can't fight back it isn't a great threat.
One further opinion: I understand the possibility that sneaky PBEM players may exploit these unarmed bicycle/motorcycle units as "expendable" recon assets, but I don't believe we should attempt to prevent this. I know the AI will probably exploit is more than players, as it doesn't do a very good job of using transports.
1. MG-armed M/Cs - these units can remain as they are. Mounted MGs in a sidecar with a crew of 2 (driver and gunner) are more like regular game vehicles than other M/C units. Small crew means they don't last as long on the field, either. Also, some of these used a flex mount for the MG, allowing the gunner to adjust for the "rough ride" to some extent.
2. "Empty" bicycle/motorcycle units - after unloading, if these units are unarmed, they are simply "targets". Armed, they can engage in "suppression" fire allowing the dismounted squad to advance easier. Either way, the AI shoots at them first, as they are a vehicle-type, apparently. BTW: the cost of the unarmed bicycle/motorcycle transport unit comes out somewhere between 5 and 9 points, depending on the Speed.
3. Horse units - same basic arguments apply here as to the bicycle and motorcycle units. All three become simple transports, although with special movement abilities. Unarmed, they do not allow "firing on the move", which by this time even the cavalry had ceased to practice, favoring the move-and-dismount tactic.
One thing that has also come up in testing is the fragility of the bicycle/motorcycle unit; with a small crew (2) it only takes one or two small arms hits to destroy ALL the transports for the squad. 12 bikes all wiped out with one shot is not realistic. Now, taking into consideration the way the game treats vehicles and crews, it is possible to make the crew of the bicycle/motorcycle equal to the Carry Capacity (e.g. 12), which would allow the unit to survive a bit longer on the field. Perhaps long enough to find cover or wihdraw far enough to be out of the immediate firefight. If the unit has no weapons and no ROF, the crew isn't going to fight back. Of course, we can't suspend it's movement ability to represent the bikes or motorcycles lying on the ground, but if it can't fight back it isn't a great threat.
One further opinion: I understand the possibility that sneaky PBEM players may exploit these unarmed bicycle/motorcycle units as "expendable" recon assets, but I don't believe we should attempt to prevent this. I know the AI will probably exploit is more than players, as it doesn't do a very good job of using transports.
RE: Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
OK, so I have a company of light infantry suffering most of all of bugs. At least nobody reacted to the fact that I couldn't shoot even though I had shots left and move even though the movement shadow clearly showed I had some movement allowance left.
I would've been content with a backbone of light infantry, as I thought speed and my panzers would prevail, but with these guys I can't do anything useful. The weird "paralyzed when first fired" bug makes it impossible to use them effectively.
In the army we used to ride bicycles everywhere, and we certainly were not taught to fight while riding, so I wasn't assuming they'd shoot from their bikes. Certainly they should be able to dismount & fight, which might be represented just by allowing them to, well, shoot back! But now with these bugs they can't do anything!
This fight is not looking like a glorious victory then. Let's hope my Tigers manage to destroy the Jacksons. I do have some six squads of SS infantry riding on my tanks, but if I have to discard a whole company to just "scout until you're shot at" role...
I would've been content with a backbone of light infantry, as I thought speed and my panzers would prevail, but with these guys I can't do anything useful. The weird "paralyzed when first fired" bug makes it impossible to use them effectively.
In the army we used to ride bicycles everywhere, and we certainly were not taught to fight while riding, so I wasn't assuming they'd shoot from their bikes. Certainly they should be able to dismount & fight, which might be represented just by allowing them to, well, shoot back! But now with these bugs they can't do anything!
This fight is not looking like a glorious victory then. Let's hope my Tigers manage to destroy the Jacksons. I do have some six squads of SS infantry riding on my tanks, but if I have to discard a whole company to just "scout until you're shot at" role...
RE: Bicycle troops + Bonus Question
THis bug has happened to me beforeORIGINAL: Whitmire
OK, so I have a company of light infantry suffering most of all of bugs. At least nobody reacted to the fact that I couldn't shoot even though I had shots left and move even though the movement shadow clearly showed I had some movement allowance left.
damnest thing
Looks like they should be able to move and fire but they cant
Wheres Mike Wood??
LOL
[:D]