Special Op Fire and Point Blank Fire seems whacked
Moderator: MOD_SPWaW
-
achappelle
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Fri May 11, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Vancouver, BC
Charles_22, I agree with your take on STalingrad, the Germans didn't lose because of anything that directly took place in Stalingrad, there were other drawn out sieges on the Eastern front, Kharkov, sevastopol for example. What caused the Germans to lose was the collapse of the puppet armies on their flanks, and the resulting encirclement. It is definite that the delay that was caused by the defense of Stalingrad allowed the Soviets to buid up their counterattack forces, but the deplotment of the German lines, and the failure by the flanks to hold were the direct reason for the defeat.
"Molon Labe" - Leonidas @ Thermopylae (Come Get Them!!)
-
Paul Vebber
- Posts: 5342
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Portsmouth RI
- Contact:
The special opfire message appearing in your turn is a display artifact, sometimes the part fo the code that generates the special opfire messege gets overruled and the mesege appears, but the enemy unit that is supposed to fire never does becasue of morale failure. Its one of those "its easier to just ignore than fix" right now...if a ASpecial opfire messege flashes up and no fire occures, well you just ignore it.
The same thing happens sometimes when "point blank opfire" flashes up and a DIFFERENT unit then uses regular opfire, so it looks like a unit pont blank opfired greater than 2 hexes away.
As to Specaial opfire being "whacked", well its its supposed to be EXACTLY THAT! Random fire by a desperate enemy that you don't expect. A couple of points:
There are 3 seperate special opfire situations that all get checked for all units every time the circumstances are met. "General" special opfire whenever a unit moves in you LOS and you have 0 shots, "Return" opfire when you get shot and have no shots, and "point blank" when the enemy moves adjacent (if advance stance) or within 2 hexes (defend stance or in cover is C2 is off) The "point plank" kind is much more common than the other types.
Note that if you are triggered for special opfire you have to pass a morale check that returns you to "pinned" status (failure of which sometimes causes the spurious messages) then after you shoot, you take a morale/experience check, failure of which causes 2-5 suppression to be added (making subsequent special opfire less likely and less accurate)
Range and ROF and suppression are key componants in generating special opfire, it will happen much more often at shorter ranges than longer ones. SO the key is suppressive fire with longer range weapons (preferrably out side "point blank")
Units in defend stance or "in cover" special opfire much more often than advancing units (reflecting overwatching fire)
The "multiple" that is used as a rnge of random number draws for determining special opfire is:
(12-ROF)*mult*range*(suppression/10+1)
Mult= 15 for defend, 20 advance for Point blank and return special opfire and 30 defend and 50 advance for "regular"
So a typical inf unit with no suppression, defending at range 1 and ROF=9 would be 3*15*1*1 = 45 a random(45)< experience indicates special opfire, so unless the unit is an imbicile, it will get a special opfire shot, assming it spotted the approaching enemy.
Now if it had 10 suppression and the enemy was at range 2 this drop to 3*15*2*2 = 180, so now even a 90 experience unit only has a 50% chance.
Now for a "regualr" opfire shot for a moving tank with ROF 6 at say 10 hexes the number jumps to 6*50*10*1 or 3000 so this is simply "dumb luck" at this range that , since its checked every hex for every moving unit, if an enemy horde is advancing you will likely get lucky every couple turns with each unit.
So range and suppression are keys here, and getting "in cover" or a defend stance makes a big difference. The idea is that as you get closer, the enmy will defend itself more tenaciously and the "soak off" tactics don't work as well. At some point though, too much special opfire will cause enough suppression that the unit will be left in a retreated or even routed state even if you don't shoot at it. Strength of number s can overwhelm, but it has to be MULTIPLES of teh enemy strength, not an extra squad of two. Melee is a key ingredient in this new soup too, as in city fighting getting into melee with an enemy is a key way to eihter wipe it out or suppress it to the point of ineffectiveness quickly.
The asynchronous nature of IG-HUGO games makes linear causality a problem...it isn;t logical, no, but as I explained in another thread:
http://www.matrixgames.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=002684
and
http://www.matrixgames.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=004726
Events in an IGO-HUGO turn are NOT sequential and inherantly illogical, but the idea is the results at the end of a pair of player turns are believable...NOT that they are played out in a linear and logical sequence. Something which is by definition impossible where one unit can "use all its time" before the next unit does anything!
That is the whole point of special opfire! Because you can move one unit its entire turns movement,and based on what it finds, move another unit its whole movement, and so on and so on you can pack hours worth "sequential" ops in a single turn if you have enough troops. Since alot of this obviously happens simultaneously, then one is left with the problem of balancing the players "gods eye view" and ability to intricately violate all sorts of laws of time and space to advance and conduct attacks, special opfire adds back the inherant strength of the defense to respond to these machinations in some manner, albeit random.
One can argue its too much or two little, but basically becasue of the abstract nature of the turn its basically a mater of personal taste. And one does not need to edit the OOBs to change this to ones taste. Turning "national characteristics" off removes the Russian "fanatical defense", Lowering experience using troop quality reduces opfire as does lowering the spotting value (as units are tougher to spot they tend) to be shot at much less often. INcreasing infantry toughness tends to reduce casualties making fire in general more suppressive but not deadly. Etc.
IT pains me to continually hear floks complain they don't like an aspect of the game, and then say its too hard to change the preferences! Obviously from the divergence in opinion on every one of these topics, its impossible to please everyone, so we tried to offer as many ways to customize tthe game to individual taste as we could!
You just have to be careful becasue after you play a pbem game your game preferences will be changed to those of the last pbem game you played, so after you play pbem always check your preference setings before you start a new one!
[ June 01, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]
The same thing happens sometimes when "point blank opfire" flashes up and a DIFFERENT unit then uses regular opfire, so it looks like a unit pont blank opfired greater than 2 hexes away.
As to Specaial opfire being "whacked", well its its supposed to be EXACTLY THAT! Random fire by a desperate enemy that you don't expect. A couple of points:
There are 3 seperate special opfire situations that all get checked for all units every time the circumstances are met. "General" special opfire whenever a unit moves in you LOS and you have 0 shots, "Return" opfire when you get shot and have no shots, and "point blank" when the enemy moves adjacent (if advance stance) or within 2 hexes (defend stance or in cover is C2 is off) The "point plank" kind is much more common than the other types.
Note that if you are triggered for special opfire you have to pass a morale check that returns you to "pinned" status (failure of which sometimes causes the spurious messages) then after you shoot, you take a morale/experience check, failure of which causes 2-5 suppression to be added (making subsequent special opfire less likely and less accurate)
Range and ROF and suppression are key componants in generating special opfire, it will happen much more often at shorter ranges than longer ones. SO the key is suppressive fire with longer range weapons (preferrably out side "point blank")
Units in defend stance or "in cover" special opfire much more often than advancing units (reflecting overwatching fire)
The "multiple" that is used as a rnge of random number draws for determining special opfire is:
(12-ROF)*mult*range*(suppression/10+1)
Mult= 15 for defend, 20 advance for Point blank and return special opfire and 30 defend and 50 advance for "regular"
So a typical inf unit with no suppression, defending at range 1 and ROF=9 would be 3*15*1*1 = 45 a random(45)< experience indicates special opfire, so unless the unit is an imbicile, it will get a special opfire shot, assming it spotted the approaching enemy.
Now if it had 10 suppression and the enemy was at range 2 this drop to 3*15*2*2 = 180, so now even a 90 experience unit only has a 50% chance.
Now for a "regualr" opfire shot for a moving tank with ROF 6 at say 10 hexes the number jumps to 6*50*10*1 or 3000 so this is simply "dumb luck" at this range that , since its checked every hex for every moving unit, if an enemy horde is advancing you will likely get lucky every couple turns with each unit.
So range and suppression are keys here, and getting "in cover" or a defend stance makes a big difference. The idea is that as you get closer, the enmy will defend itself more tenaciously and the "soak off" tactics don't work as well. At some point though, too much special opfire will cause enough suppression that the unit will be left in a retreated or even routed state even if you don't shoot at it. Strength of number s can overwhelm, but it has to be MULTIPLES of teh enemy strength, not an extra squad of two. Melee is a key ingredient in this new soup too, as in city fighting getting into melee with an enemy is a key way to eihter wipe it out or suppress it to the point of ineffectiveness quickly.
The asynchronous nature of IG-HUGO games makes linear causality a problem...it isn;t logical, no, but as I explained in another thread:
http://www.matrixgames.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=002684
and
http://www.matrixgames.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=004726
Events in an IGO-HUGO turn are NOT sequential and inherantly illogical, but the idea is the results at the end of a pair of player turns are believable...NOT that they are played out in a linear and logical sequence. Something which is by definition impossible where one unit can "use all its time" before the next unit does anything!
That is the whole point of special opfire! Because you can move one unit its entire turns movement,and based on what it finds, move another unit its whole movement, and so on and so on you can pack hours worth "sequential" ops in a single turn if you have enough troops. Since alot of this obviously happens simultaneously, then one is left with the problem of balancing the players "gods eye view" and ability to intricately violate all sorts of laws of time and space to advance and conduct attacks, special opfire adds back the inherant strength of the defense to respond to these machinations in some manner, albeit random.
One can argue its too much or two little, but basically becasue of the abstract nature of the turn its basically a mater of personal taste. And one does not need to edit the OOBs to change this to ones taste. Turning "national characteristics" off removes the Russian "fanatical defense", Lowering experience using troop quality reduces opfire as does lowering the spotting value (as units are tougher to spot they tend) to be shot at much less often. INcreasing infantry toughness tends to reduce casualties making fire in general more suppressive but not deadly. Etc.
IT pains me to continually hear floks complain they don't like an aspect of the game, and then say its too hard to change the preferences! Obviously from the divergence in opinion on every one of these topics, its impossible to please everyone, so we tried to offer as many ways to customize tthe game to individual taste as we could!
You just have to be careful becasue after you play a pbem game your game preferences will be changed to those of the last pbem game you played, so after you play pbem always check your preference setings before you start a new one!
[ June 01, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]
It's been said that the Germans had 90% of Stalingrad in their hands at one time. That's not an army that lost the battle of Stalingrad, at that point, but one who had basically won it. Of course they ended up losing all of that due to the encirclement, but it seems strange to me that people talk of the Germans losing at Stalingrad as though they were the natural occupants of that city and that the Soviets took it. In a sense, I suppose that's true, because when you hold 90% of the city and then lose it, you had taken possession and then 'lost it', but people seem to often think of Stalingrad in the terms of perhaps a Moscow or Leningrad, where the Germans lost because they took very little or none of the city proper. In such a case as Stalingrad, the Germans didn't lose because they were denied possession, so much, but more because the Soviets lost it and then won it back.[/QB][/QUOTE]
I would argue otherwise. IMO, the Germans lost 6th Army and parts of 4th Panzer Army at Stalingrad because the leadership - both political and miliatry - became fixated with a tactical and not a strategic objective. The Soviet High Command did a fantastic job of using 62nd and 64th Armies to lock down the attention of the German leadership, which caused the Germans to feed more and more units into a tactical environment. Then the Soviets launched a strategic offensive designed to do to the Germans exactly what the Germans had done to the Poles, Dutch, Belgians, French, Yugo's, Greek, Russians, and to an extent the British - a strategic encirclement. IMO, Leadership on both sides played a very key factor in that ever so critical battle.
Alex
I would argue otherwise. IMO, the Germans lost 6th Army and parts of 4th Panzer Army at Stalingrad because the leadership - both political and miliatry - became fixated with a tactical and not a strategic objective. The Soviet High Command did a fantastic job of using 62nd and 64th Armies to lock down the attention of the German leadership, which caused the Germans to feed more and more units into a tactical environment. Then the Soviets launched a strategic offensive designed to do to the Germans exactly what the Germans had done to the Poles, Dutch, Belgians, French, Yugo's, Greek, Russians, and to an extent the British - a strategic encirclement. IMO, Leadership on both sides played a very key factor in that ever so critical battle.
Alex
"Tonight a dynasty is born." Ricky Proehl, then of the Saint Louis Rams. He was right! Go Pats! Winners of Super Bowls 36, 38 and 39.
Returning, briefly, to the subject of this thread; there is an aspect of special op fire that isn't working. Close assaults by spontaneously rallied Soviets are way too lethal.
As mentioned elsewhere, I moved a self propelled gun (Sig 150 on a Pz II hull) up behind a machine gun nest in a Stalingrad campaign battle and blew it to pieces from 50 meters away. This was the only range I could engage it from, btw; but that's beside the point. Three crew survived the destruction of the nest; they promptly turned around and close assaulted the gun. They destroyed it; and the message at the bottom of the screen informed me that they had a 78% chance of doing so.
Now, after hearing all the loose talk about getting rid of supersoldiers in the new edition, I find that three concussed regular crewmen with random small arms are more dangerous to German armor than a veteran T-34. This wasn't the only such experience I've had, btw; just the most ludicrous...after all, a full, fresh squad of elite German assault engineers will never see a 50% chance of success; how did these shmoes become so potent????
As mentioned elsewhere, I moved a self propelled gun (Sig 150 on a Pz II hull) up behind a machine gun nest in a Stalingrad campaign battle and blew it to pieces from 50 meters away. This was the only range I could engage it from, btw; but that's beside the point. Three crew survived the destruction of the nest; they promptly turned around and close assaulted the gun. They destroyed it; and the message at the bottom of the screen informed me that they had a 78% chance of doing so.
Now, after hearing all the loose talk about getting rid of supersoldiers in the new edition, I find that three concussed regular crewmen with random small arms are more dangerous to German armor than a veteran T-34. This wasn't the only such experience I've had, btw; just the most ludicrous...after all, a full, fresh squad of elite German assault engineers will never see a 50% chance of success; how did these shmoes become so potent????
-
Paul Vebber
- Posts: 5342
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Portsmouth RI
- Contact:
A SIG is an open top, open rear weapon with no machine gun! They obviously got a lucky ro'l and "got the drop" on the lumbering SP gun and threw a grenade into it. Hardly the work of "supermen". Remember that moving adjacent to an enemy impies "very close proximity" not that you are assured a 50m standoff range from all enemy soldiers!
It never ceases to amaze me how "lucky die rolls" are always "bugs".
I'm really tempted to amke "little dice" in any future game so players see the die rolls with their own eyes if they want
Unlikely events in squad leader or other board games where you see the dice fly are " the fortunes of war" but in computer games. always bugs!
[ June 02, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]
It never ceases to amaze me how "lucky die rolls" are always "bugs".
I'm really tempted to amke "little dice" in any future game so players see the die rolls with their own eyes if they want
Unlikely events in squad leader or other board games where you see the dice fly are " the fortunes of war" but in computer games. always bugs!
[ June 02, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]
I don't have a problem with the op-fires.
But the big deal is to feel free to tinker with the settings.... oh, how I wish there was more of that going on.
Think the Russians are tough? Try attacking Japanese.... very high quality with large units. Soviets are a piece of cake compared to Japanese.
I just started a Hungarian-Rumanian battle outside of Budapest, Jan 45. Wouldn't be worth ten minutes time without tweeking the settings.
But the big deal is to feel free to tinker with the settings.... oh, how I wish there was more of that going on.
Think the Russians are tough? Try attacking Japanese.... very high quality with large units. Soviets are a piece of cake compared to Japanese.
I just started a Hungarian-Rumanian battle outside of Budapest, Jan 45. Wouldn't be worth ten minutes time without tweeking the settings.
Ok, Paul; let's take this from the top. First, the Sig on a Pz II hull does have an AAMG. Yes, it's open topped (I was confusing it with the same gun on the Pz III hull which is closed topped); but this misses the point you glossed right over from my post...
THREE MEN HAD A 78% CHANCE OF SUCCESSFULLY CLOSE ASSAULTING AN UNSUPPRESSED, MACHINE GUN EQUIPPED AFV FROM THE FRONT WITH NO ANTI-TANK WEAPONRY, EXPLOSIVES, OR INCENDIARIES WHATSOEVER!
Ahem. Anyway; I have no objection to miracles; if my unit had been blown to pieces on a 1% shot I would have been duly impressed, and then slaughtered the Soviets involved to prevent them from doing it again. Fortunes of war. However, I think I can safely identify a bug when the game tells me that it was all but a done deal that this assault would work, no luck need apply. Elite assault engineers and special forces don't get percentages that good; why did these crewmen?
THREE MEN HAD A 78% CHANCE OF SUCCESSFULLY CLOSE ASSAULTING AN UNSUPPRESSED, MACHINE GUN EQUIPPED AFV FROM THE FRONT WITH NO ANTI-TANK WEAPONRY, EXPLOSIVES, OR INCENDIARIES WHATSOEVER!
Ahem. Anyway; I have no objection to miracles; if my unit had been blown to pieces on a 1% shot I would have been duly impressed, and then slaughtered the Soviets involved to prevent them from doing it again. Fortunes of war. However, I think I can safely identify a bug when the game tells me that it was all but a done deal that this assault would work, no luck need apply. Elite assault engineers and special forces don't get percentages that good; why did these crewmen?
-
Paul Vebber
- Posts: 5342
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Portsmouth RI
- Contact:
Excuse me, yes it does have an AAMG, but have you looked at the picture???Gee I would feel real safe behind the 2 feet of gunshield that passes for armor...the crew is fully exposed while firing - giving that thing ANY turret armor is a bit of a stretch!
Elite special forces and engineers can and do get 85% hit chances. ANY unit that gets lucky can get a good hit percentage if the rolls go right! I just tested moving SIGs up adjacent to hidden russian Engineers and look at the results:
SO Engineer Sqd ASSAULTING sIG33 auf Pz-II with Flamethrower
hit chance 90 percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II DESTROYED ****
SO Engineer Sqd ASSAULTING sIG33 auf Pz-II with Flamethrower
hit chance 90 percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II DESTROYED ****
SO Engineer Sqd ASSAULTING sIG33 auf Pz-II with Flamethrower
hit chance 90 percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II DESTROYED ****
sIG33 auf Pz-II firing at SO Engineer Sqd, range 2 hexes, ~using 15cm sIG33 L/11~Hit Chance 4 Percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II firing at SO Engineer Sqd, range 2 hexes, ~using 7.92 MG34 AAMG~Hit Chance 6 Percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II firing at SO Engineer Sqd, range 2 hexes, ~using 15cm sIG33 L/11~Hit Chance 4 Percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II firing at SO Engineer Sqd, range 2 hexes, ~using 7.92 MG34 AAMG~Hit Chance 5 Percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II firing at SO Engineer Sqd, range 2 hexes, ~using 15cm sIG33 L/11~Hit Chance 5 Percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II firing at SO Engineer Sqd, range 2 hexes, ~using 7.92 MG34 AAMG~Hit Chance 7 Percent
SO Engineer Sqd ASSAULTING sIG33 auf Pz-II with Flamethrower
hit chance 68 percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II IMMOBILIZED
OK One was 68 becasue I tried to suppress the heck out them beofre I moved adjacent...the rest are all over 85%! (and nearly ever time hidden engineers in cover assault they get 90% (the max assualt chance)
AND HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO SAY THAT THE GAME ASUMES TROOPS MIGHT JUST HAVE A WEAPON OF BUNDLE OF GRENADES SQUIRRELED AWAY!!!! THATS WHY IT SAY MISC SMALL ARMS AS THE CREW WEAPON!!!!
Who knows what they might bring out of the fort??? Maybe those three guys were out answering the call of nature and surprised the SiG? Like Squad leader the game allows for "snake eyes" to be rolled everyso often and heroic thigns to happen? ITs "realistic" in Squad leader when a crew rolls 2, but a BUG in SP because you didn't see the dice fall!
I did the same test with 20 MG nests and moved 20 Sigs up to their rear, 12 of the 20 were destroyed, 6 had crews and 2 manged to rally and assault with 23% and 16% chances, immobilizing one.
Sheesh this is getting to be a real waste of time...how many times will I come to this board and find...
Computer rolled snake eyes on me ITS A BUG!!!!
How many times did you repeat this?
If you did not repeat it and find that retreated crews always get 85% kill chances (which I just did and they don't... THEN WHAT THE HECK MAKES YOU THINK ITS A BUG AND NOT A LUCKY SERIES OF DIE ROLLS!!
PLEASE report bugs, if you can repeat them, but htaking an hour everyday repeating myself ad nauseum responding to folks upset that the computer got some lucky die rolls is geting old!
If everytime you rolled up next to an MG nest and poped a couple 150mm rounds at it the crew streamed out and got 85% hit chnaces then that is a problem, but seeing it once or twice and not being able to repeat it is not a bug!
[ June 02, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]
Elite special forces and engineers can and do get 85% hit chances. ANY unit that gets lucky can get a good hit percentage if the rolls go right! I just tested moving SIGs up adjacent to hidden russian Engineers and look at the results:
SO Engineer Sqd ASSAULTING sIG33 auf Pz-II with Flamethrower
hit chance 90 percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II DESTROYED ****
SO Engineer Sqd ASSAULTING sIG33 auf Pz-II with Flamethrower
hit chance 90 percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II DESTROYED ****
SO Engineer Sqd ASSAULTING sIG33 auf Pz-II with Flamethrower
hit chance 90 percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II DESTROYED ****
sIG33 auf Pz-II firing at SO Engineer Sqd, range 2 hexes, ~using 15cm sIG33 L/11~Hit Chance 4 Percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II firing at SO Engineer Sqd, range 2 hexes, ~using 7.92 MG34 AAMG~Hit Chance 6 Percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II firing at SO Engineer Sqd, range 2 hexes, ~using 15cm sIG33 L/11~Hit Chance 4 Percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II firing at SO Engineer Sqd, range 2 hexes, ~using 7.92 MG34 AAMG~Hit Chance 5 Percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II firing at SO Engineer Sqd, range 2 hexes, ~using 15cm sIG33 L/11~Hit Chance 5 Percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II firing at SO Engineer Sqd, range 2 hexes, ~using 7.92 MG34 AAMG~Hit Chance 7 Percent
SO Engineer Sqd ASSAULTING sIG33 auf Pz-II with Flamethrower
hit chance 68 percent
sIG33 auf Pz-II IMMOBILIZED
OK One was 68 becasue I tried to suppress the heck out them beofre I moved adjacent...the rest are all over 85%! (and nearly ever time hidden engineers in cover assault they get 90% (the max assualt chance)
AND HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO SAY THAT THE GAME ASUMES TROOPS MIGHT JUST HAVE A WEAPON OF BUNDLE OF GRENADES SQUIRRELED AWAY!!!! THATS WHY IT SAY MISC SMALL ARMS AS THE CREW WEAPON!!!!
Who knows what they might bring out of the fort??? Maybe those three guys were out answering the call of nature and surprised the SiG? Like Squad leader the game allows for "snake eyes" to be rolled everyso often and heroic thigns to happen? ITs "realistic" in Squad leader when a crew rolls 2, but a BUG in SP because you didn't see the dice fall!
I did the same test with 20 MG nests and moved 20 Sigs up to their rear, 12 of the 20 were destroyed, 6 had crews and 2 manged to rally and assault with 23% and 16% chances, immobilizing one.
Sheesh this is getting to be a real waste of time...how many times will I come to this board and find...
Computer rolled snake eyes on me ITS A BUG!!!!
How many times did you repeat this?
If you did not repeat it and find that retreated crews always get 85% kill chances (which I just did and they don't... THEN WHAT THE HECK MAKES YOU THINK ITS A BUG AND NOT A LUCKY SERIES OF DIE ROLLS!!
PLEASE report bugs, if you can repeat them, but htaking an hour everyday repeating myself ad nauseum responding to folks upset that the computer got some lucky die rolls is geting old!
If everytime you rolled up next to an MG nest and poped a couple 150mm rounds at it the crew streamed out and got 85% hit chnaces then that is a problem, but seeing it once or twice and not being able to repeat it is not a bug!
[ June 02, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]
I want to agree with Paul about the assaults.
I'm currently testing them, scientifically (ie noting the odds on most, if not all, that I see while playing), to see if there's some sort of trend.
So far, the only fluky thing I've noticed is that snipers still seem to get higher than what I'd call reasonable asault chances.
However, my own study has only about 100 entries so far and I'd not call that enough for any sort of analysis. Once I get a serious number of results, I'll post them here.
Alex
I'm currently testing them, scientifically (ie noting the odds on most, if not all, that I see while playing), to see if there's some sort of trend.
So far, the only fluky thing I've noticed is that snipers still seem to get higher than what I'd call reasonable asault chances.
However, my own study has only about 100 entries so far and I'd not call that enough for any sort of analysis. Once I get a serious number of results, I'll post them here.
Alex
"Tonight a dynasty is born." Ricky Proehl, then of the Saint Louis Rams. He was right! Go Pats! Winners of Super Bowls 36, 38 and 39.
-
Paul Vebber
- Posts: 5342
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Portsmouth RI
- Contact:
I've yet to see any damage done by these special point blank op fires. I havn't done a test yet (It is on my list though) but It looks like just the text is being shown. So far I havn't lost a man or suffered any supression so I quit worring about it.
I can't understand why a unit fleeing in panic will suddenly get shot at and turn into a bunch of Rambo's led by John Wayne. To bad its such an old game and I presume we are stuck with three classes of suppression. If a forth class of withdrawing under fire was there the behavior would be understandable. Put it between pinned and retreating and everything becomes clear.
I can't understand why a unit fleeing in panic will suddenly get shot at and turn into a bunch of Rambo's led by John Wayne. To bad its such an old game and I presume we are stuck with three classes of suppression. If a forth class of withdrawing under fire was there the behavior would be understandable. Put it between pinned and retreating and everything becomes clear.
"The 15th May, 1948, arrived ... On that day the mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country, because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead."
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http
No sane man keeps running when fired upon. You hit the ground for cover.. that's why the pinned status is regained. Why wouldn't they fire back if it improves their chances of survival.
This has been said plenty of times before here..
This has been said plenty of times before here..
"If infantry is the Queen of the battlefield, artillery is her backbone", Jukka L. Mäkelä about the Finnish victory at Ihantala.
Thanks you gave me the clue I needed. You are treating pinned, retreating and routed as if they are physcial states. What the words describe are mental conditions. To you pinned means lying on the ground. To me it means being aware that I am the one being shot at and I need to hide better. Retreating to you would be what I consider running for my life. You don't stop to shoot because if shooting was doing any good you wouldn't be running in the first place. Let me rephrase that, just so the Illogic of this position is clear. Your unit is in a shootout and the incoming fire is outdoing the outgoing fire, so, wanting to live, you take off running. The volumn of incoming fire increases, so you stop and restart the fight you just lost, under even worse conditions. Right. Sounds sane to me. A routed unit shouldn't have weapons. They throw them away, because they are done fighting and don't need them anymore. A routed unit is looking for someone to surrender to.Originally posted by Fredde:
No sane man keeps running when fired upon. You hit the ground for cover.. that's why the pinned status is regained. Why wouldn't they fire back if it improves their chances of survival.
This has been said plenty of times before here..
My source is S.L.A. Marshall. What sources were quoted previously?
T.
P.S. there are no Sane men in a combat unit.
"The 15th May, 1948, arrived ... On that day the mufti of Jerusalem appealed to the Arabs of Palestine to leave the country, because the Arab armies were about to enter and fight in their stead."
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http
– The Cairo daily Akhbar el Yom, Oct. 12, 1963.
[IMG]http
Snipers typically get higher chances beacue they are "especially small targets" and are assumed to be stealthy as well, being better able to remain hidden and strike the tank unawares.[/QB][/QUOTE]
Strike with what??? I'm sorry, Paul, but I don't picture a sniper rifle as able to kill a tank
I think snipers should rarely assault as thier job is to scoot and shoot. Or to be cheap scouts I also don't think that a sniper should have better assault changes than combat engineers as the engineers have weapons that can hurt a tank.
Still, my test is still way ongoing so don't take this as a flame
I'll save those for tanks
Alex
Strike with what??? I'm sorry, Paul, but I don't picture a sniper rifle as able to kill a tank
I think snipers should rarely assault as thier job is to scoot and shoot. Or to be cheap scouts I also don't think that a sniper should have better assault changes than combat engineers as the engineers have weapons that can hurt a tank.Still, my test is still way ongoing so don't take this as a flame
I'll save those for tanks
Alex
"Tonight a dynasty is born." Ricky Proehl, then of the Saint Louis Rams. He was right! Go Pats! Winners of Super Bowls 36, 38 and 39.
-
Paul Vebber
- Posts: 5342
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Portsmouth RI
- Contact:
"If you did not repeat it and find that retreated crews always get 85% kill chances (which I just did and they don't... THEN WHAT THE HECK MAKES YOU THINK ITS A BUG AND NOT A LUCKY SERIES OF DIE ROLLS!!"
Because I had never read the FAQ in the manual, and wasn't aware that close assaults were at least partly random numbers. Which is why I jumped down your throat when you persisted in not regarding random assault percentages as a bug. For which I apologize.
I am curious, however; how did you get such high (90+) percent chances for 3 man engineer squads? I ran this dozens of times and never broke 45% for spotted troops attacking out of cover.
Because I had never read the FAQ in the manual, and wasn't aware that close assaults were at least partly random numbers. Which is why I jumped down your throat when you persisted in not regarding random assault percentages as a bug. For which I apologize.
I am curious, however; how did you get such high (90+) percent chances for 3 man engineer squads? I ran this dozens of times and never broke 45% for spotted troops attacking out of cover.