Jump to content

This is why I stopped playing...


Recommended Posts

Your analysis of me is incorrect.

I'd just like the AI to perform the way a human would if they had just received 15-20 rounds of 60mm and 105mm HE mix.

That's all.

But what you are saying is all humans are going to be suppressed because of this attack - guaranteed.

You cannot say that, that is the problem.

What is true suppression? I would think it means that the trooper is still alive but not able to function, either because of a wound or mental fear or actual real physical issues from the concussion of the explosion.

And as some have tried pointing out, there is chances that some of the troopers might just manage to avoid that even if they are in the zone you think they should not be able to withstand that. (and who has the proof which is correct)

If a person somehow does find a spot where shrapnel does not hit him and he is shielded from the shock wave, then he is still mentally alert. Logic tells him that when the arty has stopped, he knows the enemy is likely to assault. He will either flee and risk getting shot in the back, try to withdraw or try to fight.

He has not had time to know what the situation is with all the rest of the troopers, so he will make a decision on what he senses.

Maybe not in your world, but in mine some will stay and fight.

From what studies I have read. No matter the situation. 1 in 10 will fight because he is just a fighter by nature. 3 in 10 will likely fight because of their nature as to responsability to others, duty, following the example set by a natural fighter and such things. that leaves 6 or 7 out of 10 that are generally worthless. They will hide, run, sit in fear and such acts until they are forced to act.

So it really comes down to many factors that the game is not going to protray, or do we really want it to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your analysis of me is incorrect.

I'd just like the AI to perform the way a human would if they had just received 15-20 rounds of 60mm and 105mm HE mix.

That's all.

That's entirely possible, but in my humble opinion, I think you'd have to spend a lot more then $50 for a game and have a mid-frame processing platform that costs tens of thousands of dollars to get that kind of sophisticated result. :D

It's a micro-processor based PC game, complete with all the limitations of processing power and cost of development versus ROI that determines what gets delivered to the end customer.

Personally, I love the game, even when the realism isn't there, such as with the Sherman tank which has a LOT of gamey unrealistic edges, that I could write pages of criticisms about. ;)

How do I handle that, well, I used to come here and whine about realism, then I gave myself a shake and read my own counter argument above. So, now I've learned to live with the game and engine limitations, but I've met some great folks in multi-player, plus had hundreds of hours of enjoyment getting my lights punched out by them. :P

If don't want to play it anymore because you can't get enough of a realism fix from it, then I respect that, but respect the fact that I (perhaps others) think it's a fantastic $50 entertainment value for a war game on a personal computer platform.

Regards,

Doug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what studies I have read. No matter the situation. 1 in 10 will fight because he is just a fighter by nature. 3 in 10 will likely fight because of their nature as to responsability to others, duty, following the example set by a natural fighter and such things. that leaves 6 or 7 out of 10 that are generally worthless. They will hide, run, sit in fear and such acts until they are forced to act.

At this stage in the proceedings, would the dead wood not have been winnowed out leaving a core of troops that could handle artillery fire?

In his book Accidental Warrior, Geoffrey Picot makes his assaulting troops (he's with them) to its lean on the barrage as the opposition had shown time and time again (and in the previous war) that they can quickly get their act together following an arty barrage. In the example he gives, they just get to the objective in time, a few seconds later and they would have faced the business end of an MG.

I must admit, I've been in Cpt Mikes position, spitting feathers as my sure fire plan unravels like the seam of your favourite drinking trousers when you bend down too quickly, but what doesn't destroy us makes us stronger (after a few minutes kicking the dog and twenty minutes cool down).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your analysis of me is incorrect.

I'd just like the AI to perform the way a human would if they had just received 15-20 rounds of 60mm and 105mm HE mix.

That's all.

So all humans are the same? An elite soldier will be suppressed just as much as a green conscript? How do you know how any soldier will react in that situation? And I assume the barrages were over when you decided assault the Germans in the woods. The AI performed as I would have expected: as soon as the barrage ends the suppression starts to lessen and soldiers pick up their head to see a squad charging them, of course their going to shoot them, regardless of the suppression. Being suprressed doesn't mean that they wont shoot back, but it does lessen the chance.

And, btw, 15-20 rounds of indirect fire isn't all that much. You had stated earlier that it was a longer barrage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well then why do you care so much about whether or not CMBN models the exact speed at which tanks drive in reverse? :P

Now, that is funny.

And to tell you the truth, I know I have been just like Cpt Mike, There has ben moments where I have found things within the game that just are not realistic as to what I think RL would be and I have made my complaints here on the forum. Thinking that it would make the world better and somehow they would magically change the game and life would be good. I still wait also.

And many others that comment here have done the same, So Cpt Mike dont take it too seriously if we dont all agree with you or think it is a needed change.

I still wait for the patch that might correct the Uber pistol abilities within the game. (the issue I like to pull up each time we want to show how the game is not perfect.) But it is just that, its still is a game, and it is amazing what we have for that, we are just spoiled children that just cannot be satisfied and we throw our anger fits when the game treats us poorly.

The truth is, its a great game, and if you cannot accept it for what it really is. Then you really do need to move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well then why do you care so much about whether or not CMBN models the exact speed at which tanks drive in reverse? :P

Mere respect for some realism so people laughingly did not point out how bogus 30mph reverse was in a tank. A mere detail to you VAB as I know you thought it was realistic : )

Fortunately BF did change it in Version 1.01 so perhaps I should have credit even if the speed chosen is a bodge. The downside is all those dinky armoured cars with drivers fore and aft and a gearbox that truly allowed them to travel in either direction at speed are banjaxed.

I have to admit to being incredibly puzzled that something as simple as speed forward and speed in reverse were not modeled from the start or even CMSF. I am no programmer so perhaps it is incredibly difficult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great Googly Moogly! People here like to speculate and draw broad conclusions based on the barest of anecdotes.

So far, we have a brief account of one incident where HE appears to have not been as effective as it should have been. The description is only very general and does not describe in detail exactly the fire and maneuver plan was executed by the player; it's just a broad description of the action. We have no save game file. We don't even have a screen shot.

And we have vague references to other incidents by the same player (i.e., Capt. Mike) where he saw similar results.

Fine. Capt. Mike is not seeing the results from HE fire in the game he thinks he should. Given that he has real world experience on both ends of HE fire, his opinion carries weight. So let's take it at face value and see if we can come up with DETAILED, VERIFIABLE, and REPEATABLE data to support or refute his observations.

Tell you what, I'll see if I can find the time to create a small training/testing "micro scenario" that people can use to test fire and maneuver tactics against an enemy infantry position in good cover, and how effective HE is at suppressing enemy position(s) in this context. I will use the incident that Capt. Mike described as the inspiration for the scenario, using similar forces and a similar tactical situation. It will have multiple AI plans/deployments so people can replay and try different tactics, without knowing exactly where the enemy is.

I did a little bit of noodling in the editor last night, and here's what I'm thinking:

Reduced strength U.S. Armored Infantry platoon, 2 squads only, w/o halftracks or MMGs, but with its organic 60mm mortar team, assigned to pinpoint and eliminate an enemy HMG position on a crest in a treeline. General vicinity of the enemy HMG is known at scenario start, but not its precise position. The HMG is the only known enemy unit in area, but it may be supported by one or more other units, providing close-in and/or flank defense.

In addition to on-map units, if he feels he needs it, the U.S. player will have access to a 2-tube battery of M7 Priest 105mm SP howitzers.

I'm using an Armored Infantry platoon as the base force because if you remove the MMG squad from an Armored Infantry Platoon, the U.S. player has absolutely no fully automatic weapons; the squads have only Garands. So he will have to rely on the HE fire from the 60mm mortar and/or 105mm SPGs if he wants to reliably eliminate the enemy HMG without risking undue casualties.

There is, of course, more than enough HE ordnance in the M7 Priest ammo loads to completely wipe out a much larger enemy position. Rather than provide a scenario that is really a challenge to "win" if the player fully leverages everything available to him, my goal will be to give players a training and testing ground to try different tactics and determine, among other things, just how much HE fire is really needed in the game to reliably suppress an HMG position enough that it can be closed with and completely eliminated without undue casualties.

Sound good? Feel free to offer suggestions. It will take me at least a few days to get the scenario together. Maybe I can speed up the process by finding an already made map to work with. I'll post here when I have something for folks to look at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YD,

I think its great that you would take your time to do this but honestly I have seen enough personal evidence in this game that indirect fire is very effective. I have both delivered it to good/great effect and have been on the receiving end to my dismay on many occasions. As a result, I'm usually in the habit of giving ground when the spotting rounds start to fall because I'm very aware of the inevitable outcome.

Cpt Mike has been less than forthcoming in giving details concerning his incident or any other and until he can do so, I'm ready to call his complaint BS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

YD,

I think its great that you would take your time to do this but honestly I have seen enough personal evidence in this game that indirect fire is very effective. I have both delivered it to good/great effect and have been on the receiving end to my dismay on many occasions. As a result, I'm usually in the habit of giving ground when the spotting rounds start to fall because I'm very aware of the inevitable outcome.

Cpt Mike has been less than forthcoming in giving details concerning his incident or any other and until he can do so, I'm ready to call his complaint BS.

Well, I'd rather not cast aspersions.

In the game, I find indirect fire very effective as well, and I fully expect any scenario I construct will demonstrate this. But it's occurred to me for a while that CMx2 in general could use more teaching/learning tools -- a small scenarios focusing on particular tactical problems that can be easily replayed multiple times to experiment with the details of executing proper small-unit tactics in the game.

As I mentioned before, there's fire and maneuver theory, which is applicable to real life tactics and tactical wargaming in general (at least for any wargame with a modicum of realism). And then there's the details of how to execute fire and maneuver in CMBN specifically. One can be very knowledgeable in the former, but lack sufficient experience and knowledge of how to leverage the CM user interface to execute the theory in the game.

Anyway, no promises about how quickly I can get it done -- my job and lifestyle means I tend to get smacked by the busy stick just when I'm least expecting it. But I'll see what I can do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When this kind of thing happens to me I get really mad and just stop playing for a few weeks. Maybe I'll even blow off some steam by posting my gripes on this forum. With the hope that the game designers will notice, investigate the issue, and hopefully rectify it in the next patch/game. It is interesting to see if the community agrees or disagrees with my problem. It is always fun to watch the fanboi's scramble to defend the indefensible by any means necessary.

Anyhow, after a few weeks I've come to my senses and realized that this is just a game and nothing is perfect. I always come back and I'll bet the OP will too. It is a good game (equal to, but not better than the CMX1 series). The only other game I've played that demands, and gets, so much of my time is CIV IV. I've never played a tactical war game that is as immersive as the CM games. If you find one, let me know. I'll try it.

If I can't rationalize a certain aspect of a scenario . . . I just don't play that scenario. It is frustrating when things occur such as what the OP describes . . . but I try to chalk them up as one-off occasions where seemingly incredible things happen. Those things do happen in war. Maybe they happen more often in CMBN, but I still rationalize it as a "Knights Cross" or "Medal of Honor" moment. Not really satisfying, particularly when I think I've done everything right . . . and I still lose because of one guy with an Mp40 . . . but it gets me through.

I do believe that the game designers are intent on creating what they believe is the most authentic recreation of tactical combat. Most of the time they get it right, sometimes they don't. I realize that they have to cut corners. It's just the way it is.

I don't think they're intentionally trying to piss us off or dumb down the game. That would be bad business. For example, I don't know why there STILL isn't a "cover armor" arc in CMBN, or that I can't use the fifty on my M10 for suppression . . . but I don't think it's because the designers are trying to make me angry or push me away from the game. It must be because they can't code it . . . or they don't think it is necessary. Maybe, hopefully, one day they will.

Anyhow, I know my rant is TLDR . . . but I feel better for having had my say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is always fun to watch the fanboi's scramble to defend the indefensible by any means necessary.

It is even funnier to watch the chaos generated by unsupported, unverifiable "I saw it so it has to be true for everyone all the time and can't possibly be me" statements espoused as fact with no supporting data, save files, screenshots etc. I got to hand it to YD, he is a lot more giving than I am. Why should I spend my time trying to prove or disprove Cpt_Mike's experience if he himself isn't willing to spend the time. No offense to the Cpt, but one would think the person who feels the coding is unbalanced would need to do more than just claim it is to get a response much less an offer to do extensive testing.

And then to hear anyone who disagrees or asks for something to try and test against characterized as a fanboi. :rolleyes:

After all there MUST be aliens checking out our planet with all the statements of folks who insist they saw them right? Anyone who says different must be an anti-alien fanboi

Signed- Anti-Alien fanboi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a ****ing game, (that is more realistic that anything out there). If you really want to eat dirt, then go join the boys and girls out there.

I think I know enough about war to not want to be there. (every good war movie is an anti-war movie). Grandpa in the Dutch underground; dad was in the FFL (Indochine 52-53), 2 x Croix de Guerres, 1 x French silver star, six bullets and 1/2 pound of grenade shrapnel. Uncle as doctor in Indonesian revolution, Brother in Canadian PPCLI.

Crazy stories. One man takes out 3 machine gun nests. Other time .50 from miles away drops the sergeant. The only constant in war is that there is no constant.

Appreciate the game for the incredible realism. Offer constructive criticism. Realize it is a game.

I love this game. It takes effort, hard work, lots of thinking; gives you lots of failure, and rewards perseverance. Hey, kind of like real life!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, the fanboy crap gets old. It's a deflection tactic used when someone can't stand the fact they are being disagreed with. We have a certain forum member that uses the term so much I am starting to think it's a fetish.

However, nice to see BlackHand has come to enjoy CMBN. LOL far different view than when CMBN was first released. See? I told you if you gave it some time...

Mord.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a ****ing game, (that is more realistic that anything out there). If you really want to eat dirt, then go join the boys and girls out there.

I think I know enough about war to not want to be there. (every good war movie is an anti-war movie). Grandpa in the Dutch underground; dad was in the FFL (Indochine 52-53), 2 x Croix de Guerres, 1 x French silver star, six bullets and 1/2 pound of grenade shrapnel. Uncle as doctor in Indonesian revolution, Brother in Canadian PPCLI.

Crazy stories. One man takes out 3 machine gun nests. Other time .50 from miles away drops the sergeant. The only constant in war is that there is no constant.

Appreciate the game for the incredible realism. Offer constructive criticism. Realize it is a game.

I love this game. It takes effort, hard work, lots of thinking; gives you lots of failure, and rewards perseverance. Hey, kind of like real life!

Beautifully said fatehunter! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a ****ing game, (that is more realistic that anything out there). If you really want to eat dirt, then go join the boys and girls out there.

+1.

If modeling real life war in a computer game were so easy, then anybody could do it. I don't recall anything in the product description which claims to be able to reproduce real life situations.

Look at the alternatives...Achtung Panzer Operation Star gets raves reviews, but to me, the way the little tiny men round around is laughable. Etc.

I play the game cuz I like the sound of gunfire and explosions. When I was a kid, I had to make them myself...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you know how any soldier will react in that situation?

Ok, obviously not reading my posts. Well...you know what they say about arguing on the internet....

And, btw, 15-20 rounds of indirect fire isn't all that much.

Yes it is. The most rounds I ever received was 5 x 82mm rounds within 8-10 seconds and I can tell you it felt like the entire world was exploding, so please don't lecture me on your armchair general ideas of the effects of indirect fire on the human psych.*

I cannot even begin to imagine what a barrage of 60mm and 105mm HE mix is like. I'm sure its somewhere between Mike Tyson punching you in the face and being in a car accident.

*I'm not a tough guy, and I would prefer not to tell 'war stories' on an internet message board, but you've given me no alternative and you've pushed me to do it. You've done everything up to this point in accusing me of being a liar, and I'm not sure why. You must really love this game, to defend it to such a ridiculous point. I'm not sure you even recognize what you're talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cannot even begin to imagine what a barrage of 60mm and 105mm HE mix is like. I'm sure its somewhere between Mike Tyson punching you in the face and being in a car accident.

So you can begin to imagine what a barrage of 60mm and 105mm mix is like !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...