Steiner14 Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Interesting test. But i think in the game's reality the fire will be opened more often from the sides. How are the results then? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Interesting test. But i think in the game's reality the fire will be opened more often from the sides. How are the results then? I'll post here once I've run more tests. Can't do now because I'm at work in front of this stupid, worthless computer that doesn't (and can't) have CM installed on it. Should be able to do some similar casual tests, testing both other small arms also other engagement aspects such as flank-on, over the weekend. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 For once, I can report affirmative to something in these wish list threads. There's a new hotkey that toggles an extra-bright visibility setting for night conditions. Good! Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Another cool thing, but for early war, would be bicycles. And not just early war. The Germans were still using them in Normandy and some British units landed with them (though I hear they quickly discarded them). Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Yankee Dog, Nice tests! And 200m is typical WW II engagement range for infantry. I have no doubt a .50 will eat a 250 or 251 at anything close to perpendicular angles to the flanks, which is what I suspect happened in the combat example someone posted, but the lockers and tools within might act as spaced armor and keep out some of the shots. According to what I read, the usual load for the infantry .50s was ball and ball with tracer. By contrast, M16 GMCs would likely have AP and ball with tracer, for that is how the fighters were armed to kill aircraft. http://www.hoofsperformance.wwiionline.com/weapammo.htm Broadsword56 and Michael Emrys, Mules were absolutely critical to the U.S. war effort in Italy, being able to go where even jeeps couldn't. Transport in the mountains was so bad mortar sections were advised to fire one tube more often, rather than lug along both. Would love to see bicycles--for loads of reasons. Still praying for motorcycles! Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WriterJWA Posted June 29, 2012 Author Share Posted June 29, 2012 AHHH! Motorcycles. Now THAT would be pretty slick ... especially for fast reconnaissance. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steiner14 Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 YD, super. Thrilled to see the results. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baneman Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Yep, during a long deployment session, looking at the vast distance to cover, my scout teams were crying for motorcycles. There's always hope 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted June 29, 2012 Share Posted June 29, 2012 Still praying for motorcycles! Yeah, if we ever get to early war stuff, motorcycles will be darn near indispensable. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 YankeeDog & JonS, You are correct in that Armored Infantry did, in fact, carry tripods for the vehicle mounted MGs. I believe this is directly stated in the ORDNANCE CATALOGUE, which lists what's in each vehicle. I think, though, a little digging will show numerous instances that the MGs were used while mounted. Otherwise, why go to the expense of installing a skate rail and the mounts to use it? Clearly, they wanted to be able to deliver fire from practically any point. Anyone read this? http://www.amazon.com/World-Armored-.../dp/1846036925 It's well reviewed and would seem to have the information we need. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 YankeeDog & JonS, Or maybe we should just order the Armored Infantry Battalion manual we need from BFC and stop spinning our wheels. http://www.battlefront.com/index.php...ook&book_id=26 How about if we found the bloody thing online? http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&client=safari Mind, this wasn't written until WAY after the Armored Infantry Battalions first entered combat. "22. DISMOUNTED MARCHES.The armored infantry units march mounted until forced by the terrain, proximity of the enemy, orenemy fire, to dismount." "23. BIVOUACS (6) Enforcing fire control. All effective weapons are used to fire against hostile low-flying airplanes.Carbines, pistols, and submachine guns are not considered effective. All troops charged with this duty are constantly prepared for immediate action, but will fire only upon order of an officer or 'responsible non-commissioned officer. No airplane will be fired upon unless it has been clearly recognized as hostile or is positively identified as hostile, or attacks with bombs or gun fire. (See FM 100-5.)(7) Caliber .50 machine guns are manned. They may be removed from the vehicles and mounted on ground mounts." CHAPTER 6 OFFENSIVE ACTION Section I. GENERAL 29. GENERAL.a. MISSIONS. The armored infantry battalion inoffensive action is used as-(1) An assault element, attacking on a predetermined front to seize designated objectives.(2) A support element, supporting assaulting troops and consolidating gains of the front line units.(3) Reserves, providing depth for the attack and flank and rear protection for the attacking element. b. ATTACKING WITH TANKS (FM 17-36). The armored infantry normally is employed with tanks in offensive action. The infantry attack is coordinated with the tank attack to-(1) Protect tanks from enemy personnel executing antitank measures.(2) Seize ground from which tanks may attack.(3) Follow the tank attack closely, assisting by fire and seizing the objective, mopping up enemy resistance, and protecting the tank reorganization.(4) Form a base of fire for the tank attack.(5) Remove or destroy obstacles holding up tank attacks.c. TANK SUPPORT (FM 17-36). Tanks, conversely, assist infantry attacks by-(1) Supporting by fire.(2) Neutralizing hostile automatic weapons.(3) Neutralizing the objective until arrival of theinfantry.(4) Breaking up counterattacks. (5) Neutralizing or destroying hostile reserves, and destroying or disrupting command, communication,and supply installations.(6) Making paths through wire and other obstacles.d. For details on the employment of infantry and tanks, see FM 17-36.30. Note well the following, particularly "a. CHARACTERISTICS" and "d. ARMORED PROTECTION" below: CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ATTACK. a. CHARACTERISTICS. The armored infantry battalion in the attack makes full use of its mobility, firepower, and light armor protection from small arms fire.b. MOBILITY. The armored infantry uses its transportation to move quickly to initial attack positions where the infantry dismounts and fights on foot.Vehicles, except those used for fire support, are then withdrawn to the best available concealed and protected positions. Here they are dispersed and local security established. The vehicles may be withdrawn by company or assembled as a battalion group. The reserve company or companies may remain with vehicles in concealed positions until committed to actionor required to change position. When the objective is taken, vehicles are moved forward to new positions as necessary.c. FIRE POWER. In the attack the battalion utilizes all available weapons, including dismounted vehicular weapons when these are not needed for protection of vehicles.d. ARMORED PROTECTION. The half-track personnel carriers provide protection for the troops against small-arms fire up to close ranges. The armor also gives protection against bomb and shell fragments.Troops are transported as far forward as possible in each situation; terrain, cover, and the type of weapons available to the. enemy governing the dismounting. The vehicular weapons are used to protect the attackingtroops against air attack. Armor on the half-track does not protect crews against antitank weapons and direct hits by assault guns and light artillery. (My note) That the above passage isn't internally consistent is obvious, but it does indicate that under conditions of light resistance, as in a high speed exploitation, the Armored Infantry remains in the halftracks, which are expected to protect against the listed threats. Additionally, it's clear the Armored Infantry halftracks can, either with MGs mounted or dismounted, provide the base of fire for a tank attack. From other portions of the manual, not given here, multiple missions are listed in which the Armored Infantry stays in the halftracks. Doctrinally, the Armored Infantry is supposed to move at the same speed as the tanks it supports. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 Anyone read this? http://www.amazon.com/World-Armored-.../dp/1846036925 It's well reviewed and would seem to have the information we need. Just got added to my wish list. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kulik Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 In no particular order: 1. TCP/IP WEGO 2. Infantry formations 3.Target suppresive fire not on point but allong a line 4. Decals 5. Fire 6. Corner peeking/firing soldiers 7. Operations 8. Map/AI plan/objective generator (i absolutely respect the points why this is "almost" imposible but we're talking about features we would be willing to pay for and i would totaly pay for that one; maybe for v9.0 ) 9. Recrewable guns 10. Multiplayer 11. Map editor tool for making sharp elevation features like gulies 12. Replays 13. Ability to order suppresive fire a tiny bit beyond where your man can see or order it in a direction (for forrest engagements, its so frustrating when you know that the enemy is 5 meters beyond poin you can fire) 14. The old CM1 thingy where your troops would report a tiger when PZ II was moving on theirs possition 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 I miss the accurcy of cntrl left click to take one accurately anywhere on the battlefield. I find that in CM2 the accuracy is terrible so you pretty much always get taken where you don't want to go and it takes a lot longer to get to a desired location. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futon river crossing Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 An "ambush" command. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 An "ambush" command. +1 I've been wishing for that to come back ever since they took it out in CMBB. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steiner14 Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 An "ambush" command. Oh, what a wonderful, almost forgotten command! +1 EDIT: Didn't that command become obsolete with cover arcs? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 Biimey. I don't even recall an "Ambush" command in CMBB. And am playing a CMBB tournament right now, so will need to check it out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mord Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 EDIT: Didn't that command become obsolete with cover arcs? That's what I was just about to say. Seems an ambush command would be redundant seeing that we can just create short cover arcs, or short cover arcs + a hide command to produce the same effect. The success of which would rely on the unit's experience and C2. Mord. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 Biimey. I don't even recall an "Ambush" command in CMBB. And am playing a CMBB tournament right now, so will need to check it out. CMBO is the only game it was in. That's what I was just about to say. Seems an ambush command would be redundant seeing that we can just create short cover arcs, or short cover arcs + a hide command to produce the same effect. The success of which would rely on the unit's experience and C2. Mord. The Ambush command functioned differently than a covered arc. When an enemy unit neared the ambush marker the friendly unit would automatically un-hide, even if the enemy unit had not been spotted. On the one hand this was unrealistic, but on the other hand it got around the fact that hiding units are terrible at spotting and will sometime let enemy units walk right up to them. It made ambushes easier to pull off. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mord Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 Ah, I see what you are saying. So, in reality we'd need one more layer to the cover arc + hide to insure it was pulled off. Did anybody ever test the reliability of a cover arc + hide (ambush) combo in CMSF or CMBN? Mord. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinOrLose Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 Visible damage to tanks and other vehicles. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scrummage Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 Visible damage? Turrets flying off exploding tanks while the chassis flip over! *keepsdreaming* 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
futon river crossing Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 I don't think "covered arc" + "hide" works very well for an ambush - troops that are hiding don't spot too well. It's mainly a problem in WEGO (which i only play) - where you have to wait a whole minute, in a situation where the enemy moves into a units covered arc, but isn't spotted (because your men are hiding, and have reduced spotting) - before you can unhide them a fire, by which time it may be too late, it's compounded by the fact that you can't check LOS - because this is measured from your still hiding unit I believe this is because WEGO is RT with pauses, and is therefore a limitation of the engine - hope I'm wrong!!! Ambush is therefore needed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WriterJWA Posted July 2, 2012 Author Share Posted July 2, 2012 I'd like to see the number of casualties caused by the various types of off-map support. Right now, we can see it for on-map units, but not off-map. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.