Halftrack gunners...

[akd]

In CMSF/CMA, passenger troops were able to fire out of vehicular slits. Is that modeled in the CMBN family?

Those were dedicated firing ports...

[Michael Emrys]

Those were dedicated firing ports...

Aren't those now plated over?

As for firing from HTs, it could be done by standing up or kneeling on the seats. I doubt that it was at all common though since if the vehicle was moving fire would not be very effective unless just making a lot of noise was enough to demoralize the opposition. And once the vehicle had stopped, the transported troops would usually debus quickly.

Michael

[banned]

Gunner/Commander Kills are still ludicrous. Keeps me wondering if the gunshields are just cosmetics ingame.

[Bulletpoint]

36 minutes ago, MANoWAR.U51 said:

Gunner/Commander Kills are still ludicrous. Keeps me wondering if the gunshields are just cosmetics ingame.

They're not cosmetic, I've seen many shots bounce off them. I think the issue is that the gunner doesn't duck down behind the shield properly, but sits upright like a LEGO soldier, and that many shots are deflected upwards at an angle and then hit the head of the gunner, which is halfway exposed. And of course sometimes the shots don't need to deflect, they just hit.

But it seems this discussion will go on till the end of time..

Edited May 10, 2017 by Bulletpoint

[banned]

40 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

 

But it seems this discussion will go on till the end of time..

I don´t see what´s there to discuss as it is evident that the casualty rates are way too high. An Fix is what we need.

[Bulletpoint]

10 minutes ago, MANoWAR.U51 said:

I don´t see what´s there to discuss as it is evident that the casualty rates are way too high. An Fix is what we need.

I'm not arguing against you, just saying I've seen this discussion go on for years.

In a minute somebody will come in here and bring up the old case about the Israeli tanks suffering 50 percent commander casualties. Then somebody will say it's your fault for trying to use the machinegun mounted on the halftrack at all. Apparently the Germans only put it there because they were stupid and/or suicidal.

Then somebody will say ok, the gun shield works, but only at 1000m distance. It's your fault for going in too close with the halftrack. Then somebody will start a long discusson about the penetrative effects of rifle bullets at various ranges and angles and steel hardness, without stopping to think that the game never shows a penetration message when your gunner gets killed.

Nobody will consider the basic fact that the gunner actually doesn't take proper cover behind the shield.

Then this thread will fall asleep for some time before somebody else digs it up again. It's become a tradition

Edited May 10, 2017 by Bulletpoint

[banned]

24 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I'm not arguing against you, just saying I've seen this discussion go on for years.

In a minute somebody will come in here and bring up the old case about the Israeli tanks suffering 50 percent commander casualties. Then somebody will say it's your fault for trying to use the machinegun mounted on the halftrack at all. Apparently the Germans only put it there because they were stupid and/or suicidal.

Then somebody will say ok, the gun shield works, but only at 1000m distance. It's your fault for going in too close with the halftrack. Then somebody wil lstart a long discusson about penetrative effects of rifle bullets at various ranges and angles and steel hardness, without stopping to think that the game never shows a penetration message when your gunner gets killed.

Nobody will consider the basic fact that the gunner actually doesn't take proper cover behind the shield.

Then this thread will fall asleep for some time before somebody else digs it up again. It's become a tradition

My post wasn´t meant to be offensive/defensive. I agree with your conclusion. Keeps me also wondering why there are so many people eager to bring up justifications for... just everything that happens in CM.

Checking the visual feedback on several accounts gave me the impression that it isn´t just the TC`s/gunner´s position but something else that cause false hit/dmg registration.

Whatever lets honour the tradition and let this thread fall asleep until another chap stumbles upon it.

Good hunting!

Edited May 10, 2017 by MANoWAR.U51

[A Canadian Cat]

12 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I'm not arguing against you, just saying I've seen this discussion go on for years.

In a minute somebody will come in here and bring up the old case about the Israeli tanks suffering 50 percent commander casualties.

Not me - I don't know anything about that.

 

12 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Then somebody will say it's your fault for trying to use the machinegun mounted on the halftrack at all. Apparently the Germans only put it there because they were stupid and/or suicidal.

Well I might imply that it is user error but not for the reasons you state. It is a support weapon that should not be brought too close. So, there really is an excellent chance that a ) you are forgetting that the enemy wants to kill your guys so that is going to happen and or b ) you are bringing it too close.

 

12 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Then somebody will say ok, the gun shield works, but only at 1000m distance.

LOL yeah sure. But try staying 300m away that will help - oh and that gun shield its really only good for incoming from the front not the sides.

Actually come to think about it 1000m was likely where they were parked for the infantry to dismount and assault the final km on foot. At least the bulk of the time anyway.

 

12 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

It's your fault for going in too close with the halftrack.

Yeah, I would say that.

 

12 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Then somebody will start a long discusson about the penetrative effects of rifle bullets at various ranges and angles and steel hardness, without stopping to think that the game never shows a penetration message when your gunner gets killed.

Again not me.

 

12 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Nobody will consider the basic fact that the gunner actually doesn't take proper cover behind the shield.

Incorrect that was the actual change that BFC made recently that had a pretty big effect. But it doesn't really help much if you bring the HT too close because then the enemy can get shots on you gunner from the sides - where, guess what, the shield isn't.

Having said all that someone did present a somewhat interesting case for the gunner facing a lot more targeted fire than expected. That was an interesting finding. However none of the changes already made nor any future changes are likely to make HT's the uber IFV that some people seem to think it should be.

 

12 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Then this thread will fall asleep for some time before somebody else digs it up again. It's become a tradition

There that pretty much sums it up: Now that I have, sort of, fulfilled your prediction can we please.

[Vanir Ausf B]

The gun shields work pretty damn well in my experience and I use German HTs at less than 100 meters and have them used against me the same way. Sometimes I wonder if I'm playing the same game as some people.

Edited May 11, 2017 by Vanir Ausf B

[Sgt.Squarehead]

I'd presume that you take time to properly supress enemy positions before marching up in your HTs though, perhaps the complainant is not doing so?

[Vanir Ausf B]

I USE HTs to properly suppress things and don't lose many men doing it. I wouldn't keep doing it if I did.

I've tried dong the same with US HTs and that is suicide.

[George MC]

No evidence as such but worth in the book KG Muhlenkamp there are very few pictures of guys firing the MGs in the SPW even although they are in contact in several images. Great many of the shots everyone has their head down. In the ones where heads up it is either obvious they are not in contact - standing up right in the SPW or the few images where the MG is being used appears they are engaging a target(s) at long range. As an aside it also shows the crew of the SPW a/ tossing grenades over the side b/ firing their personal weapons from the SPW. Unfortunately for all the images no clear context as to a/ what the threat if and how close, what it is equipped with b/ if the action shots were staged (although several do appear to be candid "action shots" i.e. not posed or set-up.

What I have found in-game is a/ you need to suppress the enemy before moving your SPW close in (or at least get them to cover moving fast and with everyone buttoned up) b/ avoid moving into close range with SMGs - the hail of close range fire can pretty fatal to anyone standing tall in the SPW c/ avoid flank shots on your SPW MG gunner. I still lose MG gunners in the SPW but only when I push forward too aggressively into close range with unsupressed or often unspotted enemy. Then it gets ugly.

[Bulletpoint]

1 minute ago, George MC said:

b/ avoid moving into close range with SMGs - the hail of close range fire can pretty fatal to anyone standing tall in the SPW

When troops get really close to a halftrack, they are actually able to shoot right through it to hit guys inside (without "penetration" messages). So not only the standing gunner but also the fully protected seated driver can get killed by SMG fire. I'm assuming this is an abstraction to model close assaulting the vehicle, or aiming for vision slits...

[JoMac]

Actually, this all goes back to Unbuttoned Crews, wither H/T Gunners or Tank Crew, etc, all being 'Bullet Magnets' by getting shot at instantaneously when in LOS of enemy.  

Joe

[rocketman]

I did quite extensive testing of HT gunners as bullet magnets a while ago:

Never got any official feedback on my findings, but three things became clear to me:

1) The pattern of incoming fire on a HT gunner is very different from what a soldier in the open gets (at 300-400 m from rifle fire) which leads to lots of casualties

2) German gun shields are a life saver when hit front on

3) TCs button quite quickly when being fired upon

I'm not saying that all this justifies using HTs in an a-historical fashion, but their gunner do seem to have some "magnetism" to them which I would like to see adressed further.

[JoMac]

17 hours ago, rocketman said:

I did quite extensive testing of HT gunners as bullet magnets a while ago:

Never got any official feedback on my findings, but three things became clear to me:

1) The pattern of incoming fire on a HT gunner is very different from what a soldier in the open gets (at 300-400 m from rifle fire) which leads to lots of casualties

2) German gun shields are a life saver when hit front on

3) TCs button quite quickly when being fired upon

I'm not saying that all this justifies using HTs in an a-historical fashion, but their gunner do seem to have some "magnetism" to them which I would like to see adressed further.

I know.Steve, entered an earlier discussion back when I believe, either RT or FB came out (which was really a continued discussion way back from start of CMBN) on this very same topic...Me, Bulletpoint, and couple others were part of that discussion...

Basically, Steve, mentioned that it's easier to see then eventually hit a Crew member on a Vehicle (pin-point accuracy), then it is to see, then hit Infantry on ground (more time consuming, and presents more of an Area-Fire)...

imagine your a rifleman behind a building, but know where the Vehicle is in general. It's easier to pop your head around a corner and target anything on top of a vehicle (since the vehicle itself is easy to see, and therefore just aim your rifle to top part of vehicle. You do this with several Infantry firing on a Vehicle, and you get that 'Bullet Magnet' syndrome...

Now, On the other hand, that same rifleman entering a Firefight will always have to pop his head back and forth from behind building to re-acquire an Infantry size target that's harder to see in different terrain types. That Rifleman is more or less firing at an enemy position (Action-Spot) then individual Infantry (sometimes you see the target again, but many times you don't and just Area-Fire his last known position). 

If you ever played a First Person Shooter Game, then you will know what I mean...It's quicker to acquire and aim your rifle at a vehicle, then it is to acquire, then try and hit Infantry running, hiding in different cover.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, I understand what, Steve, was trying to say and I'm sure many others agreed...However, there were some counter arguments to the above that I will elaborate a little later...

Edited May 12, 2017 by JoMc67

[Rinaldi]

On ‎5‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 9:27 PM, Sgt.Squarehead said:

I'd presume that you take time to properly supress enemy positions before marching up in your HTs though, perhaps the complainant is not doing so?

Nonsense my good man! Bring me closer -  I shall hit them with my riding crop. Protecting your thin-skins is precisely what a ponce would do, and let none accuse me of that.

 

[Michael Emrys]

4 hours ago, JoMc67 said:

It's quicker to acquire and aim your rifle at a vehicle, then it is to acquire, then try and hit Infantry running, hiding in different cover.

Besides, a crewman in an armored fighting vehicle of any kind is in most cases going to be viewed as a higher value target than a rifleman on the ground.

Michael

[Sgt.Squarehead]

You'd think the punch of the US .50cals would serve to suppress infantry in buildings much better than the fast-firing but inaccurate MG-42s.....It really is a monster weapon by comparison.

[Vanir Ausf B]

36 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

You'd think the punch of the US .50cals would serve to suppress infantry in buildings much better than the fast-firing but inaccurate MG-42s...

It doesn't? Killing or wounding a member of a unit will suppress them quicker than anything else and the 50 has better penetration.

[rocketman]

I designed my test specifically with the aim of eliminating "priority fire" and "combat situation" as factors affecting the result. Thus, HT and infantry unit in the open were faced both by 5 riflemen at the same distance and they were given cover arcs so not to fire back and causing stress. The HT and infantry unit each faced a rifle team and the rifle teams had only one target to aim at so not to pick the HT gunner as "priority". By eliminating those two factors my intention was that target size would be the factored singled out. I can get that a vehicle is easier to aim at, but still the gunner is pretty small bit of that target (see pic in my thread). If size of target is the only factor I don't see why the incoming tracer patterns should differ that much. The only explanation to me would then be that riflemen aiming at infantry don't aim at a specific man but more of "area fire with the hope of hitting someone". Which doesn't seem right either.

If someone can come up with a better test, I'm all for it. Since conducting it I have payed close attention to all combat situations in scenarios played and it only reinforces my conclusions.

[banned]

For the sake of the usual suspects´ comprehension we should specify that the main point of the current discussion is if the rate of shielded gunners or low profiles TC´s getting hit (frontally) from greater distances is wether too high or not. Nobody has a issue with TC´s or crews getting shot up by infantry on the flanks, at close range or in insufficient protected crew stations.

 

Edited May 24, 2017 by MANoWAR.U51

[Rinaldi]

On ‎5‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 4:36 PM, MANoWAR.U51 said:

I don´t see what´s there to discuss as it is evident that the casualty rates are way too high. An Fix is what we need.

I agree, nothing to discuss; but plenty to quantify. Care to do so?

10 minutes ago, MANoWAR.U51 said:

For the sake of the usual suspects´ comprehension

 

[banned]

On 24.5.2017 at 6:54 PM, Rinaldi said:

I agree, nothing to discuss; but plenty to quantify. Care to do so?

Take a look at rocketman´s research.

[Doc844]

For me as a rule of thumb an individual soldier is trained to shoot accurately upto 300m with a good chance of hitting what they are shooting at, 300 to 600m rifles are more of a section weapon everyone shoots and someone should hit.  Anyrhing beyond that is down to the the LMG or HMG's.