A silly question or wishful thinking

[lcm1977]

I was playing a scenario earlier today and ran across a situation that a good old fashion bayonet charge would have really been in order.  :-))  

 

Just wondered if anybody else thinks this would be neat?

 

And since you asked I also thought that being able to instruct your troops when to throw grenades or when exactly to use a bazooka rather than their rifles would sure be neat and or helpful.  Had that situation numerous times in my playings also. 

 

Anyway thought I'd see if these subjects were ever brought up.  

 

Thanks

 

 

[MikeyD]

Fistfights. I want to see fistfights!

Seriously, though, BFC is not exactly Bungie software. Doesn't have millions laying around the office to throw at animations, and doesn't have the budget to hire Kenneth Branagh to do the voice acting either     BFC is 'the little computergame company that could'. Most of what you see on screen is a product of them repeating "I think I can, I think I can..." 

[womble]

You can tell them when not to use their zook by giving them target light orders.

[Bil Hardenberger]

... And a target order within 30 meters will have your infantry toss grenades.

[womble]

... And a target order within 30 meters will have your infantry toss grenades.

...if they have enough of them, IME. If your team is running low (like 4 pineapples or potato mashers left), they'll be reluctant to fling them that far, especially without a spotted target. Your start-game Assault team with a dozen or more 'nades, yeah, they'll hurl them with abandon.

[RockinHarry]

I was playing a scenario earlier today and ran across a situation that a good old fashion bayonet charge would have really been in order.  :-))  

 

Just wondered if anybody else thinks this would be neat?

 

Thanks

Neat! ...not that I´d expect to see any sort of CC anytime in the near future.

With regards to hand and rifle grenades, I´d like to see them added to the supply dumps and vehicles (incl. pillboxes) soon. That would be neat +1

[lcm1977]

Thanks all for the replies.  Didn't know about the 30 yard thing but good to know and also the light target order.  I wasn't going to ask these questions but thought what the hey so did and glad I did.  Thanks

 

RockinHarry you mentioned supply dumps.  I've never seen anything in regards to that but will try to find it in the manual.  Thanks for mentioning it.  

 

Anyway, I can see why BF didn't or probably wouldn't bother with these little actions but would have been neat.  Oh well.  

[womble]

It'd be nice to have more different things in supply dumps, for sure: mortar shells, leIG/Pack howitzer/ATG ammo, grenades and rifle grenades as you say. Extra PanzerFausts, demo charges. Even flamethrower shots! Could just be different classes of supply element selected like precise tank model or ManPAT loadout. 

[Ithikial_AU]

Given it's the case in most WW2 battles that getting into 'fist fight' range isn't the first plan of attack (if it is find a new CO ), it's one of those situation specific problems. If it crops up by accident then yeah it would have been cool to see some brawling, but because it's going to happen once in a blue moon probably not worth BF's effort to get it coded etc. (Though happy to be proven wrong )

 

I would love my infantry forces in game to perform a little better as part of their tac AI, particularly around formation movements and how they interact with buildings - from room clearing to stacking up on corners and peaking around for better spotting of the surrounding area. We can only wait and see.

[lcm1977]

Don't get me wrong I love the game and have no complains but if they wanted to include anything along those lines I would not refuse to use them.

 

Heck I guess we could go on for days of what would be neat but it is fun just talking and thinking about it.  I remember a time when they said pigs couldn't fly.  

[BLSTK]

Didn't know about the 30 yard thing but good to know and also the light target order. 

 

Achtung, Lee! Bil said "30 meters", not yards. There is a difference, you know. And it could be the difference between life and death.

Edited September 9, 2015 by BLSTK

[db_zero]

Don't know, seen or tried it in Italy, but in a couple of my h2h games in Normandy tanks that get too close to infantry-even the dreaded Tiger are easy prey to grenade hurling infantry.

 

Now that I think of it I did use German infantry to sneak up on a Sherman to disable or destroy it in one of my h2h Italy games, but they failed and paid the price.

 

Fistfights would be interesting to see. Course then you'd have to have icons for knives, bayonets and things like entrenching tools. Throw in some brass knuckles while you're at it.

 

I've never tried it, but there have been times when I was tempted to target surrendering troops-especially if they've killed a lot of my troops or vechicles. I assume if you did put a target command the surrrendering troops would get smoked. I wonder what my opponent would think if he saw it.

[RockinHarry]

Since I tinkered some with the infantry animation files, I´ve now quite a good overview of how things interact with each other, animation wise. HtoH combat situations would not just require a big bunch of new animation sequences, they´d also require lots of new game logics that have a multitude of things taken into account. But....we already have a number of abstractions for micro actions in the game, like close assaults (on vehicles/pillboxes), indoor combat and the handling of pillboxes as vehicles, with all the disadvantageous side effects. Question is, if implementing HtoH combat into the game, could it be more like any of the existing abstractions/simplifications with regard to detailed resolve in the current game engine? Probably not. If it´s not a BFC design decision to genereally not model such things in greater detail, then most likely a more sophisticated game engine is required first, that can deal with any so far abstracted micro actions. Looks like a feature for maybe a V5 version of the game engine at the earliest.

[A Canadian Cat]

I've never tried it, but there have been times when I was tempted to target surrendering troops-especially if they've killed a lot of my troops or vechicles. I assume if you did put a target command the surrrendering troops would get smoked. I wonder what my opponent would think if he saw it.

 

A target order that resulted in small arms fire would not hit the surrendering troops (they have a small arms immunity to prevent accidentally taking those trying to surrender.  They are not however immune to HE so depending on what you target them with you can take them out.

[A Canadian Cat]

If it´s not a BFC design decision to genereally not model such things in greater detail, then most likely a more sophisticated game engine is required first, that can deal with any so far abstracted micro actions.

 

I do not think that is the issue.  I recall Steve has commented on this before (sorry unable to find link) and the issue is the amount of work needed (AI changes and animations plus more graphics) is quite doable but of a fairly significant size.  So, when deciding on what effort to spend resources on this rare occurrence action that is expensive does not rise to the top of the list. Perhaps it will some day but there are so many things that BFC wants to do that we want them to do that are more important to more people... you get the picture.

[lcm1977]

lanL, I really don't see what would be more important than a bayonet charge but whatever    ..............................  

 

Yeah BLSTK I hear you.  That extra 7.5 ft could make a difference.  I know I'd want it if a grenade was thrown at me.  Thanks for pointing that out.  

[BLSTK]

No problem. The strange part of it is that while Canada has embraced the metric system, our football fields are still measured in yards. Go figure.

[lcm1977]

Now that is strange.  Wonder why.  I'm going to google that. I hate it when I don't know about something that seems strange to me.  ;-))  Hope it's something really cool and not just something - plain, for lack of a 

better word.  

[BLSTK]

You think that's strange. Perhaps Google can explain to us both why the standard field in Canadian football measures one hundred and ten yards. No joke.

 

And no, the old argument that we Canadians are used to going the extra mile doesn't hold because here we talk in kilometres.

[Ales Dvorak]

 I remember a time when they said pigs couldn't fly.  

http://www.feelnumb.com/2009/09/23/pink-floyd-animals-cover-at-battersea-power-station/

[lcm1977]

Well, maybe they do.  

[IronCat60]

Pigs fly every time there is a football game!

 

[BLSTK]

HeHe. I see what you did there, MG.

[lcm1977]

I also knew what he meant - after about an hour 

[BLSTK]

Sometimes the pigs are even under-inflated.