Why do my guys fire panzerfaust at infantry in the open?

[Bulletpoint]

So I pushed back an enemy team from a hedge, and I send my veteran grenadiers in to clean up. They take up positions at the hedge and spot the enemy covering in the grass 30m away. They then fire their only Panzerfaust at the enemy infantry :/

My gues are veteran, +1 leadership and are feeling "OK". They are tiring, but in view of their platoon leader. The enemy is not in any sort of cover. Completely unnecesary waste of a precious Panzerfaust. The guy who fired it even has a G43 ready on his shoulder, plenty of ammo..

[MG TOW]

I hate to ask, but what scenario is this? Or is this a quick battle. Are there any enemy armored vehicles you might have to face, or maybe you don't know that yet. I have a theory which could be confirmed or squashed based on your reply.

[Bulletpoint]

3 minutes ago, gundolf said:

I hate to ask, but what scenario is this? Or is this a quick battle. Are there any enemy armored vehicles you might have to face, or maybe you don't know that yet. I have a theory which could be confirmed or squashed based on your reply.

It's the final battle of "Panzers Marsch" from the basic CMBN. Big map, lots of bocage, and two enemy tanks so far. Squash away, but no spoilers please.

[MG TOW]

I haven't tested this. But I thought I noticed German infantry going free fire with their panzerfausts when either the tank threat was eliminated, or there were no tanks on the map to begin with. Forget it, probably coincidence. 

[A Canadian Cat]

Yep.  The TacAI does not have divine or even coded knowledge of the battle space.  If you guys use a faust against infantry in the open they are not trying to telegraph to you that all the enemy tanks are gone.  They are just being idiots

[Bulletpoint]

31 minutes ago, gundolf said:

I haven't tested this. But I thought I noticed German infantry going free fire with their panzerfausts when either the tank threat was eliminated, or there were no tanks on the map to begin with. Forget it, probably coincidence. 

The good old skinner box

But it was worth a shot - your theory, not the panzerfaust.

I would say it might make sense if green or conscript troops fired off weapons randomly, especially if they had poor leadership. Just watch some of those horrible videos from Syria for prime examples of idiots at war. But unstressed veterans under good leadership just wouldn't do that.

Edited September 6, 2016 by Bulletpoint

[Warts 'n' all]

Sometimes I can't help but think that Bullet's men do things just to piss him off. He does seem to cop more than his fair share of erratic behaviour.

[Bulletpoint]

3 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:

Sometimes I can't help but think that Bullet's men do things just to piss him off. He does seem to cop more than his fair share of erratic behaviour.

 

[A Canadian Cat]

LOL - yep it sure seems that way.

[womble]

The TacAI is, IMO, much too free with its squad ranged HE assets. The same sort of thing happens with rifle grenades too: they're used pretty much indiscriminately, usually the HEAT variant (if present) first in Target Area fire, and at "unlikely" spotted targets if no Target Light command is in place. I could stand them using them at the rate and ranges they do, on "Target" orders, which are pretty much saying "focus on this target and do your best to neutralise it", but IMO, the RG (and fausts; they use them too if the range to the Target Area is short enough) should not be used without a spotted target, and much more selectively on spotted targets with no Target order in operation.

[Bulletpoint]

My main issue is that they squander a very important AT tool to kill a couple of broken stragglers. Same goes for schrecks, there's no reason to fire an AT rocket at a random enemy in the open instead of using a rifle.

Maybe if the firing unit is panicked, then it would make sense that they made no sense.

[Muzzleflash1990]

I agree that units seems to eager to "waste" a faust, and also shrecks, and bazookas for US. And in CMBS, sometimes russian will also spend, IMO, too many rpg on infantry (OG and RPO exempted). I often avoid giving target orders on either area or spotted infantry, because the TacAI often interprets that as a direct order to waste AT-munitions, resulting in even larger waste than otherwise.

Edited September 7, 2016 by Muzzleflash1990

[Warts 'n' all]

I have to say that I don't recall seeing a Panzerfaust being used against infantry in the time that I've been playing the game. But, I have to agree with womble, they way Rifle Grenades get wasted is a tad annoying to put it mildly in case any younger forum members are reading this. They rarely seem to hit anything, either falling well short, or flying over the top of any enemy troops. Having said that, I do think that the erratic behaviour of our men gives the game a human touch.

[gnarly]

11 hours ago, Muzzleflash1990 said:

 And in CMBS, sometimes russian will also spend, IMO, too many rpg on infantry (OG and RPO exempted). I often avoid giving target orders on either area or spotted infantry, because the TacAI often interprets that as a direct order to waste AT-munitions, resulting in even larger waste than otherwise.

Ahh, I have recently seen this in BS with the Russkies, and was wondering what the heck they were doing....

[varin]

I just saw a schreck being fired at a fleeing tank crew which I thought was a bit odd to say least

[Bulletpoint]

14 hours ago, varin said:

I just saw a schreck being fired at a fleeing tank crew which I thought was a bit odd to say least

I think it makes no sense at all. The TacAI usually makes reasonably sensible choices about what weapons to use against what targets, so why not when it comes to infantry AT assets?

[A Canadian Cat]

So, I'm no expert so I am not arguing forcefully that what we see is correct but apparently it was (and is) not uncommon to use AT assets against non armour targets.  The game is just reflecting that.  My preference is to see this happen as little as possible but it has been made clear that it will never be zero and at this moment BFC seems happy with the level of usage against soft targets.  We can have more of a discussion if you like but there is no way BFC will change this unless we (read you :-) do some extensive testing to show the current frequency and - unless those numbers look nutty - some serious research with citations that give some kind of indication of the real life occurrences.  And by nutty I don't mean "but its nuts now" I mean if you can show that well lead units use up all their AT asses on a regular basis say in the first 10 minutes of battle - or something over the top like that.

[Bulletpoint]

14 hours ago, IanL said:

We can have more of a discussion if you like but there is no way BFC will change this unless we (read you :-) do some extensive testing

Well I am not a paid beta tester for BFC, so I feel my time is spent better elsewhere. I'm just a customer reflecting on some weird behaviour in this game.

If tanks shot AT shells at infantry, I would also consider that pretty silly, but happily they don't. If they did, I am sure some people would be able to come up with a creative explanation of how that could - and probably did - happen in real life

 

[A Canadian Cat]

LOL I am not a "paid" tester either and I feel my time is better spent elsewhere as well. The point still stands: BFC feels that the current behaviour is as desired so if no one plans to show that it is wonky it will stay that way. 

[Bulletpoint]

13 minutes ago, IanL said:

The point still stands: BFC feels that the current behaviour is as desired so if no one plans to show that it is wonky it will stay that way. 

I know, Ian. I have been around this forum for years.. Apparently BF don't play their own game, so unless someone brings issues to their attention, the chances of getting fixes and improvements are tiny.

[c3k]

27 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I know, Ian. I have been around this forum for years.. Apparently BF don't play their own game, so unless someone brings issues to their attention, the chances of getting fixes and improvements are tiny.

A lot of sources I'veread relate how panzerfaust were used against infantry. Not frequently, but they were used. In game, my sense of how often they are used in that manner is roughly correct. If you disagree, and you want it changed, then show some savegames and point out what you think is wrong. 

Firing at a flying tank crew? Yeah, seems excessive, but I've never seen it, so maybe it's a rare event.

[Jotte]

Problem with wargamers is that sometime we seem to want units to follow orders like robots and to exact spec's. Mother Nature just loves to fling s*** back at that view. Peoples actions under stress tends to produce some funky "solutions" to things. 

 

c3k, flying tank crew; now that produced a funny mental image for me... 

[A Canadian Cat]

1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

Apparently BF don't play their own game, so unless someone brings issues to their attention, the chances of getting fixes and improvements are tiny.

Sigh, you still don't get it or I suck at explaining You, or anyone else, simply declaring that some thing you see I the game is wrong does not make you correct and the game wrong. It really is that simple.

If people find things that actually are wrong or they show that something is not quite right and they gather some evidence the chance of getting fixes or improvements are nearly 100% actually. Sometimes it is downright painful, witness the long arguments about firing shreks and fausts from inside buildings.

[Bulletpoint]

34 minutes ago, IanL said:

You, or anyone else, simply declaring that some thing you see I the game is wrong does not make you correct and the game wrong.

I am only declaring that I personally find it ridiculous. You and everybody else are free to disagree.

[Bulletpoint]

1 hour ago, c3k said:

A lot of sources I'veread relate how panzerfaust were used against infantry. Not frequently, but they were used.

I am sure fausts were good against infantry in buildings etc. But at 15 metre range against infantry on an open lawn?

My point is not to convince you guys about anything. I am just pointing out that this stuff happens in the game, and I question if it should.

If Steve then sees this post and thinks "nope, that guy is wrong, fausts are working fine, they are great for killing people at close range", then case closed as far as I'm concerned.

Edited September 16, 2016 by Bulletpoint