Jump to content
Hilts

Has 4.0 made the stock campaigns unplayable?

Recommended Posts

You just think you've got it right and they update it, or say they will and then don't, or they do update it but in a completely different way to how they said they would.....It's much the same whether you are modelling them with plastic or pixels, I guess.  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/25/2017 at 9:59 AM, Holman said:

But in a town scenario, you have the choice of being in the building or in the open.  I'm seeing units flee into the street after one casualty, and often "into the street" means running into the open and towards the enemy.

This wasn't nearly as common before 4.0.

I'd really like to see BF institute some "rout rules" that would prevent units from charging toward the enemy like this. It doesn't happen every time, but when it does, it is very difficult to rationalize the behavior, short of a beserker transformation ala ASL.

A few turns ago, I had an LMG team that was in a key position holding a corner of a building complex. They'd been there for a long time, along with other units spaced around the complex -- all under HQ leadership. The team had helped repulse multiple assault attempts from a building row just across the street. They had safe fallback positions all around them, covering more than 180 degrees. Well, after being heroes for a long time, a short burst of fire from another vector sent them charging straight across at the enemy building just as it was being reoccupied for another assault attempt. They engaged those troops from the street and actually helped drive them off, but ate a grenade tossed by the last enemy trooper just before he fell back to the rear of the building. That leaves their LMG in deadly no-man's land.

That LMG was an important part of the bulding complex defense. My mind really has a hard time imagining a motivated, well-trained German MG team that knows it's in a vital position, with lots of close, safe, fallback locations available and a quality HQ very near, deciding to charge the enemy and risk losing a key asset like that.

Here's hoping this is fixable and something that BF wants to eliminate.

Edited by Macisle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/25/2017 at 11:25 PM, DougPhresh said:

Even as far back as Shock Force the Syrian Army and Uncons would stand and fight in trenches and buildings, to a point.

T

his is part of the issue. The CMSF trenches are true "terrain", with units in them physically shielded by terra firma against flat trajectory incoming (against plunging HE fire though, they are prefab mass graves, but that's another story). 

Starting with CMBN, in game terms entrenchments are effectively immobile vehicles (also why they get spotted so much quicker in concealment terrain vs unfortified units. Bunkers were always this way). So occupants basically use the crew/passenger "bail out" TacAI logic instead of sensibly hunkering down.

The logic where units abandon buildings has stayed fairly consistent since CMBN.

I don't have a solution to propose for the issue, but I think this is the root cause.

Edited by LongLeftFlank

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/4/2017 at 4:15 PM, Txema said:

Any comments from Battlefront about stock campaigns and game engine version 4.0?

If I am going to play the stock campaigns is it better to do it with the original game engine or with version 4.0?

I would like to know prior to buying 4.0...

Thank you very much for your help !

Any comments from Battlefront about stock campaigns and game engine version 4.0?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know about Battlefront but a few of us Beta testers have been running some scenarios and watching behaviors. I had a QB that I played PBEM where my US guys were constantly breaking and running, but after in retrospect was probably ok. My German opponent had more than his fair share of mortars :-)  and it was a fairly open map, so he was able to drop mortar rounds right on top of every position my guys took up. The proper reaction there is to get out of the kill zone.

I'm currently running Courage Conquers campaign in FB and so far, things look ok, although I haven't gotten very far. I've had a couple of US halftracks that panicked quickly, however, they were surprised in the woods by MG42 fire from two directions. Also a caveat that I've not played this one before so it's hard to compare.

I did run the first scenario of Road to Nijmegan and my US paratroopers behaved just as they the first time I played it. Subjectively they might have gone to ground more quickly this time, however, again, I think that's realistic. That's a wide open map and the defenders can sweep the fields with MG fire.

Also running Conrath's Counterattack in FI and so far in that one everything looks normal, and I've played that one before so I can compare. I'm only in the second scenario of that one. More to come.

I set up two QB where I was defending a densely packed town as the US, with German attackers. Mortars and MG42 did not dislodge the defenders in buildings. 

I still plan to look more as time permits. The things that I've seen have probably been more on the side of things being more realistic, where troops under heavy accurate fire fall back. I haven't seen troops exit buildings into a kill zone yet, but since it's been reported by at least a few people I'm going to keep looking.

 

[edit]  Not using any Beta version to do these checks. This is all just with the newly issued update, because I'm curious :-)

 

Edited by Ultradave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My complaints are mostly about how easy it is to shoot the enemy off entrenched positions. Troops in the open behave about as they should, it's the dug-in guys that are acting strangely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup. I'm going to have to run some more. But the title of this is about making the campaigns unplayable. So far I'm not seeing that.

One discussion we've had though is that when artillery zeroes in on entrenchments in CM, the entrenchments here are kind of hasty positions. There isn't overhead cover. Foxholes are scrapes in the ground with sandbags. If the artillery has you dialed in, it's time to move, entrenchment or not. What I want to check is the behavior described where some will run the wrong way - right toward the enemy, or out into a street covered by enemy fire, that sort of thing. 

The issues that I've seen with entrenched positions so far to me seem more realistic than they used to be actually, but I'm going to keep looking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with this is there are some issues specific to CM that affect how this plays out.  Entrenchments in CM are pretty readily visible.  Maybe that is to be expected, but the result is it becomes very easy to spot where an enemy is positioned then drop some arty knowing if they are there they will bail out and run around in the shrapnel rain.  A simple short barrage on a platoon position with an 81 mm mortar battery will cause them to vacate their position and run around in the open.  I would not expect that to be normal behavior for soldiers being hit by 81 mm fire. A player can prevent this behavior on their own units in the defense (just give them a pause command).  The AI is stuck with the behavior.

Whether it makes a campaign unplayable is a whole other issue.  How much of the campaign is dependent on that specific situation is going to vary if it happens at all. 

Considering the AI was already stuck not being able to issue hide commands when needed it further limits the impact caused specifically by this behavior- the AI was already screwed. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ultradave said:

But the title of this is about making the campaigns unplayable. So far I'm not seeing that.

I agree completely with this. I do not think the new update "breaks" any of the campaigns or scenarios in any way. It does change a few things on the small scale, but generally its not enough to affect the big picture that much. 

I'm confident the new infantry behavior will be tweaked and fine tuned in upcoming patches. Everything has growing pains. 

If there is one thing that I think testers should focus on, its the tendency of infantry to displace any type of cover while under indirect fires. I've noticed that if you drop indirect on infantry, whether they be in houses or fortifications, they tend to "shuffle" themselves. That is to say they displace a lot and run around to new positions. This behavior makes perfect sense when under direct fire, but in my opinion makes less sense when under indirect. 

Having said that, I do not think this new behavior breaks anything, or makes the game unplayable or anything like that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On April 28, 2017 at 9:19 AM, Macisle said:

I'd really like to see BF institute some "rout rules" that would prevent units from charging toward the enemy like this. It doesn't happen every time, but when it does, it is very difficult to rationalize the behavior, short of a beserker transformation ala ASL.

Speaking of ASL, IIRC a unit that routed couldn't rout toward the enemy unless it was into cover that was a certain distance away from the enemy. Since BF started as the PC version of ASL, you'd think that prohibition would still be in place. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-4-28 at 9:39 PM, DougPhresh said:

Agreed. Units taking fire from across the street and then fleeing their building... into the street doesn't make much sense.

I agree as well.

As far as infantry standing their ground, based on what I have experienced so far, they need to ratchet the fragility levels back a bit. This stands out when you are up against difficult odds. There are no last stands anymore. A fighting withdrawal turns into a disordered route. The player has less control compared to v3.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using the traditional 2-1 probe, 3-1 attack and 3+ - 1 assault, attacking even against entrenched enemies is a cakewalk and defending is hopeless. You're right to say fighting withdraw is out, troops are so fragile that the initial barrage might crumble a defensive line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm playing the American campaign now and as soon as I get some artillery on the german ridges they just pack up their mgs and runs away. Most are cut down but some irritating survivors are crawling around in the craters. The same goes for when I'm using my support halftracks, one HE round and they pack their stuff and try to run away.

I'm not enjoying it at all and I've just put 80$ into FI and GL since I wanted to assault some hills. Any update about if they are looking into these issues?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sluggoswe said:

I'm playing the American campaign now and as soon as I get some artillery on the german ridges they just pack up their mgs and runs away. Most are cut down but some irritating survivors are crawling around in the craters. The same goes for when I'm using my support halftracks, one HE round and they pack their stuff and try to run away.

I'm not enjoying it at all and I've just put 80$ into FI and GL since I wanted to assault some hills. Any update about if they are looking into these issues?

Yes I agree 100%. I went back to 3.0 and the campaign is much more enjoyable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked support. They said the only thing I had to do to "downgrade" any of the titles, was to install the latest patch before the 4.0 uppgrade.

It worked with CMBN and the 3.12 patch.

It did not work with CMFI, I had to reinstall. I don't know how it is supposed to work if you just bought the pack.

I bought my titles before the 4.0 patch

 

Edited by Swant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently, the 4.0 behavior is being worked on:

I'm glad to hear that tweaks are being worked on. I think 4.0 is a great upgrade that just needs a few tweaks. Hopefully we will get some news about it soon, as well as the tweaks themselves. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It also makes defense impossible. Issuing "pause" orders works, if you overlook the fact that guns, vehicles and the like won't turn!

e: Having show movement paths set to all is amusing as you can see streaks of orange appear as soon as you take even light mortar fire.

Edited by DougPhresh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can't be even slightly casual on the assault with the current engine either, if your units take any serious fire they'll run right back the way they came, regardless that they are Veteran, +2, High!  :rolleyes:

At least this issue does apply equally to both sides, so IMHO it's not a game breaker, but I'll be glad when it's fixed.

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

 

At least this issue does apply equally to both sides, so IMHO it's not a game breaker

In PBEMs...true

Not so much vs the AI...I feel that these changes have increased the disadvantages the AI have vs a human player when it comes to being able to react to events taking place on the battlefield...

A failed attack, a failed movement, taking neccesary steps during a bombardment etc...A player will be far better suited to make adjustments compared to the AI...

This was offcourse true pre V4.0 also...but i think the recent changes have made the difference between a human player and the AI even bigger.

Not the direction we should go imo ;) The AI needs to get smarter (a more challeging opponent)...so I'm also happy to hear that this is being looked into...:)

Some tweaking to this behaviour, more AI groups, more trigger- and reinforcement options...That is what the AI needs....

Not being further penalized by a more 'complicated/brittle' moral system...

 

 

Edited by RepsolCBR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a good point.....TBH I haven't run many scripts for Engine 4, but I'd guess the panicky behaviour of infantry could make a total train-wreck of AI assaults (they were already borderline bloodbaths on Engine 2).  :o

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/1/2017 at 4:18 PM, IICptMillerII said:

Apparently, the 4.0 behavior is being worked on:

 

I would *love* to hear from BTS about this issue and whether it is being addressed.  The new tendency of even high-quality troops to flee good positions has ruined a couple of my recent PBEM games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I started the American Campaign Road to Troina with 4.0 and notice the fleeing behavior. So far i don't see it as being completely unplayable but definitely different. I've had whole platoons flee from fire and then used my leaders to rally them.

One thing I seem to notice in all of my 4.0 games vs AI so far is the AI artillery is awfully accurate and deadly. The FO's and officers who call down artillery fire are certainly crack. This is not just Italy.

One other thing I've noticed and this has already been mentioned in the Black Sea section is the Bradley drivers are very touchy about being painted by lasers and retreat even of ordered to fast advance to a position that is covered from direct fire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×