Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • Battlefront.com

      Final Blitzkrieg v1.01 released!   05/21/2016

      Once again proving that we don't sleep much, we have just released v1.01 for CM: Final Blitzkrieg.  There's lots of great improvements and fixes now just one download away.  Click HERE to see the release notes and download links.  Thanks to everybody for reporting issues and special thanks to the testers who make sure we don't overlook them.
    • Battlefront.com

      Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips   12/27/2016

      Hi all! Now that Upgrade 4 is out and about in large quantities we have now discovered a few SNAFUs that happen out in the scary, real world that is home computing.  Fortunately the rate of problems is extremely small and so far most are easily worked around.  We've identified a few issues that have similar causes which we have clear instructions for work arounds here they are: 1.  CMRT Windows customers need to re-license their original key.  This is a result of improvements to the licensing system which CMBN, CMBS, and CMFB are already using.  To do this launch CMRT with the Upgrade and the first time enter your Engine 4 key.  Exit and then use the "Activate New Products" shortcut in your CMRT folder, then enter your Engine 3 license key.  That should do the trick. 2.  CMRT and CMBN MacOS customers have a similar situation as #2, however the "Activate New Products" is inside the Documents folder in their respective CM folders.  For CMBN you have to go through the process described above for each of your license keys.  There is no special order to follow. 3.  For CMBS and CMFB customers, you need to use the Activate New Products shortcut and enter your Upgrade 4 key.  If you launch the game and see a screen that says "LICENSE FAILURE: Base Game 4.0 is required." that is an indication you haven't yet gone through that procedure.  Provided you had a properly functioning copy before installing the Upgrade, that should be all you need to do.  If in the future you have to install from scratch on a new system you'll need to do the same procedure for both your original license key and your Upgrade 4.0 key. 4.  There's always a weird one and here it is.  A few Windows users are not getting "Activate New Products" shortcuts created during installation.  Apparently anti-virus software is preventing the installer from doing its job.  This might not be a problem right now, but it will prove to be an issue at some point in the future.  The solution is to create your own shortcut using the following steps: Disable your anti-virus software before you do anything. Go to your Desktop, right click on the Desktop itself, select NEW->SHORTCUT, use BROWSE to locate the CM EXE that you are trying to fix. The location is then written out. After it type in a single space and then paste this:

      -showui

      Click NEXT and give your new Shortcut a name (doesn't matter what). Confirm that and you're done. Double click on the new Shortcut and you should be prompted to license whatever it is you need to license. At this time we have not identified any issues that have not been worked around.  Let's hope it stays that way Steve
    • Battlefront.com

      Forum Reorganization   10/12/2017

      We've reorganized our Combat Mission Forums to reflect the fact that most of you are now running Engine 4 and that means you're all using the same basic code.  Because of that, there's no good reason to have the discussion about Combat Mission spread out over 5 separate sets of Forums.  There is now one General Discussion area with Tech Support and Scenario/Mod Tips sub forums.  The Family specific Tech Support Forums have been moved to a new CM2 Archives area and frozen in place. You might also notice we dropped the "x" from distinguishing between the first generation of CM games and the second.  The "x" was reluctantly adopted back in 2005 or so because at the time we had the original three CM games on European store shelves entitled CM1, CM2, and CM3 (CMBO, CMBB, and CMAK).  We didn't want to cause confusion so we added the "x".  Time has moved on and we have to, so the "x" is now gone from our public vocabulary as it has been from our private vocabulary for quite a while already.  Side note, Charles *NEVER* used the "x" so now we're all speaking the same language as him.  Which is important since he is the one programming them
user1000

Well I played Most Battles in Blitz As Us Side....

Recommended Posts

Many infantry problems I have played more than half the battles that came along with the game. The Us infantry for most of these battles have pathetic skill set. As US side most curl or flee if they come under fire. The troops seem to spend more time fleeing or laying down curling then they do with completing objectives for the battle. In many battles the axis always seem +2 and it is rare that you see a veteran or elite on the US side, most commonly a -2. Axis always see the us troops first even if they are in the 2nd story windows and they are in the street running at the house.

I had 15 plus US troops in a house complete with an mg team only to be forced out  by an enemy command team of 4, with mp40s. Enemy MG 42s still shoot if they come under fire, Us mgs will cower or flee. panzerfausts will fire still if they are under tank or infantry fire, yet US bazookas will curl to the ground if fired upon instantly.... I don't understand why battlefront has decided to go this route with the infantry.

 

A veteran m4a1 76mm I had, pumped 3 rounds into a mark iv panzer and not 1 member of the crew was hit all fled. That's 3 76mm rounds all penetrating.

Edited by user1000

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you can open the editor and confirm settings, but I don't know of anyone of the stock scenario creators who is into uber german settings.  Do you have some specific example scenarios?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes @sburke is right. I find that facts always help these discussions along. I remember being taken to task by the Beta team on one of my scenarios for giving a German unit a pretty middling rating, however I justified it based on the research I had conducted on the action being portrayed. So it would be useful if you could present your evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By this point in the war many German units were utterly p**s-poor, the very last scrapings of the barrel, stiffened by a diminishing number of veterans (or better).....IMHO you could use almost any combination of training & experience levels &, often within the same (reduced) platoon.

The Brits were in a reasonably similar position as we were simply running out of men, but we were slightly better off in that we still had decent supply and training facilities well behind the lines (ie: in the UK), so I'd be somewhat less likely to rate them conscript or use -2 experience and the overall unit settings would be a bit more uniform by & large.

The US had no shortage of manpower but their units were beginning to suffer the effects of combat fatigue.....Troops who had been in the field for long enough to consider veterans could see that the end was in sight and became very reluctant to stick their neck out (naturally this effected British & Commonwealth forces too), so I'd set many Veteran units to Low or even Poor morale.  The remainder would mostly be regulars but still with a decent number of enthusiastic new recruits (I usually chuck in a few green troops with high morale to compensate for the veterans).

FWIW

.

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't the user1000 describe the problems 4.0 engine brought to the infantry units perhaps? If he would play the germans he would have a very similar experience. 4.0 is bugged. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me it certainly sounds like the problems I've experienced with both Allied and Axis troops with Engine 4. And not specific to the U.S.

I've no doubt in time B.F.C will be able to tweak a few things. Although I do seem to remember people wanting their troops to take evasive action more quickly, now they are running away too readily, and wanting them to spread out more when they move, and now they don't like the fact that two or three men will stay outside of the building their squad has been ordered to move into.  As Johnny Lenin said "It's nothing to get hung about. Just go back to engine 3". Obviously, I'm paraphrasing just a tad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"...don't like the fact that two or three men will stay outside of the building their squad has been ordered to move into."

To play well, one really should break squads down to teams - that mitigates the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎8‎/‎2017 at 8:32 PM, user1000 said:

Many infantry problems I have played more than half the battles that came along with the game. The Us infantry for most of these battles have pathetic skill set. As US side most curl or flee if they come under fire. The troops seem to spend more time fleeing or laying down curling then they do with completing objectives for the battle. In many battles the axis always seem +2 and it is rare that you see a veteran or elite on the US side, most commonly a -2. Axis always see the us troops first even if they are in the 2nd story windows and they are in the street running at the house.

I had 15 plus US troops in a house complete with an mg team only to be forced out  by an enemy command team of 4, with mp40s. Enemy MG 42s still shoot if they come under fire, Us mgs will cower or flee. panzerfausts will fire still if they are under tank or infantry fire, yet US bazookas will curl to the ground if fired upon instantly.... I don't understand why battlefront has decided to go this route with the infantry.

 

A veteran m4a1 76mm I had, pumped 3 rounds into a mark iv panzer and not 1 member of the crew was hit all fled. That's 3 76mm rounds all penetrating.

Well, I always advocated for less Small Arms firing per Action-Cycle and or more reactionary cover/better Savings Roll's  (more cower for  self-preservation=less firing per Action-Cycle) for Inf, HT/Armor Gunners, etc...One Minute of Intense Combat in CM (what some call a Mad-Minute) should maybe take twice that long.

I've tried everything from reducing/increasing the Moral/Leadership ratings to using 'Poor' equipment, etc, but it only helped a little in giving me the desired Realistic Tactical Effects I'm looking for.

Of course, and in saying the above User1K, in CMFB having Germans with more Auto Weapons then U.S. at the Squad Level (especially against U.S. Armored Inf) doesn't help much either, and you will end-up with U.S. Troops taking more cover and ultimately loosing more casualties...So, unless you get the Germs in an Ambush, you will be hard pressed.

Joe

 

 

Edited by JoMc67

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, JoMc67 said:

Well, I always advocated for less Small Arms firing per Action-Cycle and or more reactionary cover/better Savings Roll's  (more cower for  self-preservation=less firing per Action-Cycle) for Inf, HT/Armor Gunners, etc...One Minute of Intense Combat in CM (what some call a Mad-Minute) should maybe take twice that long.

I've tried everything from reducing/increasing the Moral/Leadership ratings to using 'Poor' equipment, etc, but it only helped a little in giving me the desired Realistic Tactical Effects I'm looking for.

Of course, and in saying the above User1K, in CMFB having Germans with more Auto Weapons then U.S. at the Squad Level (especially against U.S. Armored Inf) doesn't help much either, and you will end-up with U.S. Troops taking more cover and ultimately loosing more casualties...So, unless you get the Germs in an Ambush, you will be hard pressed.

Joe

You will need to provide some kind of justification for why folks would be firing less.  As a beta tester I would be asked the same. BF is very particular about changing items like that.  It can’t be just a feeling or to create a different tactical effect. It has to actually be a real world demonstrable rationale. 

Regarding the auto weapons, you are exactly right and this is the very reason for Germany deploying them.  They are a more effective weapon and it reversed the typical fire power advantage the US had with the Garand over the Kar.  The US can not go toe to toe with a force that can put out more rounds faster. So you need to alter tactics.   Under no circumstances should that also be the norm. Every German unit wasn’t suddenly equipped with massive amounts of automatic weapons. Theoretically that means that in CM battles you should not see them that often, but then you are in the hands of those nefarious scenario designers or folks purchasing them in quick battles. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎15‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 4:28 PM, sburke said:

Every German unit wasn’t suddenly equipped with massive amounts of automatic weapons.

In theory they sorta were.....The German infantry platoon was pretty much built around the firepower of the MGs, the riflemen contributed almost as much as ammo carriers as they did by using their own weapons.

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

In theory they sorta were.....The German infantry platoon was pretty much built around the firepower of the MGs, the riflemen contributed almost as much as ammo carriers as they did by using their own weapons.

Apples to oranges we are talking mp40 and 44 not a single mg or two that the squad was tasked to support.  It is why I would happily go against your typical German squad armed with a couple mgs and a bunch of kar 98s with a Russian squad armed with Ppsh  

Stay focused! :)  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just had a knife-fight. Okay, not me: my troops. And, well, it wasn't really with knives. It was just very, very close range. "VCQB", I'd call it. I had four bolt-action Commonwealth guys against two German SMG guys. I don't care how fast and smoothly the Lee Enfield loads: against smgs at close range, it's like bringing a knife to a gunfight. End result: 3 down, 1 cowering. If it weren't for a Sherman firing into the Germans' room from the other side, they would've still been there when my other 6 men entered the slaughterhouse. Fire superiority is real thing. Once a side gets it, it's very hard for the other side to win. Full auto at close range is very hard to beat.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's a problem of whoever has the autos wins. Going back to first post. I can honestly say I see more german mg teams fire while getting shot at, compared to a us mg team which seems to always curl at the hint of a firefight. The water cooled .30 cal had a longer range than the mg-42, could shoot longer, and carried more ammo. Same with bazookas. Where have you seen a us bazooka team get a shot off with incoming mg fire? Panzerscreks and panzerfausts sure seem to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, user1000 said:

I don't think it's a problem of whoever has the autos wins. Going back to first post. I can honestly say I see more german mg teams fire while getting shot at, compared to a us mg team which seems to always curl at the hint of a firefight. The water cooled .30 cal had a longer range than the mg-42, could shoot longer, and carried more ammo. Same with bazookas. Where have you seen a us bazooka team get a shot off with incoming mg fire? Panzerscreks and panzerfausts sure seem to.

I can't actually say I have any experience that would align with that.  You'll unfortunately have to be able to show that as repeatable in a test if there is going to be any traction on changing behavior.  The premise is that somehow (assuming all factors are set the same) that US units behave different than German units.  BF is going to categorically deny that so it will need proof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, user1000 said:

I don't think it's a problem of whoever has the autos wins. Going back to first post. I can honestly say I see more german mg teams fire while getting shot at, compared to a us mg team which seems to always curl at the hint of a firefight. The water cooled .30 cal had a longer range than the mg-42, could shoot longer, and carried more ammo. Same with bazookas. Where have you seen a us bazooka team get a shot off with incoming mg fire? Panzerscreks and panzerfausts sure seem to.

 

10 hours ago, sburke said:

I can't actually say I have any experience that would align with that.  You'll unfortunately have to be able to show that as repeatable in a test if there is going to be any traction on changing behavior.  The premise is that somehow (assuming all factors are set the same) that US units behave different than German units.  BF is going to categorically deny that so it will need proof.

 

To @user1000, if you think this is a problem, a suggestion is to show it, just like @sburke just mentioned. If your supposition can be shown to have some merit (or at least to get others to say, "Yeah, he's got a point"), then it can be looked at and dug into.

It could be something as simple as the MG42 firing at the US M1917 has more suppression then the US M1917 firing at an MG42. A suggestion would be to put 10 of each type (M1917 and MG42) at the same end of a series of test lanes. Have the same weapon fire at all of them. So 20 lanes; 20 "enemy" MG42s firing at 10 "friendly" MG42s and 10 "friendly" M1917s. That'd give 10 data points per weapon per run. Just time how long until the target is suppressed. Make all soft factors identical. Make the lanes so that there is no cross fire. Make leadership/command the same for all. (Either all in command or all out of command.) Next, substitute an "enemy" M1917 for each of the "enemy" MG42s. Run the test some more. Time the suppression. See if there's a difference. You'll have apples to apples and oranges to oranges.

Just an idea.

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

×