Does the 4.0 engine break some campaigns due to balance?

[Audgisil]

Finally returning to my favorite games...

So, I really like the behavior of the troops in the 4.0 engine, patched to the most recent updates of course. When they're under MG fire, they go to ground pretty quickly and even fall back if the fire gets too intense for them. This all feels quite realistic since they're very careful to protect their little digital lives.

However, The campaigns were designed before this behavior was implemented and don't seem to have been adjusted accordingly. For example, I'm now playing the Troina campaign in Fortress Italy, It seems nearly impossible to beat. It feels really gamey to use first round barrages on all enemy positions (after finding out in a previous defeat exactly where they are located). And even when using the first round barrages, the casualties that the allies suffer in their assault, for example in the second and third missions advancing up the hills, are massive and the squads can hardly move without going to ground. - which is realistic. But, like I said, the scenarios just feel unbalanced - too few resources for the attacker or too many defenders, not enough artillery or registration points, no armor support, etc.

Taking your time is also difficult when a single barrage on a position can take 15 minutes to call in. Again, this is realistic and I like this very much, but the scenarios themselves just seem unbalanced and require gamey solutions and multiple attempts to even have a chance to win... or do I just really lack tactical skill (granted I'm way too impatient sometimes and get my litle guys killed, but those are the kinds of mistakes I usually preface with "I know this likely going to be stupid, but... charge that building!" and then order them to their deaths with a "hmm, well I guess that didn't work").

So what do you think, are the campaigns unbalanced now due to the much higher leathality of MGs and lower casualty tolerances? Changes which I think are good though.

[domfluff]

The balance has certainly changed with the engine upgrades - The Road to Montebourg in CMBN in particular became an awful lot nastier with the MG changes, since that's a frontal assault over mostly open ground into MG positions.

I don't think this is "broken" at all, but it's certainly more difficult.

I haven't played Troina post-patch to comment (but have certainly played it post-MG update), but you can usually muscle through with some careful planning. Fighting up a hill pretty much defines CMFI, so use of smoke to cover movements is really important to define what the enemy can see. Even if you are setting pre-battle barrages, it's probably useful to set longer, lighter barrages to force the enemy to keep their heads down - your first and foremost problem is gaining the ability to manoeuvre in these circumstances.

[PIATpunk]

Quote

awful lot nastier with the MG changes,

even due to the reduction in MG42 effectiveness?

[domfluff]

I believe that: 

Quote

* FIXED:  MG42 LMG is 258% more lethal than the Bren LMG and the B.A.R.

Is more to do with the Bren and BAR choosing to fire single shots in 4.0 more than they should, rather than the MG42 being made worse. Could be wrong though.


In any case, the MG42 (and all machine guns) are far more effective than they were in the early releases of CMBN, CMFI (or CMSF 1 for that matter), since they'll generally fire longer bursts, more often. They're a much more appropriately scary tool than they were when The Road to Montebourg was designed.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

2 hours ago, domfluff said:

The balance has certainly changed with the engine upgrades - The Road to Montebourg in CMBN in particular became an awful lot nastier with the MG changes, since that's a frontal assault over mostly open ground into MG positions.

I'm glad you said that.....The first scenario is incredibly daunting! 

Every tile gained without loss feels like a major victory.....I'm usually so stressed by the time my men are in position for the final assault that I need a day off before I can conduct it! 

The second scenario feels a bit short on time (not one of my usual gripes), but I play on Iron Mode and I don't leave my people behind, especially in minefields! 

Edited May 15, 2019 by Sgt.Squarehead

[A Canadian Cat]

4 hours ago, domfluff said:

Is more to do with the Bren and BAR choosing to fire single shots in 4.0 more than they should, rather than the MG42 being made worse. Could be wrong though.

No you are correct. Fixes were made to the ROF of Bren and BAR operators.

[A Canadian Cat]

4 hours ago, Audgisil said:

So, I really like the behavior of the troops in the 4.0 engine, patched to the most recent updates of course.

Several changes have been made over the years. In the original game you could run a platoon across and open field under the sights of a MG42 and members of that platoon could make the run in good order and kill of the MG team. Things were too easy. With the v3 engine upgrade (or was it v2 I cannot remember) the effectiveness of MG fire was increased. Then your platoon would not make it and instead would become a broken combat ineffective mess. Things were rightly hard. With the advent of the v4 engine the HMG team was to easy to force to retreat. So, while you could not rush out into the open again you could force the HGM to relocate to easily. Things went back to too easy again - different reasons though. Now with the v4 patch the HMG will hold his ground properly and things are back to rightly hard again.

So, yeah the balance of some scenarios has changed. Depending on when a give scenario was created will govern what the effects are.

[mvp7]

Has anyone played the Scottish Corridor with the latest engine 4 patch?  That campaign got ridiculously hard after that engine 2 or 3 rate-of-fire overhaul when any one of those previously just mildly annoying MG teams could suddenly out-shoot a platoon of British infantry (which suffered the most in all the factions of CMx2 from the rate-of-fire changes).

Edited May 17, 2019 by mvp7

[Frenchy56]

2 hours ago, mvp7 said:

Has anyone played the Scottish Corridor with the latest engine 4 patch?  That campaign got ridiculously hard after that engine 2 or 3 rate-of-fire overhaul when any one of those previously just mildly annoying MG teams could suddenly out-shoot a platoon of British infantry (which suffered the most in all the factions of CMx2 from the rate-of-fire changes).

There's a reason the Brits got such excruciating casualties in that operation.