Sgt. Beavis
-
Posts
101 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Sgt. Beavis
-
-
Nope, looks like he's going to keep his half-dozen complimentary posts to this thread - but he is indeed going to ignore the responses.Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:
Will you posting the by-now obligatory half-dozen complimentary posts on the same subject and then ignoring all the responses, as per syllabus?
You're good! :cool: </font>
-
And in any of these incidents, were there 3 guys, all by themselves? These guys weren't in trenches either, just shallow foxholes.Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:Take a look at the troops in the Grain Elevator in Stalingrad - or the Red House in the Red October complex.
You didn't need to be in fortified complexes, either. Teenaged troops of the 25th SS Panzergrenadierregiment (part of Hitlerjugend Division) hid out in small slit trenches as well as an anti-tank ditch near Buron in July 1944; Allied troops bypassed them only to be brought under fire from their rear. Small arms were ineffective on the Germans and eventually tanks of the Sherbrooke Fusiliers had to come to point blank range and take out individual Germans with the 75mm main armament.
It happens.
Fanaticism happens...once in a while. In CM, platoon HQs quite regularly refuse to go to ground or be killed. I'm not imagining things when I say this, because I see it happen in the games I play. Another person has said they experienced the same thing.
He also said that when he tried to post about it, a bunch of people would come into his threads and try to make excuses for crazy behavior... blah.
How many threads and how many hundreds of posts were needed on these forums to correct the obviously flawed MG problems in CMBO? And even with that issue, there were tons of people who said something to the effect of "sure, it's quite realistic for a company of infantry to charge an MG bunker over open ground and take 3 casualties!"
Makes me wonder why the British and Germans weren't so much more successful withh their WW1 attacks over no-mans' land. After all, MGs don't really cause casualties....
Anyway, I don't think it's realistic for 3 guys, by themselves, to not go to ground when facing such firepower. And if they don't, well, they'll be killed by remaining exposed.
Ideally I could ignore them. But I needed the section of the map they were in. Before assaulting them, i put down what one would think to be an adequate, even very excessive, amount of supporting fire. Naturally, they didn't seem to be affected by this, being a platoon HQ, and required a mass assault to be destroyed after repulsing an earlier attempt.
-
OK, I can see this is going nowhere fast.
HMG fire suppresses people. So does concentrated rifle fire. Why didn't these green HQ troops go to ground? If they were fanatic, how was it that none were hit by this gigantic volume of fire, all directed at one tiny spot on the map? Because some aspect relating to platoon HQs is flawed. Something funky is going on with them.
JasonC : I wouldn't have assaulted them if I didn't have to. Those 3 supermen somehow weren't suppressed by the huge volume of firepower directed at them, from close range. Why didn't those green troops break and rout when under such intense pressure? If they were fanatic and firing back anyway, nicely exposed to my fire, how is it that none of them were hit during this whole time, and I had to physically close with them in order to get rid of them?
If HMGs and concentrated rifle fire from close range can't suppress 3 man platoon HQs, or a single squad of infantry in CM, we should start including hover tanks and neutrino cannons. After all, from the way this QB was playing, and as I stated earlier... all the Soviets needed was a massive wave of platoon HQs, and they could have conquered the world. Forget the T-34s and SMG squads, we gotta bring up the dreaded platoon HQs! They can't be suppressed, wounded, or killed, and they always fight to the last man.
[ August 31, 2003, 02:54 PM: Message edited by: Sgt. Beavis ]
-
I don't mind portraying bravery, but even Audie wasn't bullet-proofOriginally posted by manchildstein II:sounds like an 'audie murphy' platoon hq...
-
True, they are represented in the game as kneeling or standing, but they would really be firing prone. But I don't think it's realistic to say that 3 green troops would make any attempt at all to expose themselves to the fire of 3 HMGs, 3 LMGs, and...a bunch of riflemen. hehOriginally posted by Monty:hmmm MY hq units always die very quickly, it seems those guys attracks bullets like a magnet.
btw i think fanatism DO play an important role, fanatism guys wont be pinned down, but when you see the guys standing up, that is not meaning they all are standing up, but they shoot from lying or prone position offcourse.
Monty
-
Thanks for the supportOriginally posted by lcm1947:Finally after years of seeing this exact same thing in my games starting way back with CMBO and then to my horror in my brand new and improved CMBB someone else sees it and thinks it's pure lame. I have posted about it several times back when playing CMBO myself but finally gave up after everybody and their mother jumbed in making excuses and reasons for it. So it is nice to see that I am not the only one that feels it's ridiculous and highly unrealistic. I'm afraid however you'll just have to learn to deal with it as I have done or it'll drive you crazy each time it happens. I even stopped playing scenarios for a long time so I could at least could edit HQ units in battles I designed where they had less ammo, no special skills and were green to correct this silly and unbelievable phenomenon. Anyway, I finally got over it and started playing scenaros again due to Pbem's and just think of all HQ units as being composed of a full sqaud as well as the HQ units themselves. But if it helps please put me down as one that agrees wholeheartedly with you.
I think this aspect detracts from the game quite a bit; I hope Steve and the guys take a look at it. It sucks wasting huge volumes of limited ammo upon 3 (or 4...heh...the German HQs are also made of ironmen) guys that simply refuse to rout or die. And of course, when you assault them, they manage to cause a few casualties to your guys before giving up the ghost. Arggghhh!
-
Ok, there's some truth to what you say. But I still think what I observed in this game, and others, is unrealistic. Hang onOriginally posted by SirReal:Walk out into nature with a friend. Have your friend wear grey or green clothing. Find a wooded field. While you turn around, have your friend walk away 200 meter, lie down facing you, making sure that he can see you. Then turn around and try to spot him.
Next, have that friend yell and make a lot of noise. Now try and see if you can spot him.
Next, consider that in the situation you described, the distance was probably more than 200m, the troops where probably dug in and camoflaged, had a lot more experience.
The incoming fire, while directed at those three men, were probably area fire; it was aimed at the area where they where. Only short ranges, exposed targets or scoped weapons will allow direct observation of the target you're firing at. Sure, you can see the gunsmoke of their rifles, perhaps a muzzle flash, and certainly the ground being ripped up by three HMGs hosing down the area. But probably not very much of the actual people there.
Finally, returning fire doesn't require one to stand up and take the incoming HMG fire in the face. Peeking out between two branches of the bush and squeezing off one aimed shot is enough.
/SirReal
The rifle platoon (full strength, no casualties at this point) was about 130 m from the enemy platoon HQ. The HQ was in a foxhole, green (as I later found out), composed of 3 guys, and they were firing at me. From 130 m, I'd see the muzzle flashes and know where they were.
The MG teams I had firing at the same HQ, even though they were around 250 m away, had an observer guy with binoculars to direct fire...he'd be able to observe muzzle flashes as well. Anyway, the MGs are supposed to provide area suppression, not precision fire, which they could easily do at 250 m.
The sheer volume of firepower being directed at that very small area, at 3 guys, would preclude exposing oneself to take shots. Particularly with green troops; they'd be busy soiling themselves and praying before thinking of firing back.
Now I'm not saying that all that firepower should result in automatic death for the HQ. But they most certainly would go to ground, and not be firing back. Particularly for the 3 or 4 turns I was directing all that fire at them. Finally, when they do go to ground, and I send a portion of another platoon to advance on the foxhole, they pop back up, not minding the multiple MG fire and the fire of the entire other platoon from 130 m, shoot, kill two guys, and the rest of the squad runs away. That just isn't how things happened.
Finally, like I said in the first post, I had to send in a massive assault wave to finish off these 3 supermen green troops. I had to go into their foxholes and cut their heads off to finally get them to stop firing at my guys. Of course, they killed one more of my guys hand-to-hand (they must have been trained in jujitsu as well) before finally being wiped out. God help me if they had been veterans; I would have needed tactical nuclear weapons to kill or rout them.
-
The platoon HQ was in a foxhole; I agree that being in a trench would have made it a bit easier to accept.Originally posted by Michael Emrys:I have a question for Beavis. Was the HQ in a trench? If so, they would be nearly impervious to incoming rifle caliber fire.
Another question: How far away were the three HMGs etc.?
Michael
The HMGs were about... 250 m from the HQ? I don't remember exactly. Not super-close, but not very far away either. I had them on a hill, 2 in a building...they had a clear line of sight to the enemy.
My contention is that doing anything but peeing one's pants and lying at the bottom of one's foxhole when facing that volume of firepower would result in getting killed. Rather quickly.
This HQ was green as well. I was facing green and conscript Soviets with (mostly) regular Germans. They didn't break, and they didn't get killed. They simply remained upright, returning fire. I can't accept that; if it was really that difficult to pin 3 guys, the Germans wouldn't have been able to conquer Denmark.
-
I do think it's a great gameOriginally posted by Monty:Beavis !
If this pissed you off so much, that means you think CMBB is a great "game" !
Otherwise, if you thought it suck, you wouldn't be so upset.
Turn your negative energie into positive, and send the save turn file to somebody of BFC to check it.
Monty
But this issue, which has existed since the first CM, is so very lame and frustrating. I think there is a weird issue with the code relating to platoon HQs that makes them "tougher" than regular infantry squads.
However, I have also seen, less frequently, the same phenomenon with full rifle squads. I think that there might be a problem with the relations in the code between fanaticism and "kill" probability. Perhaps. I'm just guessing.
-
Unfortunately, no. I got frustrated, but I didn't think of posting until later that night.Originally posted by Sailor Malan:No danger of a saved game I take it?
It happens enough, however, that I can try a few more battles and gather a few save game files.
Pay attention next time you're doing an attack. Platoon HQs, 3 guys, are sometimes immune to everything you throw at them. You have to close assault them and cut their heads off in order to defeat them. Simple MG and rifle fire isn't enough. Argh
-
Ok... I was playing a game today, a QB. I was playing the Germans, attacking the AI Soviets.
On the left side of the map, he had a group of infantry. One squad saw the firepower of a full rifle platoon and 3 HMG teams directed at them. And...
They remained unsuppressed. Uh...what the hell? How could one remain above ground, returning fire, without being shot to death when there are 3 HMGs, 3 LMGs, and a bunch of rifles all being fired at one's location?
I am glad that the game allows for fanaticism, but that was just plain retarded and unrealistic. I don't care how fanatic a group of soldiers are, their fanaticism won't stop bullets. They'll die just like anyone else once they are shot.
Finally, after a couple turns of all this firepower being directed at the one (!) squad, I sent a squad from another platoon (which had been following the first that was laying down "suppressive" fire) advancing towards the enemy. Of course, the enemy unit popped right back up with my advancing squad about 50 m away, opened fire, killed 2 guys, and sent the rest routing. Naturally, the 3 MG42s and all the rest weren't quite enough to keep these guys pinned.
At this point, I got pissed off and just had everyone on the left side of the map assault this one squad. I finally kill these supermen...and find out it was a platoon headquarters.
Ok, that made me quit CM and I was even more annoyed. 3 guys. There were 3 guys, guys immune to rifle and MG bullets striking them in the face, who were nearly impossible to suppress, and somehow managed to stand up again, and fire, killing my advancing troops. Yea right. That's total BS. The second they stood up, they would have all died from the volume of firepower being directed at them. Not to mention the previous 3 or 4 turns they remained upright, happy as can be, returning fire at the platoon I had been using initially to prepare for the follow-ons to advance. And the 3 MG42s.
I have seen this a number of times, and now I've really felt a need to post about it. A single superhuman squad or platoon leader, that simply will not go to ground, nor take any casualties even when facing down full platoons from close range along with HMGs providing fire support. From the way CM portrays things sometimes, the Russians only needed waves of platoon HQs at Bagration, and that's how they inflicted such a massive defeat on the Germans.
-
The new N35 chip is scheduled to be released around May 14, if I remember correctly. I've read that this one will correct some of the problems the FX 5800 ( I think that's the current high end card) has.Originally posted by Wild_Bill:Thanks for your input guys!
I really don't have a problem with slow frame rates for CM with my GeForce3, as it seems to handle the game just fine, but I'm looking more at other games that I'm interested in coming down the pipe. I may just wait to see what nVidia's next revision of their chip looks like, maybe they'll have optimized their chip so that it runs cooler and has better performance.
Then again, a faster 9800 Pro with 256 (!) MB of memory is supposed to be relased this summer.
-
Hannibal Smith of the A-Team
-
Steve, Andreas....
Ok, I understand what you guys are saying
CMBB is a great game, and missing a couple graphics models won't ruin the experience. I thought it would be nice to have all the models, but if that isn't feasible, I understand. There are sound reasons for not including all of them.
I'll get the new patch when it's out, and I'll be looking forward to CM2.
Others have said it before, but I haven't yet. It is nice to get a response from one of the creators of the game. I appreciate having your input Steve. And keep up the good work
-
I think he is saying that he would like a bit more detail, concerning the halftrack models. To be honest, I agree with him. I'd rather wait 2 weeks more for CM2, which is 2 years away...approximately... and have correct graphical representations for the various models that still need them. Is this a huge issue? Nah, but it sure would be nice to see halftracks, which were fairly common, modeled correctly (modeled in this case referring to the graphics).Originally posted by Andreas:But we are getting somewhere - now, does the fact that the SPW 251/17 is represented by the 251/1 diminish BFC's claim that CMBB is the most realistic wargame out there? I don't think it does - hence, IMO your expectation that all these models would be added in patches is unreasonable, based on nothing but muddled thinking on your part, and your inability to accept this makes you a whinger.
You don't think this matters, so you consider Hortlund's statements are "whining," and that he is misguided. Well, I think you're misguided.
So who is correct? I think I am correct, along with Hortlund. Doesn't prove anything, of course, and neither does your statement that he is "whining" and he's wrong. You claim the use of the spw 251/1 model for the spw 251/17 doesn't take anything away from "reality," but Hortlund and I think it does. Not a huge amount, it certainly doesn't make me depressed or anything. But to say that he is misguided and that you are most certainly correct is a wee bit arrogant. Especially since what he and I agree on is actually true. Using the 251/1 model for the 251/17 is not accurate or, dare I say, realistic.I understand the reasoning of BTS about this, and I certainly do approve of how they've done CMBB and the amount of effort put into this product. But I also think that spending a couple more weeks to add in the last 3d models would be nice, particularly the halftrack variants. I mean...they weren't exactly rare. Maybe it wasn't explicitly stated by BTS that "every single vechicle will have a proper 3d model," but I certainly went with the assumption that they all would have the appropriate graphics. I think Hortlund did too, and that is why he feels disappointed now. I do to some degree as well.
Is this nitpicking? Could be considered that way, for lots of you on here it seems to be thought of that way. For him and I though, it is worth talking about.
-
I don't know about in the game, but in real life, increasing the gun's elevation wouldn't do much to help. Yes, it would fire over the terrain, but then it would also fire over the target. What actually needs to happen is for the vehicle to advance far enough so that the terrain is no longer blocking the shot. What's happening in the game at present appears to be the LOS is being incorrectly reported. Or something.Originally posted by Michael emrys:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sgt. Beavis:
I've also noticed this. It doesn't happen too often, but enough to be an irritation. I am ok with a tank "digging for turnips" as someone said earlier
But after 1 shot like that, or at most 2, I would hope any gunner who is not severely retarded would change the elevation of the gun to prevent anymore digging. Watching a tank fire round after round into the earth while trying to hit a target is a wee bit frustrating.
Michael</font>
-
I've also noticed this. It doesn't happen too often, but enough to be an irritation. I am ok with a tank "digging for turnips" as someone said earlier
But after 1 shot like that, or at most 2, I would hope any gunner who is not severely retarded would change the elevation of the gun to prevent anymore digging. Watching a tank fire round after round into the earth while trying to hit a target is a wee bit frustrating.
Perhaps something to look at in the 1.02 patch.
-
What he said. The immaturity of some members is truly appalling. Get out of your houses and do something besides live CM as a religion. It is a game. That's all. People are free to question it whenever they want to and suggest whatever they want without being ridiculed.Originally posted by tiborhead:I usually don't butt into stuff like this around here, mostly because it has been confirmed by many that my opinion is worth the same as about a pile of gravel. Not the good, expensive kind either, the real cheap stuff. But I think some people are getting a little too defensive about a game I think I can safely say, we all love and adore.
I, as well as most others here, know that BFC will probably (most definitely) never sell out to Microsoft or some other corporate giant. I took this thread as a sort of speculative discussion. But this sort of behavior, acting out in a really (I hate to say it because I respect MOST everyone on these forums)... immature way is a little upsetting.
Is suggesting transferring CMBB, or any of it's future variants, over to a console really such a sin? Especially since, as stated before, we know it will probably (again, most definitely) never happen. Sure, it may have been discussed before, but, come on. Cut the guy some slack. If we all started behaving this way when a previously covered topic was rehashed, well, we'd probably all stop coming here.
These forums have gained a reputation of being a place of civility and maturity. And, although it may sound cheesy, and I may not exactly be the most upstanding, informative guy, I feel quite proud of being part of this community.
I don't know, perhaps I'm being a little too sentimental here. I'm almost certain most of you have stopped reading this post by now. However, for those who by some chance still happen to be reading this, my simple plea is "lighten up a little. Go play a QB against the AI or something."
Oh yeah, and CM on a console? Pfftt. No way, man.
And CM on a console will happen eventually. It will take years, but I would bet large sums of money that such a thing will come to pass.
[ December 06, 2002, 11:19 PM: Message edited by: Sgt. Beavis ]
-
Originally posted by SuperSulo:
SuperSulo--You'll notice this kind of behavior on the forum at times. For some on here (without naming names) CM is not merely a video game, it is a religion. Notice how defensive they get when you dare to question THEIR statements and interpretations. Yours, however, are open to criticism.
Some of you remind me of what modern day Pharisees would be like. "You dared to question our way of thinking?!?! CRUCIFY HIM IN THE NAME OF BTS! I AM NOT PART OF BTS, BUT I KNOW EVERYTHING THEY THINK AND I WILL INTERPRET FOR THEM, BECAUSE THIS IS MY RELIGION!"
It's a video game. Not a religion. Some others on here other than SuperSulo need to "get a clue." He can post and suggest whatever he damn well wants to, and you can't do anything about it.
-
Good topic, lots of interesting things brought up.
I created a topic a few days ago about HMG setup times, and how there is a little bug with regards to that; the timing bug also affects guns and mortars. Start a HMG team moving with a long movement order; on the second turn, add another movement order while the first still hasn't been completed. At the end of the first waypoint, the team will stop to reflect the delay in implementing the 2nd movement and the time to setup will decrease. Soon they start on the 2nd waypoint path, but the time to setup counter isn't reset and remains at the value just prior to beginning the 2nd move.
I thought I'd add the heads up to this topic as well
Secondly... We STILL can't place AT guns and AFVs inside buildings (during the setup phase) while playing as the defender in a battle.
This goes against tons of historical photographic evidence I have seen. Placement in buildings offers excellent concealment, and some cover from light artillery that can be so devastating against guns in foxholes.
-
I'm not saying the FTs are ALWAYS ineffective
But I am suggesting that perhaps their ability to hit should be increased somewhat, given that it is extremely short range, and the FT is an area fire weapon, not a precision one requiring extreme accuracy or skill to use. -
bump
I would be interested to see a BTS comment about the HMG, mortar team, and gun setup times
The FT teams...well, I'll play with them a bit more, varying experience levels and terrain and units involved.
-
I've just noticed this too; I was playing another QB that included a Pak40, and the setup times were not reset after each new movement, just as in my first post about the HMGs.Originally posted by Sigurd:I had the same setup time bug as your HMG : it was for a 75mm Inf gun.
Anybody else who's seen this ?
I strongly suspect there is a slight bug at work here. Hopefully BTS will reply to this, or look at the thread
I also hope they review the "to hit" chance for the FT teams; seems a bit low.
[ November 04, 2002, 01:21 PM: Message edited by: Sgt. Beavis ]
-
Understood....but....Originally posted by AnonymousOxide:The "way-off" misses are cause by the game engine placing missed shots randomly about the map. This happends to tanks also. Don't ask me why it's like that, it just is.
Why do they miss at this range? A FT is not a precision weapon. I would hope an operator, who is unsuppressed, would be able to do effective area fire... before wasting as misses half the ammo load of 9 "shots."
A really annoying issue in CM that I would like to talk about
in Combat Mission: Barbarossa to Berlin
Posted
The other aspect of my argument concerns the massive amounts of fire that can be directed against an enemy, and they refuse to go to ground. Fine, if they're fanatic that's possible...but they won't be fanatic for long, since they'll all end up getting shot by remaining exposed.
Stalingrad involved city fighting...and lots of fanaticism and fighting to the last man. I agree... But this fight I'm describing doesn't involve good cover in a ruined city. It's 3 guys, by themselves, in a shallow foxhole under fire from close range by an entire platoon of infantry, backed up by 3 HMGs.
How could they remain so aware of their surroundings when under that kind of fire that they pop up at just the right moment, fire, and stop the squad I had moving in on them? Seems a little too wacky for me to accept...