General Jack Ripper
-
Posts
2,326 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
21
Posts posted by General Jack Ripper
-
-
On 10/22/2019 at 7:39 AM, RockinHarry said:
I mean they can jump over walls and fences like hurdlers, so doing the same on windows shouldn´t actually be a problem from BFC´s point of view.
If hurdling means, "I'm going to put one arm down and kick my legs over the side," which I am reasonably certain it doesn't. Then again, it has been a few years since I've seen a track and field event.
There's only one problem with your hypothesis however: Walls and Fences CAN be hurdled, windows CANNOT. You can, in fact, CLIMB through a window, but usually only with some difficulty, which becomes magnified when attempting to do it with 60-80 pounds of gear. I suppose Battlefront could invest time in making an animation of two soldiers using their hands and shoulders to help a third climb through a window into a house, or they could literally do anything else, or just nothing at all.
I'm in favor of the 'nothing at all approach' otherwise the forums will be filled with complaints about soldiers being shot while attempting to help each other climb through windows, while someone whines and cries about how climbing through windows isn't correctly modeled because some regiment somewhere developed some special stepladder to do the job, and now we need to have said stepladder modeled in the game otherwise it's just broken forever.
Seriously dude, some people are still waiting for an extra tall tripod for the Bruno Enfield Light Machinegun to be modeled, so a soldier can fire it in an anti-aircraft role.
Literally a tripod, for a BREN gun, for antiaircraft use.
There was an actual argument about it and everything. Search it up.
-
And as far as I'm concerned, here's a textbook example. Every single squad is split into teams, and every single soldier went where I told them to go. No one bunched up, there were no traffic jams, and placing a waypoint in front of a door before entry leads to only about a five second pause for a four-man team. If that's just too unbearable for your grand battle plan that's timed across an entire infantry battalion down to the microsecond, then buddy, you've got more problems than I can reasonably address.
-
On 10/22/2019 at 4:28 AM, Pandur said:
The tiny "traffic jam" at the door was never a problem i wonder why this was introduced with engine 4, it solves nothing and only creates problems.
The "traffic jam" was a feature of the game BEFORE version 4, and was FIXED in version 4 by the new infantry behavior; I.E. Infantry no longer "bunch up", "move in single file lines everywhere", and "respect each other's space". This problem is not nearly as large as people are making it out to be, mostly because people would rather have their squads all run around together instead of splitting them into teams at the sharp edge of the attack.
On 10/22/2019 at 6:56 AM, Pandur said:It is just very distracting if i do not have to think about how to best engage the enemy but how to best game the system in order for my squads to use 1 damned door. Sure i can split a squad every time i let them enter a building, but how many squads do you have entering how many buildings in a urban map? Its many squads enter many buildings, to split each and every squad and on top take the penalty to moral for the split is just not a good workaround at all.
A four-man fire team is rarely a critical puzzle piece, and a four man fire team rarely tries to run around a building in order to enter it. There's an entire subsection of commands that allow you to split your squads down into various types of small teams for different purposes, with different weapon loads, and different equipment. If you can't seem to operate a three squad platoon with one or two squads split into teams, then I don't know what I can say. Maybe you shouldn't play on urban maps. Try playing on open fields instead.
If I can learn how to use effective micromanagement in a graviteam title which supposedly "punishes micromanagement", you guys can learn to split your squads into teams to make them more flexible and responsive. If I'm using a two-up one back scheme with my infantry companies, both of my leading platoons will be split down into teams. That's around eleven teams per platoon, across both leading platoons. It's only twenty two units on the sharp edge, of which maybe only three or four are even moving or receiving orders on each turn.
It's not like someone's asking you to break a battalion into teams.
On 10/22/2019 at 12:01 PM, Bulletpoint said:It's actually easier for the computer to just find the shortest path between two points than also to factor in bottlenecks and total travel time. So no need for SOP (for this problem at least)
Generally speaking, this is what the computer already does. Plot a move command directly across a small patch of marshy terrain, and sit back and watch your guys doggedly trudge through the sludge instead of simply taking the faster and easier path around it. Unless there is physically impassible terrain in your movement path, your troops generally go directly where they're supposed to, with the only deviation being the tendency to follow action spots in either straight lines, or diagonal lines.
The problem observed is the fact that building walls are IMPASSIBLE, thus forcing the ai to make a decision, and it may not make the decision you want, even if it means that the squad will arrive at the 1st floor of the building faster if it splits up and uses two doors.
Doors seem to have a position in which the soldier is "moving through the door", several positions in which soldiers are "waiting to use the door", and if all of those positions are occupied, then the remaining members of the squad look for a new door that is currently not being used.
So here's a simple rule of thumb for entering a building:
- Split your squad into teams.
- Order the first team into the building.
- Give each other team a compounding five second pause I.E. second team five seconds, third team ten seconds.
- After inputting your pause commands, place a movement waypoint for the following teams on the building, staggering between floors if necessary.
I typically have an assault team go in first to the first floor, followed by a weapons team to the second floor, with the remaining rifle section going to the third floor, if able.
When I'm ready to exit the building, I recombine my teams on the first floor prior to exiting, if not under imminent threat.
Otherwise I exit each team separately and regroup the squad in a safe location.Here's a squad doing exactly as I have described, while a second squad simultaneously fails to do as I have described:
-
My rule of thumb is to move 'Quick' unless there's some compelling reason to do anything else.
I'll often find myself changing other speeds back to 'Quick' while muttering to myself, "There's no reason I can't move quickly, vehicles don't get tired."
-
15 hours ago, JonS said:
Yeah ... nah.
I meant within context of this video game, of course.
-
-
12 minutes ago, MOS:96B2P said:
+1 NICE!!!
*doffs cap*
-
Now, I began my attack by area targeting all buildings on the leading edge of the village. Not all of them were occupied, but some of them were, and when those enemies got flushed into the open, that allowed my troops to open fire on them. This basically kicked off the general melee that carried my assault through the town and out the other side. Any positions occupied by the enemy were flattened by direct fire HE, and any enemy ambushes were dealt with overwhelming fire. The initial push into the town resulted in the large part of an enemy platoon KIA at a cost of maybe five guys on my side.
However, if you have no tanks available, this maneuver becomes far more time consuming and costly. The best thing I can say is to fight from whatever cover is available, mass your fire on anything you suspect holding enemy troops, and use whatever angles you can find to engage the enemy from as many different directions simultaneously as possible.
If a building allows you a view onto the rear of an enemy occupied building, take it. If you can circle around a building and arrive in an unexpected location, do it. If you have to split every single squad into teams to occupy every conceivable fighting position, go for it. If you have to sit there and hose down a building with fire for several turns to drive out the enemy, then resolve yourself to use up that ammo knowing you can then use the enemy position against him.
Your best friend while going into a village or town is recon by fire. Just shoot at something, and see if the enemy responds. If they don't, shoot at something else until they do.
Once you provoke a reaction, then you can develop the situation. Until you get that reaction, you should walk on eggshells.
-
Allow me to demonstrate:
-
On 10/8/2019 at 3:02 PM, IanL said:
LOL awesome - I find my self driving around the country side planning how to take the next field.
And here I thought I was the only one who did that.
Whenever we took family trips when I was a kid, I was always staring fixedly out the window as we drove along.My parents thought I was some kind of nature buff, but what I really saw in my mind's eye was tanks rolling across fields in the midst of an artillery barrage.
On 10/8/2019 at 3:40 PM, markshot said:I think that is accurate. I have no desire to ever see war personally. I have no desire to command ... management of tech organizations was enough for me.
For me, CM is an intellectual exercise in the way chess has been for 500 years in its current form. I greatly prefer CM to countless fantasy and sci-fi games. It is not that those games are not well programmed or well designed. But how can I reason about a game that models/portrays what does not exist? CM by definition is a very well modeled closed system, because what it models, in fact, occurs. There is recorded history/data. There is a base of human knowledge and martial discipline which is quite extensive; especially about past wars ... the future is anyone's guess. So, CM offers fun, graphics, goals, achievements, and a complete mental work out. I hope on my final day if it should occur before the faint glow of a display that when they find me, the text at top reads TOTAL VICTORY.
...Nice.
-
On 10/11/2019 at 12:52 PM, _mo_ said:
(If that's something that is currently possible and I am just missing a big, obvious button, ignore what I said and please point me in the right direction)
You're not missing a thing.
-
On 10/11/2019 at 7:26 PM, MikeyD said:
I recall that star constellations were accurate back when CMSF1 first showed up but I didn't know they had kept that going all these years. So that's really cool. Not one hour ago I was doing an internet search of lunar phases for 1944 in order to decide on which moonless night I want to set a certain battle in.
I recall the night sky was actually applied backwards, and no one noticed.
When I saw Ursa Minor circling Polaris in the southern sky, I sighed heavily, and then kept playing 'From the Dawn to the Setting Sun'.
Oh well, you can't have everything.
-
On 10/12/2019 at 6:55 PM, markshot said:
I have noticed that you get sort of a lateral rolling barrage with a single tube and a linear fire mission. It tends to start at one end and walk across. Of course, if you knew the timing, and which end was which, you sort of have a rolling barrage.
You must have gotten lucky, because every linear barrage I plot falls randomly along the entire line, no matter how many tubes I use.
The best rolling barrage I've made is using sequential pre-planned linear barrages, spaced a couple hundred meters apart, and set to start immediately, followed by the standard delays at five, ten, and fifteen minutes.
You can cover quite a bit of area, and having the five minute timing allows you five minutes to move into each beaten zone and clear it before the next zone ceases fire.It's not a literal "walking barrage" like you would have in WW1, but honestly, trying something like that in WW2 is just plain stupid.
One survivor with an LMG can ruin your whole plan. In WW1 walking barrages were accompanied by specific targeted barrages on identified enemy strongpoints and machinegun positions that had been identified with recon efforts up to many months before the battle even began, and even so, many attempts at attacks like these broke down in the face of even scattered resistance surviving the barrage until you had tanks accompanying the infantry.
-
Sadly, I don't think I could play this.
Much the same as the TOC scenario, I don't think I could muscle through a scenario with an average of nine frames per second.
It does look freaking amazing though.
-
On 10/4/2019 at 9:20 PM, Pelican Pal said:
They both play very differently and its hard to compare them directly.
I wish more people would realize this.
I've played both series of games, and quickly come to the realization that trying to judge them against each other is impossible.
They are both two different games, built along different designs, for different purposes, with different simulation, and completely different gameplay.
But hey, if you want to spend your life arguing between apples and baked potatoes, go right ahead.
-
On 10/12/2019 at 10:04 PM, weapon2010 said:
the video is a 4 man team, i was reffering to another game where a 2 man team was 40 yds a part
The video shows two two-man teams in two adjacent action spots, which is completely normal.
(Thanks domfluff)One thing I have noticed with some frequency is the old "separated man bug" has come back with a vengeance, most likely related to the new "corner peeking" behavior, as when the team moves out while one man is busy crawling to a corner to peek around it, and he gets left behind while the rest of the team moves to a new location.
This is now happening so often I notice it every single time I play the game, where it used to happen maybe once per scenario.
-
Use Fast only if you want your guys to prioritize 'getting there ASAP' over things like spotting, or using their weapons.
-
On 10/6/2019 at 7:49 PM, Zveroboy1 said:
Not really. The forum is a shadow of its former self. It still has a decent activity I suppose but a lot of the best posters have left. It used to be much more vibrant and interesting. Where is the Peng challenge thread, Jason C and all the grogs?
Some of them got banned, for good reason.
Having the personality of a pissed-off Rottweiler might make things "vibrant" and "interesting", but only if you are not the target of their ire.
Personally I don't come to these forums to witness dumpster fires in progress. -
1 minute ago, Bud Backer said:
Tell that to the Sherman crew..
I tried to, but they're not on the US Army communications net.
-
On 10/3/2019 at 6:16 PM, herr_oberst said:
Can't believe it hasn't been mentioned yet in a "What I'd like to see..." thread.
Space Lobsters of Doom!!!
How well would your M4A3E8 stand up to a ginormous crustacean? Does an MG42 just bounce off the carapace? Would 8.8cm KwK 36/37/41's rule the battlefield?
Way too much potential fun to be had...
Be still, my beating heart.
-
That's all from me.
I'm thoroughly enjoying this AAR. -
On 9/15/2019 at 7:49 AM, Bud Backer said:
*Clears Throat*
-
On 9/23/2019 at 1:50 PM, Bud Backer said:
By my estimate, the FlaK 88 has a cross sectional area of a small barn.
If you can spot a building, you can spot an 88.
-
On 9/13/2019 at 7:51 AM, Bud Backer said:
I’ll add that it is amazing how good the field of view is from atop the HQ building, allowing me to direct artillery in distant spots one would not expect.
Remember:
The tallest building on the map is a great observation point, but your enemy is fully aware of that fact as well.
The 'Never Say You've Seen It All' Thread
in General Discussion Forum
Posted
That's what happens when you ride the brakes like an old grand-lady.
I spent a whole day looking at 'lost anchor chain' videos and such on YouTube.
Lots of fun.
There's also 'The Gallery of Transport Loss' over here:
http://www.cargolaw.com/gallery.html
You can get your shipwreck itch scratched, sadly the website hasn't been updated since December 2012, but everything should still work. Here's an example video from the final entry.
Happy hunting.