bjarmson

There is something a little wacky about the campaign games. For one, units don't seems to suicide no matter how damaged or unmovable. The first time I played the first campaign scenario two of the vehicles you talked about, jumped the railings of the bridge and landed on their top or side under the bridge in the water. Thinking them "dead," or about to be, I ignored them till I had destroyed everything else yet was still losing on points. Noticing that the vehicles still showed alive on the maps, I drove one of my vehicles underwater to shoot them, but they proved impossible to kill underwater. I lost. WTF. I think the campaign games need some tinkering, to resolve these problems. The problem seems to be that AFVs that should be suiciding don't. And in some cases—your disabled invisible Paladins, my disabled underwater ones—become impossible to kill, thus losing the game for you.

I've had this happen twice during single play (both times in the House to House scenario): switch from my 120mm Thor (or Apollo) to observing a Cutter, switch back and I suddenly have only 20mm AP (600 rounds last time) ammo instead of 120mm. I go from a 120mm Thor to a 20mm Thor. Kind of disconcerting.

I understand what you're saying yurch. I don't want to ruin the game with unkillable super AFVs. Let the 14 years olds do that if they want. What I'm trying to do is to get some minor mods and upgrades going to make the game more playable and more fun. And to improve some weapons systems (a tank chassis 76mm, and a Thor mounted artillery piece). I do have a definite opinion against tires on combat vehicles. Even the WWII AFVs with tires had 6 or 8 of them, 4 is ridiculous. One tire loss makes maneuvering difficult, 2 is a useless vehicle. As far as I know, all modern armored personnel carriers are tracked. Nothing with wheels carries a 76mm weapon. I thought I'd like the hovercrafts (well to be truthful I've never used the Tempest, but then I think the ion weapon vehicles are virtually useless), but the Hurricane is a joke. You can hardly control it, it has trouble climbing the gentlest slope (and without constant forward movement slids back down), and often flips itself over if fired while hovering (the only way I ever fire it is when X braked-ie. sitting on the ground). But I love that cannon. Thors, Apollos and Mercurys are fine (a few refinements would be nice, but I won't be bothered if they're left as they are). Even the Shrike and Cutter are okay (though I'd like to see the Shrike made more stable, since bots tend to end up disabling themselves about 50% of the time-I've seen some truly amazing cartwheels from bot driven Shrikes, though even driving into a ditch often puts them out of action).

Dark_au are you telling us that an Abrams 120mm AP round weighs 4.6kg (a little over 10 lbs). I simply cannot believe this. We're talking about a round that's almost 5 inches in diameter and probably 1-2 feet long (and usually made of some heavy metal, such as tungsten or depleted uranium). My cat's about this size and weighs 10 lbs. I've got a vise in the basement that's about this size and weighs 30/40 lbs. A 120mm AP round has got to be a lot heavier than that. And Clay, we're not shooting at paper, we're shooting at an armored vehicle (light or medium), with two sides and a lot of internal structures (engines, fuel cells, hydraulics, electronics, ammo, internal supports, people). Shooting a can with a .22 cal causes the can to jump and usually leaves a bigger hole on the opposite side. One AP round in the center has to cause a fair amount of damage, at the very least, two should about shred a vehicle like a Shrike. And while I'd like to always use the appropriate ammo for the job, the long reload time often forecloses that possibility when under fire. When I crest the hill to an enemy held territory, I have to be loaded for bear, not squirrels. cool breeze if you're getting killed by 120mm AP rounds in light vehicles at 1000m+, then you simply aren't doing much maneuvering. The only time I regularly hit light vehicles at distance is if they are moving almost straight at me, in which case they simply run themselves into a low arch AP round. Have to at least come in at an angle, or better a S or Z pattern. Much harder to hit. Light vehicles have to maneuver, as well as, use their speed. AP goes fast, but it doesn't go fast enough to regularly hit small, fast moving vehicles maneuvering at a distance. [ August 10, 2006, 10:49 PM: Message edited by: bjarmson ]

Yeah, the 120mm HE round is mostly for specialized uses. If you have time to chamber one its great for killing Shrikes close in. It can kill AAD towers (but it takes something like 15-20). I sometimes like to use manual targeting and lob them into a turret or light vehicle area, at distance, from the other side of of a hill. If you get the distance right you may get a kill or two (and you utilize a round you don't normally have much use for). I also will fire them at distance (try to lead a bit) at light vehicles when they're coming down craggy slopes and must move fairly slow. [ August 10, 2006, 10:43 PM: Message edited by: bjarmson ]

My point in stating my opinions was to get some talk going about the good and bad of various AFVs. Remember combat vehicles undergo almost constant refinement and redesign. In WWII the tank started as a poorly armored, poorly gunned little thing (Panzer II and IIIs, for instance), which morphed into highly armored, big gunned behemoths (think German Panther and Tigers, Russian T-34xx and Stalins) in only a few years. What I'm suggesting is combat experience refinement, not making unkillable superweapons. As far as the wheels versus tracks argument, no serious front line combat vehicle (other than light recon) uses wheels. I've had Paladins get hung up going across a ditch or on a building abutment, they flip easily when taking a turn a little too fast, and they die too quickly. The 76mm is a tank weapon and deserves a tank chassis. The Mercury chassis is fairly quick, very stable and has a low profile, it deserves to have a 76mm version. Give me a Mercury chassis 76mm and I'd easily kill Paladin 76mms at about a 3-1 rate. As far as the Hurricane goes, I love the cannon, but really the hovercraft it's on is a piece of junk. If you had a choice between the original version and one on a Thor chassis, I'm pretty confident you'd soon be using the Thor version. As a soldier you expect crap weapons systems to be scrapped and constant refinement and upgrading of those that work (the "over the top, charge those machine guns" mentality ended, justifiably, during WWI). The T-34 is a great example of a good weapons system that was refined and upgraded over about 4 years (their debut forced the Germans to design the Panther and Tigers). Its first versions were relatively lightly armed, but by 1944 they'd been upgraded to 85mm and thicker armor. Time to start refining the good systems and getting rid of the crap (and really anyone who's played the game for awhile, knows there is some real crap).

My first 8 shots, or so, were while I moving quickly so probably hit helter-skelter, but the last 6 plus were while we were both stopped, aimed between the crew compartment and the turret, centered on the chassis. How they could miss the fuel cells I have no idea. Anyway, shouldn't 6 rounds of 76mm make ground round of an Apollo (hell the first 8 rounds should have done that). The Apollo was also taking fire from a 20mm bot, so it soaked up 20, maybe 30 rounds before it died (the flag popped loose). The hitting a wall at 50 mph was just figurative on my part. I have no idea what it's really like (any engineering types out there want to do the math?). But it still has to be quite a shock just hitting a small vehicle with something almost 5 inches in diameter weighing 100 # or so, going a kilometer a second; even with barrel recoil it causes the 40-50 ton(?) Thor to literally jump off the ground

There has been a great deal of talk about the various AFVs and their weapons systems lately, so I thought I'd get a thread going. Shrike: This seems to be a weapons system mainly suited for the computer to use (I've tried, but can't hit anything and crash a lot). Looks to me like one of those remote-controlled monster trucks you see kids playing with in parking lots. It would be easy to disregard it completely if it wasn't armed with the most dangerous weapon system in the game, the rightfully feared ATGM. Luckily, it's so prone to damage from merely moving around at high rates of speed (my guess would be about 50% suicide after self-induced disablement). While it has a feared weapons system (if I was a liveship weapons engineer/designer, I'd put the ATGM on a Thor chassis), it's just to fragile to be really useful. It needs a wider, lower design to make it more stable. Paladins: First of all, getting rid of the tires and putting tracks on them would improve them immensely. One bad tire and they are virtually useless. With tracks this problem disappears (ever get one of the things stuck on something and be unable to get off). It would also help with the instability problem (they sit so high on tires that they seem to roll over on the slightest whim). For some uses (personnel carrier, ATGM, AAD) it's okay. To put a 76mm on this thing, strikes me as insane. Put the 76mm on a Mercury chassis and you probably have a vehicle worth using. Does it strike you that these things look a lot like armed and armored Dodge Caravans? Not exactly how I'd design a combat vehicle. Mercury: Haven't used them much. Could use a little better armor. And please get the 76mm on this chassis and off that ridiculous Paladin chassis. Apollo: The 120mm version is a favorite. I suggest a wider track, a lower profile, and a bit more frontal armor. These things excel where there is room to get up to full speed and shoot at things from a distance. Keep moving. Hurricane: Now here's a weapons system in need of a chassis. Puttting it on this ridiculous hover thingie is insane. It's impossible to steer, balks at going up the slightest incline, and flips iself over when fired. Thank you weapons designer wacko! But put that marvelous cannon on a Thor chassis, and voila, the ugly frog turns into a beautiful prince. I occasionally use it at the beginning of a territory game. Land it way out, use it on manual ranging (vary each shot a hundred meters front and back, left and right), press the Xkey to make it sit on the ground, and lob it's 10 rounds into a nonAAD defended area (wonder how AAD would do with massed cannon fire?), extract from game and get a usable vehicle. Oh, for a Thor chassis. Cutter: An unarmored combat engineering vehicle, heh, even the Israelis use armored bulldozers and the biggest weapons they usually face is RPGs. Thors: The 120mm is probably the best total package in the game. Good survivability, great kill ability. Though if I was a weapons designer, I'd maybe check out the M1A1 Abrams. The Thor has too many flat sides for stopping rounds. Let's start sloping those sides and turret for better deflection, less penetration. One other AFV I'd like to see is a Thor mounted plasma bolt, for defensive purposes. It would make a good weapon for city fighting. [ August 09, 2006, 09:20 PM: Message edited by: bjarmson ]

But the problem is that these seriously "disabled" vehicles suddenly kill you. The other night while playing a Territory game, I crested a hill about 1000m from the red territory. Nieville's Apollo was side to me on my right at about 500m, I pumped a 120mm HEAT round into the fuel cell area, he starts smoking, to be safe (though taking fire from other reds) I pump two more AP rounds into his side, pieces flying. He isn't moving or returning fire, surely he's "disabled" and will kill himself in a moment. My attention turns to several other "nondisabled," but less heavily armed, reds, boom "Nieville kills bjarmson's Apollo with a 120mm AP round." WTF. How this can be possible after 3 direct hits from a 120mm is beyond my comprehension. Apparently he was just "playing possum" till my attention was diverted. But this is what is driving me to distraction, if 3 120mm side shots to an Apollo don't kill it, or at the very least shock it for a minute or two, something is screwed up in the game itself.

Okay, my AFV of choice is usually the Thor 120mm early and Apollo 120mm later in the game, so I use 120mm almost exclusively (my shot totals are usually 30-60 with about a 20% kill rate in a 30 minute game). I seem to get better single shot kills on the Shrikes, Paladins, and Apollos at the 500 to 1000m range than I do at point blank range. I suppose this might have something to do with shot arching, but still, to have to shoot a Shrike or Paladin 2, 3, and sometimes more from 50-100m is just ludicrous. With a Shrike or ATGM Paladin it is usually fatal. How many times have you come around the corner of a hill or structure and run head on to one of these. You get the first shot off and see it hit them squarely in the center front (usually an AP or HEAT round chambered), and then whoosh, away goes the ATGM and blooey goes your Thor or Apollo. According to every internal diagram I've seen of the Shrike or Paladin an AP round passing from one end to the other of either has to pass through several vital subsystems and a HEAT round has to incinerate and explode them. Thus one shot kill. The shock alone must be like hitting a concrete wall at 50 mph. For them to respond with a precision shot a second or two later is virtually impossible, yet it happens regularly when they don't die instantly. This is what I find a little unlikely (aah, I find it damn ridiculous). If the ATGM is going to be the best one shot weapon in the game (at the start of a recent CTF game the red capture Shrike, destroyed three Thors in a row with a single shot-I didn't get off a first shot this time), the 120mm has to a similar ability. At close range, I don't think I get better that 30-40% first shot kills on Shrikes and Paladins, maybe less than that with side shots. I get about 50% first shot kills of Thors from the sides. Something just isn't right here. How can the Thors be killed easier than Shrikes and Paladins from the side? Doesn't make sense. Even worse, when I experimented with the 76mm last night (thinking its quick reload might be an advantage), I had to hit a red flag-carrying Apollo about 15 time to kill it. In fact my last shots were after it stopped, smoking like a steam locomotive, I then pumped shot after shot (something like 6-8) directly into the fuel cell area before it finally gave the flag up. Come on, 15 shots from a 76mm to kill a lighty armored Apollo. The funny thing again is that earlier I had destroyed a Thor from about 1000m with about 6-8 shots from the side. It seems to my mind that something is seriously screwed up here.

I have a problem with the 120mms ability to kill the less armored AFVs. I regularly have to hit Shrikes, Paladins, and Apollos with 2, 3, or sometimes more shots at close range (shots centered front/back or from the side) before they die. Come on, this is a round almost 5 inches in diameter, with enough recoil to lift the front end of a Thor or Apollo completely off the ground and hitting one of the above vehicles at close range does not even stun the crew for enough time for me to fire a second time (the above usually have the wherewithal when not killed outright to immediately shoot back). I'm a little tired of being killed by one of the above after I've pumped a shot into them. I'm getting totally frustrated when I'm killed by them after I've hit them with several rounds. This just should not be possible. A 120mm round that hits center and doesn't have one shot killing power seems virtually impossible (the AP round should penetrate completely, spewing molten metal and schrapnel everywhere and the HEAT round should incinerate the insides). At ranges of 1000m or less getting hit by a 120mm must be the equivalent of having your head slammed into a concrete wall very hard, it has to temporarily incapacitate if it doesn't kill outright. In a recent game I had 70 hits out of approximately 85 shots, yet just 19 kills. Sure some of this was versus Thors at the start, but the majority was having to hit Shrikes, Paladins, and Apollos 2/3 times before I got a kill. Speaking of kill ability the 76mm seems anemic. In a CTF game I was playing last night, I had to pump 10-15 rounds (the final 6-8 directly into the fuel cell section from 50 meters after it had stopped all movement) before a flag carrying Apollo would die. Most of the shots were from the sides and I believe one of my 20mm bots got in some shots too. How could this be possible? We're talking 3 inch shells repeatedly hitting lightly armored sides yet not causing enough damage to kill until about 15 shots had been fired, unbelieveable. The liveships could sure use some German engineers working on their weapons systems. At the end of WWII the German high velocity 76mm could kill ANY Allied tank with a front shot from 1000m, the 88mm could do this at about 2000m. And I can't kill a lightly armored AFV with 10 76mm rounds from 100m. A single good shot from the 120mm M1A1 Abrams tank kills any tank it's ever faced, but I can't kill a Shrike or Paladin with one short-range, centered 120mm round. One solid 120mm hit or 1 to 3 76mm rounds should kill anything but Thors. If this isn't the case then these weapons systems are seriously flawed (the 76mm in particular is virtually useless). I'm tired of being killed by a Shrike ATGM or Paladin 20mm after I've pumped more than 1 good shot into it. [ August 09, 2006, 05:28 PM: Message edited by: bjarmson ]

I don't have any trouble with the crew being compressed in small self-contained survival pods (or whatever). It's the far future, right. What I'm beginning to have more and more trouble with is the design of the AFVs themselves. Some of the units are designed so badly, no soldier would be willing to use it on the battlefield. The Shrike sits far to high and has a terrible center of gravity, it needs a complete redesign. The Hurricane should have a Thor chassis, not that ludicrous hovercraft thing. As it is it's almost impossible to control, has difficulty climbing almost any hill, and, worst of all, flips itself over when fired from virtually any direction except 90 degrees front or back, unless you make it sit on the ground. Anyone who isn't a total lunatic would refuse to be in anything so inherently unusable in a combat situation. Yet its weapon system has some great uses. The Apollos, though very useful, could benefit from a wider tread (to improve their instability on slopes) and a flatter profile (to make them harder to hit). The Paladins, well would you design a combat vehicle that looks like an armored Dodge Caravan. Probably not. We need vehicles with much greater survivablity. As it is virtually all AFVs die within seconds (minutes at the outside) of dropping (if they don't get killed along with their dropships, but that's another matter).

Nice stuff yurch. I think it proves my point on Paladins; if they're hit squarely, from any side, by a 120mm they should die. There is just too much vunerable stuff in the way. The Shrikes are a different story. Why so much dead space? The design is horrible. They should be constructed so they're only about half as high as they are, only the ATGM launcher and perhaps a driver's periscope needs to stick up in the air. This would have two big advantages: 1) their notorious high center of gravity which causes instability (and some of the most spectacular crashes I've ever seen) would be lowered, 2) they would be much harder to hit, particularly at speed.

I thought the AAD was supposed to be extremely efficient in this game. That's why there are no aircraft. They can't survive. Crying about the AAD is sort of silly. Let's concentrate on things that need improving.

I think the dropships as sitting ducks problem could be rather easily resolved by having them come down 2 or 3 times faster and/or having them move in the horizontal plane as well as the vertical. The trouble now is that they all drop perfectly vertical and at a constant rate of speed. Eventually, it becomes almost a reflex action to lead the 120mm shot correctly, just takes enough practice (which many of us seem to be getting). I'm not sure, but don't troop carrying helicopters spiral downward and upward like a cone-shaped corkscrew. This provides movement in all three dimensions. Would improve dropship survivability immensely. Another way would be for a simple limitation on 120mm rounds, making them incapable of killing dropships at more than 1000m (or whatever distance seems fair). Something needs to be done. For a game that prides itself on a high degree of realism to have such an unrealistic way of dropping seems a trifle ridiculous. [ August 07, 2006, 01:26 PM: Message edited by: bjarmson ]

Yeah, I (and others) have mentioned the propensity of dropships to float down like hot air ballons landing. If I'm the pilot of one of these things, that would be the last way I'd fly it. And I'd surely not land directly on top of several enemy units, without the most compelling of reasons. Some sort of evasive maneuvering and pilot decisionmaking needs to be included. What good is a dropship without maneuverability? What is funny is that the game already seems to have some of this available. I've had extractions while going at full speed in many vehicles. This seems to indicate a fair amount of maneuverability on the part of a dropship. Why they don't utilize this ability when dropping is beyond me.

It's not that I'm having trouble killing things (I get lots of one shot kills, even against Thors). What I'm complaining about is having to hit a Paladin, etc, 2, 3, or sometimes more at close range for it to die. A 120mm round hitting the center part of any of these AFVs has to hit something sensitive almost by necessity, even the shock from a round this size hitting the vehicle should incapacitate the occupants for a certain amount of time. We're not shooting at empty truck trailors here, but vehicles full of hydraulics, electronics, etc, etc. The chances of not hitting something vital (what with the hot spray of molten metal, flying schrapnel, etc) is probably similar to being hit with a bullet in your center area and having it go clear through without hitting anything vital. If these AFVs are mostly empty space with nothing vital inside, then the AFV should be reduced in size because it has irrelevant space (except the personnel carriers of course). Okay, the occasional 120mm AT round might miss anything vital (the other 5% of the 95% kill ratio mentioned), but a 120mm HEAT round should incinerate the insides of any Palladin, Shrike, or Apollo at close range. If it doesn't the weapons system is flawed and needs redesigning. My problem is that some of these AFVs are harder to kill at virtual point blank range than they are at 1000m. That should not happen.

This is a great idea. I've been peeved about the lack of info in the manual, since I got the game in the mail. More info, logically arranged, good.

Yeah ions are pansys. I ignore ions to kill 20mms first, when I have a choice. Out of the 1000s of times I've been killed, probably less than 50 (maybe much less) are the direct result of ions. I think they're a pretty useless weapon. What does need improving is the kill ability of 120mms. I'm tired of having to hit Paladins, Shrikes, and Apollos several times at less than 1000m to kill them. In fact, it seems the kill ability at point blank range is often worse than at 1000/2000 meters. What gives? If I hit one of these AFVs at 100/200 meters with a 120mm (shot centered in the side or front/back), it ought to kill 95-99% of the time (it seems like less than 50%). They often return fire after having been hit (I can physically see the hit), sometimes after several hits. How can this be possible? Except against Thors, the 120mm has to be designed as a one hit kill weapon, otherwise it makes no sense. It takes too long to reload and carries too few rounds. If this is not the case, then the design is flawed and has to be fixed. I mean c'mon, the shells are almost 5 inches in diameter, a hit anywhere to the center of any light or medium armor AFV should shred or incinerate their insides. What I'd really like in an AFV is a quicker medium tank with something like the German high velocity 88mm (sort of a Space Viking's late model Panther), which could kill anything on the battlefield at range and not plod around like a Tiger/Thor. Where the hell are the design guys/AIs on the liveships. May be time to put them up against the wall and try some new people.

The AI regularly shoots down dropships with 120mm HEAT rounds, or even AT, at 2000/3000 meters distance and longer. I even had a dropship shot down by a 120mm HEAT round at some 5800 meters/3.6 miles (the odds of this happening must be nothing short of a miracle). It also seems capable of hitting you with ATGMs after you've killed the launching vehicle or removed yourself from line of sight (which as I read the rules, should be technically impossible). The AI is so good with ATGMs versus dropships at virtually any range, I'd love to keep one around that did nothing but hide and shoot down dropships.

I'm still getting a bug in which destroyed AFVs float burning in the sky. This may be scenario specific since it seems to happen more in some scenarios than others. Also in a recent game a burning Shrike fell out of the sky (no dropship visible anywhere).

The physics modeling of the game is fine for shell penetration, armor, etc, however, it is terrible for the AFVs themselves. I'm a little tired of having my Thor pushed backwards by a Shrike. I should by all rights crush it like a bug, or at the very least easily knock it aside. In a recent game I watched amazed as a dead Shrike, rolling down a hill, ran into the side of a Thor and proceeded to push it sideways down the hill for several hundred meters (approximately). This is NOT physically possible. During a future upgrade, please, please include the physical modeling for AFVs that has been done for other areas of the game. If a M1A tank and a Humvee ran head on, there would be little but flattened metal left of the Humvee. This needs to be represented in the game.

I think the dropships need some twinking (or something along the lines of poesel71's post). Most of the time these things float down like hot air ballons landing. Wouldn't evasive maneuvers be the norm until the last hundred meters or so. Also wouldn't the pilot notice he's about to undertake a landing nearly on top of enemy AFVs and undertake to land farthur away. I'm also getting a little tired of having my dropship killed by a 120mm round from 3/4000 meters away. This doesn't seem even vaguely realistic, what with winds, air currents, etc. Ever try to hit a bird with a .22 or bb gun? Large caliber AA guns don't hit planes with their rounds, the rounds have proximity or altitude fuses and then explode blasting shrapnel in all directions. Since none of the vehicles has AA rounds (usually takes a lot of firing to record a kill), they should be limited to dropship kills within a limited radius or when the dropships are within a few hundred meters of the ground (thus by necessity moving slowly). For instance, by the end of WWII most US combat ships were virtual AA platforms, loaded with enough guns to put hundreds of rounds into the air at a time. Missles with guidance systems and propulsion to allow for course changes are an entirely different matter and should have a better chance at killing dropships (though evasive maneuvers should alleviate this somewhat). Unlimited dropships, when everything else has a limit strikes me as impossible. A dropship must be much more difficult and expensive to make than any AFV. They have to transport a unit from space, into the atmoshere, land it, and return. They must be fantastically complicated and expensive gear. Yet some games they are dropping like mosquitos at a bug zapper. Hardly reasonable they would be expended like this, particularly by raiding groups with limited resources. Make dropships more survivable.

Y"know Yurch, your postings are better at explaining things than the pathetic manual that came with the game. Also usually better than the explanations the moderators post. Maybe Battlefront should hire you to do a definitve manual.

Downloaded 1.1.0 yesterday (took the better part of a day with my slow connection). Started my first game and what was a very playable gme has become untenable. A Shrike I had hit and was about to destroy disappeared (I was only about 50 meters away), literally in front of my eyes. No explosion, no debris, nothing, just gone. The driving controls are slow to the point of molasses. I got killed because I could not get my Apollo to move. My Apollo 120mm changed to a 20mm when I changed to HE ammo. And this was where I quit. About 20 minutes into my first 30 minute game. 1.1.0 is unplayable! When are these bugs going to be fixed? Till then how do I go back to 1.0.2 which I played numerous times without any of these problems occuring?