Killkess
-
Posts
166 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Killkess
-
-
Can anyone tell me what this is and how to fix it?
It started after i installed 2.01
-
Uh, someone can verify this?
Where is he test scenario?
-
The fire seems to be more accurate in 2.01 and the ROF has been tuned up as well. I am not sure which of both makes the MGs stronger, but they are definitly much better than before. I cant say that i´ve seen successive correction from the gunner, but the higher rof with a better overall accuracy enables a HMG to keep 2 squads at bay quit reliably.
-
I also miss the feature of getting "uncertain" contacts. In CM1 one often got contacts and just knew "ah, there is something somewhere over there". In CM2 every contact is displayed with maximum accuracy which makes it very easy to destroy by mortars with very little ammo.
-
While i can understand that the elevation limit is hard to overcome i still think that as long as the issue isnt fixed all infantry at-weapons should be allowed to be fired from inside houses. The current situation (elevation limit and spotting) give the tanks a onesided advantage in town-fighting, something they werent particularly good at.
-
I cant resist... once more:
-
@RockinHarry:
Würde Dir gerne eine PM schicken, bitte Kontakt "herstellen".
Danke!
Ich habe noch immer keine Erlaubnis Dir zu antworten
Schau mal woran es liegen könnte, sonst schreib mir einfach eine Nachricht über welche Mailadresse ich Dich erreichen kann.
Danke!
-
So it's not totally surprising that we find ourselves looking at MG behavior different now than we did before.
Just as a sidenote: From my observations i say that the HMG behaviour is in place since CMSF. On "bigger" CMSF maps the same behaviour showed the same problems because in the desert like lanscape u find almost perfect pooltable conditions... :eek: Ups, i did it again....
-
@RockinHarry:
Würde Dir gerne eine PM schicken, bitte Kontakt "herstellen".
Danke!
-
Worse for the attacker, of course. This whole Pool Table distraction is because some wish to compare apples to oranges. "I see this result in a Pool Table situation so it must be directly relevant to ingame situations" is a very unstable premise for a line of argument. I've explained that several times in several different ways already.
You expect a worse outcome for the attacker if he has cover/convealment available? How?
-
I'd say getting over 600m starts to get "iffy", though the more the HMG shoots the better the chances of suppressing it would be. A rifle or LMG shot doesn't have to hit. It only has to get close. And the more that get close within a given space of time, the more suppression per shot.
Shooting over iron sights with a rifle at 500m seems to be within reasonable range... but when shooting a HMG at 600m it starts to get iffy?
While we are at effective ranges lets get off topic for a second. Is there any plan to further alter the SMG behaviour? MP40 for example seems to open fire at up to 280m. I often order troops to engage specific targets for a couple of reasons. The result is that SMG-troopers often waste their ammo on ineffective ranges.
Easy! Take any "real" scenario, at all (ours or anybody else's), and tweak it so you have a situation with a platoon rushing a single MG over tactically relevant spots on the map. Any scenario. That would be a less abstract "worst case" scenario for the attacker than the Pool Table test. It's still questionable because these sorts of 1:30 battles in a vacuum weren't common, but it's not too bad.Out of curiosity: Do u expect a worse or better outcome for the attacker?
And of course let's remember that whatever you test with today is not what you'll be playing with soon enough.Sure, i did not planned to do anymore testing before the correction. While we are at it: Any clue when it is going to come? Weeks or months?
-
Oo... gotta totally disagree with you there. First of all, the optics on the German MGs isn't all that great.
Your guess, a known fact or do u speak about personal experience?
Also, I don't think 500m is too far away for significant suppressive effects from unscoped rifles and LMGs.
OK, taking 500 meters for not beeing to far away for rifles and LMGs... up to which range do u expext supression from a HMG?
Since nobody plays battles on Pool Table maps with artificially limited variables, I don't think that can be said.
Pls feel free to provide a more realistic testing scenario which deliver reasonable results.
-
To all of u!
-
1 on 1? Sure, but the situation is 30 on 1. Or are you saying that 1 HMG is more likely to suppress/kill 30 dispersed targets before 27 guys with rifles and 3 guys with LMGs will suppress/kill 1 target?
If the range is 200m i am with you, if we speak about 500m+ i am not since 500m+ is well within perfect range for tripod HMG with optics while beeing out of effective range for the 30 guys. Expecially, like in my tests, the HMG is placed within heavy woods with lots of trees meaning cover+concealment.
Do i expect that the 30 guys should getting killed instantly when they stay low and hugh the ground? No, and I havent read any single reply suggesting this. But i expect that bad tactics be punished and that is simply not the case in the current situation.
And sorry to say again, but we dont talk about 30 guys capable to overcome a HMG using brilliant tactics, we talk about 10 beeing perfectly able to do and even 4 guys have a chance to do with bold tactics.
Can't target what you don't know about.Exactly, and this is why the 30 guys have a very very hard time to deliver effective counter fire at long range, while the HMG has the means to effectively deliver its fire.
BTW if those Pooltable situation doesnt exist we wouldnt have this conversation. They do exist with CMFI and its potentialy much longer fields of fire and will be seen regularly in the eastern theater. But i have to confess that the situations in game are often even worse since the attacker doesnt have to cross open ground but has enoug cover/concealment available.
Now lets lean back and see what´s coming.
-
But this isn't really necessary. Get 30 friends together and arm yourself with a rapid fire paint ball (Airsoft) gun and an ample supply of ammo. Have your friends all armed with semi-auto or manual load paint ball (Airsoft) guns. See how long you last without superior cover. Not long, I'm sure.
With this setup u would "ignore" one of the important parts of the whole thread. It seems u talk about "short" distances again at which the 30 guys can actually deliver effective fire. This is more comparable to testing LMGs within the squad. This was about HMG fire against an enemy who is, for the most part, out of his effective fire range.
Anyways lets see what the current changes will bring.
-
1. The old methodology of spreading fire (which is what started this thread) has been abandoned and new "smarter" behavior created. Early tests indicate this largely fixes the problems most of you have been discussing throughout this discussion. This, actually, is where the Pool Table test helped out. NOT because of the results, but because it was easier to notice the targeting logic and understand why it needed to be adjusted.
2. Suppression effects have been increased. Not just for MGs but for small arms in general. The increases are proportional to the amount of lead being shot, which means MGs will cause proportionally more suppression than they used to.
Thanks for this insight of current changes, much appreciated!
Just out of interest: Taking your 30 man team against a HMG position. Which are your sources to take a look at? I am keen to know where to search for such informations.
-
Steve, first of all thx that u finally decided to join this thread.
Therefore, balancing MG behavior for a Pool Table is likely different for situations where there's intermittent cover, limited fields of fire, other supporting arms, etc.Yes, u are right that the tactical influence of a HMG will even be less if u throw in more cover, limited fields of fire and other arms.
This is the point i realy cant understand. How can HMGs be balanced for a situation where u have intermittent cover, limited FOF and so on but dont produce reasonable results when shooting long range? U realy suggest that MGs produce reasonable results apart from these "Pool Tables"?
They might work somehow on CMBN maps with its short overage firing distances, there they show at least a high ROF when engaging targets at ridiculous short ranges.
But the pooltables show that the current behaviour simply fail on maps with long fields of fire which is more typical in italy and will be a real showstopper on the eastern front.
But it is good to hear finally that there are some tweaks/fixes on the way.
-
In the first video i find it hard to believe that a tank crew who was busy shooting an enemy target to its front would be able to immediatly spot some grunts on its flank and begin to shoot all within seconds. That is a nice example of questionable spotting capabilities of tanks.
-
But out of approx.. 120 dead or wounded.
MG’s count was under 50 (approx. average 12 per unit)
Leaders had approx.. (15 dead or wounded)
That left 55 being taken out with the ammo bearers with the carbines.
So that was odd, don’t need too much science to know something is wrong.
I just wanted to repeat this snippet.
-
Look at the dates, guys.
Since the HMG behaviour is what it is since CMBN 1.0/CMSF the date dont make a difference.
-
It's funny that we have a whole thread about just that, now...
Yeah, it seems he has not even tried to do so before posting his knowledge.
-
It is also possible (likely, even)
that in many of these cases the MG gunner never saw the target and was firing along a fixed line. This would be an example of ineffective employment (poor siting, lack of traversing fire) that has nothing to with the nationality or type of machine gun.
You speak about the cases in the reports or in the videos i´ve posted? For the latter i dont think that this is true because in most cases I´ve used covered arcs and not a direct fire command. That way each soldier only opens up if he identifies a target.
-
I suppose what I'm saying here is that I think an HMG unit that leaves its prepared position ought to be useless for the rest of the game, at least as an HMG unit. But I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise by historical data (not manuals). And I suppose a GPMG like the German MG34/42 might give you more flexibility than a "dedicated" HMG like a water-cooled Vickers.
Moving the MG and the Lafette should not be much of a problem. Taking a couple of thousand rounds with you seems to be the hard part. So it might be a good idea to cut the ammo level down if one moves this kind of unit.
In my mind the same should be true for mortar units. Whats the weight of ammo such a crew carries around? Cutting the ammo supply down, if they are moved, seems to be a good solution to the excessiv offensive mortar use.
-
...and thus the most heat sinking, it would occur after the thinner portion of the barrel had already begun to sag (melting).
OK, do one already speak about a melting process if the barrel begins to bend? For me melting begins with getting something liquid.
Vehicle crew grafic anomaly?
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
Sorry ASL, but that is exactly what i´ve done... i kept my base game updated all the time and just installed 2.0 and than 2.01.