Kauz
-
Posts
222 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Kauz
-
-
I have no doubt this has been raised before but I was so annoyed with the Quick Battle I started a moment ago that I immediately abandoned the game and turned off CM:RT in disgust to write this post. What am I talking about? The AI "Setup Zone" barrages that invariably wipe out your force before the scenario has even started!
I had decided to play a quick battle, got all my men lined up the way I wanted them, and had advanced in turn-mode towards a tree-lined ridge directly in front of my setup zone so I could see what enemy I was up against. 30 seconds into the first turn, a huge artillery barrage hit the ridge, decimating my force. Every single unit took heavy casualties. WTF! My men could not see the enemy at game start, so they damn well could not see my men either, and yet somehow the commander of the enemy side had telepathically identified my hidden force behind the ridge and radioed in a massive barrage on the ridge at the precise moment my men moved off from their start line, presumably calling it in several minutes before the game even started.
Things like this add absolutely nothing to the game. They are simply not fun and put me off playing. Why should I bother going to the trouble of selecting force mix, map size, terrain, and meticulously arranging my force in the setup zone, only for all this effort to be a waste of time due to a ridiculous prescient AI barrage. What a joke!
Let me guess.........82mm rocket spam...
May be you are lucky next time and the AI buys instead of 10-30 of Katjusha 82mm rockets "only" 20-60 strafing PE aircrafts for 16 bucks each
___
But let us talk serious.....i understand your issue....but dispite the very often funny (or even absurd) money-relationship of some units.....i find it OK that the AI at least fires artillery at attack or assault missions.
Only at Probe or Meeting engagement the AI should not use artillery at the beginning.
-
I can't make heads or tails of this regarding what flaws in the game all that is supposedly showing except that you have seen a single instance of a conscript T-34 getting a hit on the 3rd shot at 2200 meters and you feel that in reality this would be impossible for some reason, although you don't provide any actual evidence for why that would be impossible.
The first hit was the 4th round....not the 3rd.
I only said the the 3rd round had same accuracy like later shots ...if you look at the picture i posted
I guess in the game an exponential learning curve (range finding process) is implemented which always work the same way....
In general....:
-I leave it open to discussion if a conscript T-34 should be able to find the correct range after the second round he shot (at a distance of 2250 meters).
-I leave it also open to discussion if the sidewards spread of the 85mm rounds should be that small.
-And i leave it also open to discussion if the two penetrations at (Test 1: and Test 2 shot no. 7) should be possible.... Especially at these points ....
I kept in mind that germans tried to fight russian tanks at 1000-1500meters if they can with their tank-hunters, tanks and anti -tank -guns...because they could hit and destroy on the one side....and the russians had problems to hit (find range) and destroy the germans on the other side.
The germans prefered to retreat before letting themselve overrun and loose their range advantage. Thats why the germans only very very very late produced tank kills with Panzerfaust and Panzerschrecks.
I guess the Jgdpz IV late was not build for handling T-34/76 (for that purpose the StugIII were enough, especially at medium and high ranges).
The Jgdpz IV late were more like build to handle T-34/85. But if he has even problems to survive at 2250 meter on a high ridge with hull down...then i ask myself why the germans build it....
But ok....i let this open to discussion, too
What did the hit text say on that impact?I already wrote it in my posted screenshot...here again:
http://www.directupload.net/file/d/3660/foklih7m_jpg.htm
The message of No.7 was "Aufbau Front Wanne-penetration"....means "Superstructure Front Hull-penetration"
-
Additonally two screenshots:
Details of the hit decal:
http://www.directupload.net/file/d/3660/qjmukxfq_jpg.htm
Here a screenshot from the bullets points of view:
-
Hello,
i remember CM:AK were 88mm guns were not able to produce more than about 8-10 % hit probability at 1300 meters. The guns/tank guns had a very limited range.
Now i was quite happy to see that in general the range increased in CM:RT.
On the other side i had the impression that tanks could quite easy/fast find the correct range/aiming in CM:RT .....
I wanted to get some impressions about:
- time or no. of shots to get right range
- penetration power (here: 85mm gun)
- armor quality (here: Jgdpz IV late)
For a start:
I had a single occasion which made me extreme curious.
Set-up:
T-34/85 late is on open field on a topography-level of 5
he faced on a distance of about 2100 meter a Jagdpanzer IV (late) on a topography-level of 30.
In front of the JpzIV is an area of topography-level 31.
The JpzIV is set up a way on the ridge that his hull is completlly down ("spotter is hull down") and that he can barely see and fight the T-34/85.
In following picture you see what it is like from a point of view of the T-34...
I zoomed in maximum (the distance to the ridge peak topo-level 31 is 2200 meter...the Jgdpz IV is about 2250)meter:
http://www.directupload.net/file/d/3660/edo4hydi_jpg.htm
In the first test the distance was about 2100 meter and not 2250 meter.
The following happened:
A standard 85mm round hit the Jagdpanzer IV (late) ...look at following screenshot for more description:
Test 1:
http://www.directupload.net/file/d/3660/6hmfd6vi_jpg.htm
Test 2:
After that "experience" (the Test 1) i set up a similar situation but on 2252 meter and the T-34/85 late became a MEGA-ROOKIE:
Experience: conscript (Wehrpflichtiger)
Motivation: Poor (schwach)
Fitness: Unfit (Unfit)
Leadership: -2
Supply: Full
Headcount: Full
Vehicle statur: OK
Apearance: standard
The following picture gives you a detailed result of the fire behaviour:
http://www.directupload.net/file/d/3660/foklih7m_jpg.htm
Conclusions:
A)
Even if you take a complete Rookie like this conscript T-34/85 and let him fire against a complete hull down, low silhoutte Jagdpanzer IV (late) at 2252 meters you can easy find the right range.
You can see (last screen shot) that the gunner already has a good aiming at the second shot and finally at the third shot he is able to perform accurate like at all other shots following after.
The exponential "learning curve" should in my opinion rise not so fast...because:
-The bad/average optics (not working with "theorem of intersecting" like the german counterparts) should make range finding more difficult.
-The range itself should make range-finding difficult too.
-And last but not least the Crew...which was conscript, low motivated and bad guided (leadership) should ensure also that range finding becomes more difficult.
There is only avery little variation (even counting the rounds flying above) sidewards(from the left to the right) from the center of the tank.
Does anyone know if this is accurate for the 85mm gun at 2250 meters????
C)
Like in my "Test 1" there was again a quite weird experience with penetration.
The sidewards orientation between Jgdpz. IV(late) to T-34/85 was only some degree.
The more weird the Hit/shot no. 7 (look screenshot) is a very "funny" impact and i wonder the same way (like in my Test 1)how that could penetrate and doing damage.
As a housenumbre i kept in mind (according to CM:BB) that the 85mm could penetrate @2250meter about 39mm at 60°, 70mm at 30°; 74mm at 0°
According to the manual the Jagdpanzer IV late has 80mm (and angle of the superstructure of 50°).*
The hit at or next to the Saukopfblende is interessting too.
On the other side i just wondered why the HE hit at the sight/optic slit (no.18) did not cause any effect/damage. I do not know if the destroyed optics were due to this hit....
But optics and radio are nontheless always the first things which get damaged and destroyed in this game....no matter where the impacts of the rounds are.
*I find it hard to explain how a round with that performance has any chance being able to penetrate in the situation of "Test 1" and the "Test 2" (shot no. 7).... not to mention doing further damage (Test 1: crew kill, flames, rear armor penetration; Test 2: Crew people kills, motor destroyed)
-
one thing which was not important in CMBB became most important in CMRT
...suppression....
It is enough for me to suspect an enemy in an area .... to let me order suppression in this area....
no matter if i want to conquer this area while producing this suppresion-fire or if i just defend an area and do not want to move further
-
By the way....
on several occasions i could observe that the casualties in the halftrack which are caused by smalls arms fire (i am not talking about the HT-gunner now) seemed to be produced due to armor spalling.
I do not know if it is plausible that such small rounds (with there low impulse) are able to cause armor spalling in a half track......
Anyone an idea/suggestion about that?
-
acrashb,
Presumably, you're talking about mild steel, not armor plate. Further, even if it weren't armor plate, I have to believe that armor slope would make quite a difference. 8mm @ 35 deg/ per
http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/ww2/nazi_germany/SdKfz-251_Hanomag.php
According to the same source, the armor was designed to defeat small arms and artillery shrapnel (shell fragments). It therefore seems reasonable to conclude the armor was designed to defeat what JasonC would call full power rifle/MG cartridges, likely even AP projectiles from the same weapons out to appreciable ranges.
Regards,
John Kettler
Yep,
i also have in mind that the 7,92x57 IS "sS"-standard rifle round (~3700 Joule) is able to penetrate:
~6,0mm steel (or ~ 17 mm iron) @ 0 meter
~5,0mm steel (or ~ 15 mm iron) @ 100 meter
~3,5mm steel (or ~ 10 mm iron) @ 300 meter
Luckily the halftrack is not made of iron.....
So angled 8mm steel will produce another outcome even for a 7,62mmX54R which is in the same equivalence class like the 7,92X57 IS.
The only option to penetrate this armor is to use for instance 7,92mmX57 IS "S.M.K" (8-10% of production?) instead of the standard "sS" round.
And this round was more likely to be issued to heavy machine gun units (as far as i know).
Would interesting if there was a russian counterpart to that round....and in which amount it was distributed to the soviet army.
-
At the risk of getting attacked by him, I think what Kauz is trying to say is that the shield on the SG43 actually acts as a physical object in-game and bullets can impact and riccochet off it, while the halftrack shield doesn't.
And I can't say I remember ever seeing an impact on the halftrack MG shield (riccochet or not).
So it's not so much about if the shields are effective or not, but more about that they seem to be modeled differently.
I attacked nobody ...
But you are right the HT-shield seems not to be simulated the way like the SG43-shield.
(btw. till now i did not see richochets at the SG43 shield....only impacts....these impacts seemed to cause after minutes of firefight sometimes a damage of the SG43 in general...it could not fire anymore)
But back to the HT shield...:
I see impacts at the SG43....and the gunner is laying behind the shield not even looking through the iron sight hole but still able to fire.
This wise he is more or less immortal even if i fire with heavy machine guns at shorter distance....
The HT-shield seems not working the same way.
I do not know if this "shield" is exactly and all over where it is shown in the game.
Even if would assume that the shield is existing where it is displayed in the game...the next question would be why a HT-gunner which is under fire would still expose his head.
On one of the pics of John Kettler ( http://panzerw.narod.ru/ot_810_m01.jpg )
you might be able to extrapolate where his forehead would be if he uses his eyes watching over the iron sights.
For me it looks like that the shield could cover his whole head while aiming
It may not cover the whole helmet ..but you know that there is space (air) between the top of the helmet and the head of the soldier.
My conclusions is that i can not exactly tell you where the abstracted shield of the HT ends and in which way it provides protection or not.
But my impression so far is that the HT-gunner is always easy prey while an in open-field established SG43 gun provides excellent cover for the gunner laying and shooting from behind his shield (it makes him nearly immortal)....
-
If I recall correctly, in CMRT half track gunners had been slightly lowered so they're more behind the gun shield. That has increased their protection level. Still, these guys standing in HTs are bullet magnets, you can tell just by looking its pretty much impossibly to keep them safe. Especially the aggressive way most players play. If you're close enough to the enemy for a PPSh to hose your HT down then you're too darned close.
like i mentioned...
open-field positioned russian medium/heavy machine gunner lays completly behind the gun-shield without exposing anything.
and he is able to shoot....!!!!!
So why the half-track gunner is not doing the same way?...why he has to expose his head for shooting?
-
*sigh* it just does not work that way. To get attention you have to do some of the work and initial testing.
You may not be aware of this but the issue of HT gunner and his protection or lack there of has come up before. Somewhere there is a couple of long threads - before yours I mean - where this is hashed out over and over and tests done and redone and adjusted.
In the end two conclusions were reached:
- don't use HTs as APCs 'cause you will be sad, keep them at range behind an infantry screen so they can provide some covering fire only
- the gunner was too exposed and died fast
From #1 many people learned to use HTs better. And from #2 BFC adjusted the protection offered to the HT gunner by adjusting his position so he was less exposed.
The current thinking is the protection for the gunner is correct and all is well with the world. Posting a seven sentence declaration that this is still not correct after all the work and convincing that was done previously will not be enough.
I understand your point...
But it changes not the point that the SG43 gunner (and if i remember right the Maxim too) in open field lays down (in contrary to the HMG34/42) and hide his complete body behind the shield.
This bring up the discussion point why a half-track gunner has to expose his head above the gun-shield, while a russian medium/heavy machine gunner positioned in open field is able to fire his gun without exposing his head above the gun shield.
- don't use HTs as APCs 'cause you will be sad, keep them at range behind an infantry screen so they can provide some covering fire only
-
Additionally:
May be it is a completly a problem of exposure.
The main problem is, that the open-field SG43 let the gunner lay down.-....and this wise he is completly covered ...No small arms round was able to penetrate this shield.
On the other side...yes....there are hits at "weapon mount" of Half-track and it looks like the shield could exist....but its protective power is obsolete may because the gunner exposes his head above the shield....a thing the laying SG43 gunner does not.
-
Setup, parameters, iterations, screenshots.
Bolding text won't make it true by itself.
*sigh*
Thank you Kauz for bringing this issue to my (our) attention. I (we) will have a closer look.
Edit:
A thing which could be relevant in case you want to try it on your own is...:
The SG43 was established in open-field....this wise the SG43 gunner is laying behind his gun and is completly covered by his gun shield. This wise no penetration of the shield and so no killing of the laying gunner behind is possible.
-
There was once a discussion about the protection ability of Halftracks against small arms in general.
I can only support the issue, that PPSH, Mosin-Nagant, SVT40 and DP28 should not be able to penetrate a halftrack at 8mm angled areas because a standard rifle round is maximum capable of penetrating 5-6 mm of steel. A submachinegun round is maximum able to penetrate less than 1-2 mm
But the issue i am here is another one.....:
I made several tests and recognized that for instance a SG43 medium machine gun has a gun shield that works while german Halftrack does not have a working one.
While i was always able to kill all gun-crew members surrounding the SG43 machine gun shield ...i never were able to kill the guy behind the gun shield....even not with heavy machine guns on shorter distances.
While it is a discussion worth if a gun shield should protect against rifle rounds (not only IS "sS"... IS "S.M.K" too)
i asked myself why the machine gunner in a halftrack is always a easy kill.
I recognized that the gun-shield of the half-track is not existing....
Not only the fact that the halftrack-gunner is dieing fast and the SG43 gunner never dies is a hint for that.
I can clearly see the impacts of rounds against the SG43 shield, while i never was able to see something similar at the halftrack.
I hope this bug will get fixed!
-
Sendet mir ne PM wenn ihr spielen wollt...
gemacht
-
He asked because in almost all your other threads, you have been arguing about aspects ( weapons etc. ) that you think behave unrealistically, but in a Quick Battle, you're happy to "spam" rocket launchers to flatten the entire battlefield.
Who said that i am happy about it ?
I just stated a fact which i criticize on the one hand and have to live with on the other hand.....
Edit:
Because of the russian rocket launchers for instance i seldom buy a lot of infantry if i play german, because i know the enemy will **** me with his rocket launcher ....I am forced to buy panther panther panther...all other units are too expensive or to rare or too weak in relation to their costs.
-
Kauz,
Did I miss something? Aren't Katyusha formations Army and Corps level assets, therefore not typically available at CMRT level of play? Remember, DIVARTY consists of a mere three Battalions: 2 x 76mm ZIS-3 and 1 x 122mm M38.
Here's what the excellent site WW II Artillery has to say.
http://www.poeland.com/tanks/artillery/doctrine.html
"Mortars and rockets play a greater role in the Soviet army than any other. Mortars are massed and used (and observed for) like conventional artillery; while rockets are under corps control and are added to key breakthrough attacks. In the attack, self-propelled artillery such as the SU-122 and SU-152 are used heavily for direct-fire artillery support. 120mm and 82mm mortars have roughly the same effects and burst radii as 122mm howitzers and 76mm guns, respectively.
76mm guns are widely used for direct-fire support of infantry and tanks. Less commonly, they're used as conventional artillery. 122mm howitzers are the backbone of conventional Soviet artillery, and 152's are used to supplement or against tougher targets. 122mm guns and 152mm gun-howitzers tend to show up in corps artillery. Antitank guns see heavy use."
My conclusion? Unless conducting a full-blown attack, they shouldn't be available at all.
Regards,
John Kettler
John,
i do not understand your question.
I only said, that i always buy in quick battles (depending on the size of the map and the money) minimum 10-30 of 82mm katjusha rocket launcher to annihilate the enemy infantry on the map .
Why i am doing this? Because i can....a 82mm katjuahs only costs 15-35 bucks (depending on the version) ...
nothing can beat this cost-benefit ratio....(why buying a LMG unit for the same or even more money if i can use a katjusha rocket launcher) :-)
I do a lot of tests and try to find out which unit is capable of what for its money.
Rarity is one thing which forbids a lot of units, but simple firepower for the money the other point.
And a lot of unit-costs stand neither in relation to their firepower nor in relation to their economical costs (Dollar, rubel, reichsmark).
sometimes it depends a little on the situation and sure you can buy some exceptions (like 1 King tiger if you have enough money).
But regulary when i play german the most relevant units are Panther and may be some infs for recon-purposes.
(if you are german-defender you may eventually buy 75mmPak40 and some infantry with panzerschrecks and perhaps 81mm or 120mm mortar with TRP ).
As russian i so far always spam with 82mm rocket launcher...the infantry is dead after that.
-
Hallo...
bin auch Deutscher.
Suche auch einen Spieler ...sowohl Real-time als auch rundenbasiert.
Grüße
Kauz
-
Steve re-introduced, under duress, the unit purchasing system after Shock Force. QB players lobbied for it but Steve found it impossible to fine tune to everyone's satisfaction. Entire forum pages were devoted to the relative costs of SMG units or Shermans. Was it fair? Unfair!!? Constant adjustments were added and tweaked. Finally BF gave up. Like Sisyphus who was doomed to push a boulder uphill, only to have it roll back down to push it up again.
You shouldn't expect any changes except for the most glaring discrepancies (themselves open to heated controversies).
well at least the 82mm katjusha rocket price is one of the candidates....
EDIT:
if possible i would establish economical prices (dollar, rubel, ...) which are set in relation to each other.
For sure tanks become much more expensive than an infantry group ....but they were also less established on the battlefield.....
If someone wants to fight a tank-battle he just gets more money...and this money he only can spend for tanks....
-
I am fairly sure there are formulas that take into account various unit attributes. The weights assigned to these attributes relative to each other will necessarily be somewhat arbitrary.
Unit prices are generally reasonable, but Soviet rockets (and U.S rockets in CMBN) are an exception. They are seriously jacked up, price-wise, to the extent that I ban them from my QBs. This is not a big deal for U.S. rockets which were very rare, but it's a shame for the Katushas.
Yep...in case of 82mm rockets we seem to agree.
But if you take a closer look you will find a lot other examples.
A light machine gun unit for instance ...it cost low (in real life), is widely established on the battlefield in real life and has low firepower (in relation).....and despite these 3 aspects it is quite expensive in relation to other units (for example: infantry gun, 20mm flak).
-
It seems to me that a lot of units do not get in use ....especially because of the rarity points.
Despite that.... i often ask myself how the costs of units got determined by the developers.
Is it their amount on the battlefield? Is it the costs economical wise (Rubel, Dollar, Reichsmark)? Is it a abstract firepower? Or is just a mix? Or is it arbitrary?
For instance:
When i play russian...i always buy 10-30 artillery units of the 82mm katjusha rocket launcher. (they cost nothing)
Why i should buy for 30-60 creditpoints a single machine gun unit when i can buy for 15-35 credits a katjusha rocket launcher.
I always pulverize the whole battlefield with my 10-30 rockets launcher and decimate the whole enemy infantry with low costs and casualties....
then i attack....
In case i play german....i just try to spam with Panthers (may be some infantry for recon purposes).....all other purchasable units....no matter if tanks, artillery, air-force or infantry seems to me more or less useless/inefficient in comparison
Eventually a single King tiger could be a option (because of his armor) for spotting and advancing without loosing him.
As german defender it may be an option instead of Panthers to buy 75mm Pak40 (other guns are to easy to spot and hit....the 88mm for example is just a victim in comparison....even on 2000 meters the enemy tanks are able to hit it with their first to third shot....)
One thing which i not tried and think could be an option is the 150mm sig33 infantry gun against infantry attacks....
-
Kauz - I refer you to LukeFF's post 11 in this thread.
Nice way to argue...
But better than nothing...
So your answer is (with regard to LukeFF´s Post):
Yes it is possible, but it is difficult.
The whole life is difficult, do you think in war god will make an exception for you or any american medic?
Thanks for the answer.
-
Kauz, the illustrations at your link speak for themselves - the first aider is in the kneeling position.
No doubt that it is convinient to do things in a kneeling position....
nevertheless....my question was another....
1. Is it possible to do it in prone position?
2. I do not talk about picture 4 in my link!.....! I talked about picture 7-8 in the link. Do i need to be in prone position to set a bandage around the leg and tight the bandage by rotating a stick to stanch the bleeding (picture 7-9)?!
-
Sorry but this is the post of an irritated person who is fed up and I generally don't like flaming new guys but ....
You start with 'in my opinion'
If your opinion is informed by combat and life saving experience them it is relevant, otherwise it is not.
The BLUF message is, if you forgive the pun ... in regard to the situation described live with it or play real time.
Luke FF's expert advice and my own limited real life experience in these situations is exactly as he said, to even give basic first aid you need to be at least kneeling.
On the other side of the coin think about the person you most love in life and imagine them being stricken. Then think - what would you do? Would you refuse to give aid because 'you only do it lying down'' or would you act naturally despite the risks? How do you legislate for that in a game of this nature? In combat, the people you are with are always your best mates.
What we have in the game is a half way house through abstraction.
Where do we go from here ... multiple threads supported by re-enactment videos, and (if we're lucky) save games. Threads might be as follows:
Scenario 1: 'the guy was hit in the arm by a 7.92mm round fired from 700m at an angle of 3200 mils in open terrain in rainy conditions etc, etc yet the buddy aid guy applied a tourniquet to the left leg although he was a 'Veteran'. In my opinion he would have had a shattered arm and be suffering arterial bleeding and the buddy aid guy should have known that instantly and knelt on the pressure point (because that is what it takes).
Scenario 2: 'The guy should never have been hit because it was a 7.92mm round fired from 700m at an angle of 3200 mils in open terrain in rainy conditions and the firer was rated as 'Green' etc etc.
Let me present scenario 3 - if your bloke gets hit try one or all of the following:
A. Question why your poor play allowed that to happen.
B. Deal with it.
C. Go into medicine.
Again, I apologise for being grumpy but I'm kind of bored with a lot of this 'in my opinion this isn't realistic' stuff - particularly as I haven't seen anybody complain about the body 'disappearing' after buddy aid - from the perspective of somebody who has had to make somebody 'disappear' under fire I can tell you that it is the hardest thing that you can do in both emotional and physical terms.
I have a short question for you as an probable expert:
Is it possible (despite it is physical or emotional hard) to stop bleeding with one or several pressure bandages from a prone position?
This question may implicates another question:
is a man able to produce the pressure without his weight just only by the force of his muscles?
When i ask you that i have for instance options 7-9 of following illustration in mind (using a stick, turning it around and this wise i making more tight to stanch the bleeding):
http://www.stefan.ganz.priv.at/content/med4teens/Data/Print_1_6_5.html
7-8: using a stick, turning it around and this wise making the banadage more tight to stanch the bleeding
Regards
-
Yeah, if there's only one left, they prioritise working the gun. In the case of MGs, this can be sidestepped, IIRC, by packing up the MG, then the "lone gunner" will give buddy aid.
Perhaps you missed Combatintman's post where he said...
It can take a lot of pressure to stop major arterial bleeding.
You have an inflated opinion of what "Buddy Aid" represents. Standard ww2 gropo gear does not include plasma and IV lines. The best you could hope for is a tourniquet and a bandage.
I do not think that a field-medic is able to perform like a "surgeon"....
And once again, Kauz, you ignore people who know better than you.
*sigh*
1.
better you read more careful what i wrote ...before you start flaming...here what i wrote:
"correct me please.... i have a very reduced picture of what a medic in the field is capable of."
2.
You can stop peripheral bleeding by establishing pressure bandage/tourniquet. If it does not stop just add addionally further pressure bandages:
www.sprechzimmer.ch/include_php/previewdoc.php?file_id=4927
If you can do this or not(adding a pressure bandage) while proning, better you let answer people who know something about it.....i guess you are not....
3.
The List i made was what i "could imagine" ....if you read carefully.
I never said that it is like this in specific.
If a field-medic of today or of yesterday is more probable to carry a blood conserve with him i do not know....
I just wanted to make clear that a first-aid medic is maximum a emergency doctor and not a surgeon.
He has to do the emergency things like adding pressure bands to stop the bleeding (and give pain killers.)
If he is not able to provide these two things (1b) and 2a)) in a prone position i would not be happy for the soldiers in combat and would ask myself if he is only able to give first aid under "optimal" conditions...(which you will have not quite often on a battlefield...like you can imagine)
How about WW1?
in General Discussion Forum
Posted
Won´t work with this game engine....
Because the trenches in this game work more like "Splittergräben" or in english "slit trenches".
They only provide protection if your unit is hidding (laying down).
If they do not hide, then they will kneel in the actual modelled, so called, "trenches" and expose all from their head down to their balls (only the legs are protected).
In real life you can stand in trenches and only expose the top of your helmet down to your eyes and maybe your nose while you are fighting the enemy.
Until this issue is not solved defense positions in general and of course WWI scenarios are obsolete.