Jump to content

General Liederkranz

Members
  • Posts

    246
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Reputation Activity

  1. Upvote
    General Liederkranz reacted to MarkEzra in A Walk In The Sun...   
    So Interesting you brought this up.  Hopefully, one day, you'll know why.
     

  2. Upvote
    General Liederkranz reacted to A Canadian Cat - was IanL in CMBN V4.02 - US on board mortar penetrate concrete pillboxes (repeatable)   
    OK I reviewed your files and created my own tests... Bug logged.
    This does seem to be a bit different than the fixed bug I found. In that case rounds were penetrating through the roof and going off inside. That was back in v1. Now these rounds are going off inside the walls and the shrapnel radius is extending into the inside. At any rate not good. I agree that the mesh deformation seems to be contributing but it is not necessary. My tests showed the issue with flat no mesh deformation scenarios. But none of my tests resulted in KIA even in the ones with some mesh deformation. While your tests with significant mesh deformation actually did result in some KIA.
    Hti text does not seem to be working either. I mentioned that too.
    I do not agree that the building rubble is related to this but I have not investigated that yet.
  3. Like
    General Liederkranz got a reaction from RockinHarry in CMBN V4.02 - US on board mortar penetrate concrete pillboxes (repeatable)   
    It was recently that I played YEG, under 4.01. These are my results. At the time, I was sure the casualties I was seeing were from direct tank/TD fire and not mortars. Perhaps I was wrong but I was carefully watching.
     
  4. Like
    General Liederkranz got a reaction from RockinHarry in CMBN V4.02 - US on board mortar penetrate concrete pillboxes (repeatable)   
    Interesting. i didn't see this problem when I tried your "You Enter Germany" scenario, but I just ran the 60mm and 81mm tests (4.02) and I see it. In the 60mm scenario the right-hand bunker lost 4 men to a round that detonated inside the bunker. In the 81mm test each bunker took a hit that detonated inside, each time losing 4 men.
  5. Upvote
    General Liederkranz reacted to RockinHarry in CMBN V4.02 - US on board mortar penetrate concrete pillboxes (repeatable)   
    CMBN V4.02 (no modules), play mode 1 player - turn based, Iron, german player defend vs US AIP
    Think I´ve nailed it. Got to recreate the problematic situation from my mission in a new test mission seperately and found:
    US 60mm and 81mm onboard mortar rounds oftenly (not always) penetrate german concrete type pillboxes when:
    The pillboxes are partly surrounded by +1 to 2m high ditch locked berms. The way the pillboxes then get "sunk" (or mesh adapt) into the terrain mesh at execution turn 1 likely detach or shift the pillboxes "hitbox" in a way that penetrations can occur (my theory). Usually these penetrations are lethal to all pillbox occupants. Also "partial" penetrations can occur with similarly damaging effects to occupants. Since I´ve made a sound mod that indicates penetrations on stone wall type terrain objects more clearly, I also got some sonical feedback that a penetration type event occurs.
    Other terrain in pillbox AS: "Dirt Red" terrain tile and single tree.
    I´ve attached an archive file (dropbox link) that includes 2 test mission files and 4 save games. I´ve tested from german side, with the US AIP just ordered to place some suppressive mortar fire missions on the pillboxes. Starting as germans and simply observing what´s happening during the US mortar bombardment was the basic test situation.
    Not tested any other situations with different US Arty or german pillbox types.
     
    https://www.dropbox.com/s/hu1b4pyei5l61xh/Mortar_vs_Pillbox_Penetrate_V402.rar?dl=0

     
  6. Upvote
    General Liederkranz reacted to A Canadian Cat - was IanL in Irrational Behaviour   
    For better or worse engaging with testers and other community members is as close to official as we are going to get. Keep doing it.
    Yeah, there was a change made. It seems to not have resolved the problem enough. Testers are still working on it. Now one has abandoned this issue.
     
    OK but that's not going to happen. We do have NDAs and sometimes that is a cause but BFC also dose not document the full behaviour scope of every little thing. So, it is what it is and it is intentional so there ya go.
    To bad so sad. Sorry you feel that way but it is how you feel not how BFC views customers. Sorry I cannot make you feel better
    Yeah, so interestingly enough it was taken seriously and reported and a fix was made (found the but report). So, are you saying you have seen this (mortar round exploding inside bukers) still in 4.0x? If so I will look at reproducing it. If you have a save that would get me ahead of the game. If not can you at least confirm that it still happens in the latest build.
    Thankfully no one has said that and no one on the testing team will. The fact that you don't seem to want to believe that isn't our problem.
    I have explained this before but perhaps you have missed this. I get that end users just see a problem with bridge crossing - heard and understood. The fact is that in the background multiple bugs have been fixed. So far every reported and logged bug has been fixed. The fact that it is still possible to find new ways of confusing bridge crossing is unfortunate. If you guys find examples and report them with a save they will be fixed. So, short version there is not one single thing that "just has not been fixed" this is a complex area and multiple bugs that show the same symptoms have been fixed. If there are more we can go after them too.
  7. Like
    General Liederkranz got a reaction from A Canadian Cat - was IanL in Irrational Behaviour   
    Just out of curiosity, I loaded the Roadblock scenario to test in 3.12, 4.0, 4.01, and 4.02. In each case, I selected 1st Squad and "Quick" moved it up to the tile to the left of the gap in the hedgerow, as @domfluff suggested to replicate the problem. I did this 6 times in each version. In every case they came under fire (MGs, small arms, and usually off-map mortars) and took casualties. I ran each scenario until the squad evaded, until its members were all casualties, or until the scenario ended. 
    3.12: Once they stayed for the entire game. In the other 5 cases they evaded (either Fast or Slow) away from the hedgerow, back into the friendly field.
    4.0: Once they stayed put for the entire game. The other 5 times they Fast or Slow moved back from the hedgerow. So exactly the same as in 3.12.
    4.01: 4 times they never fled (even with only 2 members left in one case). The other 2 times they evaded forward through the hedgerow gap, and then to the right along the hedgerow to the corner. 
    4.02: 5 times they never fled (in one case they were wiped out entirely). The other 1 time they evaded forward through the hedgerow and then right to the corner, like in 4.01. 
    This is obviously a small sample size and not nearly as comprehensive as what the beta testers and some others have done. I did it mostly to satisfy my own curiosity and my suspicion that my system is not generating this issue as much as some people's are. It seems for some people, this happens almsot every time in 4.01. For me, it was only 2 out of 6 times. 4.02 helped, but didn't eliminate it (1 out of 6 times). 
    It does not seem to happen at all in either 3.12 or 4.0.
    But what's really interesting is that in 4.01 and 4.02 the squad NEVER evaded BACKWARD, which would seem like the most logical choice. If they moved, they only moved forward. It was only in 3.12 and 4.0 that they would ever flee backward.
    (Random odd fact I noticed: in 3.12, the squad leader's name is always "Lewis." In 4.0 and later, it's always "Melvin.")
  8. Upvote
    General Liederkranz got a reaction from sttp in Irrational Behaviour   
    Just out of curiosity, I loaded the Roadblock scenario to test in 3.12, 4.0, 4.01, and 4.02. In each case, I selected 1st Squad and "Quick" moved it up to the tile to the left of the gap in the hedgerow, as @domfluff suggested to replicate the problem. I did this 6 times in each version. In every case they came under fire (MGs, small arms, and usually off-map mortars) and took casualties. I ran each scenario until the squad evaded, until its members were all casualties, or until the scenario ended. 
    3.12: Once they stayed for the entire game. In the other 5 cases they evaded (either Fast or Slow) away from the hedgerow, back into the friendly field.
    4.0: Once they stayed put for the entire game. The other 5 times they Fast or Slow moved back from the hedgerow. So exactly the same as in 3.12.
    4.01: 4 times they never fled (even with only 2 members left in one case). The other 2 times they evaded forward through the hedgerow gap, and then to the right along the hedgerow to the corner. 
    4.02: 5 times they never fled (in one case they were wiped out entirely). The other 1 time they evaded forward through the hedgerow and then right to the corner, like in 4.01. 
    This is obviously a small sample size and not nearly as comprehensive as what the beta testers and some others have done. I did it mostly to satisfy my own curiosity and my suspicion that my system is not generating this issue as much as some people's are. It seems for some people, this happens almsot every time in 4.01. For me, it was only 2 out of 6 times. 4.02 helped, but didn't eliminate it (1 out of 6 times). 
    It does not seem to happen at all in either 3.12 or 4.0.
    But what's really interesting is that in 4.01 and 4.02 the squad NEVER evaded BACKWARD, which would seem like the most logical choice. If they moved, they only moved forward. It was only in 3.12 and 4.0 that they would ever flee backward.
    (Random odd fact I noticed: in 3.12, the squad leader's name is always "Lewis." In 4.0 and later, it's always "Melvin.")
  9. Like
    General Liederkranz got a reaction from PIATpunk in Irrational Behaviour   
    Just out of curiosity, I loaded the Roadblock scenario to test in 3.12, 4.0, 4.01, and 4.02. In each case, I selected 1st Squad and "Quick" moved it up to the tile to the left of the gap in the hedgerow, as @domfluff suggested to replicate the problem. I did this 6 times in each version. In every case they came under fire (MGs, small arms, and usually off-map mortars) and took casualties. I ran each scenario until the squad evaded, until its members were all casualties, or until the scenario ended. 
    3.12: Once they stayed for the entire game. In the other 5 cases they evaded (either Fast or Slow) away from the hedgerow, back into the friendly field.
    4.0: Once they stayed put for the entire game. The other 5 times they Fast or Slow moved back from the hedgerow. So exactly the same as in 3.12.
    4.01: 4 times they never fled (even with only 2 members left in one case). The other 2 times they evaded forward through the hedgerow gap, and then to the right along the hedgerow to the corner. 
    4.02: 5 times they never fled (in one case they were wiped out entirely). The other 1 time they evaded forward through the hedgerow and then right to the corner, like in 4.01. 
    This is obviously a small sample size and not nearly as comprehensive as what the beta testers and some others have done. I did it mostly to satisfy my own curiosity and my suspicion that my system is not generating this issue as much as some people's are. It seems for some people, this happens almsot every time in 4.01. For me, it was only 2 out of 6 times. 4.02 helped, but didn't eliminate it (1 out of 6 times). 
    It does not seem to happen at all in either 3.12 or 4.0.
    But what's really interesting is that in 4.01 and 4.02 the squad NEVER evaded BACKWARD, which would seem like the most logical choice. If they moved, they only moved forward. It was only in 3.12 and 4.0 that they would ever flee backward.
    (Random odd fact I noticed: in 3.12, the squad leader's name is always "Lewis." In 4.0 and later, it's always "Melvin.")
  10. Like
    General Liederkranz got a reaction from Warts 'n' all in Irrational Behaviour   
    Just out of curiosity, I loaded the Roadblock scenario to test in 3.12, 4.0, 4.01, and 4.02. In each case, I selected 1st Squad and "Quick" moved it up to the tile to the left of the gap in the hedgerow, as @domfluff suggested to replicate the problem. I did this 6 times in each version. In every case they came under fire (MGs, small arms, and usually off-map mortars) and took casualties. I ran each scenario until the squad evaded, until its members were all casualties, or until the scenario ended. 
    3.12: Once they stayed for the entire game. In the other 5 cases they evaded (either Fast or Slow) away from the hedgerow, back into the friendly field.
    4.0: Once they stayed put for the entire game. The other 5 times they Fast or Slow moved back from the hedgerow. So exactly the same as in 3.12.
    4.01: 4 times they never fled (even with only 2 members left in one case). The other 2 times they evaded forward through the hedgerow gap, and then to the right along the hedgerow to the corner. 
    4.02: 5 times they never fled (in one case they were wiped out entirely). The other 1 time they evaded forward through the hedgerow and then right to the corner, like in 4.01. 
    This is obviously a small sample size and not nearly as comprehensive as what the beta testers and some others have done. I did it mostly to satisfy my own curiosity and my suspicion that my system is not generating this issue as much as some people's are. It seems for some people, this happens almsot every time in 4.01. For me, it was only 2 out of 6 times. 4.02 helped, but didn't eliminate it (1 out of 6 times). 
    It does not seem to happen at all in either 3.12 or 4.0.
    But what's really interesting is that in 4.01 and 4.02 the squad NEVER evaded BACKWARD, which would seem like the most logical choice. If they moved, they only moved forward. It was only in 3.12 and 4.0 that they would ever flee backward.
    (Random odd fact I noticed: in 3.12, the squad leader's name is always "Lewis." In 4.0 and later, it's always "Melvin.")
  11. Upvote
    General Liederkranz reacted to Ultradave in New "02" patches for Game Engine 4 are now available   
    Ok, I've been able to duplicate this and posted on the beta forums to have someone (or two or three) double check me. Also a couple thoughts on the specific situations that are happening (I'll hold that for now until I'm sure or someone confirms what I think I'm seeing). 
  12. Upvote
    General Liederkranz reacted to Hister in New "02" patches for Game Engine 4 are now available   
    Excellent, thank you and defenitely a route to follow - hotfixes have been dearly missed with Battlefront in the past.
  13. Like
    General Liederkranz got a reaction from Howler in mortar response time   
    Unfortunately you can’t. In the game, offmap artillery/mortar call time isn’t affected by previous missions. There’s no “memory” of previous targets, and there’s no benefit to repeating a previous mission. Each fire mission starts from scratch. That may not be realistic but it is the way the game is built.
    Placing a TRP before the game will speed up call time, but again that’s independent of whether you’ve fired at that spot during the game previously. It just speeds up all shots at that target. 
    You can of course adjust the target of a fire mission BEFORE it’s finished, and that will be quicker than calling a new mission. But there are limits to what you can change by adjusting. Most notably, you can’t change the length of an ongoing mission. 
  14. Like
    General Liederkranz got a reaction from professionalXMAZ in mortar response time   
    Unfortunately you can’t. In the game, offmap artillery/mortar call time isn’t affected by previous missions. There’s no “memory” of previous targets, and there’s no benefit to repeating a previous mission. Each fire mission starts from scratch. That may not be realistic but it is the way the game is built.
    Placing a TRP before the game will speed up call time, but again that’s independent of whether you’ve fired at that spot during the game previously. It just speeds up all shots at that target. 
    You can of course adjust the target of a fire mission BEFORE it’s finished, and that will be quicker than calling a new mission. But there are limits to what you can change by adjusting. Most notably, you can’t change the length of an ongoing mission. 
  15. Upvote
    General Liederkranz reacted to umlaut in Interview of a Waffen SS Soldier   
    I am not offended, but that is just plain wrong. Yes, communism is surely a totalitarian extreme of socialism. But fascism has got nothing to do with socialism.
  16. Upvote
    General Liederkranz reacted to Michael Emrys in Irrational Behaviour   
    'Decimated' or 'annihilated'? People often use one word when the other is intended.
    Michael
  17. Upvote
    General Liederkranz reacted to Kaunitz in Reverse slope/grazing fire.   
    Here is the heavy weapons company's field manual from 1942 ( https://archive.org/details/Fm7-15/page/n69 ); Take special note of chapter 5 & 6. [If you're unfamiliar with the map symbols required to understand the diagrams, take a look at the US map symbols here: http://lesliesoftware.com/mods/CatTacticalIconsCMBN/index.html; Basically, MGs are black dots - without a short line at the 11 o'clock  position; these are ATguns -  with long, protruding arrows that indicate their fire line - light Mgs have a "L" on their fire line? Obviously, each MG has two fire lines - one main (the bold line/arrow) and a secondary one (dotted line/arrow)]
    I also found a few interesting mentions related to machine gun fire in some eyewitness accounts. Of course MG fire is mentioned all the time, as the basic experience for the attacking infantryman in WWII was to face MG fire and artillery. But I found these extracts interesting as they provide a bit more details:  
     
    This account is interesting. It describes an attack that was supported by Vickers machine guns. But also, it seems as if the attackers could never determine the source of the incoming enemy fire. Apparently, it is MG fire.  
     
  18. Like
    General Liederkranz reacted to Kaunitz in Reverse slope/grazing fire.   
    I think this is the right topic to share some thoughts about how the heavy machine gun can be used in Combat Mission. Maybe I will create a small tactical video on it once I get some adequate footage from my actual H2H games as the explanations below would certainly benefit form some form of visualisation. I think that in some circumstances, the HMG is the most misunderstood, underrated but also most difficult to employ weapon in Combat Mission. Judging from AARs, I think that many players are unaware of its great potential!*
    So why do I think the heavy machine gun can be the infantry's defensive weapon number one? And how to employ the heavy machine gun for good effect?
    1. Lines of fire / control of space: I can't stress enough that HMGs should make maximum use of oblique grazing fire. You always need to fire at your opponent from an angle. This way, you create a line of fire that crosses the axis of his approach, rather than running paralell to it. After all the defender's main goal is to stop the attacker's advance. Instead of locking down individual spotted enemy teams for 2 seconds with every burst, our aim is to lock down lines of 400+ meters' length permanently and (almost) blindly. For this to work, you need to find adequate fire lines in the terrain, which is admittedly extremely fiddly and requires you to make "test runs" on the map before you start the actual battle. Your "fire lines" should be as long as possible - the longer they are, the more ground your HMG can control. Also, wherever possible, the HMGs gun's bullets must travel close to the ground (--> "grazing fire"). The HMG must be positioned roughly at the same height as its intended beaten zone. So you have to consider the muzzle height** of the machine gun in and the height of the tile that you're aiming at. The line in between the muzzle and the aimpoint will determine the elevation of the fire. Even though they're conspicious and likely targets for the enemy, multi storey houses can be usefull to achieve an even line between the HMG and the intended beaten zone. 
    Also be aware that shifting your aimpoint forward and backward affects the "spread" of your fire. 
    2. Reliability: The good thing about HMGs is that they come with plenty of ammo. While the ordinary HMG units are still somewhat limited (2k ammo) and might require some extra supply asset (trucks, wooden bunker),  wooden HMG bunkers offer plenty of ammo (5k). This means that your HMGs can and should be firing non-stop. This way, they are really able to lock down the enemy. LMG units cannot achieve this as their volume of fire decreases very quickly with range. HMG units, by contrast, keep up a high volume of fire even at ranges of 600m+ (their "aiming" task is much shorter than that of LMGs and they fire longer bursts).
    Also note that smoke screens don't help against your HMGs. That's because you're relying on area fire and the LOS between your muzzle and your aimpoint (e.g. at 80m distance) will be clear and unaffected by the smoke screen at the beaten zone (e.g. at 600m).
    3. Protection: The heavy mg's best protection is distance in combination with concealment. If enemy squads can get eyes on your hmg within 300 meters, your hmg is not well positioned. At ranges under 300 meters, you risk getting suppressed by ordinary riflemen and LMGs. by contrast, if you employ the HMG at proper ranges and in some concealment, it can stay concealed for a very long time even when firing. I really had some eye-opening moments (testing in hotseat mode) when my HMGs were able to pepper the opponent who had no clue where it was coming from. Therefore, HMGs are extremely usefull to scare away a tank's infantry support. When a mixed column enters the beaten zone of HMGs, the infantry gets suppressed, bullets hit the tanks (gradually damaging tracks and optics) but neither the tanks nor the infantry can see where it's coming from (note, however, that tanks could "block" the fire lines of your HMGs to build a "bridge" over the fire line for the infantry..!). The greater distance between the HMG and the opponent also helps against artillery and speculative fire, as the number of potential positions increases with range. It will be harder for your opponent to "guess" where the HMG is. [There is still the problem of sound-locating the HMG though, which I personally consider cheating/a bug].
    4. Exploitation: The lines of fire described above are very effective at suppressing and pinning enemy infantry. This alone can be extremely usefull as it disrupts and slows down enemy advances. The lines of fire will not wrap up many kills for you though. Therefore, the standard WWII procedure works very well in Combat Mission: HMGs anonymously pin the infantry, mortars and arty do the killing. 
    So, with these 4 points, HMGs can be deployed for great effect iif the circumstances are right. I don't consider any of this particularly "gamey". Rather, it's just another example that you can recreate proper WWII tactics in Combat Mission (although in this particular case it is very fiddly). I've even tried to apply some indirect machine gun fire - firing from a reverse slope - , but found that the maps were not large enough for it ;).  Of course the HMG can also be applied in the attack, but just like in the defense, you'd need to test your positions before the battle in order to prevent ugly surprises (the beaten zone is not where you want it to be, or the bullets go high alltogether). 
     
    ----------
    * Even though I might come across as a lunatic, I also want to point out that the way that many quickbattle maps are designed severely handicap HMGs (and other support weapons and tanks). In my opinion, they often cut lines of sight unrealistically short. The maps are often too "bumpy" (the slopes are not soft enough, hills are too "small", ridges too sharp) and/or they are not deep enough to position support weapons at their proper ranges (support positions are simply "cut off").
    **Note that medium machine guns are usually fired from the prone position (--> difficult to achieve good angles), heavy machine guns from the "sitting" position (-->better), and HMG bunkers are fired standing (-->best). 
  19. Upvote
    General Liederkranz got a reaction from A Canadian Cat - was IanL in Line of Sight Question   
    Yeah, I think we're talking about the same thing. What I meant by "LOS tool" is using the Target line from a waypoint rather than from the unit's current location.
    Definitely, I think in two ways. First, Hide makes them stay prone. So they can't see over things they might be able to see over if they were kneeling or standing. Second, soldiers who are Hiding I believe can't spot at all, or at least get a penalty when they do. That said, some men in a Hiding unit will still occasionally rise up and change over to "Spotting").
    As I think about it, I think something else might be causing this problem. Is this a US MG team? There's a particular oddity with MG teams since the line of SIGHT is traced from the stance of the soldiers, but line of FIRE is traced from the position of the MG itself. This can cause problems, especially with US .30 cal air cooled MGs, because when the gun is deployed it's usually down at ground level but the leader of the team might be kneeling. So if the team is behind a hedgerow, the the game might calculate spotting from the leader's eye level, and it might use him to trace the line of sight when you use the Target tool. BUT the MG won't be able to fire because when the game tries to trace line of fire, it finds the barrel is down at ground level, with the hedgerow berm in the way. I've seen this happen and I believe there are more details in other threads on the forum. 
  20. Upvote
    General Liederkranz got a reaction from A Canadian Cat - was IanL in Line of Sight Question   
    Was the MG already in that spot, and was it deployed? If not one reason could be that when you use the LOS tool to check LOS from a position before you move there, it uses the unit's current stance (prone, kneeling, or standing for infantry). But if the unit's actual stance when it arrives is different, that'll change LOS. This can easily happen with MG teams because they often lie down when they set up the MG.
  21. Upvote
    General Liederkranz reacted to Hardradi in Thread about confirmed patch issues   
    I will probably be wrong about this but wouldn't it be a good idea to have a dedicated thread outlining confirmed issues with the new patch?
    Each patch issue would be outlined with a brief description and its current status. This will give players an idea of whether they want to start or continue playing battles and campaigns. The thread should be blocked from public posts and controlled by Developer(s). Players can pile in on separate threads about other potential issues. 
    At the moment browsing the forums I can see:
    1. RT: PBEM games are not compatible and have to be finished in 4.0
    2. FI: Fallschirmjager uniforms have issues. 
    3. BN: Appears to be some odd behaviour of troops fleeing towards the enemy to seek cover.
     
  22. Upvote
    General Liederkranz reacted to Bufo in PBEM game without any cheating   
    Hi!
    What you have described here applies only for the Hot-Seat mode, not PBEM games. I really cannot understand why there is difference, but anyway. Obviously you can cheat this way in the hot-seat mode but not in PBEM.
    Here is a small sheet I made the explain the difference:

  23. Like
    General Liederkranz got a reaction from Badger73 in Bug or Quirk: Sherman .50 cals   
    Just realized this depends on whether they have a loader's hatch. 
  24. Like
    General Liederkranz got a reaction from Bulletpoint in Bug or Quirk: Sherman .50 cals   
    Just realized this depends on whether they have a loader's hatch. 
  25. Like
    General Liederkranz got a reaction from Bulletpoint in Bug or Quirk: Sherman .50 cals   
    In an ongoing CMFB game (started since the patch) I've noticed that differently types of M4 tanks use their .50 caliber MGs differently. M4 (late) and M4A1 (late) types, which carry 300 rounds, fire their .50 cals if they're given a "Target Light" order and they're opened up. The only way to keep them from using up all their .50 cal ammo is to button them up. On the other hand, M4A3(75)Ws and Jumbos, which carry 600 rounds for their .50s, do NOT fire those weapons on "Target Light," even when the commanders are opened up. The only way I've found to get them to fire their .50s (in area fire) is to give them a full Target order. I don't know which of these behaviors is better, but it seems odd that it's different between models. Maybe this difference is deliberate, but I don't see any reason why it would be.
×
×
  • Create New...