Jump to content

holoween

Members
  • Posts

    100
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by holoween

  1. 16 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

    You better start reading some books. Or watch some useful movies. I try to copy their tactics and surprise they work. 500 yards is what they are using in the movie. 

    Employment of Heavy Machine Guns in the Attack - 1944 - YouTube

    Where do i even start

    Your previous post contained 1 true but unrelated statement and one that is arguable aside from that every single thing you said was wrong yet you feel the need to tell someone elst to read. Especially since i do take the time to actually test what im talking about ingame.

    they are using 500 yards to give a size for the beaten zone. They have to because the size and shape of the beaten zone changes with range and the ground youre shooting at. That doesnt mean all their shown positions are at 500yards.

    i assume with indirect fire youre talking about fire from what the video calls Position Defilade. Youre only able to do that at longer ranges. Note how its demonstraded once and never actually used throughout the rest of the video except where they talk about supporting advancing infantry with overhead fire and specifically note the long range required on flat ground makes it "unsatisfactory"

     

  2. 8 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

    Funny you don't address the issues of the HMG in the indirect fire mode just behind the crest of a ridge. They have special sights for this. That is what I like to see, and their HQ could call for a linear plunging fire.

    I didnt adress it because 1 it isnt particularly relevant to general troop survivability as it can only be used at fairly long range and at those ranges it doesnt make a big difference and 2 because it isnt particularly relevant to the issue of supressing.

    8 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

    I solve this problem by for example the 60 mm mortar for US forces and the 50 mm for British commonwealth. I think that is why those units were so generously supplied in the game.

    The game depicts historical oob. The mortars are there because they historically were.

    8 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

    I agree with @mjkerner that MGs shift their fire anyway.

    I ight have different standards to you but at best that mg fire covers 10m of that wall barely more than a single action square. Thats not shifting fire for me.

    8 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

    Combined arms are always the answer to solve tactical problems and innovation.

    While true its irrelevant to the discussion on the capabilities a specific weapons system should have.

    8 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

    Shooting an HMG from a defilade position for suppression is usual a waste of ammo. A German MG 42 in HMG mode is supplied with four thousand rounds in theory he can go through them in 4 minutes.  Go to camera position 1 and observe in which manner the game let him fire. 

    1 Depends on the situation and your fire doctrine.

    2 2500rounds

    3 3:20-2:40min for 4k rounds

    4 It shoots at 125rpm exactly the same as the us hmg at 300m. And 190rpm vs 160rpm at 100m.

  3. 7 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

    I think what actually happens is:

    Small arms are extremely inaccurate in this game, and there's a large angular spread left and right. As it's based on an angle, not targeting specific squares, the farther from the gun, the larger the spread.

    If you target a square close to the gun, it will look like the gun basically targets the centre of the square.

    Farther away, it will look like the gun targets centre, left and right parts of the square.

    Even farther, it will look lik the gun targets the selected square and the one on the left and the right.

    At very long distances, it looks like it targets the actual square, plus two squares left and right.

    I thested the us hmg at 130m and it clearly fired bursts at each edge and the center.

  4. 36 minutes ago, mjkerner said:

    While I agree that HMG fire doesn't seem to suppress like we'd expect, FWIW area fire does shift fire to the AS on either side of the targeted AS. 

    This doesnt happen what happens is this:

    21 minutes ago, womble said:

    And there is *some* suppression in AS adjacent to AS where bullets strike, I believe. I think the determination (several years ago, so it may have changed) was that it was about half that of the targeted AS. 

    Basically it seems the mg targets one burst on the left edge of the square one on the right edge and one in the middle. With supression having some aoe it bleeds into the adjacent squares depending on where the enemy actually sits i the square.

  5. 3 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

    An HMG is the wrong tactic. The HMG HQ can call in mortar fire and he doesn't need a radio. You always need a combination of units. We need 25 years more before the AI can copy every human behaviour. You just discovered you need a human opponent. 

    That i cant effectively use a hmg for supression because the game will only let me target one action square per turn even though this is the only role hmgs have on the offense is the core issue here.

    That i could use other assets doesnt change the fact that the hmg cant perform as it should

    I almost entirely play against other humans. It does however only make the issue more aparent as against the ai it really doesnt matter.

  6. 44 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

    That could be a human behaviour. Redirect at the next turn. You need to be in hide mode to make a trench full cover. 

    Buddy aiding is human behaviour. kneeling in the open to get shot yourself isnt.

    Hiding in a trench doesnt protect you from the shells landing inside. CM trenches simply are far wider than any infantrymen would ever build them.

    Quote

    Give it 15 seconds covering fire combined with a 15 sec of the maneuvering element near the end of a turn. You realize the HMG need to be in enfilade to be effective. In enfilade you need only one action square. In defilade you need to spray and pray and waste a lot of ammo. In the case of an MG 42 he will run out of barrels too. 15 seconds is enough to suppress once they cover you lose a full contact.  

    To get supression fire only on the last 15 seconds you need to get a movement command inbetween which makes it practically impossible to do what you suggest with a hmg and simply impractical with lmgs. Unless youre in a perfect flanking position with your hmg targeting one action square wont get fire on the entire treeline so if there is more than one team your supression will fail.

    Quote

    Works both ways. Put somewhere an empty bunker and watch how many tanks give their position away. Empty trench or foxholes with your TRP on it. I like Hotseat that is the sort of Catch22 we play. Take it from me first spot gets your intel and plan. 

    Yes you can use bad things in a smart way. Doesnt mean most defenses arent underperforming in CM.

  7. Just now, chuckdyke said:

    Makes no difference against the AI. Human players can deal with it to make a few house rules. 

    Houserules shouldnt be required for something so simple

    Just now, chuckdyke said:

    Buddy aid do them when you have secured the area. 

    As long as your unit is in an action square with a casualty it will try to buddy aid no player choice involved

    Just now, chuckdyke said:

    Tactics! 'Spray & Pray is a bad tactic. Use cover arcs. 

    Yea if i want to assault a treeline ill put my hmg on a cover arc rather than have it fire supression fire at it great idea.

  8. There are a lot of reasons why the casualty rates are so high

     

    Things that arent related directly to the mechanics:

    Battles usually represent tip of the spear scenarios where high casualties are expected.

    Players push their forces way too hard.

    Low time limits lead to overly hasty attacks.

     

    Directly related to the mechanics:

    Infantry maintains too little spacing.

    Infantry accuracy is too high while under fire (and too low when not).

    Support weapons can only effectively supress one action square. All belt fed mgs are far less effective at supressing than they should be.

    Hunt command doesnt work properly. Units shoudl stop when getting shot at rather than just when they see a target.

    Entrenchments are underpowered. They are far too easy to spot and generally provide too little cover.

    Tanks are far too good at spotting infantry close up especially on the flanks and rear.

    Units giving first aid expose themselves unnecessarily.

  9. 40m bar+4 garands 3.75 vs 1lmg42 4.4

    80m bar+4 garands 1.45 vs 1lmg42 1.45

    120m bar+4 garands 0.8 vs 1lmg42 0.8

    160m bar+4 garands 0.55 vs 1lmg 0.46

    192m bar+4 garands 0.44 vs 1lmg 0.34

    Note this is against foxholes which provide some of the best cover ingame.

    So at relevant small arms ranges its overall similar with the lmg doing better at shorter ranges. Note that supression isnt factored in here.

    312m  bar 32rpm vs Bren 44rpm vs lmg42 71rpm so assuming each supress as much per round youre still left with quite a bit higher supression.

    Supression reduces rate of fire so even a slight advantedge quickly compounds to give a massive one. So overall the lmg42 gives a german infantry squad the firepower advantedge. This wont matter much against ai which wont hold fire until targets are in effective range and let themselves get destroyed by heavy weapons but against human oponents that edge does matter massively.

     

     

     

  10. 2 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

    My point is that while the LMG42 is theoretically better in a relative sense, (because it causes 40 percent mre casualties than the Bren at 312 metres), in absolute terms, we're still only talking 0.10 kills per minute for the Bren compared to 0.14 kills per minute for the LMG42.

    Small arms are only really usefull within 200m and even then only pick up much killing power below 100m

    Beyond 200m heavy weapons like hmgs, mortars, tank guns, arty matter and small arms fire only serves a purpose in the absnece of these. If they are available small arms fire beyond 200m simply makes the unit a target for larger weapons.

    Within the 200m though the lmg42 on its own has the same firepower as half an american infantry squad (1bar+4m1). And thats not counting supressive ability.

    2 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

    The only reason I brought up the LMG42 was as an example of a "mythical" German weapon that many people seem to have an exaggerated idea about. Yes, it's a little better, but no, it's not any gamechanger by any means.

    Its one of the weapons that massively outperforms the allied counterparts. The issue is that all those weapons keep getting treated like magical superweapons. Once they are used with proper care and their inteded tactics they do show their potential.

    2 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

    I don't mean to say the Germans are rubbish in CM, but I feel that they lack an edge compared to the US forces. Especially when you factor in the US 60mm mortars, ability to split squads into three teams, and fast artillery call times.

    Id argue the plentiful radiaos and quick artillery calltime are the primary edge the us has. The mortar is nice but personally i find mortars at platoon level overkill and for company level 80mm mortars seem more useful to me. And splitting into 3 teams is only rarely usefull for at or scout puropses and at least at i find is better dealt with by an additional team for the platoon.

    2 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

    So while the Germans are not true "underdogs", like the Italians for example, I still feel they are quite limited in many ways. Please note that this is not a complaint, but an observation.

    The germans work differently but aside from scenarios putting them into the underdog role i cant see them as such.

  11. 22 minutes ago, Artkin said:

    A server browser where you can host or find lobbies to play scenarios or quick battles at least. I imagine it would be a lot of work.

    Everyone talks about replayability.. well what do you think it would be like with real mp?

    No need for dedicated servers, that's kind of a cherry on top.

    A few things to keep in mind for mp

    Anything except wego becomes practically impossible to controll past platoon level in real time (ive tried).

     

    An ingame automated pbem would certainly be nice to have though i think it would be fairly low priority overall since the majority of players interested in it will find their way to the forum or any of the fan forums to organize games.

  12. 40 minutes ago, BFCElvis said:

    When the original CMBN came out it, along with CMSF1, were built using Game Engine 1. When Fortress Italy was made more features were added to the game engine that CMBN did not have. That is when the 2.0 Upgrade was first created for CMBN. It Upgraded the game engine from Game Engine 1 to Game Engine 2. Making it so that CMBN's game engine did not become obsolete. Red Thunder added more features and that was created using Game Engine 3. 3.0 Upgrade's were created for CMBN and CMFI so they they use Game Engine 3. The current game engine is Game Engine 4. All new purchases use Game Engine 4. I see that you joined the forum in 2018. If that is when you purchased your first game then it was already using Game Engine 4. 

    A 5.0 Upgrade would mean more features being added and available for all titles.

    THX for the reply. Yes i only got my first CM game then.

    How extensive are these features? What was in other engine upgrades for example?

  13. 1 hour ago, SimpleSimon said:

    Where? When? How?

    In Europe, by gpmgs/mmgs and assaultrifles, starting in the mid 30s and certainly being the case by the mid 40s. For what is essentially a mid 20s design thats very good.

    And i dont think the brits were making a bad decision when getting the bren since they were getting what was the best lmg in the world. That they ended up against one of the best gpmg designs was bad luck they couldnt have forseen.

    Also note that obsolete isnt useless.

    Bolt action rifles became obsolete in the mid 30s They still ended up being the most prominent weapons in ww2 due to several factors and they still worked but they got destroyed when up against selfloading rifles.

     

  14. 1 hour ago, SimpleSimon said:

    It's just that even looking at the Bren from MG42 Mountain paints a misleading picture. It leaves out that the British expected the Bren to work in tandem with a 2in mortar, sniper teams, engineers etc all under the cover of the battalion's mortars and HMGs.

    Where is the difference in usage to an mg42?

    That seems about as focused on the mg as the germans. A proper mg is simply a better weapon. Just like semiautomatic rifles completely obsoleted boltaction rifles as an infantry weapon and then the assaultrifle obsoleted it.

    The only place where you still find lmgs is when they are basically just a standard assault rifle with a heavier barrel and a bigger magazine. While the bren was quite possibly the best lmg it simply became obsolete just like the watercooled hmg.

×
×
  • Create New...