Lanzfeld Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 After being away from the game for a bit and comming back I just wanted to bring up two things that I thought would have been corrected by now and see if there is a reason that they have not been. 1. When a HQ is spotting for a 60mm mortar sitting 10 meters away with voice icon the delay is still 5 minutes in elite mode. We had a person on this forum who had a family member that was an actual 60mm mortar guy in the WW2 era and he said that the time from first request from the HQ to the first spotting round leaving the tube was about 30 SECONDS and full FFE was 1 minute! This also just makes morre sense to me. Now when there are radios involved I can understand a delay but when it is close voice this long delay makes NO sense. Why hasn't this been changed to reflect a more realistic value? 2. It is still impossible to ambush from or get ambushed from an enemy non AI) in a foxhole as the foxholes themselves give away the positions. Are there any plans for a more camouflage foxhole? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 Now when there are radios involved I can understand a delay but when it is close voice this long delay makes NO sense. Huh? The delay is caused by the passage of information from one person to a calculator to a fire unit, PLUS the interpretation and calculation that has to occur at each step. Whether that passage is by voice or by functional radio is utterly incidental. Delay is NOT an intrinsic feature of any technology used. Why hasn't this been changed to reflect a more realistic value? Because the way it is is more realistic overall? 2. It is still impossible to ambush from or get ambushed from an enemy non AI) in a foxhole as the foxholes themselves give away the positions. Are there any plans for a more camouflage foxhole? Huh. That's odd. I must have the Mission Impossible Patch, since I seem to be able to manage it, in both directions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanzfeld Posted March 27, 2012 Author Share Posted March 27, 2012 Well there is more of a delay IRL when using a radio because of establishing contact and using proper radio proceedures, readbacks, ect, take time. I can relay information faster face to face than over a radio. Your modern day cellphone is a good example. Stories just take longer to tell when you are not face to face. It has already been established by a guy that did it IRL that 30 seconds was the time for first spotting round from a 60 mm mortar in combat conditions when the spotter was 10 meters away so the current system we use is off by several minutes. How is that more realistic overall? You mean to tell me that when you spot those foxholes a few hundred meters away you dont hose them down? I dont think we should spot the foxhole at all until much closer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 Well there is more of a delay IRL when using a radio because of establishing contact and using proper radio proceedures, readbacks, ect, take time. I can relay information faster face to face than over a radio. Your modern day cellphone is a good example. Stories just take longer to tell when you are not face to face. Sure. But telling a story is a little less exacting than relaying fire orders. It has already been established by a guy that did it IRL that 30 seconds was the time for first spotting round from a 60 mm mortar in combat conditions when the spotter was 10 meters away so the current system we use is off by several minutes. In those /specific/ circumstances, for that /specific/ team, on that /specific/ day, and /assuming/ that his recollection is correct; yes, it's off by several minutes. Of course, you as an omniscient player have a number of significant advantages that he didn't have, which go someway towards balancing things out. How is that more realistic overall? Because, overall, 60mm missions took a sight longer than 1 minute to go from "hmm, I think I want some HE over there" to *BOOM*BOOM*BOOM*BOOM* You mean to tell me that when you spot those foxholes a few hundred meters away you dont hose them down? Not always. Why would you assume that every foxhole is occupied. I dont think we should spot the foxhole at all until much closer. Not all foxholes are created equal. Some stand out like dog's nuts, others you could fall into before you saw them, but generally those that have been in continuous use for a time tend to fall into the dog's nuts category. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 2. It is still impossible to ambush from or get ambushed from an enemy non AI) in a foxhole as the foxholes themselves give away the positions. Are there any plans for a more camouflage foxhole? You might be affected by a possible bug that only seems to be occurring on certain systems. Check this thread and help test: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=103276 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pak40 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 Jon, Ask yourself, what's the difference between a spotting HQ unit standing 10m from the Mortar team and a member of the mortar team doing the spotting themselves (whether it's from 10m or exactly at the mortar itself)? The answer is absolutely none. In both cases the spotter is within shouting distance of the mortar. In fact, it should be quicker for the HQ to spot for the mortar team because all the members of the mortar team can do their job and the fact that the HQ is more experienced at spotting and relaying distance etc... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 Ah, good point. I'll make the suggestion that direct firing of the 60mm mortar should be slowed down so it's consistent with the time taken to conduct an indirect mission. Happy? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger33 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 If anything, mortars doing direct fire should be less accurate, take longer, etc. Even when playing RT against the AI, a direct fire mortar can wipe out half a squad before you even know what's happening. For game balance, I have grown to not really mind the long delays. Combining the omniscient spotting of the player with shorter delays would make mortars even more deadly than they already are. I know, in WW2 mortars and artillery accounted for most of the casualties, BUT the guy calling it in wasn't seeing the battlefield from the sky and generally didn't know the precise location of the enemy. My only combat experience is on the paintball field but even there, chaos and confusion reigns supreme. You're lucky if you can even keep track of your teammates, much less being able to see exactly where the enemy is. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlowMotion Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 In the game you know accurately -your own position -often your enemy's exact position and detailed info about what kind of unit it is (floating icons, UI's info panel help quite a bit) -range to target And thus can make much better decisions on how to use arty. I think in almost all real cases knowing these as accurately as we do in the game would involve considerable delays and often exact enemy info would be available only from soldiers that are dead or surrendered. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanzfeld Posted March 27, 2012 Author Share Posted March 27, 2012 JonS, You do not qualify yourself very well if you still think that communication over a radio is done with the same speed and clarity as communication face to face. You simply cannot look at your 60mm mortar man and say "Johnson! Give me HE bearing 350 at 250 yards!" over the radio. I am not going to dismiss what the real 60mm mortarman from WW2 said as the amount of time it took until FFE (1 minute). He was there. He knows. Not every story from a vet is anecdotal. I mean we are talking about setting a direction and range relayed from a guy 10 meters away and dropping a bomb into a tube. I am not a 60mm mortarman but I know I could do that in 20 seconds flat with a setup mortar. Maybe I have a bug with my foxholes. Thanks for the thread AKD. I will look into it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pak40 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 Ah, good point. I'll make the suggestion that direct firing of the 60mm mortar should be slowed down so it's consistent with the time taken to conduct an indirect mission. Happy? You seem to think that the 60mm mortar is some complicated weapon that needs a calculator and several minutes in order to get the first shot off. Any trained mortar crew is going to know the elevation of the tube by memory for any given distance. It's why they train. It is literally a quick adjustment of two knobs on the mortar and then you can fire the first spotting round. In reality it's not much different than an AT gun. You certainly don't think that it takes several minutes to adjust and fire an AT gun, do you? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xian Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 I have to agree about the foxholes - they are a bit of a giveaway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.