Cover Armour Arc

[Brindlewolf]

My first experience where this button is needed.Never really worried about it before until now.To cut a long story short-playing the German Campaign from original game.Basically it's the mission where you have to secure the N road and then exit map one before hitting the main village i think.

Anyway,have 2 Panthers holding middle of map with infantry doing bounding overwatch up each side of the map.Suddenly on the left flank the Allies begin a counter-attack with a Sherman 76 and 4 to 5 half tracks filled with infantry.So i move a Panther up on the left,if i get first shot off it's a turkey shoot.Anyway Panther moves up to engage with visual on all the Allies stuff and i do get the first shot..............at a f****** jeep.76 fires,one dead Panther,along with its infantry umbrella.That's the left flank screwed and the game because my Panthers are holding off a right flank attack.I won't win now.

Just annoying,nicely executed little move,arc set and everything ,ruined because my veteran SS TC is a total dumbass and hates jeeps.

[mjkerner]

Just annoying,nicely executed little move,arc set and everything ,ruined because my veteran SS TC is a total dumbass and hates jeeps.

I feel your pain Brindlewolf, but that made me laugh!

[zmoney]

Haha that was a pretty funny story. Even worse when u have an ATG in a perfect ambush spot only for him to give his position away by firing at infantry.

[skogtroll]

Heheheh soldiers in CM are a cosmic idiots:D. I had a few similar situations especially with ATG's and shrecks (dammed assistant). Last time I was trying to kill tank commander with my marksman but instead of one shoot one kill I got a mp40 barrage fire:P.

[Hister]

He he, what a funny read! Fine polishing of the game is needed, some features are sorely missing - that we can all agree upon

[skogtroll]

Yes but I think this shouldn't be very difficult for BF to fix this or make some improvement. I hope they will do it and do wall:).

[womble]

Yes but I think this shouldn't be very difficult for BF to fix this or make some improvement. I hope they will do it and do wall:).

I agree that it looks like that sort of targeting decision suggests that the "priority" lists of units could benefit from some tweaking. It might be that the order of appearance of targets is given too much weight, or the range, over the "intended purpose" (to combat armour) of the systems in question.

[dieseltaylor]

As so much of CMBN's vehicle code seems to be CMSF ported it maybe that light vehicles are assumed to be potentially ATGM armed. I am guessing - obviously. : )

[WinOrLose]

While they are at it add a "fire ATG only" button. My anti tank team snuck up on a Stuart and I issued an attack order. They fired their faust which only damaged the tank. Rather than take cover they stood in plain view firing thier rifles until the turret rotated and blew them to pieces.

[Lanzfeld]

While they are at it add a "fire ATG only" button. My anti tank team snuck up on a Stuart and I issued an attack order. They fired their faust which only damaged the tank. Rather than take cover they stood in plain view firing thier rifles until the turret rotated and blew them to pieces.[/quote

On the turn that you choose to attack that tank try this.

Target the tank with a 10 second pause then fast away to cover out of LOS. If it kills the tank fine. f not, they will run away.

[WinOrLose]

I thought about that but sometimes they take longer than anticipated to fire.

[womble]

I thought about that but sometimes they take longer than anticipated to fire.

I generally feel that if they're going to be futzing about in the open for more than 10-15s, I'd rather they scurried off with the job undone than hang around to be spotted and mowed down like victims. While you can't guarantee they won't be spotted if they don't let rip with the Faust, you can be damn sure they will be once they have, so some sort of "getting the flock out of Dodge" order is almost always a good idea. If the tank is buttoned, the small arms in the team/squad won't open up on it, so you won't be actively giving your position away til the AT Rocket goes "woosh".

[YankeeDog]

My gratuitous swing at the carcass of this dead equine:

At this point, I've mostly learned to compensate for the lack of a Cover Armor Arc command via careful placement, creative use of regular Cover Arcs, Pause, Face and Hide commands, etc.

By MY GOD it's a pain in the ass... requires far more micromanagement that I want to have to do to get realistic behavior out of a unit.

It's not a "game breaker" for me -- I love CMBN and play regularly with much enjoyment. But if there was ONE major feature I would add to the current game engine, it would be a Cover Armor Arc command, or something that gives similar functionality.

[umlaut]

It's not a "game breaker" for me -- I love CMBN and play regularly with much enjoyment. But if there was ONE major feature I would add to the current game engine, it would be a Cover Armor Arc command, or something that gives similar functionality.

I

agree

completely

[skogtroll]

At this point, I've mostly learned to compensate for the lack of a Cover Armor Arc command via careful placement, creative use of regular Cover Arcs, Pause, Face and Hide commands, etc.

I personally hate enforced substitutes like this. This not a game breaker okey, but I probably will not buy a CW module before I see the next modules fix some things:(.

[womble]

I personally hate enforced substitutes like this. This not a game breaker okey, but I probably will not buy a CW module before I see the next modules fix some things:(.

Generally, modules aren't intended to add new "gameplay" features, so even though I've not got it myself, I'm pretty confident CW won't be fixing anything like Cover Armour Arcs, and the earliest we'll see any sort of changes like that will be the Bulge title, which will have engine and, apparently, interface changes.

[skogtroll]

Generally, modules aren't intended to add new "gameplay" features, so even though I've not got it myself, I'm pretty confident CW won't be fixing anything like Cover Armour Arcs, and the earliest we'll see any sort of changes like that will be the Bulge title, which will have engine and, apparently, interface changes.

So my adventures with CM:BfN ends here? It is time to find new game:P. Did anyone from BF said that the Bulge will have a new engine? If didn't I don't think that this will change.

[YankeeDog]

I personally hate enforced substitutes like this. This not a game breaker okey, but I probably will not buy a CW module before I see the next modules fix some things:(.

I'd love to be wrong on this, but I have to agree with Womble -- I think it's highly unlikely we'll see Cover Armor Arc functionality added to CMx2 before the next major game release (i.e., CM:Battle of the Bulge).

Guess I'm just a glass half-full guy -- I can live without it for now and don't mind paying a few bucks for modules of CMBN that mostly just give me fun new units and scenarios to play.

If some sort of armor-only targeting doesn't make into the game for CM:Bulge, though, then I will throw a hissy fit.

For now, I think one thing that would help the lack of a CAA a bit would be if they toned down chance that the AI for AT-primary weapons teams will decide to target enemy infantry at long range. Talking about ATGs, 'shrecks, and 'zooks here.

As of v1.10, I'm still seeing AT Guns decide to shoot HE (or even AP, if the gun doesn't have any HE) at spotted enemy infantry at ranges of 350m or greater. IMHO this should should not happen unless the player specifically orders it with a Target order. It would be far easier to manage AT guns if they only weren't so happy to reveal their gun position by shooting at enemy infantry that is too far away to be an immediate threat. Absent other orders, I think AT Guns should hold fire on enemy infantry until the infantry is pretty close -- probably ~200m or so. At this point, the gun probably should open up as a self-defense reaction.

In addition to making management of AT Guns easier for the human player, I actually think this would also make the Computer player a more challenging opponent. Right now, it's really easy to goad the computer player into revealing his AT Guns by dangling a few infantry scout teams in front of them. I'll trade a couple of riflemen for an AT Gun any day of the week...

Similar deal with 'shrecks and 'zooks -- while it seem like this may have been toned down a bit, it still seems rocket AT teams are way too eager to loose their very limited rocket ammo at enemy infantry. In some situations (e.g., enemy infantry in buildings), using rocket weapons on infantry makes sense. But it seems a little much right now to me.

[YankeeDog]

So my adventures with CM:BfN ends here? It is time to find new game:P. Did anyone from BF said that the Bulge will have a new engine? If didn't I don't think that this will change.

According to BFC, CM:Bulge will be a "New Game Family". AIUI, this means major new features and improvements to the game engine and user interface will be incorporated. But the basic foundation will probably still be the same CMx2 code. That is, they're not planning on starting from scratch and building a completely new code base.

Whether you call this a "New Engine" or not is largely semantics. It's definitely an "upgraded engine", at the least.

[skogtroll]

Interesting:). I am wondering what "new Game Family" phrase really means. Well we will see. My kingdom for modder tools (after last module of course:)!.

[ExurbanKevin]

I'd love a "Cover Armor/Cover Infantry/Cover All" option as well. I'm tired of my infantry wasting ammo and revealing their location by blazing way with small arms at buttoned-up tanks. AFV's and light vehicles? Maybe. But a Kar98k ain't punching through the front armor of a M5A1, no matter how much Jerry wants it to happen.

[womble]

I'd love a "Cover Armor/Cover Infantry/Cover All" option as well. I'm tired of my infantry wasting ammo and revealing their location by blazing way with small arms at buttoned-up tanks. AFV's and light vehicles? Maybe. But a Kar98k ain't punching through the front armor of a M5A1, no matter how much Jerry wants it to happen.

They don't. Blaze away at buttoned up tanks. Not any more (if they ever did), unless you specifically target the tank (which is, granted, a weakness when you're talking about AT teams, and not addressable by Cover Armour). Is your game patched? They do continue to fire on a tank that has just buttoned up, to the same degree that AT weapons sometimes continue to fire on a target they've destroyed "to make sure".

[ExurbanKevin]

They do continue to fire on a tank that has just buttoned up, to the same degree that AT weapons sometimes continue to fire on a target they've destroyed "to make sure".

I'm running CMBN with the patch on OSX.

The issue shows up the most with "A New Dawn", and I now that I think about it, it may be because the Germans saw an M5A1 unbuttoned, started shooting and then because of the darkness, they couldn't see that the tank is now unaffected.

[mjkerner]

They don't. Blaze away at buttoned up tanks. Not any more (if they ever did), unless you specifically target the tank (which is, granted, a weakness when you're talking about AT teams, and not addressable by Cover Armour).

No kidding? I missed that change...but I never was really too bothered by that anyway.

[womble]

No kidding? I missed that change...but I never was really too bothered by that anyway.

As I mentioned, they may never have, and it was always observer error. When I whinged here about the "brain dead TacAI" giving away positions by firing at my buttoned tanks, Steve told me I wasn't seeing what I thought I was, and looking harder, I could see he was right. And the same TacAI is used by our pTruppen, so it follows that if we think we see it, we might be mistaken. Certainly BFC have said they shouldn't, so if you are certain a unit opens up on a buttoned up tank, save that turn and submit a bug thread to the Tech Support thread, cos sommat's squiffy.