Wish List....

[ctid98]

Here are just a few things I'd like to see added or changed in the game.

1) A sustained fire button for machine gun teams. We have the Target and Target Light buttons which are great, but I'd like to see my HMG's that have a couple thousand rounds of ammo firing off more than 6-8 round bursts. So, what I would suggest is having a toggle button for sustained fire like the Hide and Open Up that is either on or off, when off the teams fire as they do now, when on they fire 15 - 20 round bursts or maybe more, now the gun teams can defend an area of the map well or suppress the enemy when on the attack.

2) QB selection for the AI. This is the only way I really play the game, not into online games and don't care the the campaigns much, but it's being ruined by the AI not picking balanced forces, usually it's a company of tanks, a FO, mortars and machine guns and thats it, the only ways to change this is either pick the AI force myself (doesn't leave much suspense after that) or limit the AI to Infantry or Mech troops. I don't mind the AI having tanks but the force has to be balanced. If this is too difficult to code use the selection process for CMBO, or even have set forces already hard coded that get selected randomly as a short term fix.

3) Flavour objects. I'd like to see a few more of these such as civilian vehicles, railroad buildings or even planes to simulate airfields, lets push the boat out a little here.

4) Fortifications on QB maps. It would be good to be able to design QB maps but have fortifications on them too, the AI has no idea how to set them up, rarely even takes them, it could do with a helping hand, this would be one way to do it as well as give maps a new feel.

5) Minefield size. How big are they??? In CMBO when you positioned a minefield you could see how large it was so you could cover the maximum area, now though I have no idea how large an area it covers, this would be good to have back on the setup.

6) AI Deployment. I've seen many times the AI set up behind houses with zero view or behind a hedge instead of "in" it so that it can see through. Is there any way the AI could be give a helping hand? When designing a QB map you allocate the deployment zones, perhaps a new setup zone that indicates to the AI this would be a good place for a tank or AT asset?

These are the things I'd like 1 and 2 definitely the rest would be nice to have, any thoughts?

CTID98

[Sublime]

+1

The sustained fire especially. Im not a game programmer - I have no idea if this would be easy to code or not. But by my logic, it seems that they must have entered some sort of number for the amount of bullets fired per machine gun burst. It'd be nice if this could be randomized a little - 7-10 one burst, 4-8 the next, so on and so forth. The sustained fire option should definitely be added however - as it is now, water cooled MGs lose the advantage they would have in situations like that, and also things like the MG42s rapid barrel change capability arent as important. I very much think IRL the machine guns would be spitting out a lot more lead than they do now, and if this was increased in game I think it'd be more realistic and make them more useful.

As it is now I find HMG teams a little.. unnecessary. Unless its a US .50 Cal. I cant seem to ever end up in a scenario with a vickers yet, in fact I just saw my first today but it was my opponents =(

With the Germans though, the squads all have MG 42s, and they're basically about just as useful to me as the HMG teams, which always seem to get pretty cut up to due their large size and inability to split. The HMGs might be more accurate ( i notice the barrel climb with the LMG 42s all the time ) but they still dont pump out near as many rounds as they could and this negates a lot of their use.

[womble]

But by my logic, it seems that they must have entered some sort of number for the amount of bullets fired per machine gun burst. It'd be nice if this could be randomized a little - 7-10 one burst, 4-8 the next...

MG crews were, if I recall the last time I saw this thread crop up correctly, trained to use short bursts. I'm sure someone with either citable sources or personal experience will pipe up if I'm wrong. In general units fire off their ammo more rapidly if they're given (or the AI selects) a direct target (as opposed to area fire) or if they're closer to the target, and more likely to hit (and a bit more desperate to kill it before it kills them). Since MMGs and HMGs are meant to be used for long ranges really, they don't often get seen flipping the switch to "rock and roll" in-game, and AIUI, this actually represents RL doctrine.

...as it is now, water cooled MGs lose the advantage they would have in situations like that, and also things like the MG42s rapid barrel change capability arent as important...

I've never seen an animation for a barrel change. I suspect such things are abstracted.

I very much think IRL the machine guns would be spitting out a lot more lead...I think it'd be more realistic...

That may be what you think, but you may equally well be mistaken. If you can produce some sort of reference to back up your assertion, you might be in with a better chance of influencing a change.

...and make them more useful.

For me, the most useful thing about the MMG/HMG is the amount of ammo available. You can get all the continuous area effect fire you want out of a mounted MG. Try that trick with an LMG and you'll run dry in 5 minutes or less.

The HMGs might be more accurate...

There's that too.

...but they still dont pump out near as many rounds as they could and this negates a lot of their use.

Only it doesn't. If the MG42 (tripod mount) was used as a bullet hose, with that monster Cyclic RoF, it would run dry real fast, for very little additional effect. It doesn't matter whether 4 bullets fly over that cowering squad's head, or 40, they're still cowering and likely to stay that way. At 4 bullets a burst you can keep them pinned for 10 times as long.

I find MMG/HMG very useful indeed. If you don't, perhaps you've not found out what they're good for yet?

I'll admit that the German HMG teams are pretty vulnerable, with 6 bods crammed into an action square, but it does mean the opposition have to kill 6 guys before the gun stops speaking, as opposed to 3-4 for other MMG/HMG teams.

[BadgerDog]

MG crews were, if I recall the last time I saw this thread crop up correctly, trained to use short bursts. I'm sure someone with either citable sources or personal experience will pipe up if I'm wrong.

Yes, correct, at least as I was trained on the .30 Cal Browning MG.

Barrels burnt out fast on sustained fire and also suffered from inaccuracy under high heat.

For timing purposes, we were trained to say the phrase to ourselves "son of a bitch" as we pulled and released the trigger, holding the trigger down as long as it took to say the phrase ...

Regards,

Doug

[fry30]

For timing purposes, we were trained to say the phrase to ourselves "son of a bitch" as we pulled and released the trigger, holding the trigger down as long as it took to say the phrase ...

That's awesome.

[Pak40]

1) I think we all would like to see this but I also think some serious changes would have to be made in order for this to work. As it is now the game does not track each weapon's temperature(to my knowledge). And, as you pointed out, some weapons have special ability to cool or change barrels. This would all have to be coded individually for each automatic weapon. Even more, the ammo for each squad is abstracted into a shared pool. If MG42s start spitting out a lot more ammo then you'll have entire squads running dry prematurely. The ammo tracking would have to be on an individual basis.

2) I think this is one of the biggest issues with the QB system. I hoped that it would have been improved in the CW updates but my hopes were dashed. But, I'd have to advise you that if QBs are the only way you play the game then you're really missing out. The AI plans in the QB missions are very basic at best. Game supplied battles and user made battles offer the best single player game play. Campaigns are just as good.

3) Would be nice but I think this is last thing on BF's list to improve. After all, it's nothing but eye candy.

4) I agree.

5) Minefields are 8x8m each. Of course, most designers will cluster a bunch of these to make a more comprehensive mine field. If you open up editor and play around with it you'll see learn some specifics about how things are placed on the map.

6) This is solely on the scenario designer, the one responsible for painting setup zones and developing AI plans (movement orders). All the tools are already in place for a scenario designer to do the things you ask.

[Fūrinkazan]

I saw a very interresting movie on the National Geo channel.

it was a documentary about automatic weapons.

They made a test with 2 experimented hmg gunners from the British army if i remember well.

With 250 bullets against 250 ballons :

first the ballons are in line in front of the hmg : only 30 ballons "killed" with 250 bullets.

then with the hmg in the flank : 240 ballons were hit with 250 bullets.

So the placement of the hmg is very important.

The fire is not precise and you have to target in the mass of the ennemy (and the demonstration was made by an experimented gunner) If you fire against a line, you'll have to target each man and most bullets goes between (only 30 hits with 250 bullets and that were fixed targets)

I did a test with a company of 125 men charging 5 mg bunkers. To reproduce the flank effect i attacked in column. i lost 58 kia and 51 wia and all the squads were panicked. the best results by hmg were from the left to right :

17 hits, 22 hits, 24 hits, 33 hits, 13 hits.

the best results were from hmgs in the middle that were able to shoot through the column.

for the rate of fire, in the test they used short burst, like in the game, but with less delay, maximum 2 seconds i think.

In the game you'll have to wait 4 and up to 7.8 seconds between bursts and i think that's were the problem comes.

I found a soviet infantry tactics book the rate of fire of soviets hmgs :

the practical rates are 250-300 for heavy 7.62 hmgs, 300-310 for the DS-39,

250-300 for the sg-43

we should expect something like this in the game but :

if i'm not wrong, bursts are 4 to 8 bullets

the delay is 3 to 12 seconds between each burst

during most tests i did in the past i could have at most 12 burst minutes :

12 x 10 bullets max = 120 rpm for a hmg 42

I don't think the game is totally wrong but the delay between bursts should be reduced to have a more realistic result. (remember i had 5 hmgs against 125 men running in the open)

You can have good results but only under 100 m. during a QB on hmg 42 started to shoot every second because the enemy squad was at less than 90 m . So during that time, the hmg practical rate was about 420 rpm.

so the game can do it.

My opinion is that for german hmgs the practical rate of fire should be around 400rpm and 250 300 for allied ones.

we will not have a new order in the game because it's a new feature, but i think that BFC could change data so that hmgs can have less delay between bursts.

With the new patch the game was greatly improved, for exemple, now snipers are deadly, much more than before.

I see 3 problems :

Pistols too accurate at more than 50 m (and the super tank crews)

Smg like mp40 are shooting at a too long range, i still see mp40 shooting at almost 300 m (50 to 100m max should be better i think)

the Hmg burst delay.

[Crushingleeek]

friendly casualty summaries at the end of each WEGO turn.

[Panzerfest]

friendly casualty summaries at the end of each WEGO turn.

+1 Good Idea!!

[Erwin]

Once again, it would be great to have the results for each unit available every turn as we had in CM1.

I understand why things changed, cos they were funded by Aussie DoD who wanted a sim not a "game" and so a lot of the gamer-helpful features had to go. But, now, I think the commitment has swung back to satisfying gamers rather than milpros (at least until CM3), so it would be great to have some of those CM1 aid features back (not that I am holding my breath).

[Mord]

Not having bodies disappear from vehicles when they are KIA or WIA...You never have any idea what's happened to guy in or on vehicles and bunkers if you don't see it right as it happens...For instance you AT LEAST get red dots for guys inside vehicles but once that vehicle is knocked out you don't have access to anything that happened to it...besides it's done.

Be nice if they'd put bodies around a vehicle when they are hit while on it (Halftracks and the like) and not black out info for dead tanks when they are done.

Mord.

[Vanir Ausf B]

1) Lynx available in QBs.

2) M21 and M4a1 mortar halftracks too!

[Newa]

Squad formations. I'm entirely sick of watching my squads walk in a single file line.

If this game truly has a real POV spotting system then you need formations. Atleast the wedge and line formation.

[slysniper]

Squad formations. I'm entirely sick of watching my squads walk in a single file line.

If this game truly has a real POV spotting system then you need formations. Atleast the wedge and line formation.

BOY DO I SECOND THAT.

Just made a mistake the other day, sent a 6 man tean running across the street to try and get a faust shot on the rear of a tank. Hoping not to move into any enemy fire since that side of the road had not been scouted. needed to be fast so that a enemy tank covering the road did not get a shot on them.

Low and behold, a man pops up at a building window across the street and fires away , getting all 6 men since they were in a perfect line running towards him.Yes, bad decision, but multiplied since the unit does not move in any military fashion.

[Newa]

staggered column would of came in handy me thinks

[Childress]

Squad formations. I'm entirely sick of watching my squads walk in a single file line.

If you break up their movement by plotting waypoints on the way to their destination they will reform and spread out. Be resourceful!

[Crushingleeek]

If you break up their movement by plotting waypoints on the way to their destination they will reform and spread out. Be resourceful!

but then they pause and wait for every individual to reach their endpoint before moving onto the next waypoint, which sucks when you are in sort of a hurry

[Ryujin]

But then they have to stop and sort themselves out at each waypoint and at best all you get is a tactical blob. You can also split up squads and move the fire teams in formation, but that multiplies the micromanagement and still doesn't address te teams themselves.

You shouldn't have to fight the game to get some basic formations.

Also, I'd like for my troops to be able to use building corners and other objects as cover (ideally you'd mark all the corners and etc with points for AI).

And of course the number one on my wishlist is adding enemy AI.

[Lt Belenko]

My wish list:

A new module every month.

A new game every 4 months.

Eastern Front before Bulge.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Functional anti-aircraft weapons.

[Pak40]

If you break up their movement by plotting waypoints on the way to their destination they will reform and spread out. Be resourceful!

I agree with this method. Yes it takes a few seconds more; but, if you're in a hurry (i.e., under heavy fire) then you shouldn't be sprinting a full squad across a field anyway.

Also, the Assault command works very well for spreading your squad out although it takes a long time for movement. But, if you're not into the whole micro management thing of splitting your squads up then this is the way to go.

[ridge]

Sound options. I really hate having to "mod" out ambient sound. Please make options in sound settings.

[womble]

...split up squads and move the fire teams in formation, but that multiplies the micromanagement...

As far as I'm concerned it's a team-level game, so splitting squads is just breaking up "administrative" units into the units the game's meant to be played with.

...and still doesn't address te teams themselves...

Tru dat, and ideally you'd have the option to have teams in v, -, \ or / lines.

Also, I'd like for my troops to be able to use building corners...

Most of the time my pTruppen seem to use corners fairly well, staying on the 'safe' side of them if the corner's in the Action Square they've been told to stop in and firing round it with one or two at a time. Or did you mean something beyond that?

[Vanir Ausf B]

Your pixeltruppen fire around corners? As in: pop out, fire, then pop back in cover? I don't think mine ever do that. Wouldn't that require them to be able to "remember" an enemy out of LOS, which I don't think they can?

[womble]

Your pixeltruppen fire around corners? As in: pop out, fire, then pop back in cover? I don't think mine ever do that. Wouldn't that require them to be able to "remember" an enemy out of LOS, which I don't think they can?

I don't think they pop out and back, but they look/fire round corners and I see bullets ricocheting off the corner of the house that would have gone through the mass of the team if the house wasn't in the way. Or at least I think I do. Maybe I'll go back and watch the last few minutes of my most recent scenario just to check.

Edit: and it appears that I have been deluding myself. The example I remembered they were shooting round/through a hedge, not a wall, and I couldn't get any of 3 teams to shoot round a corner. I'll keep looking as I play, cos I'm sure I've seen it, but it's obviously not something that's "commonplace", probably needs some special geometry of target-wall-team, if it happened at all.