fatherof4 Posted August 24, 1999 Share Posted August 24, 1999 I doubt that a MG team would surrender to long distance, albeit voluminous, small arms fire. Is this just a gaming thing to show that they have panicked and will no longer return fire? To me, the latter is totally believable. If the former happened and I would imagine they would be shot anyway because there would be no way of accepting their surrender. Is my opinion based on reality or just what I've seen in novels & movies? BTW, do you get more, same, or less victory points for surrendering units? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted August 24, 1999 Share Posted August 24, 1999 MARTIN DON@T READ THIS MESSAGE.. S P O I L E R A L E R T That single MG team which was left all by itself (with no leaders anywhere around it to motivate it) was being fired on by over 40 German infantry soldiers and 1 German HMG team .. In other words that MG team was being fired at by enough firepower to stop an infantry platoon in its tracks. Thus it hit the ground. once it figured that there was nothing it could do to fight back and that all it was going to do was die in place it surrendered. FWIW I've seen how units behave under fire in CM and the volume of fire per unit time has a HUGE impact on the decision to surrender or not. If the unit takes 5 casualties in 10 seconds it very well might surrender but if it takes 5 casualties in 2 minutes then it'll fight on as hard as ever. In this case the MG had many things going against it: 1. No leader nearby to stiffen it (at least I didn't see any). 2. MASSIVE volume of incoming fire. 3. It was in clear LOS of the enemy. It's only options were to surrender or die. I would have surrendered, just like it did, if I'd been placed in its position. Turn 3 contains another interesting surrender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted August 24, 1999 Share Posted August 24, 1999 Martin... still don't read this Uhm Fionn... you forgot about your little vehicle coming down the northen wooded road. The shell craters in and around the MG are a dead give away that a little more than rifle fire was being aimed at the MG Another factor that caused the MG to surrender was that there were NO friendly units WHAT-SO-EVER nearby. This really freaks units out So if there had been two rifle squads nearby it probably wouldn't have surrendered. HOWEVER... We do think that it gave up a wee bit too easily for the distance (about 100m) from the nearest enemy unit. While this most certainly did happen in real life, it was more common for the unit to try and run away. In this case the team would have abandoned its MG and got the heck out of there Charles made a tweak that should take range into account a little more heavily than it did in this game. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolColJ Posted August 24, 1999 Share Posted August 24, 1999 Steve> We do think that it gave up a wee bit too easily for the distance (about 100m) from the nearest enemy unit. While this most certainly did happen in real life, it was more common for the unit to try and run away. In this case the team would have abandoned its MG and got the heck out of there My exact thoughts CCJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike D Posted August 24, 1999 Share Posted August 24, 1999 I thought this unit surrendered way too easily as well. Considering there are not enemny units in the immediate vicinity for it to surrender to it doesn't seem to make much sense. Would make much more sense for it to break and run or just go to ground and find the best cover and cower. Sounds like you are already working on a fix though. And BTW, IMHO folks should stick to posting comments regarding the battle in their appropriate places so: 1) I and everyone else don't have to go looking all over for them and more importantly, 2) Fionn or Martin don't come out here reading on the board and accidently run across something that they shouldn't see! Regards, Mike D aka Mikester Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Los Posted August 24, 1999 Share Posted August 24, 1999 I don't feel that they went down too easily given their isolated position and massive fire against them. 100 meters is not that far away. If you are going to surrender, the longer you wait (meaning the closer the enemy has to get fight to surrender to you), the less chance you have to survive. ****, in the gulf, some of them started surrendering as soon as we entered the same time zone! <grin> Of course the may just as well have routed and hauled ass but despite what we watch on TV not everyone is cut out to be Audie Murphy. I wouldn't make any single isolated incident into a design flaw. Los Los Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixman Posted August 25, 1999 Share Posted August 25, 1999 I just want to second Mikester on following the posting protocol. This one should clearly have been in the thread for Steve's eys only. Or maybe a question in Fionn's thread along the lines of, "Were you surprised when Moon's MG crew surrendered so quickly?" No offense intended to Fatherof4 here. Just don't want to set precedent that leads to a trend. But, since we are here -- Steve I did not see an answer to Father's question at the end of his post about points for surrendering units. I'd be interested in knowing how that works too. Thanks ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatherof4 Posted August 25, 1999 Author Share Posted August 25, 1999 At the time, I didn't think I was giving anything away that both players didn't already know. I guess I didn't make it generic enough. Sorry 'bout that guys. No one wants to preserve the FOW for them more than me. I too encourage others to always err on the side of caution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted August 25, 1999 Share Posted August 25, 1999 Well, I'm eagerly awaiting questions in my thread ... I'll leave this one now just in case something I shouldn't see gets posted. BTW feel free to deluge me with questions. I'm logging on every couple of hours to check my thread and answer questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted August 25, 1999 Share Posted August 25, 1999 I'll just wrap this up, the close it up. Discussion can continue in the "Steve" thread if anybody has further questions. I agree with LOS. 100m isn't too much to expect someone to toss up their hands and rush forward (towards the enemy) screaming don't shoot" in whatever language would be most helpful. It *could* have even happened in this case. However, we think the reason it happened was going to be too common in the future. While we don't want to judge anything based on one incident, there have been others that have also made us wonder if a particular value should be tweaked. So Charles tweaked things so the guys are more likely to pack up and go home than to surrender. Still can happen though! As far as points for capturing go... I don't know But it is certainly better to capture guys than to have to kill them. Sure, prisoners present a burdon, but in terms of morale it is much cooler when they toss up their hands and give up than fight to the death! Also, prisoners can be liberated if a nearby friendly unit comes to their aid. Lots and lots of factors determine if this happens, so it is far from automatic. However, the captured guys do NOT get their weapons back. So send 'em to the rear and sigh in relief that you saved some of your own men (and victory points ) Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts