Killkess Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 I always wondered about why it is so hard to efficiently use heavy machine guns in CM2. I recently made some quick test using a setup of HMG 42 against a platoon HQ. Both are regular troops with normal motivation. I setup a firing lane (standard ground in the editor) and let the HQ charge right into the barrel of a MG42 from a distance of 1000m. Without doing statistical analysis this is what the fire looks like (keep in mind that the HMG 42 is mounted an the "Erdziellafette" with 8x/4x magnification): I really wonder how such a shot placement should be possible. The gunner has to aim deliberately away from the target to miss that far: And this behavior is not realy range dependant, while the shooting gets in general nearer to the target, this flick shows the same situation some minutes later when the gunner tried to shot some people lying prone from 200 meters: What really puzzles me is the way the gunner seems to forget his aim each or nearly each burst. Sometimes the bursts seem to get closer to the target as if the gunner is correcting his shots. Then suddenly he completely screws up and shots literally somewhere. Besides all the mechanics behind it one serious question: Who thinks that a group of 4 people should be able to charge up 800 meters in front of a firing HMG before taking the first casualties? I also, at times, could charge the HQ in range to use the garants which in turn took out the HMG. Admitting that this was not the usual outcome thought. Often when it came to discussions about the efficiency of mg fire before, people argued that it is not the main purpose of a mg to kill but to suppress. What suppression are we talking about if a hmg is not capable to suppress 4 guys running in the open? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baneman Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 I admit, I've also seen tripod-MG's miss by so much that I imagined the gunner was some kind of conscripted conscientious-objector. And also thought "surely with the tracers he can walk his shots onto target within 20-40 seconds ?" and sadly, they don't seem capable of that. Certainly at the ranges HMG's are advertised as being effective, I don't see much result at all. Someone posted a quote about how the MG42's high rate of fire was so that enemy could be hit before going to ground/reaching cover. I have definitely not seen it manage that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 Killkess, That's simply appalling. Baneman, I'm that someone you mentioned. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paper Tiger Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 Oh dear God! I just watched the first video and that is truly appalling shooting! I will have to take a close look at this in CMBN 'cos I don't have FI. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFF Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 That really is hideous shooting. Even lower-quality troops wouldn't miss by that much. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 Killkess, Excellent video. That seems very wrong. Savegame? Thanks, Ken 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paper Tiger Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 No save games appear to be necessary. I set up an identical test using CMBN German Grenadiers with a Regular, 0 Leadership MG42 team and it was EXACTLY like watching that video. Try it and see. Or I'll post it up myself. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killkess Posted September 23, 2012 Author Share Posted September 23, 2012 For everyone interested: mgtest.bts Thats not the same test because i´ve not made any savegames when i produced the videos, but it should be fairly easy to replicate. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ithikial_AU Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 That's appalling shooting. Would be interesting to see if that's a bug. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killkess Posted September 23, 2012 Author Share Posted September 23, 2012 What else should it be? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 This is an example of how a well documented bug can get immediate attention and sent up the chain. The screenshot shows the problem. The youtube video makes it painful to watch. Paper Tiger took this and ran with it... He did additional tests to show it's not a one-off issue, but that it may be (probably is) endemic to all German machinegun fire. Next, let's see if it is present for US/CW/Axis machineguns... Regardless, due to the clarity of the presentation of the bug, it has been brought to BF.C's attention. Well done, Killkess. Thanks, Ken 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stikkypixie Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 Thanks beta testing guys for following this up 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Childress Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 Good going, Killkess. Some posters have asserted that the attacking side enjoys a decided advantage in H2H matches. If true, ineffectual MG fire may be a contributing factor. The bugs are mounting up. But one supposes that's an inevitability with a complex system, two programmers and hundreds of gimlet eyed beta testers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hister Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 Paper Tiger is not from the internal team but he has far better chances of being heard then us other champs do. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sublime Posted September 23, 2012 Share Posted September 23, 2012 this is great though. The entire time Ive played this since BN came out Ive noticed how ineffective my MGs seem as compared to historical anecdotes. I also noticed that even though getting an HMG, especially an mg42 should be a stronger choice for defensive positions, it usually doesnt do much better than an LMG version. Only HMG that is truly worth it as it stands in the game now is the 50 cal and thats only because it.s huge round. It.d be fantastic if part of the problem all along has been the mg.s accuracy has been bugged. It excites me to think about how much it.d help if mgs worked more as 'advertised' from my readings, etc. Then the mortars wouldnt be quite the super unit as they once were, or at least there'd be variety in what.s important defensively. I.d also like to throw in that I think at least it'd be nice if the bursts were randomized. 4 rounds one burst, 7 the next, then 5, then 3, etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paper Tiger Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 I ran a further test this morning with the same parameters and the US squad was able to advance to within 400m of the MG unit taking only one casualty. At which point they started returning fire and killing one of the MG team, not the MG gunner. Of course, the MG team goit suppressed quite quickly. The exchange of fire went on for some time with no result for either side. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hister Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 PT, do you plan to notify the devs about this? Maybe it's still time it gets included in the commin patch? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Paper Tiger is not from the internal team but he has far better chances of being heard then us other champs do. Um, this is not exactly an accurate statement. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinnart Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 That's appalling shooting. Would be interesting to see if that's a bug. Lol. Thanks, I need a good laugh 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vinnart Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 I have noticed this too with MG’s, and with rifles ect... Plenty of times I have thought if these guys were real troops they would not get the minimum score to even qualify with their weapons. I have come to the conclusion though that it is the way it is as an abstraction to make the game playable. It probably is a case where extreme realism just may not translate into playability for a game similar to how artillery was in the first cmbn demo, and how it now. The same case probably with small arms. Too accurate ( a few shot for a kill) just might not translate to good playability. That being said I do see the need for more 45 cal availability to be on a more even keel with the Axis availability of 9mm because it takes more shots to get a kill due to abstraction. That, and less deadly pistols are my only real request for changes for small arms. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZPB II Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Vinnart makes a good point. If arms are as deadly and as accurate as in reality, then in order to maintain realistic gameplay, the infantry AI needs to be as good as in reality. This will not happen any time soon. There isn't as much cover and concealment available as in real-life due to technical limitations. Programming an AI as sophisticated as the human brain under stress, I don't even want to think about that one. The animation budget would need to be obscene to accurately model every way in which troops utilise cover available to them. I'd love to see MGs being fixed and I expect I will. But there will always be abstractions. We will just nudge and tweak these abstractions so they portray reality more accurately. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PanzerMike Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Hitlers saw seems to be blunt... The MG42 had a fearsome reputation, but is not very impressive in CM. That has been my experience too. But a clip like this is a revelation. I am curious if this appaling accuracy is intentional (playability?) or a bug. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZPB II Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Hitlers saw seems to be blunt... The MG42 had a fearsome reputation, but is not very impressive in CM. That has been my experience too. But a clip like this is a revelation. I am curious if this appaling accuracy is intentional (playability?) or a bug. I recall that when CMBN came out there was plenty of discussion related to the shortcomings of machineguns, especially machinegun teams in CMx2. I've felt that MGs aren't as much of an area denial weapon as they should be. There are times when an MG burst cuts down a squad in the open but then there seem to be plenty of times when the whole squad escapes unscathed as the entire burst lands somewhere near the next post code. To the last point, I believe it is a bit of both. There may have been an intent to model area denial by spreading the bursts over adjacent action spots, but a glitch causes this effect to become so prominent that it actually lowers the effectiveness of the MG. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hister Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 PT is not an internal developer but an external one. he deals not with the code but with the campaign/scenario/map making. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZPB II Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 PT is not an internal developer but an external one. he deals not with the code but with the campaign/scenario/map making. Paper Tiger is not the only beta tester and external developer in this thread, therefore the statement wasn't exactly accurate. (This might also be an inaccurate statement, since I don't know how deep in the rabbit hole he or she or maybe it is!) 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.