Where is the best place to find weapon ranges?

[Paulverisor64]

In playing the game I've observed that some units show the weapon range while others do not.

Is there an area that this is cataloged? If so I'd like to print this out to go with the rest of the game manual.

[Sublime]

there's a useful mod that will display the weapon's ranges under the picture of the weapon.

as a rule of thumb, SMGs are useless beyond 100m, and realistically I would only use them around 50 m or below. Rifles are good for a few hundred meters. LMGs 100/200 meters. HMGs theoretically longer, but in practice much the same.

The light mortars are where it gets iffy. The Brixia Italian mortar has a max range of 562m IIRC, though I may be off. The US 60 can reach further though... Brit 2 inch as well I believe, though I may be wrong. The 82mm mortars have a long max range for CM purposes.

All the panzerfausts you'll see in the CMx2 games now can only reach to 30m. Bazookas and panzerschrecks, while technically have a max range of 250 meters, are almost useless at that range. The closer definitely the better, though I usually open fire at 100m unless I have a specific ambush in mind.

[eltorrente]

All the panzerfausts you'll see in the CMx2 games now can only reach to 30m. Bazookas and panzerschrecks, while technically have a max range of 250 meters, are almost useless at that range. The closer definitely the better, though I usually open fire at 100m unless I have a specific ambush in mind.

Yeah I'd also recommend not paying attention to the 250 max range for bazookas. They can hit at that range, and occasionally get lucky, but it's best to shoot at less than 100m. At around 100m, a good team can hit maybe half of the time. I always expect them to miss on the first shot. If I can help it, I like to get within 50m before opening up.

[Paulverisor64]

I appreciate both of your help.

I would like to look for the Mod you suggested Sublime as it would be helpful.

It would be nice to have listings of max and effective ranges.

I've been more or less eyeballing it up to this point. Perhaps this has some to do with my lack of effectiveness.

[Sublime]

I forget who made it but its easy to find. look for alternate weapons silhouettes. theres several variants and one has the weapons ranges under the pic. very useful.

[MikeyD]

This is the sort of stuff that once you know it once you know it. Its only for the first few games that you're left guessing. Long range duels between MG42s and Thompson SMGs don't usually end well for the Thompson. You eventually learn attempting to pierce building walls with an M1 carbine from beyond 200m is futile but a .50 cal Browning will make swiss cheese of 'em from across the map.

[umlaut]

I forget who made it but its easy to find. look for alternate weapons silhouettes. theres several variants and one has the weapons ranges under the pic. very useful.

Right here:

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=107081

[dieseltaylor]

I think you should bear in there is real life practical and theoretical ranges and CM ranges. As there have been continual up-dates it is not possible to be categoric on CM's effective ranges but a trawl of the threads will reveal things like a tanks nailed at hundreds of metres by ATG.

MikeyD refers to a Browning piercing building walls across a map in CMX2 which is a rather sad indictment of the Germans bothering to use them for defense in WW2.

This report for the RCMP would also seem to suggest that the Browning modelling may be over-hyped. These tests were at 25m using fixed guns.

http://www.claybrick.ca/pdf/cmri_bulletproof_project.pdf

My gut reaction is that BF have taken a lot of post-war verbiage, and uses against mud buildings, and light conctrete panel buildings, with probably improved ballistics and retro-fitted it to a Europe of substantial stone buildings.

Part of the problem might be this gung-ho film of what modern armaments do to what I would call a shack:

note the range of the test!

but then if we get further away say 300yds

and just for interest

[phil stanbridge]

Look for Marco Bergman's mod either on repository or GAJ's Mod whorehouse.. Just what you asked for, and very nice to boot.

[LukeFF]

Now, if only SMG-armed soldiers would stop wasting their ammo on targets beyond 100 meters...

[phil stanbridge]

Now, if only SMG-armed soldiers would stop wasting their ammo on targets beyond 100 meters...

Are they still doing this?

[YankeeDog]

Are they still doing this?

Yes. Just yesterday I had a Squad leader dump his entire Thompson ammo load (150 rnds). at an enemy unit in good cover ~160m away, without causing a single casualty. Took him about 2 turns.

To a degree, you can split teams and micromanage to control this, but it's still really annoying. Now that other more significant issues are fixed, I really hope they'll revisit this.

IMHO, the best fix probably involves tweaking several things:

(1) IMHO SMGs and especially the .45 ACP American SMGs (which have the poorest long-range performance of any SMGs in the game) are still a bit too willing to open up, especially against enemy 150m+ away in good cover.

(2) In general, there seems to be no low ammo awareness in CMx2. That is, ideally soldiers should become more conservative with ammo as they run low. It may make sense for a Thompson gunner to take a few speculative shots at an enemy 150m away when he's carrying 5 full clips of ammo, but when he's down to only 1-2 clips, this behavior makes less sense.

(3) SMGs are often carried by the Squad Leader. In general, it seems that the game does not currently model in any significant way the additional duties that a squad leader has in a firefight. Ideally, in a firefight, the Squad Leader should modeled as spending a significant amount of time making sure everyone in his squad is in good position, is actually shooting their rifles, reporting contacts up chain to the Plt. HQ and receiving orders from same, etc. This means he would be firing his SMG significantly less, especially when the enemy is relatively distant and his personal weapon isn't that effective anyway.

Edit to add: Experience should matter, too. I think it's perfectly realistic for Conscript or Green SMG gunners to burn ammo firing at marginal targets, especially if their morale is shaky. But the better trained the soldier is, the smarter he should be about how he uses his personal weapon.

[phil stanbridge]

Okay good points, I'll see if this has been raised as an issue with the team.

[womble]

(2) In general, there seems to be no low ammo awareness in CMx2. That is, ideally soldiers should become more conservative with ammo as they run low. It may make sense for a Thompson gunner to take a few speculative shots at an enemy 150m away when he's carrying 5 full clips of ammo, but when he's down to only 1-2 clips, this behavior makes less sense.

Also, SMGs only ever fire 3-8 round (estimated) bursts. I'm sure it was possible to squeeze off just one round, even if they weren't select fire like modern autofire weapons (and the Thompson) are. This exacerbates the problem.

(3) SMGs are often carried by the Squad Leader. In general, it seems that the game does not currently model in any significant way the additional duties that a squad leader has in a firefight. Ideally, in a firefight, the Squad Leader should modeled as spending a significant amount of time making sure everyone in his squad is in good position, is actually shooting their rifles, reporting contacts up chain to the Plt. HQ and receiving orders from same, etc. This means he would be firing his SMG significantly less, especially when the enemy is relatively distant and his personal weapon isn't that effective anyway.

Indeed, the squad leader seems to be coded to try and get the best view of the enemy, which tends to lead to them being in a position to shoot more often than their squad mates... and to be the target of return fire, with predictable consequences.

[womble]

MikeyD refers to a Browning piercing building walls across a map in CMX2 which is a rather sad indictment of the Germans bothering to use them for defense in WW2.

There are walls, and then there are walls. I went back to Normandy this summer, staying in parts that haven't seen much building since the Nineteenth century, and the number of wood framed buildings with tar-papered shingles for walls is quite eye-opening. In contrast, I didn't see a single "stone farmhouse" that could serve as a bunker.

This report for the RCMP would also seem to suggest that the Browning modelling may be over-hyped. These tests were at 25m using fixed guns.

http://www.claybrick.ca/pdf/cmri_bulletproof_project.pdf

The walls that stopped a Ma Deuce are in no way representative of early C20th civilian building styles. Cavity wall is rare pre-war, and concrete brick unheard of. Brick houses probably have a double thickness of brick. So I'd dispute your conclusion that the modelling is overhyped; your evidence doesn't support it.

Oh, and the AK74 shoot represents something a lot more like an M1 .30 Carbine than an M1 .30-06 rifle round.

[Killkess]

Okay good points, I'll see if this has been raised as an issue with the team.

IIRC this issue has been raised many many times starting with CMN 1.0.

If one gives a fire command for a squad the smgs will open up until 250-270m.

[phil stanbridge]

I mean raised as a problem/bug with the beta testing team. Not just on here. Maybe it will be addressed in due course. I can't say I have seen that behaviour recently, but then I've been using mostly rifles

[YankeeDog]

IIRC this issue has been raised many many times starting with CMN 1.0.

If one gives a fire command for a squad the smgs will open up until 250-270m.

I actually don't mind too much if SMGs open up at longer ranges when the team is given a Target order by the player -- to me, this signifies a situation where a team is ordered to go "all out" against that particular target (or area), using any and all weapons that might have an effect, even if said effect is marginal.

However, I must admit that while I don't mind SMGs firing at longer ranges under a direct target order, there are limits, and IMHO 250m+ should probably be out of the range envelope for SMGs except perhaps in the case of rattled conscripts spraying wildly in the direction of enemy movement.

I dunno, if you want my SWAG, I'd say under typical conditions with a trained shooter and assuming good ammo load, Thompsons should start taking occasional single shots or very short bursts at around 150m, and really start rocking and rolling around 100m or slightly under. Maybe add 50m to these figures for units under a direct target order.

MP40s should probably be used at slightly longer ranges than this, since the 9mm round has somewhat better long-range ballistics and also IIRC the MP40's sights were set for a somewhat longer range than the Thompson's.

Not sure about Stens... ballistics are fundamentally the same as MP40 but I'm less familiar with the sighting arrangements of this weapon.

Edit: Also, IIRC, SMG firing behavior was toned down *some* in one of the early patches to CMBN. It just doesn't seem to me that it was toned down enough.

[womble]

I dunno, if you want my SWAG, I'd say under typical conditions with a trained shooter and assuming good ammo load, Thompsons should start taking occasional single shots or very short bursts at around 150m, and really start rocking and rolling around 100m or slightly under. Maybe add 50m to these figures for units under a direct target order.

MP40s should probably be used at slightly longer ranges than this, since the 9mm round has somewhat better long-range ballistics and also IIRC the MP40's sights were set for a somewhat longer range than the Thompson's.

I think those figures for the Thompson are a smidge optimistic, and more like what the 9mm weapons should be doing. I'd knock 50m off the ranges given, for the Tommy gun.

[YankeeDog]

I think those figures for the Thompson are a smidge optimistic, and more like what the 9mm weapons should be doing. I'd knock 50m off the ranges given, for the Tommy gun.

You're possibly right; it's a difficult to make any objective conclusion about this kind of thing and I don't have any personal experience with the weapon to go by.

IIRC, the Thompson's fixed iron sights were zeroed at something like 50 yds., which would make them still somewhat useful out to about twice that. Beyond this, the bullet drop relative to sight picture is going to get pretty extreme and a shooter is basically going to be golfling rounds at the target.

It's also a matter of what you think the "effectiveness threshold" for opening fire should be for small arms absent any Cover Arc order or similar.

Iron-sight rifles will happily open up at ~400m in CMBN, albeit at a fairly slow rate of fire. They're only marginally effective at this range, but riflemen will pop off a round now and then at distant targets, if they manage to spot something this far away. So I figure an SMG gunner letting off the occasional single shot or carefully aimed burst at ~150m would be a reasonable parallel to this. But I'll freely admit this is a SWAG.

[Vanir Ausf B]

I mean raised as a problem/bug with the beta testing team. Not just on here. Maybe it will be addressed in due course. I can't say I have seen that behaviour recently, but then I've been using mostly rifles

This is from the CMBN 1.01 Readme:

Soldier Behavior

* Soldiers are less likely to use SMGs at longer ranges.

So yeah, the issue has been raised. But "less likely" must mean they reduced the frequency from 100% of the time to 90% of the time because I still see SMGs fire at targets up to at least 200m.

[JonS]

The problem here is, I think, that by and large this issue is heavily context dependant. It's not hard to come up with cases where an SMG should be used at 250m, and it's just as easy to come up with cases where they should not be used at 25m. Coding a robust and flexible TacAI that suits all circumstances is possible, I suppose, but I doubt it'd be easy or only take a few minutes. Given that this has already been addressed once, I doubt it'll get a very high priority to be looked at again.

Which basically means that I think you have to accept that there'll be times when your p-truppen will use their weapons in ways you think are sub-optimal. Which, funnily enough, isn't all that unrealistic.

[dieseltaylor]

My father-in-law says the Sten was great if the enemy was in the room with you. But I think he exaggerates,

It was a weapon designed for a specific purpose and given inaccuracy at anything over 50m it would seem remarkably stupid to draw attention to yourself when facing enemy with more accurate weapons and over 50m away.

Womble - As for the incidence of wooden framed buildings in Normandy I do think MikeyD was talking CMFI though and he makes no distinction as to building material.

However if you wish to discuss building methods and buildings in France and Normandy in particular I am fine with that. Perhaps if you could narrow down which part of Normandy - I am guessing the Normande Suisse.

I have stayed in a few older French properties and one cottage I particularly recall near Le Mans had a main beam in the kitchen was 2'X2' by about 5 metres , and window embrasures of at least 18', massive stone lintels over door , window and fireplace.

As for tar paper shingles are you sure they are not cut and trimmed slate? Slate being lightish and durable I would think much more likely. Wooden shingles have a lifespan of around 100 years or less so even if wood originally slate makes an excellent rain barrier replacement.

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=98368&highlight=bricks

which is a thread with some figures. Unfortunately the 0.5" is not mentioned but the figures are at 100m which I regards as quite close. MikeyD was suggesting firing across a map ....

[YankeeDog]

The problem here is, I think, that by and large this issue is heavily context dependant. It's not hard to come up with cases where an SMG should be used at 250m, and it's just as easy to come up with cases where they should not be used at 25m. Coding a robust and flexible TacAI that suits all circumstances is possible, I suppose, but I doubt it'd be easy or only take a few minutes. Given that this has already been addressed once, I doubt it'll get a very high priority to be looked at again.

Which basically means that I think you have to accept that there'll be times when your p-truppen will use their weapons in ways you think are sub-optimal. Which, funnily enough, isn't all that unrealistic.

This is a very good point and worth remembering.

With this said, I can think of all sorts of incidents where I have watched SMGs burn ammo at ranges where they are clearly ineffective. But I can't think of a single incident in any CMBN game I have played where good-order soldier (i.e., unsupressed, etc.) with an SMG hasn't fired, when I would have wanted him to.

So I think the balance is off. I'd happily accept an occasional incident of an SMG gunner not opening up when he probably should, if the incidents of SMGs rapidly and ineffectively burning off ammo at long range could be substantially reduced. Variance on both ends of the spectrum, not just all on one side.

I'll totally agree that occasionally seeing "sub-optimal" or "unexpected" behavior in the game isn't unrealistic. But when a certain behavior is frequently and consistently wrong in the same way, I think it's an issue that should be looked at.

[dieseltaylor]

It's not hard to come up with cases where an SMG should be used at 250m,

!!

Really? I must admit apart from intentionally trying to distract the enemy I can think of no good cases to fire at 250m. For that matter bad reasoning would be a push at that range as even the most inept soldier would surely realise the futility of it.

So exampleS please.