noob Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 After reading the posts on HMG fire effects in CMBN i was curious to see what the weapon was like in an ideal situation for it, so i ran a test, i placed a platoon of Regular UK infantry with Normal motivation, 0 leadership, and Fit, at one end of a 1000m x 325m default flat grass map, the weather was clear, warm and dry, there was no wind, and the time was 9 o'clock in the morning. I then gave the platoon a quick move order to move to a low bocage hedgerow at the opposite end of the map, behind that hedge was a Regular Heer HMG team, with Normal motivation, and 0 leadership. Every test showed that the HMG was useless at inflicting casualties and suppression, so much so that the UK infantry could happily lie down and rest without going on hide, then get up and continue the attack unruffled, also at no point did i order any suppression fire against the HMG, not even from the 2 inch mortar, and everytime the UK infantry got to the hedge with less than a handful of casualties. I would appreciate it if other people ran similar tests and posted the results, as at the moment, IMO, the HMG is useless, and definitely needs tweaking. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fizou Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 In my experience all HMG gives you the same result in CMx2. The result difference between CMBO and CMBB come to mind, it feels like we are back to CMBO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sublime Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 +1 bump bump 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil stanbridge Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 I'm not so sure personally that there is a significant problem with this. Don't forget the different circumstances you will find yourself under during combat and how certain things change under duress. You've also got to factor in different terrain types and how the MG's are positioned. All this is much more detailed and accurate in the new games. Are they in a position to suppress in the first place for instance, or is it literally spraying an area indirectly. Tests will only show so much in my opinion. In my campaigns I have been struck dumb just how good the MG's actually are at suppression. In fact, I literally hate the moment I hear those MG34/MG42's firing because I know I will take casualties. In fact, I just lost 6 men who were advancing to a hedge for cover to one LMG team (MG42) who were firing from a second floor window from several hundred yards. I couldn't believe their damn luck! I eventually got my men to cover, but they were certainly suppressed and pinned. What you are seeing may be in fact something to do with the way their ROF is modelled? Instead of constant bursts we are given short bursts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanzfeld Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Whatever the reason, accuracy or burst length or frequncyI wish they would adjust this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil stanbridge Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Whatever the reason, accuracy or burst length or frequncyI wish they would adjust this. But adjust what? Apart from the fact the burst length is probably abstracted, I don't see what is wrong. Maybe it's just me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanzfeld Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 I don't know......but try ANYTHING. The way MG's are now they have no real teeth. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil stanbridge Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 I don't know......but try ANYTHING. The way MG's are now they have no real teeth. lol Well I have to beg to differ I'm afraid. I'm being pinned down right this minute by what seems to be a single guy manning a semi-deployed MG42. I can tell my guys are suppressed judging by the suppression icon. He's a right PITA having taken out 4 men so far who were approaching the house from different sides. He's kept my whole platoon at bay for several minutes now and I'm just about to launch some PIAT love his way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 I would appreciate it if other people ran similar tests and posted the results, as at the moment, IMO, the HMG is useless, and definitely needs tweaking. But we did long ago, directly after release. The code doesn't move and there's always people who like to hear themselves talk who want to redefine reality as what the game does. Quite ridiculous since CMBO was defended the same way right up to when CMBB did the opposite, at which point reality had changed or somefink. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 lol Well I have to beg to differ I'm afraid. I'm being pinned down right this minute by what seems to be a single guy manning a semi-deployed MG42. I can tell my guys are suppressed judging by the suppression icon. He's a right PITA having taken out 4 men so far who were approaching the house from different sides. He's kept my whole platoon at bay for several minutes now and I'm just about to launch some PIAT love his way. My anecdotal experience is more close to the OP (although I have experienced similar situations as you have.). I find HMGs and MMGs to be pretty ineffective by them selves. The test example the OP uses to me feels just wrong. From accounts I have read about whole platoons being pinned down by an MG nest being able jog across a field right up to an MG nest just does not feel right. It makes me wonder if there are other variables that we should be considering. I still worry that something is not quite right though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 BTW @noob thanks for starting a new thread about MGs in game. Ian's nice way of saying let us try to stay focused on the issue @noob brings up instead of getting into the mud. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FFE Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Has anyone evaluated the effectiveness of higher skill HMG crews in the game? Perhaps veteran or crack HMGs are utterly lethal? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baneman Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 I'm not so sure personally that there is a significant problem with this. Don't forget the different circumstances you will find yourself under during combat and how certain things change under duress. You've also got to factor in different terrain types and how the MG's are positioned. All this is much more detailed and accurate in the new games. Are they in a position to suppress in the first place for instance, or is it literally spraying an area indirectly. Tests will only show so much in my opinion. ... Thing is, Phil, factoring in terrain and so forth would be reducing the effect of the HMG which the tests have shown to be already useless at stopping a squad crossing a completely open piece of terrain. In your example, you state that your guys have taken some casualties - yes, that will cause suppression. But when the HMG's are as inaccurate as tests show, the HMG has to be lucky to hit and cause suppression. Right now, terrain and positioning is irrelevant - HMG's hardly aim at the target ( unless it's a vehicle ) - so much so, you could almost make a case for them deliberately aiming away from the target - and hardly ever correct their aim. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Has anyone evaluated the effectiveness of higher skill HMG crews in the game? Perhaps veteran or crack HMGs are utterly lethal? They have a higher rate of fire. I don't know if there are any other effects. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil stanbridge Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 It makes me wonder if there are other variables that we should be considering. It may be there is something fundamentally wrong with how HMG teams are abstracted/portrayed in game, but the above sums it up perfectly in my opinion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil stanbridge Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 Thing is, Phil, factoring in terrain and so forth would be reducing the effect of the HMG which the tests have shown to be already useless at stopping a squad crossing a completely open piece of terrain. In your example, you state that your guys have taken some casualties - yes, that will cause suppression. But when the HMG's are as inaccurate as tests show, the HMG has to be lucky to hit and cause suppression. Right now, terrain and positioning is irrelevant - HMG's hardly aim at the target ( unless it's a vehicle ) - so much so, you could almost make a case for them deliberately aiming away from the target - and hardly ever correct their aim. I wouldn't necessarily say that the HMG teams are innacurate per se. I would say it's perhaps some abstraction taking place, or something to do with the way the burst rate is portrayed in the game. But I do think luck plays its part, as it did in reality. I have seen a MG42 pray and spray with rounds firing seemingly over the enemy's head and miss by a long way, but equally I have also seen HMG teams suppress whole platoons and fire accurately. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sublime Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 I agree with the OP. they feel like they need tweaking. The other thread has screens of the bursts missing enemy troops by a lot and not being corrected. this was never adressed.. comparing CMBO and CMBB is useless as those are completely different games. What is more, different games without 1:1 modelling and abstracted 'firepower' numbers. Also related, though it has nothing to do with effectiveness, I would really like the bursts to be more randomized. It's too mechanical now, 6 rnds, 6 rnds, 6 rnds, etc I'd rather see 5. 6, 4, 7, 5, 6, 4, etc..? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noob Posted December 11, 2012 Author Share Posted December 11, 2012 To be more specific, the HMG was a MG42 mounted on a tripod, with a cover arc encompassing the approach to the hedge, and the gunner was allowed to chose his own targets. The bullets appeared to go too high from the start, and it appeared there was no aiming correction, which would explain the ineffectiveness of the weapon in the most ideal situation for it. Anecdotal evidence is useless to determine a weapons effectiveness, the reason being that there are other variables that could affect the result, that's why one must set up a test like the one i have to remove those variables, and as far as the tests show, the MG42 on a tripod is woefully ineffective, unless it's reputation was just hype. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poesel Posted December 11, 2012 Share Posted December 11, 2012 noob (and others): you might want to take a look at this thread: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=106462 at currently 452 posts the subject is very thoroughly analysed from many aspects. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pak40 Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Well, Tom Hanks and a handfull of Rangers were able to take out a HMG 42 with only one loss. I never once thought to myself that this was an unbelievable situation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PzKfW Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Run, Forrest. Run! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Schultz Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 Give a deployed HMG an area fire command across the line of advance of any infantry you care to set on the map, so that the fire ends well beyond any possible route of advance. Run that test as many times as you like. See how many boys make it across the line of little lead love notes. Place a building to either side of a line of fire set to about 200 meters, and send troops across. They will still take a loss or two and maybe get pinned in the open, or fall back. The closer the endpoint of the area fire command(or any fire command for that matter) the greater the rate of fire. If the HMG is firing at an actual picked target, as opposed to area fire, the the ROF will increase markedly as range decreases. (pucker-factor ROF) What you experienced in your test was most likely the TACAI picking the "most dangerous" target and staying on it. What you may have wished to see was a spray being swept across multiple targets to keep everyone suppressed. That ain't gunna happen. See above... and take positive control of all support weapons in area fire mode to get as close to what you expect them to do. Otherwise the TACAI will pick the target it likes best and stick like glue until a better/deadlier one shows up. - 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noob Posted December 12, 2012 Author Share Posted December 12, 2012 What you may have wished to see was a spray being swept across multiple targets to keep everyone suppressed. Not so, what i wanted to see was the fire having more effect when the TacAI did concentrate on one particular squad. See above... and take positive control of all support weapons in area fire mode to get as close to what you expect them to do. Testing using fire commands is a good idea, i will get on it and report the results back as soon as possible. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 It was the gum that did it. Well, the gum and the stick. Actually, gum, stick, and the mirror. The mirror is the key. Helpful comment: this is, indeed, something that several beta's are interested in and looking at. That statement does not imply anything other than what it says: some individuals are looking at it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vergeltungswaffe Posted December 12, 2012 Share Posted December 12, 2012 That statement does not imply anything other than what it says: some individuals are looking at it. All that can reasonably be asked. Thanks for checking into it. 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.