There is a bug with the MG bunker in 2.01

[Erwin.Rommel]

I just make a test map with 1 x HMG-42(veteran,high motivation) against a American platoon attack from 300 metres.When I placed it in building/trench/foxhole,the MG inflicted heavy losses to the enemy soldiers with high accuracy and high rate of fire as it should be with the 2.01 patch. But when I placed the MG in a bunker(concrete), the fire rate and accuracy is vastly decreased compared to the tests before and inflicted minor losses to the enemy(in my test just 2-3 casulty before the enemy knock out the bunker).There is definitely a bug with the caculation of the bunker(I just check the UI in the editor, it shows that when the MG been placed in the bunker, the UI showed the semi-deployed) I don't know if the bug lies with it, So BFC, could you check this?

I also upload my test mission in the attachments.

test4.zip

[c3k]

Thanks. It will be looked at.

Ken

[akd]

HMGs, including HMG34 and HMG42s, cannot fire their primary weapon from "shelter"-type bunkers because they are flagged as a heavy weapons team. It would be great if these MGs could be treated as a special case since they can function both as an HMG and an LMG, but that would apparently require entirely new code.

In general, however, if you want to depict a bunker armed with an MG, you should choose the "MG" rather than "shelter" option for the bunker. Although they don't have the same behavior as their equivalent HMGs in the open, you should still find them quite deadly (RoF is handled differently due to their vehicle-based coding, but they are more accurate).

[Erwin.Rommel]

HMGs, including HMG34 and HMG42s, cannot fire their primary weapon from "shelter"-type bunkers because they are flagged as a heavy weapons team. It would be great if these MGs could be treated as a special case since they can function both as an HMG and an LMG, but that would apparently require entirely new code.

In general, however, if you want to depict a bunker armed with an MG, you should choose the "MG" rather than "shelter" option for the bunker. Although they don't have the same behavior as their equivalent HMGs in the open, you should still find them quite deadly (RoF is handled differently due to their vehicle-based coding, but they are more accurate).

Could you just check the test map before you typed a lot of words that all veteran CM played have known. I definetely know that I should choose a MG bunker rather than a shelt bunker and it is definitely that the accuracy of the MG bunker is much more lower than the MG in the open.

[akd]

Okay, why the comment about "semi-deployed" then? It is irrelevant. Which ever unit is loaded into the MG bunker first mans the MG. The status of the unit's own weapon does not matter. If you put a mortar in the bunker, the unit would show "not deployed" over its silhouette.

Anyways, I ran the scenario and the bunker suffered 1 casualty while inflicting 37. As noted above, RoF for bunker MGs is handled differently, but their accuracy is higher.

[Erwin.Rommel]

Okay, why the comment about "semi-deployed" then? It is irrelevant. Which ever unit is loaded into the MG bunker first mans the MG. The status of the unit's own weapon does not matter. If you put a mortar in the bunker, the unit would show "not deployed" over its silhouette.

Anyways, I ran the scenario and the bunker suffered 1 casualty while inflicting 37. As noted above, RoF for bunker MGs is handled differently, but their accuracy is higher.

I repeat this tests again and again, got the completely different results with yours, just wait other player's result.

[ASL Veteran]

But when I placed the MG in a bunker(concrete), the fire rate and accuracy is vastly decreased compared to the tests before.

Your post has some conflicting information in it so I'm going to make a few assumptions about what you are doing. You purchased a concrete MG bunker and compared the results to an HMG placed in a trench or foxhole of some type. You noticed that the ROF for the MG bunker was lower than that for the HMG in the open. That's the way it's supposed to be. It's not the way that BFC would like it to be, but the game treats bunkers differently (I'm going to guess that bunkers are treated like vehicles) and the ROF increase that was applied to other HMG was not applied to bunkers for technical reasons. Your result of a lower ROF for bunkers therefore is not a bug but known and operating as intended. As a trade off for the lack of an increased ROF the bunkers were given an accuracy boost since it can be presumed that a bunker crew would have a nice range card filled out for the area that the bunker covers.

There is definitely a bug with the caculation of the bunker(I just check the UI in the editor, it shows that when the MG been placed in the bunker, the UI showed the semi-deployed) I don't know if the bug lies with it, So BFC, could you check this?

I'm going to guess that once you saw that the bunker MG has a lower ROF than an HMG in the open, you purchased a shelter bunker and attempted to place the HMG in the shelter bunker either so your bunkers would have the same ROF as an HMG in the open or to compare an HMG in a shelter bunker to a bunker MG. You could then say "Hey look, if I place an HMG in a bunker the rate of fire is higher than if I purchase an MG bunker". However, when you attempted this the HMG would not deploy. This is also working as intended. You can't deploy HMG in shelter bunkers. You are stuck with the MG bunkers.

So there are no bugs here. There are just results that you find disconcerting. What you have identified is a limitation with the way the game can treat bunker MGs and it couldn't be coded around. So nothing to see here, everybody just move along.

[Kanonier Reichmann]

Wouldn't it be better to await the results of c3k's tests before deciding unilaterally, based on potentially flawed assumptions, that there's... nothing to see here, everybody just move along.?

Regards

KR

[c3k]

Well, ASL Veteran did put my thoughts down, quite succinctly. I expect my results will correspond with his narrative, as they should (and as they have in the past).

I'll test, but just to verify that it is acting the way it should...as ASL Veteran has written it up.

Ken

[Erwin.Rommel]

Well, ASL Veteran did put my thoughts down, quite succinctly. I expect my results will correspond with his narrative, as they should (and as they have in the past).

I'll test, but just to verify that it is acting the way it should...as ASL Veteran has written it up.

Ken

1.about the type of bunker

I am absolutely sure that I have correctly chosen the right type of bunker(the MG42 bunker,not the shelt bunker).

2. about the semi-deployed

I just re-check the test, the reason that the UI of the MG team showed the semi-deployed is that I also deployed a FO team in the bunker. when I removed this FO, the UI doesn't show the semi-deployed anymore, but this change exert no effect on the results.

3. I re-test the map many time. the results are same as I depicted in this topic.

[eniced73]

You noticed that the ROF for the MG bunker was lower than that for the HMG in the open. That's the way it's supposed to be. It's not the way that BFC would like it to be, but the game treats bunkers differently (I'm going to guess that bunkers are treated like vehicles) and the ROF increase that was applied to other HMG was not applied to bunkers for technical reasons. Your result of a lower ROF for bunkers therefore is not a bug but known and operating as intended. As a trade off for the lack of an increased ROF the bunkers were given an accuracy boost since it can be presumed that a bunker crew would have a nice range card filled out for the area that the bunker covers.

I am not seeing the increase accuracy with bunkers. Maybe I have not used them in scenarios enough but I do know that the last 3 games that I played have not demonstrated any increase in accuracy. I even used some TRP's in areas where my opponent advanced troops and noticed nothing different. Not sure about that one (even though BF states they tweaked it). Anyone else seeing an increase?

Also curious as to what would of been affected if increasing the rate MG's on HT's or in bunkers was also tweaked. Would this have caused all MG's on vehicles to be increased? If so, what is the problem with that?

[MikeyD]

I believe, based on old conversations, that mg bunker fire is (was) equivalent to LMG fire, not heavy tripod MG fire. Expect LMG ranges and accuracies from your bunkers. Actually the last time I played a QB against an AI-controlled bunker the bunker was automatically given a cover arc (to my surprise) so was restricting fire to well inside its normal mg range.

[Doug Williams]

General question (not about the alleged "bug"):

Why would machine gun fire from inside a concrete bunker be less effective than the same machine gun fired from a prone position on the ground? I've fired a machine gun (M60) a few times from a prone position on a target range, but I've never fired one from inside a bunker.

[ASL Veteran]

General question (not about the alleged "bug"):

Why would machine gun fire from inside a concrete bunker be less effective than the same machine gun fired from a prone position on the ground? I've fired a machine gun (M60) a few times from a prone position on a target range, but I've never fired one from inside a bunker.

The difference between MG fire from bunkers and HMGs in the open with a tripod is simply a coding limitation in the game.

[ASL Veteran]

Also curious as to what would of been affected if increasing the rate MG's on HT's or in bunkers was also tweaked. Would this have caused all MG's on vehicles to be increased? If so, what is the problem with that?

You could probably make an argument about coaxial mounted MGs on tanks, but a GI firing a .50 cal over open sights from a halftrack is a different set of variables. He's more than likely going to be firing with the weapon at about chest level walking the rounds into the target. The .50 cal isn't typically fired at the same ROF as the smaller caliber MGs either, although it's recommended that the gunner use longer bursts.

I'm sure that BFC will be looking at further improvements to MG behavior in the future. The way it is now is probably not the end state of where it's desired to be taken so fear not.