INF vs TANKS

[A Canadian Cat]

Sure we can understand that. On the other hand this topic has been around and around and around a lot. It does get tiresome.

[Vanir Ausf B]

I find the continued inability of infantry to use buildings as cover to attack armor from more tiresome than the discussions regarding it.

[womble]

Rifle grenade baby.

PzGrenadiers, darlin'. Don't have 'em. I suspect it was a "trailing" team member who wasn't in the building yet, but got a spot. Or one of those odd "through the wall" position selections you sometimes get.

[Oddball_E8]

So... you can't fire Fausts/Zooks/Schrecks from inside buildings no matter how large and roomy those buildings are.

But you can fire them from right outside the building with your back to the wall.

Makes sense.

Underabstract the one situation (you can NEVER fire from inside a building) and overabstract the other one (Well we can't restrict troops from firing because of being close to something now can we).

Personally i think it should be possible to fire from inside a building, but with an abstracted chance to cause friendly casualties.

[Fizou]

I hope this changes soon (for pzf, zook and schreck). Might be to late for MG but in the next patch maybe. Vanir and Argus have done the research / has the physics knowledge. In adition to that, the fact that tanks dont have any elevation restrictions. A change in this behaviour just makes a lot of sense IMO.

[Sublime]

Vanir - I completely agree. Its bad enough without the rockets being able to fire inside. Once I confirmed that units will not attack close topped AFV's from inside buildings AT ALL (cept for PIATs) I was devastated. This, along with the rocket issue and the lack of elevation limits for tanks means that your opponent is probably safer running an AFV INTO a city than outside it, and then sitting its fat a$$ outside buildings and shelling your pTruppen with relative impunity. It's happened to me many a time, and I'm not a poor player (and I exclusively play humans now) Your only hope is literally dashing your men into the street to fire rockets, and this is really chancey. You're completely and utterly f*cked if you dont have any rocket AT weapons though. This issue REALLY needs to be looked at, since the future of CM goes backwards in years (for WW2) rather than forwards, after the initial EF title.

[db_zero]

This has probably already been suggested-why not allow designers to designate buildings as "prepared" structure where zooks and fausts can be fired from freely. They would only be initially visible as such to the side that occupied them at the beginning of a battle. This would simulate building that were prepared in advance.

For quick battles allow a defending side to purchase prepared structures like TRP's.

Might also consider giving a small percentage chance to a building that has been hit by shell fire to become a structure that becomes a free fire building where zooks and fausts can be fired from. This would simulate the fact that with holes and sides of a building blown out the blast effect could be negated to the point where it was feasible to fire weapons that produced a back blast.

[Baneman]

Another option that occurred to me would be to create a "Deploy Time" for AT in buildings - in the same way that HMG's take a few minutes to deploy in buildings, simulating preparing a position, make the schreck/zook/faust guy take a few minutes to prepare his position. That would also mean the players would have to plan where to put their inf-AT - you couldn't just run into any old house 10 seconds before the tank rolled by. How would people feel about this ?

I wonder how BFC feel about this because although, as Fizou points out "Vanir and Argus have done the research / has the physics knowledge", BFC have said nothing on the subject for a long long time and the last thing they said was more or less "we've made up our minds on this one and not likely to change them". I think the evidence presented has been fairly conclusive, but do they ?

Sublime - are you sure about this - "Once I confirmed that units will not attack close topped AFV's from inside buildings AT ALL (cept for PIATs)" ?

I'm clearly remember a squad ( on the 1st floor of a multi-story building ) shooting an AT rifle grenade into the rear of the turret of a Sherman in CMFI ( back when it came out ).

Didn't do them any good - it penetrated, but hit all that empty air inside - then the Sherm blew them away. But they did do it.

Was your test done in CMBN ? Pre 2.0 ?

[db_zero]

Another option or variant of that I'm sure has been suggested is once a percentage of buildings on a town/village what have you, been damage or destroyed any infantry taking cover in or near a damaged/destroyed building gets an addition defensive and concealment bonus. Any road becomes rough terrain and any tank traversing it has a chance of becoming disabled.-perhaps treat it like a wall or hedgerow terrain.

As many I'm sure have already noted there really isn't any consequence from shelling a town heavily or just standing back with tanks blasting buildings and then rolling in, when in fact there was.

[Sublime]

Baneman - yes Im certain. Rifle grenades will fire from inside buildings though. But seriously, try taking out any tank with rifle grenades, it almost definitely will not happen.

The more serious issue I see is the lack of infantry close assaulting tanks within range (30m or less) from inside buildings with grenades, or even satchel charges...

In fact I also remember a rifle grenade incident from FI. I defended a town with infantry and 75mm PAK. My newish opponent took an almost all armor force. I KO'd a few Shermans, and he KO's my 2 PAKs. No problem right? It's a dense city, on a hill, he's got probably a platoon (-) of infantry, and I have over a company of vet PzGrenadiers, all in buildings untouched in the city.

Being newer, he rolled his Shermans right into the city streets under my Pz Grenadiers, his infantry lagged far behind. I was gleeful - Shermans alone in a city, literally surrounded by about over a hundred Wehrmacht troops. One Sherman took 7 rifle grenade hits - its response to every penetration? Calm traverse of turret with a burst of MG/75mm. Result? No dead tanks, 1 company of PzGrenadiers wiped out. I ended up 'sallying forth' into the streets to try to attack the tanks. This was met with the more or less execution type of slaughter of my remnants. Result? No dead tanks, more dead Heinies.

[ZPB II]

I almost never play urban scenarios because in my opinion they are currently broken. Tanks are king in the city, and that is the exact opposite of reality.

During my peaceful military service, I was the rocket launcher guy in an armoured infantry squad (LAW & Apilas). I think bazookas/fausts/shrecks and infantry close assault from inside buildings should be enabled. Though I do admit that I have never fired WW2 era rockets.

This is even worse because CMx2 doesn't model peek-shoot-GTFO behaviour for infantry very well. The kind of behaviour that is taught to possibly every guy ever handed a rocket launcher and instructed in it's use.

[para]

It is ridiculous, that you are left with no alternative but to try and charge tanks in built up areas. Give the infantry a fighting chance and allow AT to be fired from within buildings.

[Oddball_E8]

I almost never play urban scenarios because in my opinion they are currently broken. Tanks are king in the city, and that is the exact opposite of reality.

During my peaceful military service, I was the rocket launcher guy in an armoured infantry squad (LAW & Apilas). I think bazookas/fausts/shrecks and infantry close assault from inside buildings should be enabled. Though I do admit that I have never fired WW2 era rockets.

This is even worse because CMx2 doesn't model peek-shoot-GTFO behaviour for infantry very well. The kind of behaviour that is taught to possibly every guy ever handed a rocket launcher and instructed in it's use.

Yeah I don't use tanks in urban areas any more either for that same reason.

[ZPB II]

The problem feels bad partly due to the point that I think tanks spot threats from the side and rear a bit too good and react to threats a bit too fast. Having played a lot of CMSF back in the day, the AFVs feel modern in that respect.

The visibility from a modern IFV (CV90) to the sides is somewhat bad, especially when it's moving. Especially that the CV has dual commander hatches with 360 degree vision (although slotted ofcourse) both for the vehicle commander and the infantry squad NCO in the back. Having looked at museum Stugs, PzIVs and several Soviet tanks I've come to think of the visibility from inside one as utterly abysmal.

This is all just gut feeling ofcourse. When Eastern Front comes out, I can see myself posting and cursing about Soviet tanks being blind.

[PanzerMike]

Well, perhaps some tweaking has been done in the MG module. Lots of new stuff on the homepage, but no mention of changes to the engine.

[slysniper]

Rifle grenades will fire from inside buildings though. But seriously, try taking out any tank with rifle grenades, it almost definitely will not happen.

The more serious issue I see is the lack of infantry close assaulting tanks within range (30m or less) from inside buildings with grenades, or even satchel charges...

GETTING HYPED ABOUT THIS AGAIN ARE WE.

Really, I think if Bf would just tweek the game to allow for all infantry to have some close combat abilities vs tanks, it would solve all the issues without having to fix multible things. Who cares if my AT assets dont work from inside a building as long as when the enemy parks a tank next to me there. I have a chance of taking him out. At least in CMX1, that happened once in awhile. Fix this one issue and I think it would solve most of the problems with city fighting

[nachinus]

Close Combat series allows rocket firing from buildings, and urban combat is really dangerous for tanks, as it should be.

As it has been said above, in RL the rocket guy would've looked for a room big enough to allow for the backblast to dissipate while the rest of the team would've stayed in a safe spot, or would have fired peeking from a corner, or balcony, or whatever clever stuff people think of to kill enemy tanks in RL. Pixeltruppen can't do that, which isn't realistic, so I join the popular petition to allow this small unrealistic feature, to compensate for unrealistic behaviour, so we can get a realistic result.

Perhaps BF can make firing rockets from inside buildings more difficult (ie taking more time to reload and aim), or allow firing only from medium to big buildings.

[Fūrinkazan]

I don't want to start a fight like it was for the hmg problem but i think that shooting from buildings with bazooka etc.. is not the problem.

First, i've been reading the osprey elite books: "infantry anti tank tactics" and "WWII street fighting tactics". Both books forbid the use of AT rocket launchers in buildings. So i would tend to think BFC is right on that point.

I've been playing a lot of QB's in a small city map that i modified and it can be fun to train to kill tanks with demo charges/grenades or panzerschreck.

I use some rules :

- The map : It's very important to provide infantry with places to hide, put some destroy buildings, shell holes, walls, tree, ruins and use the elevation tool in the editor to simulate ruins. I have modified the qb map 260 to have a place to play. You already have an AI plan so just modify the map.

- Split squads is a must. I have AT teams oustside buildings protected form infantry by the rest of the squad. This avoid loosing a squad if the attack against the tanks fails. You also can assault tanks from multiple directions for better results. prepare alternative positions if things go bad.

- Use obstacles and mines : they help to slow tanks and make them go were you can set ambush. If in cmfi mines are efficient, it's not the case in cmbn. I have seen a tank touched by 3 mines and still rolling. This should be looked upon i think.

- it's possible to destroy tanks with at rifle grenades but you'll need lot of luck. I 've seen once a sherman destroyed and burning with one single rifle grenade shot from a building.

with trainning and good tactics, tanks will have a very bad day if they come in cities.

Now, there are some problems i think :

- spotting : i have seen many times buttoned up tanks spot infantry before infantry spots them. Even from the rear, they have very good spoting and i think that this could be modified. Even with destroyed optics, they spot well.

Infantry , AT guns and Hmgs suffer from what i call the crawling problem : when they have to change their spotting direction (with fire arcs for exemple), instead of just turning, they start to crawl and that takes too much time.

- Foxholes and trenches are not efficient. Because they are not really holes inside the ground but more just sandbags they don't provide enough cover. It's sometimes better to be in shell hole than in a trench. If you take a look at pictures from real life, in foxholes you can just see the heads of soldiers.

I've seen hmg position were the barrel of an hmg42 was just over the hole, maybe 20cm or less making it very hard to spot and kill, the same for AT guns positions.

- I don't think that the concussion effect of demo charges or grenades affects the crew or not enough. As you can see on this link : http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt07/german-tactics-against-tanks.html

the crew should be temporaly knocked out. I have seen crews ready to fight just after they were hit by demo charge and their tank destroyed.

the crew shoud be blinded or K.O. for a moment allowing a close assault of the tank and making it easier

- we don't have much blinding possibilities except smoke but sometimes, through smoke infantry spots after the tank and gets destroyed.Incendiary Bottles would be an interresting addition to the game i think.

- small weapons don't have blinding/moral effect on crews or maybe not enough.

- as i said in my other post, tanks don't have minimum range or gun limitations. When cmsf came out i had the chance to talk with Steve about this and it seems it's a problem of AI programming that would bring a lot of other problems. Now, assault guns have gun limitations, so developers managed to do it maybe they could take a look at this to avoid the most extreme situations and adapt the rules made for assault guns to tanks.

- The reaction time : as said before, tanks seem to react immediately.

Even if the TC is killed by infantry (sniper) they spot, react very fast.

- I would really like to have more stealth snipers.

Back to CMX1 i remember that they were a plague for tc and i used to never approach building areas with opened hatch.

These are just my experience after a lot of AT fighting in cities. I'm not expecting the game to replicate the exact reality, but i still hope that BFC will find a nice solution to those little problems like they did for hmgs/small weapons.

I still enjoy destroying tanks in cities, especially with troops not equiped with at rocket launchers and those problems are not game killing for me, but i think that improvement is needed to avoid the most frustrating problems.

This could be as important than the modification made for hmgs i think.

Regards,

[Oddball_E8]

I don't want to start a fight like it was for the hmg problem but i think that shooting from buildings with bazooka etc.. is not the problem.

First, i've been reading the osprey elite books: "infantry anti tank tactics" and "WWII street fighting tactics". Both books forbid the use of AT rocket launchers in buildings. So i would tend to think BFC is right on that point.

I've been playing a lot of QB's in a small city map that i modified and it can be fun to train to kill tanks with demo charges/grenades or panzerschreck.

I use some rules :

- The map : It's very important to provide infantry with places to hide, put some destroy buildings, shell holes, walls, tree, ruins and use the elevation tool in the editor to simulate ruins. I have modified the qb map 260 to have a place to play. You already have an AI plan so just modify the map.

- Split squads is a must. I have AT teams oustside buildings protected form infantry by the rest of the squad. This avoid loosing a squad if the attack against the tanks fails. You also can assault tanks from multiple directions for better results. prepare alternative positions if things go bad.

- Use obstacles and mines : they help to slow tanks and make them go were you can set ambush. If in cmfi mines are efficient, it's not the case in cmbn. I have seen a tank touched by 3 mines and still rolling. This should be looked upon i think.

- it's possible to destroy tanks with at rifle grenades but you'll need lot of luck. I 've seen once a sherman destroyed and burning with one single rifle grenade shot from a building.

with trainning and good tactics, tanks will have a very bad day if they come in cities.

Now, there are some problems i think :

- spotting : i have seen many times buttoned up tanks spot infantry before infantry spots them. Even from the rear, they have very good spoting and i think that this could be modified. Even with destroyed optics, they spot well.

Infantry , AT guns and Hmgs suffer from what i call the crawling problem : when they have to change their spotting direction (with fire arcs for exemple), instead of just turning, they start to crawl and that takes too much time.

- Foxholes and trenches are not efficient. Because they are not really holes inside the ground but more just sandbags they don't provide enough cover. It's sometimes better to be in shell hole than in a trench. If you take a look at pictures from real life, in foxholes you can just see the heads of soldiers.

I've seen hmg position were the barrel of an hmg42 was just over the hole, maybe 20cm or less making it very hard to spot and kill, the same for AT guns positions.

- I don't think that the concussion effect of demo charges or grenades affects the crew or not enough. As you can see on this link : http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt07/german-tactics-against-tanks.html

the crew should be temporaly knocked out. I have seen crews ready to fight just after they were hit by demo charge and their tank destroyed.

the crew shoud be blinded or K.O. for a moment allowing a close assault of the tank and making it easier

- we don't have much blinding possibilities except smoke but sometimes, through smoke infantry spots after the tank and gets destroyed.Incendiary Bottles would be an interresting addition to the game i think.

- small weapons don't have blinding/moral effect on crews or maybe not enough.

- as i said in my other post, tanks don't have minimum range or gun limitations. When cmsf came out i had the chance to talk with Steve about this and it seems it's a problem of AI programming that would bring a lot of other problems. Now, assault guns have gun limitations, so developers managed to do it maybe they could take a look at this to avoid the most extreme situations and adapt the rules made for assault guns to tanks.

- The reaction time : as said before, tanks seem to react immediately.

Even if the TC is killed by infantry (sniper) they spot, react very fast.

- I would really like to have more stealth snipers.

Back to CMX1 i remember that they were a plague for tc and i used to never approach building areas with opened hatch.

These are just my experience after a lot of AT fighting in cities. I'm not expecting the game to replicate the exact reality, but i still hope that BFC will find a nice solution to those little problems like they did for hmgs/small weapons.

I still enjoy destroying tanks in cities, especially with troops not equiped with at rocket launchers and those problems are not game killing for me, but i think that improvement is needed to avoid the most frustrating problems.

This could be as important than the modification made for hmgs i think.

Regards,

Don't want to star a whole discussion here as there is another thread for this, but the point of the discussion there isn't that infantry cannot use rocket launchers from buildings (which i think they should since the game abstracts things like moving out of cover to fire the rocket and then back in) but the fact that infantry will not use grenades and demo charges from buildings.

The only things they will use against vehicles from buildings are rifle grenades and piats.

[MikeyD]

I find it interesting how players seem magnetically drawn to buildings. If there's a building on a map you're compelled to climb someone to the top floor to look out. But buildings only provide initial concealment, they're porous to pretty much any incoming weapons fire bigger than an M1 Carbine, and they provide a convenient aim point to shoot at, Heck, oftentimes buildings find themselves targeted as a matter of course whether anyone's been spotted or not! I recall browsing an old infantry tactics manual. It said recce should pick out the most obvious landmark and NOT go there. Instead of being in the top floor of some ridgeline palais royale its better to be hunkered down behind a bush, next to another bush, next to another bush.

[A Canadian Cat]

Perhaps BF can make firing rockets from inside buildings more difficult (ie taking more time to reload and aim), or allow firing only from medium to big buildings.

Didn't you mother teach you that two wrongs don't make a right?

I would rather see BFC tweak and improve things that are short comings and by doing so create a better experience of urban fighting. Things such as, but no limited to (in what I consider a rough priority order):

1. peaking, firing around corners (no need to run across the street when you can just peak around a corner and back)
   
2. close assault a tank that is next to the building you are in
   
3. revisit the ability for tanks to spot enemy infantry behind them and at their sides
   
4. follow tank that you want to close assault - at least a short distance if the tanks moves slightly
   
5. have troops not stand around in the middle of the street to die when the tank they are close assaulting moves too far away for them to close the distance (see above)
   
6. look at what can be done to implement minimum range of the weapons of a tank
   
7. look at what can be done about elevation limits
   

I realize this is a long list and I get that it is not a quick solution. Given that engine v 3 is being worked on I hope that some of these items have made it onto the list.

[ZPB II]

All those improvements sound nice, but I don't see BFC doing it's black code magic on the TacAI and the general AI anytime soon. That's a lot of stuff there.

In the meanwhile, it'd be nice to be able to play against the AI and have it mount a convincing urban defence. Many times even if the scenario designer has carefully placed the defenders in good spots, if they fall back the TacAI places them inside buildings, neutering their AT capability. Sometimes even in H2H matches the TacAI retreats inside a building for the turn and your AT guy ends up loitering there when he could and should be taking a shot.

Some QB maps and scenarios are designed in such a way that there isn't much small cover to use other than buildings.

All this has me thinking if the AT weapon building ban is worth the hassle, since oftentimes the simulation provides results that are not entirely realistic due to it. Since the net result right now is that tanks roam the streets with way more authority than they should. Tanks not riding into the boulevard should be the norm, not something only achieved by Grandmaster level tacticians and map editors.

Also, are those tactics manuals and training from peacetime or wartime? Since there are usually vast differences in protocol depending on the gravity of impending death. To face a tank pointing it's gun at you and not pull the trigger, to not risk burst eardrums and burnt skin instead of HE turning you into pink mist...

[Vanir Ausf B]

I find it interesting how players seem magnetically drawn to buildings. If there's a building on a map you're compelled to climb someone to the top floor to look out. But buildings only provide initial concealment, they're porous to pretty much any incoming weapons fire bigger than an M1 Carbine

Do you actually play Combat Mission?

[Vanir Ausf B]

Didn't you mother teach you that two wrongs don't make a right?

What is wrong about letting soldiers fire rockets from buildings? They could and they did. And they still do in urban fighting today.

1. peaking, firing around corners (no need to run across the street when you can just peak around a corner and back)
   
2. close assault a tank that is next to the building you are in
   
3. revisit the ability for tanks to spot enemy infantry behind them and at their sides
   
4. follow tank that you want to close assault - at least a short distance if the tanks moves slightly
   
5. have troops not stand around in the middle of the street to die when the tank they are close assaulting moves too far away for them to close the distance (see above)
   
6. look at what can be done to implement minimum range of the weapons of a tank
   
7. look at what can be done about elevation limits
   

I realize this is a long list and I get that it is not a quick solution.

All of those ideas listed are good ones, but as Zebulon mentioned, most of them involve significant changes to TacAI. Corner peeking would require new animation. The last two items have been essentially ruled out by BFC. By comparison, the engine already allows rocket firing from buildings (e.g. PIAT). It's just a matter of allowing it for the specific weapons.

[db_zero]

This has probably been asked...are different buildings with different material and construction techniques that provide different levels of protection and resistance to small arms, motrars, artillery and dheavy/medium/light direct fire weapons?