MGs ignoring orders to fire at half-tracks

[jhmorneau]

I was wondering if I was the only player around grumbling about that : you can't order a MG to fire at a halftrack (let alone at a tank). Unless there is an enemy soldier manning the MG, they won't even open fire at the HT !

I understand the underlying logic (MG can't destroy a HT so it isn't worth trying), but as a player, I sometimes want some MG suppressive fire to be directed at enemy HT in order to shatter the soldiers inside and make the driver decide it's wise to reverse out of harm's way. As it is now, you can't do that. MG won't obey the order....

I wish there were a way to tell ou pixeltroopers : "We both know you won't kill it with your bullets alone, but trust the man in charge here and HOSE DOWN THAT S.O.B !"

[womble]

I think that's new (and, if standard, undesirable) behaviour. Particularly if the halfie in question is a US one, which MG42 rounds can penetrate from many aspects. And even if it's a BAR shooting at the front of a Hanomag, you can have plenty of joy if the fire's at all plunging into the crew/passenger compartment, whether the gun's manned or not. I've enjoyed frequent and decisive success using HMGs to drive off half tracks in the past, and I believe it used to be that a small arm-equipped element wouldn't fire at a buttoned AFV unless you told it to, but would if you did...

[Baneman]

I agree with womble - I certainly hope it's a bug and not standard behaviour, as I've also many times destroyed/damaged or driven off enemy HT's with small arms.

[womble]

I'm wondering if it's in some way linked to the mortar targetting issue raised here: www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=113595

[Doug Williams]

Thanks for bringing this up. I'll check when I get home. HMGs, especially 50 cals, can make mince meat out of halftracks. Would suck to not be able to order them to target HTs.

[Baneman]

Ok, I have run some quick and dirty tests.

I tested American .30 Cal MMG's, .30 Cal Vickers, .50 cal HMGs, plus 60mm and 81mm mortars against German Halftracks ( all buttoned ).

Range was 250m in all cases.

All were given covered arcs so as not to fire until the enemy vehicle was spotted and they were then given an explicit TARGET command.

Result:

- Both types of mortars fired on the enemy HT's

- .50 cal HMG's fired on enemy HT's

- neither of the smaller .30 cal MMG's would fire.

This definitely seems to be off.

( possibly unintended consequence of reducing the much-complained-about infantry's tendency to fire on tanks with small arms ? )

On a happier note, several of the HT's which did not have gunners - and even 1 which did - failed to spot the enemy after 1 full turn. So the "buttoned AFV reduced spotting" IS definitely working

[jhmorneau]

Thanks for your test, Baneman. I think you nailed it: I just finished playing a pbm QB where I had more than 15 american HTs and I ran into this obvious and upsetting "MG won't fire at enemy HT" problem.

Most of the HT were equipped with .30 cal. MGs. The only one which scratched enemy HTs were armed with .50 cal MG.

I had a couple of HG .50 cal teams though, and I'm pretty sure some of them ignored fire orders too, but their HT targets were just inside the max range of their weapon (around 1000 m). This makes me wonder if shooting distance triggers this behaviour as well for the .50 cal MGs.

[Webs]

I noticed that too, here: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=113294

[Baneman]

Hmmmm, even more interesting.

I reran my ( note: very basic ) test with the sides reversed.

And the German MG's - 34 or 42, tripod-HMG or bipod-LMG all DO fire on American Halftracks.

Problem therefore seems to be specific to Allied MG's below .50 cal.

[jhmorneau]

Baneman, could you possibly share your hand made test scenario ?

I'd like to run a few tests on my side but I would like to have a look at your designe before I start something new (I've never started the scenario builder !).

[aleader]

Hmm, playing a PBEM game right now (ME, QB, Mech Infantry) and last turn I drove off a german HT (75mm) with a US MMG (.30cal). Injured/killed the commander, so it was obviously not buttoned. Maybe the buttoning has something to do with it?

[Baneman]

Hmm, playing a PBEM game right now (ME, QB, Mech Infantry) and last turn I drove off a german HT (75mm) with a US MMG (.30cal). Injured/killed the commander, so it was obviously not buttoned. Maybe the buttoning has something to do with it?

Well spotted aleader !

I reran my tests with the German HT's unbuttoned and all MG's fired.

Except, that is, the ones facing German HT's without a gunner

Also, if the HT was lucky ( ? ) enough to lose the gunner to a bullet, firing then ceased !

So the problem is narrowed down to : Allied MG's below .50 cal wont fire on buttoned or gunnerless Axis Halfracks.

You just know I'm going to have to test against kubels and trucks now too

EDIT : No problems shooting at soft skinned targets. Trucks and Kubels were massacred

[womble]

So the problem is narrowed down to : Allied MG's below .50 cal wont fire on buttoned or gunnerless Axis Halfracks.

...No problems shooting at soft skinned targets. Trucks and Kubels were massacred

Do you feel like running the Hanomag test in a situation where the .30cal MGs have a chance to fire into the vehicle through the top? It might be that the TacAI has been told that sub-five-oh calibre fire can't damage a Hanomag, so it won't fire, but if it sees the open top it might feel daring...

[Baneman]

Heh, I didn't think the TacAI took such things into account, but I was wrong

From the top of an 8 story building, the MG's did fire into the buttoned HT's :eek:

However, I must stress that the test map I used was very hastily and crudely adjusted and the HT's were only about 50m away, so the MG teams opened up with small arms too - which may influence their behaviour.

I need to do some serious mountain building before this can be anything like definitive.

Also, the MG's I had in buildings were all Vickers ( the .30 cals were on 'heights' ) and all but one Un-Deployed of their own accord - bizarre - but the one that didn't was definitely firing.

Also, they didn't seem to respect their 16 second pack-up time - ie. no soldier was ever in a "Packing Up" state - the turn started and the gun went to Undeployed immediately.

But that's for another test, lol.

[Holien]

On a side note I have a 50 cal letting rip at a buttoned Panther without me asking it to.

I am not sure side on how effective 50 cal is vs a Panther?

I could understand at an unbuttoned one but surely not vs a closed down side on Panther?

[jhmorneau]

Thanks to Baneman I had a go with his german MGs vs US Half-tracks test scenario.

My findings are :

1/ Germans MGs will engage automatically HT with "open up" status.

(that is, until the enemy soldier manning the MG is shot up. Then, behaviour switches to #2)

2/ German MGs will not automatically engage buttoned-up HT.

3/ When ordered to do so by the player, german MGs will engage buttoned-up HT until :

a/ HT is destroyed

or

b/ HT is abandoned or all its crew is dead

3/ b/ is weird, because even if you want the MG to keep on firing at the dismounted HT... MG won't obey your order ! The german MG ceases fire the very instant the last soldier in the HT is shot. I find it strange because in real life how could the MG team know for sure that there is nobody left in the HT?

3 other minor findings :

- The driver of the american HT is pretty immune from MG fire from the front. However he's dead meet the moment he decides to turn right or left as MG bullets will easily rip through the lateral doors

- In german MG teams I did not see soldiers firing their rifles at HT at all, even if ordered to do so (they may fire if the HT is open up but I'm not 100% sure about that).

- In Baneman's test scenario, there are a couple of small perpendicular stone walls on the side of the firing lanes. American HT drivers tend to park the HT behind them to get some cover. Aren't these pixeltroopers cute ?

[Baneman]

...

- In Baneman's test scenario, there are a couple of small perpendicular stone walls on the side of the firing lanes. American HT drivers tend to park the HT behind them to get some cover. Aren't these pixeltroopers cute ?

Hehe, yes, I put those there as rough range indicators ( and because the map is from earlier tests where the low wall was continuous and functioned to make riflemen kneel. )

Further to the "cute" behaviour - I gave all HT's about 100m covered arcs to prevent them from shooting at the enemy MG's.

In a couple of run-throughs, one or two HT's had the brilliant idea to drive balls-out at the enemy line until their covered arc was over the enemy, then they could open up.

For all its shortcomings ( as with all AI ), you've still got to admire just how very very good this game's AI is.

[Michael Emrys]

No problems shooting at soft skinned targets. Trucks and Kubels were massacred

Maybe, maybe not. In one scenario I played last fall, I set up an ambush for a Kubelwagen that was coming down the road. I hit it at close range with everything owned by two squads of paratroopers, BARs, M1s, and SMGs. This went on for at least two turns and the K. must have been hit at least, at least, a hundred times. But it took two or three turns to kill the car, and the driver was unhurt until he got out of the car, when he was killed outright. That was one tough car!

Michael

[Baneman]

Maybe, maybe not. In one scenario I played last fall, I set up an ambush for a Kubelwagen that was coming down the road. I hit it at close range with everything owned by two squads of paratroopers, BARs, M1s, and SMGs. This went on for at least two turns and the K. must have been hit at least, at least, a hundred times. But it took two or three turns to kill the car, and the driver was unhurt until he got out of the car, when he was killed outright. That was one tough car!

Michael

Bonnie and Clyde should have driven a Kubelwagen ! :eek:

It used to be that passengers were almost immune to incoming small arms as (I think) the "target centre mass" seemed to make troops fire at the chassis of jeeps/trucks etc.

I have a similar experience to yours a while back - I remember a jeep full of ( all of 5 ) GI's driving through my lines banging away and killing the better part of a platoon shooting at them at about 50m or less. It was only when the jeep was KO'd that the passengers debussed and got nailed.

However, I see in the 2.01 patch notes "Better small-arms aiming at unarmored vehicles" - and it certainly looks like it.

I generally try to throw away all my preconceptions whenever a major patch comes out as knock-on effects can go anywhere

[jhmorneau]

Still running tests now and then...

I found out the german wheeled reco vehicle PSW 223 is totally immune to 12.7 mm HMG under 300 m ! It is definitely weird because in all my tests so far 12.7 mm HMG have destroyed every lightly armored german AFVs I've fed them ! Maybe there is something wrong with its armor ratings ?

Regarding .30 cal MGs, it seems there is a max distance for engaging buttoned-up lightly armored AFVs. I find it really hard to bracket but it may lie between 240 and 270 m.

Generally speaking, lightly armored german AFVs easily shrug off .30 cal bullets hitting their front (even the soldier manning its MG now benefits from a decent protection from frontal fire). Now, a sustained frontal shower of .30 bullets will cause suppression and subsequently force the driver to reverse, but the damage caused is very light and mostly affects the radio (not the running gear). HMGs are more effective at that because their ROF is much higher than MMGs and LMGs.

Hope that helps !

[Vanir Ausf B]

I found out the german wheeled reco vehicle PSW 223 is totally immune to 12.7 mm HMG under 300 m ! It is definitely weird because in all my tests so far 12.7 mm HMG have destroyed every lightly armored german AFVs I've fed them ! Maybe there is something wrong with its armor ratings ?

From the front at 260 meters it is fairly resistant but not invulnerable. I see a lot of spalling and an occasional partial penetration through the front turret. From the side the .50 goes through it like butter.

[jhmorneau]

I could never have guessed that PSW 223 were so resistant. As far as the user interface is concerned the frontal armor rating is the same color for PSW 223 and german HT (red bar = poor), isn't it ?

This is a good example of the huge difference that exists between the basic information provided by the user interface and the amazingly detailed "under the hood" modelization of each vehicle !

One never ceases to learn by playing this game :-)

[Fizou]

Get this to get a better UI of armor and penetration data. I use the XC alternative and love it.

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=111940

[jhmorneau]

Yes I was using that fantastic mod too, but not the XC version with numbers.

So I installed this XC version and had a look at the respective armor values for SPW 250 1 (easily destroyed by 12.7 mm HMG bullets) and PSW 223 (more or less immune to 12.7 mm HMG bullets).

The result is puzzling :

So according to this mod, PSW 223 comes with less armor than SPW 250/1 but is not destroyed by 12.7 mm bullets :confused:.

I know that armor thickness is not the only parameter to take into account.

There is also the orientation of the metal plates.

Still, looking at the 2 vehicles I can't see why PSW 223 shrugs off the very same bullets which easily destroy the SPW 250/1.

Any ideas ?

[Vanir Ausf B]

Hmm, there are conflicting sources. WWII Vehicles says the psw 223 has 8mm of frontal armor at 37° according to Chamberlain and Doyle, while another source claims 14.5mm at an unspecified slope. The same site lists the 250/1 HT frontal armor as 10mm at 30° and 14.5mm at an unspecified slope. So the two vehicles should have very similar protection.

CMBB models the 223 late as having 8mm @ 35°. I don't think that would stand up to .50 cal machine gun fire.