Direct artillery hits too weak..

[Bulletpoint]

Did some prep fire of this forest, later I spotted this gun firing on happily though it had clearly taken a direct hit from a 105mm artillery shell.

Please help explain this to myself.

[Doodlebug]

Hmm. At first glance that does seem a little odd.

[JoMac]

I feel your pain...there's this and alot of other anomalies in CM.

Many times I feel casualites are to much, and other times not enough.

Joe

[bodkin]

I sometimes see this with AT Guns, it's like the sheild gives 360 degree protection like a concrete bunker.

[Redwolf]

I sometimes see this with AT Guns, it's like the sheild gives 360 degree protection like a concrete bunker.

I think the shield is not directional at all.

[Vanir Ausf B]

AT guns can be extraordinarily resistant to the effects of HE.

[Michael Emrys]

There have been numerous complaints that HE is insufficiently effective. So far the most telling explanation is that it was intentionally nerfed down to counteract the effects of infantry tending to bunch up on single ASs rather than taking a tactical spread as they would in real life and suffering ahistorical levels of casualties from mortars, artillery, and whatnot as a result. One hopes that at some early point the BFC team would revisit this issue and put all these factors into a better balance.

Michael

[Redwolf]

AT guns can be extraordinarily resistant to the effects of HE.

Well at least that one has been placed in a foxhole.

I don't have a problem with that one being resistant against hits that apparently didn't go into the foxhole.

[LukeFF]

I've seen this far too many times to count. I once dropped a full barrage of German 105s on a 17-pounder AT gun, just to see it get back up after the barrage ended. :mad:

[Bulletpoint]

I think the problem with artillery historically has been that you need a direct hit to be effective, and as accuracy was poor, that meant lots of shells needed to saturate the area. I'm not asking for artillery to be unbalanced or unhistorically deadly, I'm just asking for artillery to actually do real damage when you do get lucky and hit your target.

[c3k]

Not being a fanboi, but that 88 seems to be dug in. It is, after all, sitting in barnacles. Would that help resist HE?

The emplaced guns may not LOOK different than unemplaced guns, but perhaps they are treated much differently.

Ken

[Redwolf]

Not being a fanboi, but that 88 seems to be dug in. It is, after all, sitting in barnacles. Would that help resist HE?

The emplaced guns may not LOOK different than unemplaced guns, but perhaps they are treated much differently.

Ken

Errr. We are discussing two different screenshots. One in foxholes, one not.

A historical gun in direct observation of an artillery spotter (aka the spotter can see the gun) would need a bit more than a foxhole to be safe if it is getting a point target treatment.

[Fizou]

There is still some abstraction to take into account when it comes to HE and CMx2. HE effect is nerfed down as Emerys touched upon. A direct hit is not necessarily a direct hit.

The same thing can happen with small arms. A bullet can intersect with a pixel truppe and have that pixel soldier unharmed.

Bunched up pixel men only being able to run straight up and the lack of micro terrain needs to be abstracted.

[slysniper]

How quick we forget.

remember, back in the 1.xx series, everyone thought arty was too strong.

so where do we draw the line.

Plus, with crews not being able to leave the weapon, the guns were useless.

Crews were lasting seconds, not minutes

Now at least they have a chance, I like to think of it as if the crew went to a slit trench and then came back to man the gun, which would be more realistic.

But I have to agree, the one example here would have tossed the gun and made some scrap metal of it. But you know, the game just does not get it right all the time. the question is, does it get it right most of the time.

In general I have not had much of a problem taking out guns with directed arty strikes, and yes once in awhile one survives and manages to place fire on me. And that is how it should be.

But to each their own.

[Bulletpoint]

For a game that does so much for realism, I feel it should stick to "what you see is what you get".

If you see a shell blowing a big hole somewhere, you should be able to safely assume that no enemy is waiting at that particular place any longer (that is, in the actual shellhole).

If arty is too strong in the game, then there are other ways to balance it. Give less of it, make it less precise, make it slower to arrive.

But when it finally does arrive on target, it should be deadly when it actually hits..

[Redwolf]

There is still some abstraction to take into account when it comes to HE and CMx2. HE effect is nerfed down as Emerys touched upon. A direct hit is not necessarily a direct hit.

The same thing can happen with small arms. A bullet can intersect with a pixel truppe and have that pixel soldier unharmed.

Bunched up pixel men only being able to run straight up and the lack of micro terrain needs to be abstracted.

Errr, I don't think the game has direct hits for indirect fire on non-vehicles.