Rex Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 Okay, I realize that this has probably been discussed before, but here goes... Shouldn't squads be able to share ammo between themselves? Last night I had two squads in the same building. One was 'low' on ammo, but the other had ammo for 17 volleys. In real life, wouldn't they split up the ammo? Why not have a 'Share ammo' command for this type of circumstance? Rex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOS was 71331 Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 Which one was low on ammo -- the American one or the German one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tom punkrawk Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 Hahaha ------------------ We ain't got no place to go,let's go to a punk rawk show Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 To some degree units would share ammo, but if you think that some grunt is going to give up half of his remaining ammo (in this case 50% less than what he started with), in the heat of battle, I don't think so He might toss a clip/strip over to the other guys, but I doubt he would give half. After all, bullets mean life, so the guy is basically giving up his own chance of coming out alive. Perhaps in a lull he would yield some if ordered, but this is outside of CM's scope. Of course, the above realistic selfishness flies in the face of über commander desires to have everybody combat effective We do have a slight abstraction for sharing/scrounging ammo. No weapon FULLY runs out of ammo. Guys harbor a couple of last bursts "in case of emergency" and also carry a few that they might have picked up on the battlefield or bummed off another unit. Not 100% accurate, but neither is an ammo sharing order (imagine ordering two squads from 100m away to meet up to swap ammo! How realistic would that be? ). Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freyland Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 Uh Steve? My Mortar guys in "last defense" were very much out of ammo. Which, I might add, was most unfortunate. Jonathan ------------------ For the last time, you don't need antibiotics! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Deans Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 Redistributing ammo is something that is well within CM's scope. In certain circumstances, no, but a lull does not always mean a pause for the night. It could be 10 minutes here or there. In contact, this could prove to be most difficult, of course, but as the reserve platoon of the company that has taken the foot hold of the objective and is now behind the other platoons who are continuing to fight through, why, this is the reason for such tactics. The issue of "ammo is life" has merit and this is perhaps why the idea was not for automatic redistribution but rather an "order" for it to be done. The platoon commander has to keep his platoon effective and this is one way he has to do this. I know that the subject has been talked about before, but as with many others, the demo casts new light. The issue of ammo resupply. In a large battle of, say, battalion strength (the "comfortable" size of CM) this is a factor that should be included. A battalion battle of 60 or 90 turns (much too short, but this is a game) would be incomplete without resup. After one attack sections and platoons need more ammo. Ammo is everywhere on the battlefield. The key is where the ammo is and more importantly where it isn't and to have good enough admin to get to where it is needed. The issue of limits is taken for granted but it is unrealistic to consider that in a battlaion battle that no element will resup. I would propose resup at the company level by a unit of the company HQ. The Company Sergeant Majors of Commonwealth infantry companies did this as their battlefield job. Ammo up, casualties and PWs back. The company goes into action with a small "tail" just for this purpose. Look, I know that there are many things that people are asking for but these items are key to the reality of the 30 to 90 minute battlefield. I certainly am not advocating the "uber" ammo cache that units can sit beside and tap into the unlimited surplus of MG ammo. I won't bore anyone with my ideas of how to incorporate this into the game, but if it hasn't been done already, maybe take a second look at the subject. Thanks Rob Deans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 Ammo resupply is in for the campaigns and happens between the battles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 Rob, The "LOW" ammo behaviour works pretty well. They fire but not often and not with full firepower (its as though they're down to their last few clips and are REALLY only shooting at sure targets)... Since they can't ever run out this simulates the "I'll only fire one round at a time cause I'm low on ammo..> Gotta make it last." situation Freyland... Ammo for mortars, AT guns, tanks etc IS tracked to the last round and so they CAN run out. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Los Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 "but if you think that some grunt is going to give up half of his remaining ammo (in this case 50% less than what he started with), in the heat of battle, I don't think so He might toss a clip/strip over to the other guys, but I doubt he would give half." That is exactly what's supposed to happen. Consolidation and reorganization is as important part of any action or drill as the actual fighting. It normally entails the team leaders getting (among other things) a count on everyone's ammo and then redistributing it so everyone has the same amount. As a squad leader/PL it's worse than useless if one guy had 10 clips and everyone has one! Once that's done the ammo report goes up the chain-plt leader-company etc. If there is major disparity then some redistribution occurs. However in CM terms it might be a pretty awkward process (though handled well in the campaign system.) Usually consolidation and reorganization occurs after you have secured the objective or dispatched with the immediate threat. If there were to be a redistribute command, then perhaps it would require the two transferring units to be in "base" contact with each other within the command radius of the leader? Of course the smart thing is to keep a wary eye on your fire distribution during the battle in the first place. Though IMO things work pretty well now so I wouldn't get in a rash trying to do something. Los Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C Colapietro Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 One thing I would like to see (and I realize that this touches dangerously close to a topic that has been closed) is the ability to scrounge ammo from downed soldiers in the unit. Of course this would involve tracking individual bodies... In a situation where a squad is holed up in a strong point like a building I think this makes complete sense and could have a big effect on hold-out time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Posted November 9, 1999 Author Share Posted November 9, 1999 Of course, you guys know better than I whether sharing ammo was a common occurance or not. But it seems to me, if I was about to rush across an open field, and the men who were suppling me with covering fire said 'Sorry, we're out of ammo', I'd probably toss 'em a few clips. I realize that 'ammo is life', but having more men firing at my enemy seems to me a better tactic than having everyone else sit back while I did all the shooting (and attracting all the return fire). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Deans Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 "Since they can't ever run out..." I was unaware of this. Thanks. Still, a redistribute command with "base to base" contact would be worth while. Thanks Rob Deans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 First off, only small arms can't run out of ammo. Mortar rounds, AP, bazooka, etc. can. Los, you hit upon what I was talking about. Redistribution of ammo is something that happens, but not in the heat of battle (or at least to the degree that people are requesting). I think of the scene in Saving Private Ryan where they are redistributing ammo. That makes sense, but is not relevant to an individual CM batte (campaign, yes). What doesn't make realistic sense is moving squads around, during the course of a firefight, explicity to swap ammo. This is what people would do all the time if we had such a feature. Squad x is on the left flank, y is on the right. 200m seperate them, and they are not part of the formation. One has lots of ammo, the other none. Move orders are issued so that the two can meet and swap ammo. Complete nonsense realistically, and could have a significant impact on the battle, but how are we supposed to prevent this? Squads with ammo are not some sort of mobile refuling station, and that is what they would become. So we have to remain abstract here. While two squads, in the same position, might realisticallly toss each other ammo (to some degree), by and large this is not enough to justify some sort of game function to allow this. Yet another case of a small abstraction to avoid a much bigger one. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebaker Posted November 9, 1999 Share Posted November 9, 1999 <<But it seems to me, if I was about to rush across an open field, and the men who were suppling me with covering fire said 'Sorry, we're out of ammo', I'd probably toss 'em a few clips.>> Rex, I wonder if we're attaching more rational thought than occured in the panic, fear and confusion of the typical battlefield. I've read that most soldiers didn't fire their weapons at all. Maybe lack of ammo wouldn't be a consideration. But I'm certainly not an expert on this subject. Just wondering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Deans Posted November 10, 1999 Share Posted November 10, 1999 I'm not trying to antagonize anybody here but redistribution of ammo is alot more common than is being talked about. Redistribution is done at the section level after a firefight. Redistribution of ammo happens after a platoon's attack. Redistribution happens after a company objective is taken though resupply might be more the order of the day. The comment about "a mobile refeuling station.." well to some extent, it is. If the two lead sections of a platoon fight through an objective, once that local area is secure (could be a house, a field, a copse of trees) then the platoon will redistribute from section to section. Mags, grenades and the like are stripped off those who have and given to those who need. No, this can not happen in action to the same extent but at a lull in that platoons battle, yes. When Private Ryan was mentioned I'm guessing that the redistribution scene was the section attack on the MG. What, 30 sec to do this? Imagine this.... a platoon attacking that MG and "one on the other side of the radar". The platoon reorgs and goes into reserve as the next platoon sweeps through and tackles a bunker 100m away over the rise. This is certainly within CMs scale. That first platoon that took out the two MGs at the radar? They are redistributing ammo. The third (uncommitted) section of the platoon reorgs up with the two committed sections and the Plt Sgt and two runners come around and take a bandolier off every man from that third section. The battle rages over the rise as the next platoon attacks their bunker. Those bandoliers go straight to the other sections. This scenario could take place in a built up area too as platoons leap frog through, from building to building. After the building is secure and sentries are posted, the admin takes over. The point is that this is done after a bound. The way the game is, many bounds are encompassed with in a single game (Re: both demo scenarios). I am curious as to the basis that the "against redistribution" argument is based. Please adivse..... Thanks Rob Deans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sten Posted November 10, 1999 Share Posted November 10, 1999 Would it be a good idea to have a "LOW" unit be able to utilise another units ammo, if they were close enough? This would not be the same thing as redistributing ammo, but would reflect the handling over of one clip. Ex. A rifle squad with "LOW" ammo is by the north wall in a house. A rifle squad with "17" ammo is by the south wall. The house gets attacked from the north, out of LOS from the squad by the south wall. The north squad fires at almost full strength, despite having "LOW" ammo and the other (south) squads ammo count is dropped to "16". The south squad 'helps' their buddies with one volley, because the north squad *needs* it. Wouldn't that be both doable and realistic? Sten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beamup Posted November 10, 1999 Share Posted November 10, 1999 Realistic, yes - doable, I'd have to guess a resounding NO. From a programming standpoint, what you suggest would almost certainly be difficult and time-consuming. It may sound trivial, but I've tried to program similar things and it isn't at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Los Posted November 10, 1999 Share Posted November 10, 1999 RE: Moving squads to redistribute ammo: "Complete nonsense realistically, and could have a significant impact on the battle, but how are we supposed to prevent this?" Well, presuming that you were even predisposed to implement a redistribution feature the only realistic way would be to have squads in contact with each other. That IS realistic and how it would be done. As to the issue of having sqauds 100 yards away move towards each other, well that's a platoon leader issue, he needs to be able to control his people. A conslidation and reorganization by defination entails pulling the platoon together and getting your **** together. However it should be something that only squads in the same platoon should be able to do. The whole redistribution thing needs to be a deliberate act if it's to be done at all. Anything more than platoon redistribution should be a post game issue. So the point about squads from differnt platoons sharing is probbably best left untouched. Rob, good points! Again, however the proper management of one's fire distribution and fire discipline will normally make this a non-issue. Los P.S> And as Steve says (and as I was thinking) the way they have implemented low small arms ammunition works very well in this regard. [This message has been edited by Los (edited 11-10-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tss Posted November 10, 1999 Share Posted November 10, 1999 How about allowing two squads of the same platoon to share ammo if the platoon leader is also present? Similarily, squads of same company could share ammo if the company commander is present. -Tommi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest L Tankersley Posted November 10, 1999 Share Posted November 10, 1999 Hmmm, here's a question maybe someone can answer. How is ammo usage handled for half-squads? I haven't deployed any squads in the demo yet, I'm wondering if the half-squads use their ammo half as fast, or if they each get ammo equal to the parent squad and when they recombine the new squad has the average of the ammo level of the two halves, or what. Leland J. Tankersley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Deans Posted November 10, 1999 Share Posted November 10, 1999 "(something that only)squads in the same platoon should be able to do." I agree. In contact with the Platoon Commander and touching bases. This makes sense. Only I doubt that it will make it to the game. Can always wish.......... Rob Deans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted November 11, 1999 Share Posted November 11, 1999 Rob, you do make some good points, but I still don't think it is really that important to add. I don't know about you, but generally all my squads within a platoon generally burn through their ammo at about the same rate. Sometimes one guy winds up with about 25% left while another has Low. This is not a lot of ammo to divide up, so I rather leave it with the guy and have one fairly effective squad as opposed to three very weak ones. And generally my squad with more ammo has taken fewer casualties, so it is generally the unit I will lead off with for the next skirmish. The big difference in ammo levels comes from squads of different platoons. One platoon is on the flank, isn't touched, and another is in the thick of the fighting and runs low. That sort of thing. However, swapping ammo between squads, of a single platoon, in contact, with time penalties is not a bad idea. But it isn't going to make the cut due to the limited time we have and the low game/realism yield (watch ammo levels in your next COUPLE battle and I think you will see that it isn't a big issue that needs to be tackled. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Deans Posted November 11, 1999 Share Posted November 11, 1999 I don't expect that any suggestions, mine or otherwise, will be incorporated. I just like disscussing things that I see here. Good luck to BTS as the final version approaches. Rob Deans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted November 11, 1999 Share Posted November 11, 1999 We like discussing them as well In fact, I forwarded off the ammo suggestion that was formulated here so that Charles can put it into The List. It won't make it into this rev, but it is a GOOD, realistic idea that isn't that is doable and probably can't be abused to any serious degree. The thing I love about CM is that we *CAN* talk about these thigns. Because CM has so many of the basic things right, we can sit here and discuss the finer points. Note we haven't had big discussions about one solder lugging around 10 Panzerfausts, or tanks that have MGs when in fact they didn't. And not once have we called the people in a discussion of realism here "fat morons" Yup, we look at this as a team effort, and we are all on the same side Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts