How can I prevent infantry running away?

[Xorg_Xalargsky]

@Oleksandr Thank you for the detailed guide!

One thing about RPG's is that they produce so much smoke that it's easy to spot them after just one shot. I really wish the game would include a Hit And Run command. The way I imagine it, it could be used like a Target Briefly command, but based on the number of shots or "fire until taking return fire", after the command is finished, the team would go to the next waypoint or some location away from the target (kind of like hitting the Retreat button). As of now, it's possible to have a similar effect with the Target Briefly command, but there's too much guesswork and it relies on up-to-the-second timing.

[slysniper]

3 hours ago, LUCASWILLEN05 said:

From what I have seen so far with the current update (and I only purchased this a week ago) units in cover coming under heavy fire stay there most of the time rather than bugging out. Units in the open but in a bad situation (heavy close range fire causing casualties probably will bug out. Which is as it should be.

Perhaps the way forward on this is to document situations and responses taking into account tactical circumstances, type of cover. morale, leadership, amount of incoming fire  etc. Videoing what happens and quantifying the ratings of the unit in question is necessary to assess what happens and why 

You are correct in the fact, that it takes proper testing and reporting to get any real results that BF is interested in. Along with the fact that you also have to show why something needs to change to be more correct to real life actions.

So instead of just saying troops will seek the closest cover when routing, they want me find a documented study that somewhat proves such statements.

I normally do just enough testing to help me play the game , I have no interest in proving anything to anyone. At times recently I do not notice the issue as I play, other times it seems pretty clear something does not seem right as to why the troops are breaking from cover anymore. So just in that observation, I figure it is going to be a challenge to prove when and how much this event is happening and then to somehow point out it is not realistic.

Or you can see that many here through simple observation can tell its not correct, but then the challenge is, what is correct.

 

So back to this statement

As for breaking from present cover and fortifications, I think it is pretty clear that has been a undesired effect in the latest changes.

But before, sometimes they were too determined to stay in place no matter the amount of fire they were receiving.

 

So how do you get to something in between, and then who is to say if it is correct and what correct is.

They could make it perfect for what I think it should be, but I can promise you there be plenty of players complaining it was still totally wrong because of their perception of what it should be.

I feel for BF every time a tread like this pops up.

( but I can at least say, My vote this time is their latest change lost as much ground as it did to improve  aspects as to how the infantry acts - I am not saying my opinion is correct, even if I think it is with what knowledge I have on the subject)

[LUCASWILLEN05]

15 hours ago, slysniper said:

You are correct in the fact, that it takes proper testing and reporting to get any real results that BF is interested in. Along with the fact that you also have to show why something needs to change to be more correct to real life actions.

So instead of just saying troops will seek the closest cover when routing, they want me find a documented study that somewhat proves such statements.

I normally do just enough testing to help me play the game , I have no interest in proving anything to anyone. At times recently I do not notice the issue as I play, other times it seems pretty clear something does not seem right as to why the troops are breaking from cover anymore. So just in that observation, I figure it is going to be a challenge to prove when and how much this event is happening and then to somehow point out it is not realistic.

Or you can see that many here through simple observation can tell its not correct, but then the challenge is, what is correct.

 

So back to this statement

As for breaking from present cover and fortifications, I think it is pretty clear that has been a undesired effect in the latest changes.

But before, sometimes they were too determined to stay in place no matter the amount of fire they were receiving.

 

So how do you get to something in between, and then who is to say if it is correct and what correct is.

They could make it perfect for what I think it should be, but I can promise you there be plenty of players complaining it was still totally wrong because of their perception of what it should be.

I feel for BF every time a tread like this pops up.

( but I can at least say, My vote this time is their latest change lost as much ground as it did to improve  aspects as to how the infantry acts - I am not saying my opinion is correct, even if I think it is with what knowledge I have on the subject)

Personally I have not noticed anything seriously wrong. Actually if a unit is out in the open and comes under heavy fire  they probably should bug out if the fire is heavy and close range. Maybe if they are in good cover (trenches, buildings) they might stay  where they are if they cannot reach better cover very quickly.

I  do not see Battlefront making changes until they are convinced by video evidence of what you are saying. Personally I am far from convinced myself  that there is an issue here. If you can provide evidence to the contrary such as videos of incidents combined with information regarding troop quality, motivation, levels of suppression which may affect the result that would generate solid data. So far nobody has provided any firm evidence

[slysniper]

true, having some documented events would help the discussion as to what is going wrong.

I believe there is a earlier thread with some of the issues in video format.

I know I do not have any because I do not have a program that will create  video, cannot get the free version to work either.

but I can make images and show it in slide format. So I have no issue doing that the next time I have one of the events that seem non-logical.

there is others in this thread that should be posting some examples also, if you are wanting to be heard.

 

Because, here is proof already, some think the present system is great, while some of us do not. Who is to say whom is right, without some hard examples to discuss, its just a waste of efforts with all involved here.

[JoMac]

It's interesting, actually...I remember in v3, that some were complaining that it took a long time to break an Enemy Inf Squad (suppression didn't last long enough, etc)...So, in all my v3 WWII Titles, I had to actually reduce Moral by one state lower along with some soft factors just to get the desired results I was looking for (Vets would become Reg or Green, etc).

Now, in v4 I have to do the complete opposite in order to even remotely give the same desired results. 

* Side Note*...How I once enjoyed v1 Days of CMBN where Inf Firepower was reasonable, and tactical Casualties were lower (albeit, still twice it should be compared to RL)...Now, with each and every version comes even higher Firepower (Small Arms & Arty Increase), and easier chance of breaking...This, to the point where just showing up on the Battlefield is going to be a deadly affair no matter what. 

Edited May 2, 2017 by JoMc67

[slysniper]

25 minutes ago, JoMc67 said:

It's interesting, actually...I remember in v3, in all my WWII Titles, that I had to actually reduce Moral by one state lower along with soft factors just to get the desired results I was looking for (Vets would become Reg or Green, etc)...Now, in v4 I have to do the complete opposite in order to even remotely give the same desired results. 

So, in a sense, all you are doing is taking moral and adjusting it to make the infantry react as to how you feel they should respond within the game.

That is one way to get what you want. 

I always thought that it would have been nice to have some features within the game to allow the player to adjust quickly how the game worked in some aspects.

slide bars that would allow for fast universal adjustments.

(like spotting, morale, aiming accuracy, or any feature that is somewhat subjective as to what is correct.)

 

[JoMac]

25 minutes ago, slysniper said:

So, in a sense, all you are doing is taking moral and adjusting it to make the infantry react as to how you feel they should respond within the game.

That is one way to get what you want. 

I always thought that it would have been nice to have some features within the game to allow the player to adjust quickly how the game worked in some aspects.

slide bars that would allow for fast universal adjustments.

(like spotting, morale, aiming accuracy, or any feature that is somewhat subjective as to what is correct.)

 

Yes, a slide bar adjustment at beginning of game to represent either a Low or High intensity Combat for that Scenario, would be great...Maybe an adjustment if it's a Meeting vs .Probe vs. Attack/Defense. 

 

Edited May 2, 2017 by JoMc67

[LUCASWILLEN05]

On 5/2/2017 at 8:53 PM, JoMc67 said:

Yes, a slide bar adjustment at beginning of game to represent either a Low or High intensity Combat for that Scenario, would be great...Maybe an adjustment if it's a Meeting vs .Probe vs. Attack/Defense. 

 

Sounds more like a scenario designer's tool to me. Perhaps rather than a slide bar something like this should be implemented as a drop down menu. Perhaps placed in the description or data sections of the scenario editor. I do not feel that a player should be able to change the intensity of fighting as such but a scenario designer could

Edited May 5, 2017 by LUCASWILLEN05

[slysniper]

Well, that is a matter of opinion.

I would think giving the player the ability to adjust many aspects of the game in a quick and easy way as to how it plays and how the troops react would take away many of the problems we hear on these forum pages. Most threads are just like this one, with some players thinking the troops rout too quickly, while others disagree they are just fine.

Wouldn't it be nice to be able to adjust it to what you like quickly without having to get buried into the scenario settings that are needed.

 

face it, most of their game sales and people that play, play these games solitaire, they come at many different skill levels. From not understanding war and tactics hardly at all to people who have done the real thing. Letting them have easy control on how the game plays to some extent, does not hurt anyone. For those people, they can make the game challenging to their likings.

 

As for us that like competition and playing others. Then it is easy to set all the setting back to the game designers defaults or to a tournament masters settings or whatever else is wanted. Look at it presently, when is the last time a tournament was not played on the elite setting, Iron is more realistic in a sense, but as a community, everyone has come  to a understanding of what the majority likes and it is accepted as a good h2h setting.. I would think slide bar settings would find a acceptable norm given some time and having players imput as to what the majority likes.

It sure would be better than this, creating threads, hoping for some magic in the facts that the designer will tweak the settings slightly to make the game react more to what ones perceptions are as to how troops should be reacting.

Edited May 5, 2017 by slysniper
type error

[slysniper]

Like the designer has any time for this or should we want them wasting time with setting adjustments anyway. Give us the players the power to tweak the engine more.

I suggested slide bar, but as you have pointed out, it could be any type of format. you want - a pull up screen with boxes behind categories that give you adjustments from numbers 1-10, then so be it. I could care less about how we are given the ability, just give us the ability to adjust more and stop acting as god and thinking your game must be played by the default settings you select as to how troops react.