Agenda / Handguns.

[semmes]

"The effectiveness of handguns is roughly comparable to that of rifles at 40 and 80 m."

This is from the intense testing (Pdf) by Drifter Man. This game is a zombie-shooter. I mean, they shoot at you and you don't take cover, pistols are like rifles...
This is the official website of the game but I wonder why it is an anathema to say that this game is a zombie-shooter game.

I am still testing the AI in one scenario...
The AI is deploying where it should even if I had to move one wood out of the way, the AI is specially fond of immobilizing lorries in woods. I wonder if it would be too realistic to mod the AI so that lorries don't go through woods, over trenches or stay on the front line, by the troops they were carrying.

Still 2 rf pl in the wood.
Total number of men in those units taking casualties / Total KIA. Total number of leaders-LMG-rifles / KIA.

36/6        L         4/-          -
                M        6/3         50%
                R        26/3        <20%

Under mortar fire.

One educated guess would be that the AI is going to spend all its artillery support in the first target it gets.
Another one would be that bullets from a MG  300m away are wise enough to hit gunners but not leaders -this time.

45/21        L        5/1            20%
                 M        6/4           66%    
                 R        34/16        <50%    
54/27        L        6/1            <20%        
                  M        8/5           >60%    
                  R        40/21        ~50%
65/37        L        11/3           >20%    
                  M        10/6         60%
                  R        44/28       <70%

Firing 300m away:        1 sniper               0    KIA
                                       1 (round) AT        2
                                       Artillery               24
                                       3 HMG                 11
One HMG suffered (the) one casualty while (surprisingly) crawling away, the leader; 1 out of 6.

In another AI deployment, final KIA, including some Germans.
R 54/17        L        6/3              50%
                    M        9/2             <33%
                    R        39/12          ~33%
G 24/6         L        3/1               33%
                    M        3/2              66%
                    R        18/3            <20%
I would say that the formula used for -who is- KIA is biased. We are playing with loaded dice.

 

"the more 'realistic' you make the game the slower it's going to play because the harder it is to kill the enemy the longer it takes to complete the mission." I will translate this as: This is a zombie-shooter game for zombie-shooter players. You are in the wrong game, mate! Translations are tricky, I know.

Somebody mentioned "realistic armour. Meaning the "incoming" plate of armour, so it's half-realistic; "realistic" unless somebody has to write too much code.

Some people around here seems to have the agenda that this is the greatest game ever, even if I wonder if they are being paid to say so. I may be wrong.

 

Do I want the realism of B. Mauldin? No, thank you very much. Even if I wonder how many people around here have been firing at something 200m away, not in a range, no a clearly-marked, huge target.

In case somebody missed the point I will say it again: Pistols are like rifles at 80m. This game is a zombie-shooter.

 

Dig a hole in your backyard while it is raining. Sit in there while the water climbs up your ankles. Pour cold mud down your shirt. Sit there for 48 hours, and, so there is no danger of you dozing off, imagine that a guy is sneaking around waiting for a chance to club you on the head or to set your house on fire. Get out of the hole, fill a suitcase of rocks, pick it up, put a shotgun in your other hand and walk on the muddiest road you can find. Fall flat on your face every few minutes, as you imagine big meteors streaking down to sock you. Snoop around until you find a bull. Try to figure out a way to sneak around him without letting him see you. When he does see you, run like hell all the way back to your hole in the backyard, drop your suitcase and gun and get in. If you repeat this performance every three days for several months you may begin to understand why an infantryman gets out of breath. But still you won’t understand how he feels when things get tough. B. Mauldin.

[Monty's Mighty Moustache]

If you don't like it, don't play it. There are plenty of other games on the market.

If you have found a genuine bug and have evidence to back it up then raise a bug and hopefully it will get incorporated into a patch.

Those are the choices, raising repetitive threads to bang on about the same point is not going to get you very far.

MMM

[semmes]

In case somebody missed the point I will say it again: Pistols are like rifles at 80m. This game is a zombie-shooter

[chuckdyke]

10 minutes ago, semmes said:

"The effectiveness of handguns is roughly comparable to that of rifles at 40 and 80 m."

This is just about the most ridiculous statement ever. Pity I can't invite you to a range and see or you can even hit the paper of a standard bullseye target at 25 meters. Most people with military experience are struggling. 

[Bufo]

19 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

This is just about the most ridiculous statement ever. Pity I can't invite you to a range and see or you can even hit the paper of a standard bullseye target at 25 meters. Most people with military experience are struggling. 

LoL you actually agree with him (I suspect you didn't want to), because of  your obliviousness to even try to understand that he is talking about the game and not real life.

[Bufo]

Where can I find this test analysis?

[chuckdyke]

1 minute ago, Bufo said:

he is talking about the game

Show me a screenshot that a pixeltupper is placing a shot at over 9 action squares. They hardly ever use a pistol. 

[Monty's Mighty Moustache]

29 minutes ago, semmes said:

In case somebody missed the point I will say it again: Pistols are like rifles at 80m. This game is a zombie-shooter

Didn't miss the point, my comment still stands. Provide proof and raise a bug or live with it. Simples.

MMM

[The_Capt]

59 minutes ago, semmes said:

"The effectiveness of handguns is roughly comparable to that of rifles at 40 and 80 m."

This is from the intense testing (Pdf) by Drifter Man. This game is a zombie-shooter. I mean, they shoot at you and you don't take cover, pistols are like rifles...
This is the official website of the game but I wonder why it is an anathema to say that this game is a zombie-shooter game

@dbsapp come back!!

Huh, so I am not even sure how to test this.  In CMCW, at least, I can't even find a tactical unit that is all pistols.  Closest is a tank crew but even the Soviet crews have at least one AKS-74, US crews have Grease Guns.  Even the Supply sections have rifles.  I would very much like to see this pdf by "Drifter Man" to see how he isolated and tested pistol behavior.  I assume by "effective" he would have to compare fire fight results against another small unit (same experience etc) armed with rifles and find that there was a 50-50 split in who won the fire fight?  I mean the bullet from a handgun can easily travel out to 80m with lethal force so technically, from a strictly kinetic energy point of view (i.e. hurling metal) a pistol can be compared to a rifle, the same way a house cat can be compared to a Bengal Tiger...they both purr and will walk over your keyboard but the overall effect is quite different.

As to "zombie-shooter", hey I like it.  Have you seen what Back 4 Blood is making out there.  Hell if BFC wanted to sell out we could do a WWZ (but legally distinct) knock-off and make millions (Battle of Yonkers etc).

As to how it applies to the current series within the franchise, well it is an anathema (nice Scrabble word btw) because it is an insult to all those behind the scenes who spent hundreds of hours researching, modeling and building the game in order to make it as close to a "military grade" (not my words) simulator as we can get it.  You can see that when a hypothetical incoherent troll comes onto the company forum to make unsupported claims in this direction that it causes a bit of push-back.

But hey keep em coming, this is an interesting way to pass a Tuesday while awaiting Steam release.

[chuckdyke]

18 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

I can't even find a tactical unit that is all pistols.

Maybe it is the data for submachine guns that at least makes sense. 

[The_Capt]

Just now, chuckdyke said:

Maybe it is the data for submachine guns that at least makes sense. 

That might actually make more sense, submachine guns at 40-80m can put out a lot of bullets accurately and in many ways are superior to rifles at that range.  That is why we came up with the assault rifle as an unholy hybrid.  However, as with many of semmes posts, this remains enigmatic. 

[chuckdyke]

4 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

However, as with many of semmes posts, this remains enigmatic. 

I agree I just reacted on the first silly statement.

[ratdeath]

Good news everyone, semmes have started a new thread!

[The_Capt]

[MikeyD]

Players often do stupid things then blame the game for it. I recall a post from an outraged player complaining that doing a bum's rush on a bailed tanker got his bolt action rifle wielding pixeltruppen shot. Why did you think they wouldn't get shot? Just yesterday I was watching an old Youtube video of someone playing CMSF2 'Al Huqf Engagement'. In one part a Syrian RPG man pauses in mid-firefight, draws his Marakov pistol, fires three rounds in the direction of the Americans, then continues running down the street out of view. Pistols aren't being carried for decoration, they're lethal weapons.

[Redwolf]

I can't parse the OP.

Is the complaint that handguns are too effective in CMx2?

[Vergeltungswaffe]

Something about shooting zombies with pistols being just as effective as shooting them with rifles...

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[LukeFF]

5 hours ago, semmes said:

"The effectiveness of handguns is roughly comparable to that of rifles at 40 and 80 m."

This is from the intense testing (Pdf) by Drifter Man. This game is a zombie-shooter. I mean, they shoot at you and you don't take cover, pistols are like rifles...
This is the official website of the game but I wonder why it is an anathema to say that this game is a zombie-shooter game.

I am still testing the AI in one scenario...
The AI is deploying where it should even if I had to move one wood out of the way, the AI is specially fond of immobilizing lorries in woods. I wonder if it would be too realistic to mod the AI so that lorries don't go through woods, over trenches or stay on the front line, by the troops they were carrying.

Still 2 rf pl in the wood.
Total number of men in those units taking casualties / Total KIA. Total number of leaders-LMG-rifles / KIA.

36/6        L         4/-          -
                M        6/3         50%
                R        26/3        <20%

Under mortar fire.

One educated guess would be that the AI is going to spend all its artillery support in the first target it gets.
Another one would be that bullets from a MG  300m away are wise enough to hit gunners but not leaders -this time.

45/21        L        5/1            20%
                 M        6/4           66%    
                 R        34/16        <50%    
54/27        L        6/1            <20%        
                  M        8/5           >60%    
                  R        40/21        ~50%
65/37        L        11/3           >20%    
                  M        10/6         60%
                  R        44/28       <70%

Firing 300m away:        1 sniper               0    KIA
                                       1 (round) AT        2
                                       Artillery               24
                                       3 HMG                 11
One HMG suffered (the) one casualty while (surprisingly) crawling away, the leader; 1 out of 6.

In another AI deployment, final KIA, including some Germans.
R 54/17        L        6/3              50%
                    M        9/2             <33%
                    R        39/12          ~33%
G 24/6         L        3/1               33%
                    M        3/2              66%
                    R        18/3            <20%
I would say that the formula used for -who is- KIA is biased. We are playing with loaded dice.

 

"the more 'realistic' you make the game the slower it's going to play because the harder it is to kill the enemy the longer it takes to complete the mission." I will translate this as: This is a zombie-shooter game for zombie-shooter players. You are in the wrong game, mate! Translations are tricky, I know.

Somebody mentioned "realistic armour. Meaning the "incoming" plate of armour, so it's half-realistic; "realistic" unless somebody has to write too much code.

Some people around here seems to have the agenda that this is the greatest game ever, even if I wonder if they are being paid to say so. I may be wrong.

 

Do I want the realism of B. Mauldin? No, thank you very much. Even if I wonder how many people around here have been firing at something 200m away, not in a range, no a clearly-marked, huge target.

In case somebody missed the point I will say it again: Pistols are like rifles at 80m. This game is a zombie-shooter.

 

Dig a hole in your backyard while it is raining. Sit in there while the water climbs up your ankles. Pour cold mud down your shirt. Sit there for 48 hours, and, so there is no danger of you dozing off, imagine that a guy is sneaking around waiting for a chance to club you on the head or to set your house on fire. Get out of the hole, fill a suitcase of rocks, pick it up, put a shotgun in your other hand and walk on the muddiest road you can find. Fall flat on your face every few minutes, as you imagine big meteors streaking down to sock you. Snoop around until you find a bull. Try to figure out a way to sneak around him without letting him see you. When he does see you, run like hell all the way back to your hole in the backyard, drop your suitcase and gun and get in. If you repeat this performance every three days for several months you may begin to understand why an infantryman gets out of breath. But still you won’t understand how he feels when things get tough. B. Mauldin.

(Yawn)

[Bud Backer]

As with many hyperbolic discussions, this one appears rooted in something real, but the signal to noise ratio clouds the message.

One has to refer to this thread, more specifically the comprehensive testing done by @Drifter Man to see where this is coming from. 
 

On page 23 of the PDF he posted, one can see that at 40m the M1911 pistol is showing a higher kills/min rate than 2 of the rifles: the Lee Enfield MkIV, and the Kar98k. At 80m they are roughly on par, as seen on page 24. (I’m discounting the rifles firing rifle grenades as the RoF would be low and their purpose is not the same as rifles firing bullets). 

However, context is king. This is not a first shot kill probability chart. Comparing someone firing a pistol at a target as quickly as possible and easily reloading is not the same as a bolt action rifle. Give each man one bullet and one would see a different result. 

I’d be inclined to say this is a poor understanding of the test and the results, but given the bombastic posting style it’s hard to take as much more than trolling. I find this unfortunate as an open and honest discussion of these results would lead to greater understanding of how things work and why they work a particular way (and perhaps an object lesson in statistical analysis). 

 

 

 

Edited November 16, 2021 by Bud Backer

[Pelican Pal]

The 80 meter efficiency seems a little too good for WW2 style pistol shooting but the 40 meter seems perfectly reasonable.

[Bud Backer]

Based on anecdotal information, I would be inclined to agree. But it is important to remember that this is not saying a pistol is more accurate at that range, just that it’s RoF overcomes it’s inaccuracy relative to bolt action rifles. How true that is, I can’t say. It seems slightly counterintuitive, but I’ve often seen that when one really gets real world data what we expect and what truly happens are not always the same.

PS: tests are invaluable in gathering data, but it’s also important to remember that they are modelling one specific situation: what the tester designed, and that situation may be uncommon or even extremely rare in real battles. How often does a single man with a pistol face a single man with a rifle, both with no cover or concealment? Compound that with the fact that this number (kills/min) is derived from thousands of such encounters, which tends to make what are actually a great number of outcomes distilled into a single number that we see as a singular possibility rather than the full range of possibilities. 

Edited November 16, 2021 by Bud Backer

[MikeyD]

Any pistol in the game will go 'bang-bang-bang' as fast as you can pull the trigger. That's a luxury bolt action rifles don't have, especially if the rifleman is on his feet and moving. A low chance of hitting the target is not the same as no chance of hitting the target.

People talk of CM casualty rate being too high but we're talking WWII where as many men can die in a single afternoon's battle as died in all eight years of the Iraq war. In the Battle of the Bulge the US saw 89,500 casualties. That averages out to more than 2,000 men a day, every day for 40 days. and that's just the Americans.

Edited November 16, 2021 by MikeyD

[Bud Backer]

I think MikeyD has a point..

Or at least, his agrees with mine.

I’m all out of upvotes today. 

Edited November 16, 2021 by Bud Backer

[The_Capt]

Ok, dug into this a bit.  Looks like he used a British tank crew and Engineer Bn HQ to test the pistols.  Still not clear on how he isolated the pistol shooter but I will take him at his word.  This is really good and detailed testing btw.  Anyway for the M1911:

So what is the issue here exactly.  If I am reading this correctly, sure the old 1911 could hit someone at 80m but it takes 135 rounds to do it.  That is over 19 mags!!  The M1 took 85 (which is worth looking at as it is a little low at 80m but these are targets in foxholes).  The Lee Enfield and Kar 98 take 65-66 rounds per kill.  The Springfield takes 30.  How are these roughly comparable? (See pg 23 graph).  They do seem comparable on kill per minute but this looks more a function of rate of fire, a semi-automatic pistol being much faster than a bolt action.

This is a lot of hard work but it also misses a big question...how do these weapons compare in suppression?  These would be some interesting results.

As to the OP, did you actually check on this statement before you immediately tied it to your forgone conclusion?  I am betting, no.  God deliver us from lazy trolls.  I have a lot of respect for hard working trolls, they put the time in.  But this trend in lazy trolls who grab nuggets of information out of context just to reverse engineer to their assumption...well that simply will not do.

[Bud Backer]

Quote

They do seem comparable on kill per minute but this looks more a function of rate of fire, a semi-automatic pistol being much faster than a bolt action.

Exactly my point:

Quote

But it is important to remember that this is not saying a pistol is more accurate at that range, just that it’s RoF overcomes it’s inaccuracy relative to bolt action rifles. 

Must say I’m glad someone with actual experience looked at this.

Edited November 16, 2021 by Bud Backer