Agenda / Handguns.

[The_Capt]

8 hours ago, dbsapp said:

Vlad ordered to postpone our psy-op until AT-4 issue is fixed.

Damn your fuzzy Russian eyes!  That campaign was creating buzz.  Ok, ok...AT-4s are on the list.  You wanted them as a buying option for specialist teams?

[dbsapp]

2 hours ago, The_Capt said:

AT-4s are on the list

That's great news, thank you!

Yeah, I guess they should be an option for specialist teams. 

[semmes]

 

we have established...
Really? Before, anybody mention anything, anywhere?

...they shoot at you and you don't take cover,
By "cowards" I think you mean "training" and that should be "always".

...military trucks are by-design all terrain?
 - Are you saying the military never had road-bound lorries?
 - You read something about requisitioning any kind of vehicle?
They spend billions...
 - In WW2?
 - Including fighting on the front line?

AI and arty...
Agreed, I mentioned what scenario designers can do to sort out the -faulty- code but I was talking about the AI.
Sorry, I should have said almost all, most of the time, as long as it only has one target... an educated guess, I said.

Prove it.
Wow! Have you been asking everybody to prove every single statement in every thread?
-and... maybe you do remember those 2 Rf pl getting into the woods-
and... the code is the only proof.

"outgoing" plate of armour...
There is a thread about that.

Probably about half...
Probably about half the riflemen in WW2 -say they- disagree with you and at least one serviceman in this forum, not in this thread.

Suppression...
Somebody mention that word, again.

Now for you...
That if you don't value my opinion why should I value your -moderated- opinion?

...it's only business.
(Even if I wonder why some people keep saying that I don't like this game... I miss "Cry Havoc!", it is not "SqL" but... still fun. I cannot see anything wrong with this game being a zombie-shooter, on the other hand, people saying that the game is great and feeling affronted because somebody dared to argue against that... )

The victor will never be asked if he told the truth. (If I name the author your opinion about the statement may vary).

[BeondTheGrave]

22 minutes ago, semmes said:

 

we have established...
Really? Before, anybody mention anything, anywhere?

...they shoot at you and you don't take cover,
By "cowards" I think you mean "training" and that should be "always".

...military trucks are by-design all terrain?
 - Are you saying the military never had road-bound lorries?
 - You read something about requisitioning any kind of vehicle?
They spend billions...
 - In WW2?
 - Including fighting on the front line?

AI and arty...
Agreed, I mentioned what scenario designers can do to sort out the -faulty- code but I was talking about the AI.
Sorry, I should have said almost all, most of the time, as long as it only has one target... an educated guess, I said.

Prove it.
Wow! Have you been asking everybody to prove every single statement in every thread?
-and... maybe you do remember those 2 Rf pl getting into the woods-
and... the code is the only proof.

"outgoing" plate of armour...
There is a thread about that.

Probably about half...
Probably about half the riflemen in WW2 -say they- disagree with you and at least one serviceman in this forum, not in this thread.

Suppression...
Somebody mention that word, again.

Now for you...
That if you don't value my opinion why should I value your -moderated- opinion?

...it's only business.
(Even if I wonder why some people keep saying that I don't like this game... I miss "Cry Havoc!", it is not "SqL" but... still fun. I cannot see anything wrong with this game being a zombie-shooter, on the other hand, people saying that the game is great and feeling affronted because somebody dared to argue against that... )

The victor will never be asked if he told the truth. (If I name the author your opinion about the statement may vary).

Sick Hitler quote bro. Probably the exact thing you needed to say to win this internet argument. 

[LukeFF]

22 minutes ago, semmes said:

(If I name the author your opinion about the statement may vary).

Lol ok. You know we have search engines on our phones, right?

[HerrTom]

I think writing in more complete thoughts might help people engage with you, I have to admit I have a lot of trouble understanding what you're writing.

13 minutes ago, semmes said:

we have established...
Really? Before, anybody mention anything, anywhere?

Most of the discussion in this thread, really.  For example, these great insightful posts:

 

16 minutes ago, semmes said:

...they shoot at you and you don't take cover,
By "cowards" I think you mean "training" and that should be "always".

I'm not sure what you mean here. There's good discussion in the thread The_Capt linked to. I would say I'd like some better controls over what your squads do when they get shot at, like whether to stop and drop or sprint off, etc.

Also, it's not visually represented but I recall our pixeltruppen get a little "saving throw" to represent taking cover in microterrain not represented at the game level that increases their survivability.

19 minutes ago, semmes said:

...military trucks are by-design all terrain?
 - Are you saying the military never had road-bound lorries?
 - You read something about requisitioning any kind of vehicle?

A truck that can't drive on grass isn't very useful, even as far back as the Great War that was the case.  But ultimately, don't drive them through tough terrain. They're not tanks or jeeps!  What's really the problem here?  That a truck gets stuck if you drive it somewhere it could but really shouldn't go?

--- skipping a bit since I don't have that much time ---

20 minutes ago, semmes said:

Prove it.
Wow! Have you been asking everybody to prove every single statement in every thread?
-and... maybe you do remember those 2 Rf pl getting into the woods-
and... the code is the only proof.

I mean, you're the one making the accusations here.  Give some evidence why something's wrong, let us engage you on the game-mechanics level!  Hell, sometimes they just don't agree with you (like, *cough*, artillery fragments against light armour!) but you at least get an interesting discussion about it.  Look at it this way, if I tell you the world is flat, that goes against the current understanding, it's my duty to give you reasons to believe that.  Similarly, if a game mechanic doesn't seem right, show us why.

24 minutes ago, semmes said:

"outgoing" plate of armour...
There is a thread about that.

You might need a couple of well thought out paragraphs on this one. I don't think anyone understands what this means.

I'm going to stop here. Cheers!

 

(also @The_Capt I 110% support the idea of CM:Z, but only if I get my Bundeswehr and Nationale Volksarmee first! )

[Sgt.Squarehead]

32 minutes ago, semmes said:

The victor will never be asked if he told the truth. (If I name the author your opinion about the statement may vary).

Ooooh.....Are we doing inappropriate quotes now? 

Here's one for you:

 

Edited November 18, 2021 by Sgt.Squarehead

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, semmes said:

The victor will never be asked if he told the truth.

Oh lord what an incoherent mess, topped off by an Adolph H quote…seriously?  I am starting to feel guilty to be honest, this is like poking the town drunk with a stick on a Friday night because the power is out.

Look if there is a language barrier here why don’t you try in your native language and I will try G translate (not perfect but better than whatever is happening here).

So I guess all I can glean for this is that you do not think CM is realistic for a bunch of reasons.  I am afraid that I cannot understand exactly what those reasons are nor have you really established or cited any real facts so I think you just keep restating your opinion just from different angles.

So why don’t you go to the thread:  

This is how someone puts forward a clear and concise issue they are seeing in the game.  We take these seriously and are following up on it because it helps us make the game better.  Now compare this to your feedback so far and maybe you can see why no one is really taking you seriously.  Honestly, if you have feedback that can make the game better we want to hear it (less the Hitler quotes, you might want to steer clear of Nazis in general) but I am afraid based on what you have provided so far:  “Thank you for purchasing our product and we hope you enjoy it.  If you have any problems with it please contact our product support department.”

[The_Capt]

1 hour ago, HerrTom said:

(also @The_Capt I 110% support the idea of CM:Z, but only if I get my Bundeswehr and Nationale Volksarmee first! )

Right?!  The idea is growing on me I have to admit.  We would have to model the zombies, which would be a big job on both behaviour and their ability to absorb damage.  And the there is the zombie melee which would be different.  But we already have all the “living” equipment including arty and air.  I mean you could do a whole “escape from NY campaign”.

I mean Steve will never go for it but a boy can dream…

[Lethaface]

The only thing we can be jealous about with regards to Semmes is that he already has this CM:Z in his imagination. The rest of his imagination seems on the disorderly social side to me. 

But some of you have A LOT of patience 

[MikeyD]

I recall, almost 2 decades ago, an endless CMx1 debate about the penetration ability of the Russian 45mm anti-tank gun. It was an endless circle of conjecture, opinion and assumption going 'round-and-'round. Since then the internet has firmed-up in it role of 'font of all the world's knowledge'. Conjecture and opinion tends to get nipped in the bud pretty quickly these days.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

17 hours ago, The_Capt said:

Right?!  The idea is growing on me I have to admit.  We would have to model the zombies, which would be a big job on both behaviour and their ability to absorb damage.  And the there is the zombie melee which would be different.  But we already have all the “living” equipment including arty and air.  I mean you could do a whole “escape from NY campaign”.

How would you handle infectious bites? 

17 hours ago, The_Capt said:

I mean Steve will never go for it but a boy can dream…

Didn't he say that about CM:CW once upon a time? 

 

Edited November 18, 2021 by Sgt.Squarehead

[A Canadian Cat]

32 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

How would you handle infectious bites? 

The buddy aid animations would have to change

[chuckdyke]

Dungeons and Dragons are the objectives of the Zombie assault.  

[semmes]

I think you are missing the point.

"There are things that are true even if G. W. Bush believes that they are true." (Do you see my point with him?)
Something is true because a Duke told the story?, is it false if it was a peasant?
"The cure for a fallacious argument is a better argument, not the suppression of ideas."

I have been told before that my texts are too short... I'll try.

My impression is that some people around here are using the forum as a private club to tell each other how good the game is, how great the job they have been doing is and to keep clapping each others' back.
Your football team is the best in the world... because you say so.
Why should I agree?

Now...

I  agree, I think we have established that you are totally upside down on this one.  I thought the testing that DM did is some of the most creative I have seen in a very long time.
Who is 'we'?, how have you stablished 'what' exactly? 
Some of you agree on something. Anything else has been 'proven'?
Anybody made any comment about pistols in that Pdf?, because I haven't been able to find it; before, I mean.

"...they shoot at you and you don't take cover," From another thread with The_Capt: 'By "cowards" I think you mean "training" and that should be "always"'.
If this is WW2, soldiers are not suicidal -maybe even nowdays they are not suicidal, they take cover always, they train them to do that, they take cover even when they are not shot at. Maybe... those without training -worse that green- don't, because they don't know better.
My point is "always", anything else is... incorrect, or a zombie shooter, if you like.

"...mod the AI so that lorries don't go through woods, over trenches or stay in the front line, by the troops they were carrying."
You did notice I was talking about the AI, right? The 'code' should tell the AI to avoid difficult terrain, IMO. Well... and maybe that they shouldn't deploy with the infantry on the firing line... Unless, of course, you think that the right place for a lorry is the firing line.
- Are you saying the military never had road-bound lorries?
I do not know the cross-country capabilities of the Opel Blitz, do you? Nor of any other wheeled vehicle, do you?
Still, that is not the point, the AI is stupid, should it immobilize lorries in woods?, avoiding that would be an improvement?, if the code is not that great, how good is the game using it? Zombie-shooter level?
- How many billions spent each country in lorries development in WW2? the exact figures, please, inflation-adjusted, if you don't mind.

AI and arty is one area that I would like to see improvements for in the next engines.  That said, scenario/campaign designers use the reinforcement option to spread the AI use of artillery out in the game.  For onboard indirect fire assets you can use the area fire command to finely tune mortars (you can even set it to triggers).  So no, not "ALL".
-Scenario designers try to get the best they can out of a faulty code. If the AI has only one target it is going to use all the artillery it has in that target, that is my educated guess. If that is the code, how good is the game that use it? Anybody can prove that that is not the code?, anybody can prove otherwise?
Mind, I am not asking to see the code, we all now is never going to happen.

Prove it.
You are a Moderator, right? The job description doesn't say anything about impartial moderator, right? 
Your BFF don't have to prove anything, right? Only those who disagree with you?
The code is the only proof, any test is an approximation, better than an impression but no 'proof'.
The results obtained from those 2 Rf pl moving through the wood, again and again, are... not a test, but how would you define it?, a non-test test? The same units were taking casualties in the same area under the fire of different units, a picnic?

As opposed to the "outgoing" plate of armour?  In my experience if your  armour is "outgoing" it means that you, personally, are the next set of "incoming" armour and I am pretty sure the game captures that.
Your "experience", could you elaborate, please?
There is a thread about that where it has been... proven/argued/discussed -maybe you want to choose the word, as moderator- that no, the game that not captures that. Again, that is the code, how good is a game using that code...

Probably about half the beta testers and myself personally.  Pretty well.
All right.
Wait, can you prove that 'pretty well'? Is that an opinion? Is your football team the best in the world? If anybody disagrees that person must be wrong?

There is a recent thread about suppression. I my opinion the code of this -may I say zombie-shooter?- game doesn't model, pretty well, the definition by the DoD. I will say this again, nothing about a teapot in orbit around Venus, nothing about the experience of the animations, nothing about... Only the code and the DoD.

Again... anything wrong with a zombie-shooter?, somebody finds below his dignity to play a zombie-shooter?

Again... it's only business.

It is called "confirmation bias", Whatsapp provides some advice about it. The "value" of a quote has nothing to do with his author, even if we don't like bad painters.

 

I don't know which I should admire more, your courage before the enemy or before your superiors. An Austrian officer to a German officer.

[chuckdyke]

AI like most computers have an IQ of 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000001% Human Beings on the average have an IQ of 100. It seems there are a few exceptions here. The game is meant to be played H&H against the AI it is a little like a sandbox. The protocol:  we play the game and have a problem. First see or your game has a patch to update it. Solved the problem for Counter Attack at Son for example. Armor now can drive over the bridge. Another problem I had a problem with a sniper (he took position on the balcony) Pretty silly for a sniper actually made me stop playing a scenario. But two gentlemen on the forum kindly showed a way around it. First show your problem with a screenshot with a description then you post it. Scouting well difficult to find an outpost. Advice from real life. In this case General Patton "Keep driving on the road till they start shooting at you." Sorry but that is the way it is. I did it in the game with a halftrack. Lost the gunner and the halftrack for some mysterious reason went into 'Panic" and reversed into a orchard. I don't have a problem with it but it is my opinion. The best solution would have been driver reverses, grabs the bazooka which you can acquire and knock out the MG post. Now post it and see or BF will modify their amination. Like anything else it depends how much support there is.  

Edited November 19, 2021 by chuckdyke

[Lethaface]

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.", Albert Einstein (or so they say). 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

1 hour ago, Lethaface said:

Albert Einstein (or so they say).

I thought it was that mad bloke in Far-Cry 3? 

 

Edited November 19, 2021 by Sgt.Squarehead

[The_Capt]

3 hours ago, Lethaface said:

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.", Albert Einstein (or so they say). 

Only applies to a linear system.  I am not sure that OP qualifies.

[ASL Veteran]

There is definitely an agenda in this thread - I'm not sure it's about handguns though

[slysniper]

Semmes

Some how your attitude seems to be more about complaining about aspects of the game that you dont think does a very good job as to being realistic. 

And to tell you the truth, I agree that many of the items on your list the game does do poorly, there is other things that I have no clue as to why you are complaining.

But you need to understand, complaining is not going to get people to take your comment seriously.

You need to discuss your reasons  with some logical facts that show how the game if falling short and then also its helpful as to suggestions as to how to make it better.

You did try that with pistols at the start of the discussion, but you only evidence was that of the work of another player that you could not explain as to what he had done to get his numbers.

Once it was looked at, still does not show a issue that seems to need addressing. 

So then you went on to attack every thing you dont like about the game.

Lets talk about a few.

Units not taking cover (which I agree, the animation in the game does not show men going for cover as fast as you would exspect if it was a real person in the same situation. (could it be improved, sure would be nice, up to the programmers to ever improve it)

AI pathing issues, all units are subjected to this, not just trucks.  No question, sometimes when the AI takes over the pathing instead of leaving it in players hands it does a terrible job as to what it decides on. (could it be improved, sure would be nice, up to the programmers to ever improve it) My last view of this was a AA truck I had as a key unit deciding to ignore my commands and I watch it drive onto a foot bridge and get stuck for the rest of the game.

Ai use of Arty, yes this is a weak point in the game programming and has been a known weakness for a very long time. (could it be improved, sure would be nice, up to the programmers to ever improve it)

Suppression has been discussed many times on the forum, again is it perfect, no. I think it is been shown pretty clearly that units recover from it way to fast compared to what it would be like in real life. But then again, everything in the game is happening way faster than it does in real combat. So how do you fix that and what is the correct fix. First, its a game and the blasted thing is already slow and boring as far as I am concerned. I sure dont want to make it more realistic so that it takes me twice as long to play and just that much more boring. but a discussion as to what is appropriate times for suppression should and could still be helpful for improving the game. How long should the effects likely last?

As for the comment that the AI is targeting certain important units (Leaders and MG"S and such) maybe it is and if I was the programmer, I would have designed it to do it also. Becase in real life, it sure is done. So the question should be is it programmed in the game and do we have evidence that the incorrect units are taking and using the programming in its targeting. The only units that should have it programmed into them is when its a person looking down a sight and the enemy is close enough that they can tell who is the high priority target. But presently, I dont see anything that sticks out as being unrealistic, and that is again after just finishing a game where my MG's were consistantly the first or second man to go down in almost every fire fight. But in my view they should be. And guess what, I still kick the enemies butt, because I overwelmed them with fire power and I recrewed those MG's with other men and almost evey MG I had is still in the game and is working. Just as I was trained to do in real life.

 

So just stop with the attitude and stop trying to act like you are the victom, you came to troll, if you want to make some real effort to discuss ways to improve one of these aspects, great.

But we have seen the list of why the game is just a game and how the hell are we accepting the fact it is not perfect to the list makers standards. it gets old. because guess what. because its a game and its not going to be perfect, ever, do you understand. ever.

But good discussions, might, just might get the programming gods to think about improvements if there is enough factors that can show the value of doing it.

 

Edited November 20, 2021 by slysniper

[MikeyD]

In the game if your men are being shot at and not taking cover its likely you picked 'fanatic' or 'extreme' motivation, thinking that would give you an advantage in the fight. What it gives you are men willing to die for their country. Crack and Elite troops will make every effort to complete the order assigned to them. Again, that has its downsides. Also, if your men are in direct contact with a fanatical +2 commander they're less likely to make their own decisions regarding self-preservation. 'Play-to-win' type players tend to pick the highest motivation troops not factoring in the downside of those choices.

[Redwolf]

5 hours ago, MikeyD said:

'Play-to-win' type players tend to pick the highest motivation troops not factoring in the downside of those choices.

Nah, too expensive.

[chuckdyke]

Lure & Trap works with cheap units. A conscript or green unit appears the same as a crack or elite unit. At least when you play Iron or Elite. But if you want to entice your enemy to attack you use units -2 conscript for example. The enemy may use their artillery assets on them. Our poor green conscript forces break and start running. The enemy may try a pursuit right into an ambush. It is fun to play Soviet WW 2. Bailed out of an armored car left the AFV. I have a bad conscience now of being too gamey. But a PAK 75 mm revealed its position. Better to lose an armored car than an ISU 152 . It is why a human player wouldn't fall for a ruse such as that. Conscript and Green units have their uses. A ruse starts with waving a helmet above a trench. But if you have a character such as Marshall Zhukov he may use a human wave of battalion strength just to learn the positions of his adversaries. The game is as realistic as you make it. 

[semmes]

 

@slysniper

Thanks for your analysis instead of a playful comment.

Could you please explain to me how seriously should I take a comment about billions of pounds spent in lorry development?

It is a game, I do understand; it is a business, I do understand; game limitations, I think we should call that decisions taken. What I actually find annoying is people repeating what a great game it is, even using the word "realistic". I do point out/complain about how unrealistic it is... for a game.

These are not my first posts, I have made suggestions, more people have made suggestions, there are more than one 'wish list' around and we get... -I used the word 'nothing' to get a reaction. The business is selling games, it is not improving the game -your 'up to the programmers to ever improve it.

'Pistols' was just another example. Everybody was saying that the test was a great job -indeed it is, but the conclusion from the results by the own author is: 'roughly equivalent'. Great game = roughly equivalent, sorry, I cannot see it, even if it is a limited test, under certain parameters...

I still play board games where, a posteriori, some players try to explain... whatever it was. No need, the author wrote the rules, it is going to be like that because he said so.

I agree with you, it is not an issue, I wouldn't call it realistic but certainly not an issue.

Your "about a few..." Perfect, you see an issue or not that much of an issue and you express your opinion about it -even if we disagree about the facts, details about the facts or it implications. Now, your 'up to the programmers to ever improve it' is telling me that the game is not that good, there is plenty of room for improvement, it cannot be that great, it cannot be that realistic; important or unimportant.

I think it would sound better a "We should stop the attitude.

On your own words: 'up to the programmers to ever improve it. I cannot see the point in discussing -'might, just might'- those ways -any more, even if I am still learning more that a few things- but if people keep saying how great the game is -I  wonder who are those trolls talking about rainbows and unicorns anyway?- I will keep pointing out not that great, we will keep making comments.

Mind, "still learning, I cannot see the point in "destroying ideas, even if it can be "fun" sometimes.

 

@MikeyD.

Thank you for your "out of the hat" recent creation. You made up a situation and solve it using your imagination.

I have never played a QB. My last 3 scenarios are with "Low" and never -not even- "Crack" troops on the field and it still looks like Harry Potter in Narnia.

Can you tell me my shoe-size too? I wonder what is the point of answering your fantasies...

Oh! yes, sorry... Prove it... or it was test it?

 

Soviet accounting of supplies

The terms boekomplekt, zapravki, s/dacha — respectively munitions load, refill of fuel, and days ration — is a concept that runs through Soviet rear records. 31 The concept for munitions is that each individual weapon has an allowance of munitions of a set number of pieces with a known weight, as shown in Table 2.32 The allowance for individual weapons would be scaled up by multiplying by the number of weapons in a unit, be it a company, battalion, brigade, or division, and then these numbers could be combined into a single average to express the overall munitions state in number of boekomplekt.

 Table 2.32  https://www.dropbox.com/s/gofuqumfc9dcdkd/T00.JPG?dl=0  (I am having problems with the Dbox link)

THE JOURNAL OF SLAVIC MILITARY STUDIES
2020, VOL. 33, NO. 3, 420–441
doi.org /10.1080/13518046.2020.1824106

I think this would have been a good start for a game but we already have the -uploaded- load for German and Russian artillery in another thread anyway.

 

The necessary supply of heroes must be maintained at all costs. Lord Carson.