Gamey Recon?

[guachi]

"If vehicle crews are appropriately valued in regards to victory points then there SHOULD be no need to artificially handicap the vehicle crews by limiting their weapons beyond historical accuracy. Don't you agree?

I mean: if I am willing to risk using a vehicle crew to defend a building even though they are substantially more valuable than the equivalent infantry unit then I should pay the price if they are wiped out, but I should be able to do it. I should not simply be prohibited from doing this by an artificial restriction on their available weaponry."

Scott, you wrote this many months ago on the forum. And I was wondering what changed your mind so completely on the use of crews?

Jason

[Guest Scott Clinton]

Because I don't think they are valued high enough. Nor, do I think they ever will be. People would freak.

How do you value crews? On thier real abilities as infantrymen? Surely not.

On rarity? No, there are way too many reasons why this will never work in a game of this scale.

How about thier value to the 'general war effort'? Okay, that is better and that makes them more valuable, but still not beyond the grasp of most gamey play.

What about their value based on how they really would be used in combat (a blend of all of the above and more).

For example: If I was an infantry company commander that was lucky enough to have a platoon of Shermans attached for a single engagement, and a couple of the Shermans got KOed...then I ordered their crews to make a "last stand" in house-to-house fighting and lost the crews...

Doesn't anyone think my butt would be in a sling when word got back to Battalion on how I was using these 'assets' after thier tanks had already been shot out from under them?!?

But, most importantly: I started remembering what I have read. What REALLY happens to tank crews after they bail? They head for the rear 99.9% of the time (literally!). They don't stand beside the infantry and fight, they don't guard POWs for the local infantry commander, they don't stop for ****. They head back to the rear as fast as they can. Nobody has spoken up with any examples that dispute this, nor do I ever expect they will.

Now, with the POW question (read my last post). We are not able to dispatch single men or use 'walking wounded' to guard POWs (as I have read done MANY times). So, I figure using vehicle crews is not so bad as a stopgap for the game.

------------------

Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own.

[aka_tom_w]

Just sending this one back to the top as it has to do with the current post about crew bail out ability.

-tom w

[SS_PanzerLeader]

Sorry Scott -- i dispute this my grandad was a warrant officer in the British Engineers as a Tank driver/gunner . HE saw MUCH combat and part of his job was to bring tanks from the front to the lines ... if he were alive to day Im sure he would be quite insulted by your opinion that the crews did nothing outside of ther vehicles ....THIS DOESNT NOT MEAN I CONDONE OVER-USE OR FREQUENT UNREALISTIC USE OF CREWS THO....... but in a pinch with plausibility they can be used IMO..... I DO THINK Assembling a whole force of crew members is soon some gamey crap tho

------------------

SS_PanzerLeader.......out

[Mikester]

From Scott C in post above:

"But, most importantly: I started remembering what I have read. What REALLY happens to tank crews after they bail? They head for the rear 99.9% of the time (literally!). They don't stand beside the infantry and fight, they don't guard POWs for the local infantry commander, they don't stop for ****. They head back to the rear as fast as they can. Nobody has spoken up with any examples that dispute this, nor do I ever expect they will."

Scott hits the nail right on the head here. This is exactly what crews did. They were not ordered to go play recon roles and get killed. They went to the rear. Yet CM in all its realism allows players to abuse bailed out crews, use them for recon, etc. And at what amounts to no real penalty for doing so.

In my view, this needs to be "fixed" in the game by the game designers. There is very little reason I can see for allowing people the ability to abuse how bailed out crews can be used in the first place when it can most likely quite easily be prevented by implementing design changes to the game. Why allow players the opportunity for unrealistic game play when it can be prevented????

Mike D

aka Mikester

[Mikester]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:

Word back from Charles is that he is going to reduce the ability for a crew to spot enemy units. The new range will be something like 25-50m only. This means that if you do what you are supposed to do with a crew, which is move it to the rear, you will have NO problems. But if you try to move the crew through enemy territory on a scouting mission, it will most likely only spot an enemy unit just as that unit wiped it out. So at best you might spot one enemy squad or MG before losing your expensive crew.

While this is not a perfect solution, on balance it is FAR more accurate than the way things are now. And because this is a fairly easy tweak to make, it is the best and most practical solution to put in place at this time.

Thanks to everybody for the debate and ideas. This is how CM is made better and better each and every day!

Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dang it. Missed this. I need to start paying more attention I guess.

Steve/Charles/BTS glad to see this is being addressed. Please ignore all my other recent ranting and raving today here and on the other thread about bailed out crews. Thanks.

Mikester out.

[Guest Mirage2k]

That was a good fix IMHO, but, even after re-reading this thread, I still don't see the problem with using crews for general combat purposes. Did it happen often in real life? Probably not. Would such a crew be shaken up after having their vehicle blow up under them? Definitely. Are there penalties already in place for someone who loses a crew? Absolutely.

To me, it all comes down to playing style. If you want to risk your crews, then go ahead. I'll be just as happy to shoot them up for you. A cautious commander will be rewarded when an overzealous, brutal, driving commander runs his crews into certain death.

But if you want to be that sort of commander (and I'm sure that kind of person existed somewhere) go ahead. I really don't see why I should care.

-Andrew

------------------

Throw me a frickin' smiley, people!

[Hakko Ichiu]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

Word back from Charles is that he is going to reduce the ability for a crew to spot enemy units. The new range will be something like 25-50m only. This means that if you do what you are supposed to do with a crew, which is move it to the rear, you will have NO problems. But if you try to move the crew through enemy territory on a scouting mission, it will most likely only spot an enemy unit just as that unit wiped it out. So at best you might spot one enemy squad or MG before losing your expensive crew.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What about crews of recon vehicles? Are they truck drivers first or scouts? I would think it less gamey to use the crew of an M8 for scouting (esp. if it was part of a recon unit). After all that is what they were trained to do.

Of course it may be much more of a coding problem to differentiate between crew types.

------------------

Ethan

-----------

Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

[coe]

what about perhaps probablistically modeling

spotting info, it might have to allow for alot of chain computation....but basically

the farther you are from another unit, the

less you will be able to "tell it"....i.e.

even though the commander can see everything

every unit sees, at least in the above way,

some units may not be able to target a

certain unit becasue they don't "see" or

"know" about it.

So there's two steps,

A.) unit sees the enemy unit because enemy

unit does something

B.) if it doesn't it "sees" it because it

is told by a nearby unit

C.) how to model the delay?????

[aka_tom_w]

YES but....

I understand that the LACK of a radio is waht is being modeled after the crew bails out.

They may be scouts and trained recon specialists but, assuming they bailed out without a radio they are as useless as ever other crew.

I think it is fair to assume that ALL crews that bail out of vehicles do so with only pistols and NO radios or rifles or submachine guns or anything.

So therefore even crews from recon vehicles would not be able to get the word back if they were out of the command radius of the nearest CO.

That all makes sense to me.

-tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hakko Ichiu:

What about crews of recon vehicles? Are they truck drivers first or scouts? I would think it less gamey to use the crew of an M8 for scouting (esp. if it was part of a recon unit). After all that is what they were trained to do.

Of course it may be much more of a coding problem to differentiate between crew types.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Priest]

Okay. I agree that the crews can be used beyond their intended scope. Also I agree that radio contact is an all important element when dealing with recon information. In CM all we can hope to see is that the TacAI takes over. TacAI override is already built into the game and if I understand correctly then the parameter could just be assigned that the crew unit type becomes Tac AI property. How about TacAI controls them until radio contact is re-established (ie. redlined by a commander). Until then they would head in a general direction towards the rear. Also how about giving them the LOW ammo setting so commanders really would not want to use them in battle once they got them in command. Also players who don't already use their company level and higher commanders as rally points would have a reason to now thus helping to end any abuse of those units also. So if the crews are low on ammo and far back in the line what good are they? Why not let them go off the map? I don't know why you would not let them go off the map but at least I think it simulates a "more real" situation. I seriously support the ability to re-create ALL the different possibilities in CM. And while it was far from common and borderline stupid some commander somewhere in the post-Normandy campaign used crews on the front line. I think that by putting the above restrictions it would counter any advantages. Oh yeah they have to stay in contact of a commander or the TacAI takes over again. This would surely make someone think twice. It would simulate things like,"hey Charlie the boss ain't look'in lets git the hell ooutta here!"

Of course with the LOW ammo rating and the already shaky morale and can here some fool commander now, "okay guys just sit in this tree line and look threatening.". Anyways I have started rambling since what seems to be the beginning of this post but I would be really interested to someones response to these ideas and I don't doubt they have been suggested already so please excuse the repitition. Email me.

[This message has been edited by Priest (edited 07-26-2000).]

[Priest]

oh and about the FOW question. If the TacAI controlled squad happens to pick up something on the way back have the results semi hidden (ie. no positive id) until under player control and then mark the positions that the crew saw as per when they saw it. Simulates them telling the CO what happened. Okay now I am done.

[kverdon]

Scott,

In your scenario about putting the tank survivors in line with the infantry I'd have to say that it would depend on the situation. There WERE times when crew survivors picked up M-1's and temporarily joined the infantry. This was undoubtably not the norm but it did happen. I don't think that you'd get too much chewing out at battalion for making use of available manpower in a crunch.

Having said that, I'd like to say I'd like to see them under the full control of the Tac AI and have the AI try to retreat them or get them to cover. Most of the time they would simply hunker down or retreat off the map and then sometimes they'd take a hand in the fight. This would be more realistic with them not in the players control.

Kevin

[Hakko Ichiu]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

YES but....

I understand that the LACK of a radio is waht is being modeled after the crew bails out.

They may be scouts and trained recon specialists but, assuming they bailed out without a radio they are as useless as ever other crew.

I think it is fair to assume that ALL crews that bail out of vehicles do so with only pistols and NO radios or rifles or submachine guns or anything.

So therefore even crews from recon vehicles would not be able to get the word back if they were out of the command radius of the nearest CO.

That all makes sense to me.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You mean they don't have cell phones????

------------------

Ethan

-----------

Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

[aka_tom_w]

This is what Charles Says about this in the

v1.03 patch

simple and direct.....

here it is:

" * Bailed crews now have poor visual spotting ability."

I think that should do it.

-tom w

[aka_tom_w]

what a GREAT thread!

time for a Bump!

-tom w