FO's in campaigns come back unable to spot

[Erwin]

Have an FO that had casualties in an earlier mission.  Now it's back as an single-man FO but the man is labeled as a "gunner" - so he cannot spot for arty.  If an FO returns in a campaign he should have spotting ability.  Bug?

[chuckdyke]

50 minutes ago, Erwin said:

Have an FO that had casualties in an earlier mission.  Now it's back as an single-man FO but the man is labeled as a "gunner" - so he cannot spot for arty.  If an FO returns in a campaign he should have spotting ability.  Bug?

Depends which member of the original team Imo. Assistants could be just another infantry.

[Erwin]

The point is that it's silly to have a FO return in the next mission of a campaign unable to spot for arty.  That is a bug imo.

[chuckdyke]

2 minutes ago, Erwin said:

FO return in the next mission of a campaign unable to spot for arty.

If the FO's name is Lazarus, is there a different name than the previous mission?

[A Canadian Cat]

9 hours ago, Erwin said:

  If an FO returns in a campaign he should have spotting ability.  Bug?

Depends. If the team member designated Observer is a casualty then the FO team can no longer call for fire support.

If who the casualty is changes from battle to battle then that would be a bug.

[Brille]

If the actual "observer" was hit in the mission before it is true that you can´t call any arty with this unit.

 

It is no bug so far since Combat Mission don´t decide if it is logical to sent in a one man observer-team with no actual observer in the team...it just counts who died/got injured and who can still fight.

Guess bad luck for you in this one OR better keep your FO safe next time. (no offense)

[Ultradave]

Probably assumes his radio did with him. The assistant/RTO in an FO team would normally also be trained to call for fire, but if the FO's radio got shot to pieces, well, ....

Protect your FO's. That's where the firepower is. (I may, of course, be biased).

Dave

[Erwin]

You guys do understand I am talking about subsequent missions of a campaign where the FO got KIA?   Not sure I believe that in RL a FO couldn't be replaced in the hours/days between missions.

In game terms it's a PITA to find that you cannot complete (say) Mission 6 cos the FO was KIA in Mission 1 and one needs an FO n Mission 6.  To make the game playable and enjoyable, one really needs FO's to be replaced between missions.

I will try and get the useless FO killed.  Am wondering that if KIA then the FO is replaced in the next campaign mission.

PS:  Anyone want my SETUP file of Mission 6 to check on the inability to recrew a 251/17?   The file is only about 3MB so could attach to e-mail.  Send me PM if you want it.

Edited February 25, 2023 by Erwin

[PEB14]

I wouldn't wall it a bug, even if it can ruin the game. If I understand correctly campaigns mechanics, core units are replaced only according to a replacement percentage, defined by the campaogn designer. For a 2-men team, any percentage lower than 50% means that basically you have low chances to get a replacement, whatever would happen in RL.

I'm not an expert, but would this happen if the FO wasn't labelled as core unit?

 

[Grey_Fox]

On 2/25/2023 at 12:49 AM, Erwin said:

Have an FO that had casualties in an earlier mission.  Now it's back as an single-man FO but the man is labeled as a "gunner" - so he cannot spot for arty.  If an FO returns in a campaign he should have spotting ability.  Bug?

Is this a bug because you don't like how reinforcements work?

What game and campaign are you talking about?

[Erwin]

"KG Von Schroif".  (MIssion 6)  If you send me PM with your e-mail I can send you the file with the vehicles that cannot be recrewed and the FO that cannot call in arty.  Since this is a game, there is no need to return units like this in subsequent missions as they are useless.  Eg:  Tanks that normally have 4 or 5 crew but now have only 2 crew do not return.  (Or, they are recrewed.)    I think these look like bugs in the campaign game system.  

If you PM me your e-mail will be happy to send you the file.

Edited February 26, 2023 by Erwin

[Combatintman]

6 hours ago, Grey_Fox said:

Is this a bug because you don't like how reinforcements work?

What game and campaign are you talking about?

Yes, that's essentially the so-called "issue."

[Ultradave]

19 hours ago, Erwin said:

You guys do understand I am talking about subsequent missions of a campaign where the FO got KIA?   Not sure I believe that in RL a FO couldn't be replaced in the hours/days between missions.

Yes.

There are never enough FOs to go around. In WW2 or today. In the 70s and 80s we never, not once, were full up to our TOE. And this was the 82d. You'd think if anyone would be, it would have been us. So the replacement FO would have to come from another unit nearby. In many cases the subsequent mission follows almost directly after the previous one. Yes, you may get some replacements or may not. But it makes it harder to get specialists, as opposed to cross attaching a reinforcing company from next door, for example.

Maybe they could be replaced, maybe not. It's pretty annoying to permanently lose a someone like that, no doubt. An FO is not the only guy on the battlefield that can CFF. He does it better, but someone just has to fill in.

Dave

Edited February 26, 2023 by Ultradave

[PEB14]

7 hours ago, PEB14 said:

I wouldn't call it a bug, even if it can ruin the game. If I understand correctly campaigns mechanics, core units are replaced only according to a replacement percentage, defined by the campaogn designer. For a 2-men team, any percentage lower than 50% means that basically you have low chances to get a replacement, whatever would happen in RL.

I'm not an expert, but would this happen if the FO wasn't labelled as core unit?

 

 

I checked your save. I was able to reproduce everything you found.

I stay convinced that the FO issue is not a bug. You've lost the only guy able to call artillery in, his buddy is not able to do so on his own. Annoying, but technically it doesn't sound like a bug. If the campaign designer wants to pre vent it I guess he can simply not put the FO in a core unit and independently add a FO to the player's OB at the beginning of each mission: this way he would be sure the player always has got one.

On the other hand, the SPW issue sounds like a bug. Whatever the troops your crew them with, they still show as "dismounted". I dismounted other SPW and recrewed them with different teams (SPW crews, a HQ, a HMG team): it always works.

Do you remember what was the status of these SPW at the end of mission 5? And Wasn't the Zug they belong to completely wiped out?

 

[Erwin]

Thanks for looking at the file.  No Zugs were completely wiped out.  I can't recall exactly, but I think the rest of the ZUG appears in Mission 6 - but with 2-man crews. The set-up turn started with the HQ already mounted in the 251/1.  But the vehicle was still listed as "dismounted".  

Other than the 251/1's that carry the HMG's - which only ever have 1 crew - all the other 251/1's have 2 crew members and IIRC casualties amongst those crews seem to be replaced between missions.

The issue is what is the point in the game of having units appear in subsequent missions that are useless.  

Even with the FO that cannot call in arty.  What to do with him?  Send him on suicide recon mission?  Is that what happens in RL?  In a game, what is the point of loading up the campaign missions with useless units?  I do recall that the FO unit was completely KIA in Mission 5.  So... the campaign game system has brought back a one-man FO that is useless.  That is a bug in the campaign game system.  

Does this ruin the game?  Of course not.  It's still very enjoyable.  Am simply pointing out that the CM2 system is an inexpensive "Commercial Off The Shelf" entertainment game that quite understandably has flaws that hopefully are in a list somewhere to be fixed.  Elsewhere I made a list of over 20 similar issues.  I thought that would be helpful.  But, some folks are so embedded in the idea that CM2 is a flawless and accurate simulation of RL that it cannot be criticized or improved.  Perhaps they are worried about their govt contract customers looking too closely.  Who knows...

 

[PEB14]

Well, it depends what one calls a "bug". When the game does not work as intended, to me it is a bug. This is the case of your SPW, that should be crewed by any of the troops.

The issue of the FO is tied to the game mechanics, which has its own flaws, as you point out, but from a software point of view it is not a bug, as it works as intended: you got some replacement unfortunately it turns out that the replacement guy is not up to the task.

As for RL… I think it depends much on the campaign itself. If you're on your own behind enemy lines, it's understandable that you won't get a new FO. If there are only 6 hours between missions 5 and 6, same thing. In other context it might be less obvious…

[Erwin]

4 hours ago, PEB14 said:

you got some replacement unfortunately it turns out that the replacement guy is not up to the task.

Far enuff... However, doesn't that make the game more unrealistic as (am assuming) that a new FO would not be assigned who was unable to to call in arty.  (Or are we saying that the screw-up is part of the game's realism?) 

In game terms it's just a frustration of having useless units arriving in future missions.  And this seems to be a cumulative problem... as in the campaign I am playing, the number of uncrewed HT's that cannot be crewed by anyone grew from mission to mission.  Of course am defining "bug" as anything that makes the game seem ridiculous.  And that has to be a programming/software issue, no?  

Either way, thank you for taking a look and confirming the HT bug.  Added to the list.

 

 

[Blackhorse15A]

I don't think this is a bug. Sounds more like a misunderstanding of what is being modeled/represented by the game.

You say you got an FO back, but you didn't. You got back a gunner for an artillery observation vehicle. You are still waiting on replacements for a driver and a replacement FO (and perhaps the vehicle itself). This can happen in real life too. That gunner isn't trained in to make actual call for Fire, and so can't do it. It's the gunner's job to protect the actual FO, not call for artillery fire.

Perhaps it's confusing because the unit icon is for an observer. But need to realize those are *unit* icons and not individuals or capabilities. It is the capability of the full up unit at 100%, but you don't have that (yet). Granted, in real life if the supporting artillery unit got a replacement gunner, they wouldn't send him out to a supported manuever unit without an actual FO in the team and just wouldn't send him at all, but that would be less than what you have now. But it is realistic that the unit would receive a replacement gunner (or the wounded gunner was returned to duty) before/without the actual FO and had a partial team like that which cannot actually call for Fire.

Protect that one replacement and it will be more likely that the other spots in the team get replaced when future replacements come in.

 

[Erwin]

Thank you for your comments.

I thought about the other bizarre bug re the HT's that cannot be re-crewed.  Have played almost entirely campaigns (and CMRT in particular) for thousands of hours either as playtester or for fun in the last decade and I cannot recall either the HT issue nor the FO issue occurring before.  IIRC the KIA FO's return in later missions completely capable.  Otherwise it could break the campaign making it impossible to continue - after you may have spent dozens or hundreds of hours playing another 6+ missions only to get stopped because you needed the FO.  Who wants to replay 6 big missions just to save the FO?

One has to think about this re what makes a good game and a good experience for the customer.  There is nothing one can do with a FO that cannot spot... other than use him for suicidal recon missions.  It's ridiculous to make a game that deliberately frustrates a player who is trying to get entertainment value from the product.  

Suspect that bugs have been introduced with the last update(s).  

I get the impression that many well-meaning folks who refuse to believe CM is riddled with bugs do not actually play the game that much, certainly not campaigns, and therefore are not that familiar with the game - esp campaigns.  Campaigns are where many features of CM2 are stressed and can come undone, eg: the C2 system.  This doesn't mean the game is not enjoyable or fun.  But, I've never had rose-colored glasses.

 

[chuckdyke]

6 hours ago, PEB14 said:

that should be crewed by any of the troops.

Even in the 50's to be able to drive a car was a big deal. Just prior to WW2 in Europe only three people had a car. The mayor, doctor and maybe some very well to do person. To be able to drive a truck with the responsibility to maintain it was something like today's PHD. If everything BF is generous, the big plus for US forces the local infrastructure was the world ahead by twenty years. Germans relied on horses it was not only because of lack of fuel.

Edited February 27, 2023 by chuckdyke

[PEB14]

8 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

Even in the 50's to be able to drive a car was a big deal. Just prior to WW2 in Europe only three people had a car. The mayor, doctor and maybe some very well to do person. To be able to drive a truck with the responsibility to maintain it was something like today's PHD.

I think you misunderstand me (sorry, probably my bad!).

I mostly agree with what you write, but in game terms what I describe above is what should happen. And indeed it DOES happen: taking the save file from Erwin, I was able to un-crew and re-crew several other SPW with very different units (MG gunners or HQ units most notably). Whether this is realistic or not is not my point; my point is, this is possible from a Combat Mission software perspective, which makes what happens to Erwin technically a bug.

[chuckdyke]

23 minutes ago, PEB14 said:

I describe above is what should happen.

If the command panel says dismount, every other unit should be able to mount a vehicle. If it says bail out only the original crew can mount it, even of the same formation can't remount it. I tried to bail out a Green Crew and substitute them for an Crack Crew, same type of tank same platoon. I was on the point to report it as a bug but it is not.

[PEB14]

1 hour ago, chuckdyke said:

If the command panel says dismount, every other unit should be able to mount a vehicle. If it says bail out only the original crew can mount it, even of the same formation can't remount it. I tried to bail out a Green Crew and substitute them for an Crack Crew, same type of tank same platoon. I was on the point to report it as a bug but it is not.

Well done, I haven't tested the difference between "dismount" and "bail out".

IIRC I only tested "dismount".

[Bulletpoint]

While I completely understand Erwin's frustrations here, I must say that it's not really so much a bug as an unfortunate consequence of the reinforcement system. The FO's utility depends on that single soldier, so if he doesn't come back as a reinforcement due to the game's "dice roll", you're stuck without artillery support (without the biggest guns at least).

For other units, the game understands that it doesn't make sense to replace for example a lost tank with a new tank crew without the actual tank. So you either get a new tank or you get nothing.

In my opinion, it would be nice to have the same logic applied to FO's, but even if it were, if reinforcement chance was set to 50% you'd still either get a brand new FO unit or not. Instead of getting a new gunner, as in Erwin's case, you'd get nothing. So it's up to the campaign designer to make sure the player either gets that new FO or that the campaign can be completed without it.

[George MC]

21 hours ago, Erwin said:

"KG Von Schroif".  and the FO that cannot call in arty.   I think these look like bugs in the campaign game system.  

 

Yup its a design feature not a bug.

As it says in the READ ME:

"This campaign covers a short and sustained period of combat operations taking place over a period of less than 72 hours, in Poland, on the Eastern Front in early August 1944. Although fictional it is heavily based on actual events."

AND

"It is worth noting that the player receives no reinforcements and little in the way of refit in the 72 hour period.
Therefore you, the player, have to use your forces wisely, especially your panzergrenadiers. Keep your casualties as low as you can, for as long as you can. The key to success is close co-operation between your SPW, panzergrenadiers and panzers.
Key characters, including platoon leaders, are all named individually and are tracked throughout the campaign. You’ll notice, as casualties mount that key names slowly start to disappear. Don’t get killed yourself though early on, as it may lead to you ending the campaign, like your life, prematurely."

So given the tight frame no chance of having key assets replaced.

Lesson - don't get key stuff killed (especially von Schroif) as it ain't coming back...