Guest Pillar Posted December 9, 2000 Share Posted December 9, 2000 Many people have came around asking, "What movement command best tells my guys to stop and shoot at the enemy upon contact?" I think this is because even with "Move" or "Sneak", in CM, the men are very reluctant to stop and fire. In a recent pbem with aaronb, we both had platoons moving towards each other slowly (mine at move). They walked right by each other, though they saw and targetted each other -- BUT they didn't stop to shoot until they had passed each other by. They were moving within maybe 5 meters of each other. Clear, Day, Summertime. Dry ground. Perhaps in a future patch, the propensity to stop and fire (target acquisition works fine as it is) should be increased for the "Move" command. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximus Posted December 9, 2000 Share Posted December 9, 2000 Point taken and understood, but isn't *that* what the "Sneak" command is all about? To me "Move" was just another form of "Run" but without the likely-hood of the men getting Tired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoePrivate Posted December 9, 2000 Share Posted December 9, 2000 From the 1.03 Readme: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>* Sneaking is now more sensitive to incoming fire when it decides to stop (i.e. "advance to contact")<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I'm sure you were aware of this so are you saying Sneak hasn't worked for you as stated above? From my experience Sneak has been exactly movement to contact, I haven't seen otherwise in my games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pillar Posted December 9, 2000 Share Posted December 9, 2000 I'm suggesting an increase in the propensity to stop when moving as coded under the "Move" command. When an enemy passes you by from only a few meters, regardless of whether you are trying to be quiet or not, one should stop and shoot! Even the "Fast" type of movement should stop and fire when meeting the enemy at that kind of range. I agree that the faster you move, the more time it should take to identify and target the enemy... but ONCE targetted they should stop at that kind of range and fire. In the example I gave, the squad had spotted and targetted the enemy but STILL walked past him (some distance) before stopping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoePrivate Posted December 9, 2000 Share Posted December 9, 2000 I understand what you are saying in your example but I think the intent of the command design was simplicity. There have been lots of requests for more specific unit orders to handle special circumstances, especially for AFVs. If you had used 'Sneak' then your squad would have stopped to engage as I said earlier, 'Move' and 'Fast' have different characteristics. If you really want to increase the speed of your squad in that one minute of action then you could insert a Fast or Move order along with the Sneak. If that's not to your liking, you can try and convince BTS of adding another order Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pillar Posted December 9, 2000 Share Posted December 9, 2000 "I understand what you are saying in your example but I think the intent of the command design was simplicity. There have been lots of requests for more specific unit orders to handle special circumstances" Can you name me a situation where you WOULDN'T want your moving (fast or slow) troops to stop and shoot an enemy squad 5 meters from them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoePrivate Posted December 9, 2000 Share Posted December 9, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Can you name me a situation where you WOULDN'T want your moving (fast or slow) troops to stop and shoot an enemy squad 5 meters from them?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Every time I use those orders. If I'm expecting an unknown contact who I want to engage then I will use Sneak. It's not like the situation will get totally out of hand in the one minute of action or that every possibility must be accounted for at that instant. Anyways I was just trying to be helpful, you can save your facetious comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pillar Posted December 9, 2000 Share Posted December 9, 2000 Joe!! The smiley at the end was there to make sure you didn't interpret anything the wrong way! And yes, in one minute of action MANY things can happen... entire platoons can be wiped out easily. Why is it so dangerous to make requests around here? Seems everyone takes offense to the original poster and then everything he says is taken the wrong way. Boy, if that's the trap I'm falling into, I'll retract my request and get the hell out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoePrivate Posted December 9, 2000 Share Posted December 9, 2000 Ok that's fine I don't know what led you to the conclusion that your request was being attacked. Your first post implied doubt whether CM implements a move to contact order. I and another simply pointed out it does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pillar Posted December 9, 2000 Share Posted December 9, 2000 No problem. It's not that I thought people were attacking me, it's that I was afraid people felt I was attacking THEM. Just to get back on track: "Even troops using the "Fast" type of movement should stop and fire when meeting the enemy at that kind of range. I agree that the faster you move, the more time it should take to identify and target the enemy... but ONCE targetted they should stop at that kind of range and fire. In the example I gave, the squad had spotted and targetted the enemy but STILL walked past him (some distance) before stopping. " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted December 9, 2000 Share Posted December 9, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pillar: No problem. It's not that I thought people were attacking me, it's that I was afraid people felt I was attacking THEM. Just to get back on track: "Even troops using the "Fast" type of movement should stop and fire when meeting the enemy at that kind of range. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I disagree - when I tell my troops to run somewhere, I want them to run there and not stop to dawdle and shoot up an enemy or two. If your troops get shot up on the way, it shows you have not done your homework, and had them run somewhere they should not have been running. Think about it - in effect you are asking the Tac AI to protect you from the consequences of making a big mistake. This opens the door to all kinds of gamey behaviour, e.g. if you are not sure if the enememy is hidden over there, just run a couple of squads down there and you know that they are not in as much danger, because they will no longer press on once they spot danger. It is your job as CO to decide whether they should be running there in the first place. Once you have done so, the Tac AI should not be able to override your command. ------------------ Andreas <a href="http://www.geocities.com/greg_mudry/sturm.html">Der Kessel</a > Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission. [This message has been edited by Germanboy (edited 12-09-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief Posted December 9, 2000 Share Posted December 9, 2000 Pillar: I can think of a situation in which I don't want infantry to stop and shoot at nearby enemies, and that's when I want to close-assault the bad guys. I find that "Move" or "Run" works well for this. I can tell a squad to move into a house and do the close in thing without fear that their orders will park them in the street 5 meters away from the door. Of course, enemy fire is another matter . . . . Not being a subtle type, I haven't used "Sneak" all that much. But if the idea is that sneaking troops will have a higher propensity to stop, drop, and shoot, then the specific functions of the two commands make sense to me. ------------------ Also los, Augen zu, und hinein! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest aaronb Posted December 9, 2000 Share Posted December 9, 2000 I just watched the turn Pillar was referring too - an unholy mess. For the doubters, my guys were told to 'sneak', and they still intermingled with the opposing force. Thus spoiling what would have been a completely successful ambush in the woods. [This message has been edited by aaronb (edited 12-09-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scott Clinton Posted December 12, 2000 Share Posted December 12, 2000 Sneaking units will only stop and fire if they are fired upon first. I.E. the will return fire, not instigate fire no matter how juicy the target. The "SNEAK" command has always been this way. Moving units will fire as they move if, and only if they enemy is in thier general frontal arc. They will NOT stop unless they break morale in some manner. I estimate a units 'frontal arc' to be 60 degrees to be safe but it may be closer to 90 degrees, but I have never been able to get anyone from BTS to respond to this (and I have tried... ) Lastly, I don't come here often for several reasons I won't get into. I only post because some of the newer faces (to me at least) appear to have the orders confused. I hope this helps. Please don't be put out if I don't respond because like I said I don't come here too much anymore. (Also, I am double posting to another related thread also in an attempt to reach as many new folks as possible) ------------------ Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own. [This message has been edited by Scott Clinton (edited 12-11-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pillar Posted December 12, 2000 Share Posted December 12, 2000 If that is the case, then it would indeed be a welcome addition for an order that did as outlined above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackson Posted December 14, 2000 Share Posted December 14, 2000 Pillar, Have you tried testing this occurance? It seems that two opposing squads will pass each other like ships in the night if neither is firing at the other. Try adding waypoints every 10 or 15 meters and see if they stop their movement and open fire. I often set multiple waypoints through two or three forest tiles when I anticipate contact or minefields. However, since starting the practice, I can't recall actually running into a moving enemy, so I don't really know if it works. (It does work against minefields.) ------------------ My plan is the ultimate in “flexibility,” since I make most of it up as I go along! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azazyel Posted December 14, 2000 Share Posted December 14, 2000 Is "Sneak" slower than "Move" ? TIA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackson Posted December 14, 2000 Share Posted December 14, 2000 Sneak is a lot slower than move. I seldom use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts