Pham911 Posted October 31, 2000 Share Posted October 31, 2000 I was testing something last night(after many problems in the past with this) and found some disturbing results.This may apply to other nationalities, but I only messed with the Germans. Here's a couple of examples: *Two full Vet German rifle platoons engaged a single Reg US rifle platoon in woods. Results: AI pulled back two squads to a building(which was burned and the squads routed), and the single left squad proceeded to hold off the two platoons for five minutes and reduce them to 1/2 a platoon strength. We're talking a range of between 10 to 5m for this engagement, and about 50% of the Germans bringing fire to bear on the squad at any given time. This seems wrong for that range. Armor: Tried Stugs, Panthers, and Tigers, and assorted lighter armor. Long range duels resulted in, more often than not, German casualties and about 60-70% of the time they died with the first shot fired, after cresting hills or emerging from other cover. Those that lived beyond the first shot did so only because the enemy missed. That's not only an incredible hit ratio(hit 6 out of 10 tanks on the first shot), but seems that the German armor is made of butter. Short range engagements also had many German deaths, but that much less troubling due to a faster turret speed on the American tanks. When aiming at each other at the start of the engagement at shorter ranges, the Germans didn't fare much better, despite better frontal armor. It seemed that the Allied tanks were firing rounds that could penetrate German armor, where historically, they had much more trouble. The only tank that seemed more immune to this than others was the Tiger for some reason. Has anyone else noticed any weird, ahistoric combat results for other nationalities(or even Germans), or am I just cursed? And didn't the Germans have better optics(Zeiss?)? They seem to miss far more often than thier counterparts at any range. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terence Posted October 31, 2000 Share Posted October 31, 2000 I don't know about the rest of it, but it _may_ be that you are being righly punished for bad tactics. Armor should NEVER crest hills. Any tanker will tell you that the top of a hill is a rotten place for a tank. And it is sweet and befitting that any tanker who does so get beat like a rented mule. As for the rest of it, I have no idea, but if you will permit me a general observation, I will say that even if one has great tools, one will not reap benefits if one uses them poorly. I hope I have given no offense. Terence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pham911 Posted October 31, 2000 Author Share Posted October 31, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Terence: I don't know about the rest of it, but it _may_ be that you are being righly punished for bad tactics. Armor should NEVER crest hills. Any tanker will tell you that the top of a hill is a rotten place for a tank. And it is sweet and befitting that any tanker who does so get beat like a rented mule. As for the rest of it, I have no idea, but if you will permit me a general observation, I will say that even if one has great tools, one will not reap benefits if one uses them poorly. I hope I have given no offense. Terence<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Oh, jeeze, how could one take offense (rolls eyes). But, seriously, it's not my tactics that I'm concerned of. I'm wondering about penetration values, and how well the tanks aim. Repeated first shot kills at over 500m-1000m are pretty odd, IMO, unless the tankers are bionic and the rounds are magic. It can happen sure, but it seems to be happening more often than not. And, the infantry in question was halfway ringed by vet riflemen, who arrived at the same time(save the first squad who made contact), and wouldn't even pin at 5-10m distance with about 40 some-odd guns firing at them. Just seemed unbelievable. (and, honestly, no offense taken.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamstersss Posted October 31, 2000 Share Posted October 31, 2000 I haven't seen it and, frankly, it sounds like you're dressing up anecdotal evidence to vent frustration about some Panther or another getting killed. ------------------ I've got far more annoying things than that up my sleeve. -Meeks You must wear awfully loose shirts to fit an oompah band up your sleeve. -Chrisl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theron Posted October 31, 2000 Share Posted October 31, 2000 I have had 4 pz IVs kill 6 shermans and 2 fireflys, with no losses on my side, in a long range tank duel, 900-1000m. So the higher velocity German guns do seem to work well at long range. As for infantry I had 1 platoon of SS motorized with some artillery take out a batallion (kill or break them all) of brittish infantry in heavy woods. In both of these cases I was fighting the AI. It is difficult to tell what kind of tactics you are using from your post, but I think the German forces work just fine. Theron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted October 31, 2000 Share Posted October 31, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Terence: Armor should NEVER crest hills. Any tanker will tell you that the top of a hill is a rotten place for a tank. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What??? Are you nuts? I have had incredible success in using Tanks at hill crest. It is my SOP. The benefits are numerous: 1. You are hul down when you engage and thus harder to hit. 2. For enemy return fire you armor slope is greater, thus providing more protection. Conversely the enemy's slope benefit is decreased. 3. Your visibility is better. 4. You have an avenue of retreat so that you can displace safely. I think those reasons are enough. Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CavScout Posted October 31, 2000 Share Posted October 31, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pham911: And, the infantry in question was halfway ringed by vet riflemen, who arrived at the same time(save the first squad who made contact), and wouldn't even pin at 5-10m distance with about 40 some-odd guns firing at them. Just seemed unbelievable. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I think I heard some real Germans complaining about somehting similar.... where was it again... oh yeah, Bastogne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pham911 Posted October 31, 2000 Author Share Posted October 31, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Elijah Meeks: I haven't seen it and, frankly, it sounds like you're dressing up anecdotal evidence to vent frustration about some Panther or another getting killed. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, actually I thought about that and don't think I'm venting. But, I do believe that there's a real probability that I'm suffering from a common problem: Unlikely events are memorable, and annoying events are more memorable still. So, it could just be that I've been ignoring the results for the other side. So, it seems the game is tilted against me just based on what I'm paying more attention to. Or, could just be a run of odd luck. Not sure, but if nobody else has noticed a problem, I'll chalk it up to one of those two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted October 31, 2000 Share Posted October 31, 2000 My experience has been that the German 75mm, particularly the MarderII, and the 250/8 short 75 are fairly leathal. In long distance duels the MarderII will generally take out an armored target on the second shot, while the short 75mm can toast ShermanII's with frontal shots in medium distance duels. Dunno, but that works for me. With infantry, remember US squads had 12 men, vs German platoons of 18 men or so unless their Rifle, then it's like what, 27. The word Platoon with regard to the Germans is a bit deceiving. There weren't that many more guns to bring to bear. Now, if tactics are applied, using a squad to flank the single US squad, I have found they (Allied squads), will quickly react to flanking fire and head South. In a discussion of pure numbers concerning the penetration values, I'm aware that there are a few folks at least, who dispute some of the figures used and potentially with some good arguments. I really can't speak to that, but I'll say that I'm unaware of any wargame yet that didn't have detractors when it came to the baseline figures used to determine penetration values. I believe the reason is there are little or no absolutes and numerous complexities involved. Ballistics testing is not an exacting science, leaving plenty of room for debates. Do the German's need tweaking? Probably everything in the game could be tweaked, I suppose the question is; what price perfection? And would any of us know it if we saw it? Paint something olive drab, and right off someone pops up with a picture that his Uncle Snort took in France showing something different. I think the best one can do, is about what BTS did. Get as close as you can, and let it go at that. One could spent eternity tweaking this stuff, and there'd still be considerable room left for debate. Which does not precisely dispute your point, just saying that the majority seem please with what we have is all. ------------------ "Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth." -Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916) [This message has been edited by Bruno Weiss (edited 10-31-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted October 31, 2000 Share Posted October 31, 2000 The Germans are highly overrated by gamers, and therefore when anything bad happens to them, the first cry out is "the game is broken" instead of "my tactics need improving" or even more likely "my understanding of warfare is perhaps skewed". Seen it a hundred times already <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Has anyone else noticed any weird, ahistoric combat results for other nationalities(or even Germans), or am I just cursed?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> "Ahistoric" is anything that regullarly, and predictably, occures that did not in fact happen to that extent in real life. Nothing in your examples noted raised my eyebrows in the least. For an example of how German gun accuracy is held to an unrealistic and incorrect standard, check out the quite long thread: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/011342.html After over 12 pages of complaining, arguing, and genuine examination of the facts, page 13 shows that after all the discussion CM probably has it about right. At the very least nobody has presented a strong case for what is "correct" vs. the way CM does it. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
istari Posted October 31, 2000 Share Posted October 31, 2000 Pham911, I understand the frustration at reading about the awesome German material and then seeing it more vulnerable in practice. But I think Combat Mission is actually modelling real-life very well. Remember, most of the gun duels in CM are happening at <800m, due to the limited size of the battlefields. The superior German optics really gave an advantage at 1000m+ - in fact, it was standard practice for Panthers to engage at 1000-2000m to take advantage of their range and sight advantage. At <800m, I don't think the Sherman is as badly overmatched in optics. Furthermore, my anecdotal evidence is the opposite of yours. I have worked very hard to spring ambushes with Shermans on unsuspecting Panzers, firing into their flanks at long ranges(~600-800m), and more often than not, my Shermans will miss the first few shots and get nailed by an accurate Panzer riposte in 1 or 2 shots. So my SOP now is never to try to engage with Shermans at >500m. Period. Based on experience in the game. As for the troops in the woods, remember two things: 1) First salvo counts far more than numbers. Once a unit is suppressed, its return fire is far less accurate. It is entirely possible for a small force to beat up a larger force if it can get the first volley of fire. 2) At this micro-level of combat, random luck plays a big role. You may have just had an unlucky episode in that forest. Just my 0.02 Chris Johnson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts