Certain units too easily spotted

[Annalist]

This is similar to the thread about buttoned tanks and AT teams. I agree, AT teams are the focus of too much enemy attention. They should remain nearly invisible until they raise that huge, unmistable tube to their shoulders to fire. Remember, Bazookas and Panzerschrecks couldn't be fired from the prone position, only kneeling or standing. If they're part of a firefight, no smart infantryman would shift fire from an opposing squad, who's putting out a MUCH larger volume of potentially painful fire to suppress or kill an AT team. Mortars are different because they pose a much greater threat to him.

In addition, why is it that an artillery spotter, snuck or crawled into position and hidden becomes a target by a unit at more than close range? These units do absolutely nothing to give themselves away and draw enemy attention. They sit still and use radios. They should be invisible unless you trip over them. They also seem to die way to easily.

[Guest Napoleon1944]

I have been doing research on this and I agree. My main complaint is the PIAT teams. The PIAT was much smaller and could be fired from a prone position. It seems that BTS models all AT teams alike when it comes to spotting/eliminating them.

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

The only enemy I fear is nature.

-Napoleon

[Annalist]

That's true, I'd forgotten the PIAT. It was actually spring launched so it reduced the signature of the AT team. They could fire it from ambush without creating an exhaust trail and muzzle flash for enemy units to hone in on. The round didn't fire its motor until it was a certain distance from the muzzle of the launcher.

[Polar]

Originally posted by Annalist:

This is similar to the thread about buttoned tanks and AT teams. I agree, AT teams are the focus of too much enemy attention. They should remain nearly invisible until they raise that huge, unmistable tube to their shoulders to fire. Remember, Bazookas and Panzerschrecks couldn't be fired from the prone position, only kneeling or standing. If they're part of a firefight, no smart infantryman would shift fire from an opposing squad, who's putting out a MUCH larger volume of potentially painful fire to suppress or kill an AT team. Mortars are different because they pose a much greater threat to him.

In addition, why is it that an artillery spotter, snuck or crawled into position and hidden becomes a target by a unit at more than close range? These units do absolutely nothing to give themselves away and draw enemy attention. They sit still and use radios. They should be invisible unless you trip over them. They also seem to die way to easily.

They die easy due to their numbers. A FO unit only represents two guys, where one of the three infantry men depicted in any give unit can represent from 1 to 4 men.

If you want to see guys die REALLY fast, try a flamethrower team... they only represent 1 guy!

Joe

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

"I had no shoes and I cried, then I met a man who had no socks." - Fred Mertz

[This message has been edited by Polar (edited 01-23-2001).]

[This message has been edited by Polar (edited 01-23-2001).]

[jgdpzr]

I could be wrong here, but I thought PIATs were harder to spot than 'schrecks and 'zooks (in game terms). Admittedly, I haven't done any testing to determine this, but I do know many people assume they are harder to spot. I know that when I am playing, the first thing I usually see of enemy anti-tank units is the puff of smoke, except in the case of the PIAT which is usually betrayed by sound rather than sight.

[IPA]

Annalist,

I posted a similar thread on Artillery spotters some time back, and fully agree. I still maintain that in a heated battlefield, enemy FOs would not be easily distinguishable from normal infantry, officers or radio operators and should not be identified by the AI (friendly AI that is).

It would be more a case like the sniper in SPR "That's where I'd be" ie when the shells are incoming, now looking for likely FO spotting locations and targeting those.

IPA

[This message has been edited by IPA (edited 01-23-2001).]

[This message has been edited by IPA (edited 01-23-2001).]

[Guest ciks]

PIAT teams ARE harder to spot in the CM.

Once i had a Vet PIAT who managed to fire 4 or 5 shots at a Panther (buttoned), but Panther could not figure out from where the shells are flying.

[russellmz]

Originally posted by Napoleon1944:

I have been doing research on this and I agree. My main complaint is the PIAT teams. The PIAT was much smaller and could be fired from a prone position. It seems that BTS models all AT teams alike when it comes to spotting/eliminating them.

too bad it had to be reloaded while sitting...

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

russellmz,

Self-Proclaimed Keeper for Life of the Sacred Unofficial FAQ.

"They had their chance- they have not lead!" - GW Bush

"They had mechanical pencils- they have not...lead?" - Jon Stewart on The Daily Show

[Guy w/gun]

Hey! I like the attention my guys give to AT teams. Makes sense. "Hey, there gonna destroy this big pile of metal thats protecting us! Get'em!!!

All that aside, I'll leave this argument up to the more knowlegdable people. The key WOULD be distinguishing the inf as a AT team.

[This message has been edited by Guy w/gun (edited 01-23-2001).]

[Slapdragon]

To fire the Piat, one had to stand up and make a longish pull of the weapon, then a shell placed on the spigot. The shell did not sit well on the spigot - a bazooka or chreck team could run a hundred meters stop and fire no problems, but once piat team stops, it needs to mess with the tube. The weapon can be carried cocked, and if properly fired, it will recock. If not, it needs to cock again. The weapon is less conspicious than an zook or chreck when fired. All of this boffing around by any armour unit seems to make them more visible. I am not sure which team would be less visible with all the goofing around the piats had to do, although without the back blast they would be less visible from the tanks.

Artillery spotters are not invisible I believe for good reason, 10 kg of field radio, a 3 meter whip antennae, and one of their numbers scanning around with a field glass.

[Guest Andrew Hedges]

Originally posted by Annalist:

I agree, AT teams are the focus of too much enemy attention. They should remain nearly invisible until they raise that huge, unmistable tube to their shoulders to fire. Remember, Bazookas and Panzerschrecks couldn't be fired from the prone position, only kneeling or standing.

It depends on where the AT team is. If they are in the open, or moving through scattered trees, they *should* be spotted and identified, at least tentatively. If they are stationary in woods or scattered trees, or *crawling* through scattered trees, they should be harder to spot.

I *think* that's how it works in the game -- at any rate, I tend not to spot stationary AT teams in woods until they fire, although I often spot them moving in the open.

WRT to the buttoned up question, though, there are limitations in the game's spotting mechanics that essentially mean that if anyone on your side spots an enemy unit, *all* units on your side can see the enemy unit. Even the buttoned up tanks. A search on "relative spotting" will give you more information on this topic than you probably want.

[Pak40]

I remember way back when I first started playing this game. I thought the same thing all of you in this thread are thinking. But since then I've learned to keep my AT teams and FOs alive. I'm not saying that all of you are beginners, just that I've changed my tactics.

[Michael Dorosh]

In theory, the PIAT recocked itself after firing, so you could reload it while prone.

And yes, to fire the initial shot, the PIAT had to be manually cocked.

There were instances where it failed to recock, in which case the firer had to take the measures described here.

See Weapons and Warfare Volume 19

[Jarhead]

Originally posted by Annalist:

Remember, Bazookas and Panzerschrecks couldn't be fired from the prone position, only kneeling or standing.

I know this was not the point of the post. I also admit my knowledge of the bazooka is very limited. As far as the Panzerschrecks go, I know nothing other then it was a German AT weapon. Ok, that out of the way. I don't understand why a Bazooka can not be fired from the prone position? The soldier would have to hold the weapon at an angle away from his body. Assuming as well there are no obstruction behind him that would deflect the back blast. Could someone enlighten my on this small but curious point.

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

Semper Fi.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Jarhead:

can not be fired from the prone position? The soldier would have to hold the weapon at an angle away from his body.

That would entail pointing the muzzle of the weapon to the ground, so that the backblast didn't set his clothing on fire or scorch his back and legs. Since he's prone, pointing the weapon down would give the weapon an effective range of about 10 feet before the round struck the dirt.

[Olle Petersson]

Regarding this firing while prone sub-thread:

I can't see any problems either. The world-wide common Bofors Carl Gustav 84mm RR can easily be fired from prone, kneeling or standing position, as long as you have at least 5 or 10 metres free to any large object to the rear.

To avoid the blast while prone, the gunner and loader take up a position where they're almost perpendicular to the gun, something like this:

>-o|o-< (the gun being the middle part)

The backblast just bounce off the ground and is scattered further backwards, so no problem.

The WW2 rocket launchers were wuzzies compared to this one...

Cheers

Olle

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

Strategy is the art of avoiding a fair fight...

[This message has been edited by Olle Petersson (edited 01-24-2001).]

[PeterNZer]

Firring Prone

I've seen a PDF of a German field manual and other things and the recommended firring position for the panzerschreck is prone! You lie down and the Ps is fired while you lie perpendicular to it. (you make a nice T shape ok )

PeterNZ

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

"Patriotism is the virtue of the viscious" - Oscar Wilde

"Don't F*CK with Johnny Cash!" - Chupacabra

[tss]

Slapdragon wrote:

Artillery spotters are not invisible I believe for good reason, 10 kg of field radio, a 3 meter whip antennae, and one of their numbers scanning around with a field glass.

And in many cases that field glass is of range-finding variety that has two periscope-like things projecting upwards.

- Tommi

[chrisl]

Originally posted by Slapdragon:

Artillery spotters are not invisible I believe for good reason, 10 kg of field radio, a 3 meter whip antennae, and one of their numbers scanning around with a field glass.

To add a little to this-- go over to Tankbooks.com and read some of the interviews. I read one the other day about a guy who hauled the radio for his PL-- he would draw fire like a magnet, and went lost three Lieutenants in his time in combat. The FO has a radio (or field telephone) and some nice binoculars or rangefinder. Those probably stand out as much as a guy armed with a Carbine or Pistol (an officer). If you see someone talking on the phone, looking through binoculars, and waving maps around in a combat area, you can bet that you don't want whoever he's making a date with to show up in your neighborhood.

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

"If you can taste the difference between caviar on a cracker and ketchup on a Kit-Kat while blindfolded, you have not had enough aquavit to be ready for lutefisk." (stolen from some web page about lutefisk)

[Annalist]

I'm not talking about FO's on the line of contact. My thread referred to FO's snuck into place and hiding. They were in woods and tall pines and after beginning to call rounds became targets of units 400+ meters away. Now, relatively speaking, a man-sized silouette(sp?) at 400 meters appears about 3mm tall. How could you spot an unmoving FO from that distance? There's only one way you could, light reflecting from the lenses of his field glasses and I don't think CM models that.

[Guest rune]

Take that same man, and look at him thru a 8X power binoculars. Gee, I can see him fine at that range.

CM does assume that platoon leaders and tank crews have bincoulars. Since relative spotting will not be in untill CMII, once one spots him all spot him.

Am sure Charles or Steve can comment furhter if needed.

Rune

[Treeburst155]

I seem to have luck moving spotters into relatively forward and dangerous positions if I already have a nice firefight going with enemy units who could possibly see him in his new position. It seems the troops are too busy dealing with the people shooting at them to notice the spotter. In these instances the spotter has always attained the dangerous position along a movement path that is out of LOS of the enemy. It could be in these situations that I have completely suppressed the enemy. I'll have to pay more attention to be sure. In other words, if the spotter can get to a position unseen he can remain unseen if you keep the enemy busy (suppressed?). AT teams however, are probably a different story.

Treeburst155

[Dan Robertson]

I have fired the British Armies LAW 94 from the prone position.

To fire it from the prone position you must place it on your shoulder but be careful not to have the back blast any where near your feet.

To do this you aline your body about 30 degrees to the left of the target. The ideal launch point is on a reverse slope where you can fire it prone, but you feet ate very much lower so you don't have to worry about them.

This may be different with the Bazooka or shreck because their MV's were much less than a more modern weapon, so presumably required more elevation.

[Guest Napoleon1944]

Looks like more evidence to make AT teams harder to spot when hiding.

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

The only enemy I fear is nature.

-Napoleon

[Roborat]

One other point is that foos dont usually stand up and look around the battlefield. They hide, in the bushes, or in a hole, with cam or other cover on top and in front, so to see them more than about 100m away, or even 50 m, when they are not moving, would take the eyes of an eagle. And the radio is usually hidden further back, with a long handset. The same goes for the hiding and shooting thing. There is no reason for the change in accuracy when firing. The foos pick their position so they can see their target from concealment, without having to move. So in game terms, they should be firing while hidden, no change in accuracy.

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

"With cat-like tread, Upon our prey we steal;

In silence dread, Our cautious way we feel." -G&S