More suggestions...

[Apa]

Sorry boys, couldn't resist

1) Flamethrower squads should turn faster. Try this: Have a squad run past a FT so that it doesn't get closer than ~15m to the FT. FT doesn't fire (at least in my tests). To me this seems that something is wrong, but haven't never used a flamethrower in real life (well nowadays my real life is CM but still...)

2) Flamethrowers should target at enemy infantry even when enemy inf is not in range, so that when the squad comes to range, they could immendiately fire.

3) This is about morale, and I think it is well known that this isn't realistic, but just want to say it again: I have made a squad accidentally run through a barrage, and yes, it runs straight into it, gets broken, and runs away of the barrage. If I had been there, I wouldn't have run into that barrage... would you? propably very hard to "fix", and an endless source of bugs when done.

Ok some toughts from me, feel free to express your opinions, but please, in better english than mine

[Michael Dorosh]

Interesting suggestions, but I don't see anything that needs fixing here.

It seems to me that flamethrowers are offensive weapons, not defensive - targeting running infantry, as in your first two examples, was simply not done. The flamethrower was a dangerous weapon to use (it drew a lot of enemy attention), carried only a few seconds worth of fuel, and was not usually wasted on a squad running in the open, but used on bunkers and buildings and entrenched infantry - tough to kill targets. I don't see a need for concessions to allow their use on running infantry.

I think most infantry were trained to advance through enemy fire - they didn't always do it successfully, as your broken squad will indicate.

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

http://wargames.freehosting.net/cmbits.htm

[Jeff Heidman]

The biggest thing BTS could do to make FT teams more useful is make them harder to identify.

At the moment the are identified and elimanted very quickly, usually long before they ever get to fire.

Actually, I can't say I have used them (or had them used against me) since the 1.1 patch, so perhaps this issue is already resolved. In general it seems harder to identify infantry as specific types.

Jeff Heidman

[Apa]

Yes, maybe you are correct, but it feels stupid when an enemy runs straight into your foxhole and kills your FT... no fire from that FT at all... btw the FT was unspotted by enemy inf, rotated into correct direction, and no hide / ambush. But I also misused it by not having supporting infantry.

And about that barrage part, you are propably correct, but still if you are trained to do that, it doesn't necessarily mean that you will do that in combat, atleast veteran troops shouldn't do that...

[Leonidas]

Flamethrower squads should turn faster.

Agreed, but you don't go far enough! Most infantry should turn nearly instantaneously. How long does it take a squad to do an about face? A second, maybe a second and a half.

MGs and mortars are a separate case, I'll admit. But the turning model for other infantry units is strange. They seem to have a fixed degrees per second turning speed, like a vehicle.

Having pointed out the problem, I'm not sure what the solution is, because there are other features of turning a team or squad that might be tricky. For example, I imagine that infantry is always checking for the nearest direct fire threat, and using available cover and concealment to counter that threat. After all, that's the reason that infantry is so durable when used properly.

So while an infantry unit could about-face instantaneously, it might need some time to acquire a new set of protected positions, depending on the immediacy of the threat. If the squad is getting ready for a 100m firefight, they would probably take the time to set up defensive positions. If the enemy squad is at 5m, then I imagine they would about face and start firing immediately.

[This message has been edited by Leonidas (edited 02-05-2001).]

[Leonidas]

Originally posted by Jeff Heidman:

The biggest thing BTS could do to make FT teams more useful is make them harder to identify.

That might help game-wise, but historically it has problems. It would be pretty easy to spot the fellow lumbering along with a giant heavy backpack and a nozzle in his hand.

I find that FTs are darn near impossible to use, and wildly overpriced in QBs. They are slow, have short range, and aren't all that effective once you get them into place. I assume that they would be much more effective in jungle, or in towns where the buildings are not built on the 'one building per 60m square' plan.

But I think what's really missing is that infantry hiding in a building can't get hyper-defensive and refuse to expose itself to enemy fire. Because defending infantry in CM always makes itself reasonably open to enemy infantry fire, anything a FT can do in range, a squad can do about as well.

[Barticus]

Originally posted by Leonidas:

I find that FTs are darn near impossible to use, and wildly overpriced in QBs. They are slow, have short range, and aren't all that effective once you get them into place. I assume that they would be much more effective in jungle, or in towns where the buildings are not built on the 'one building per 60m square' plan.

Although I haven't had a chance to try this vs. a human opponent, I have had good luck with FT's in villages, towns and heavily forested areas. Mind you, this is against enemy vehicles, not infantry. Had one team rack up 3 M4 Sherman kills.

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

"I have slipped the

surly bonds of earth...."

[Michael Dorosh]

You are assuming infantry changing facing is simply rotating on the spot. Not so! You have 6 or 9 or 12 men shifting position. Having done fieldcraft training with the military, I can tell you it's not as simple as that. You have to consider the ground they are on, settling in their weapons (especially the LMG) so that all members of the squad have a clear field of fire, as well as the best cover they can find. It takes a bit more than a second, especially while prone. It also takes your focus off whatever ground or targets you are watching, and it takes a second or two, once you have done fidgeting around on the ground, to take up focus again outside of your immediate surroundings. Rereading your comments, I think perhaps you have already considered this, so you are right in much of what you say.

As for identifying flamethrowers - this was a real life concern, and flamethrower operators did take heavy casualties. German flame crews were supposes to wear big bulky rubber suits, which I think many discarded, but the large tank(s) on the back of flamethrower crews caused them to move slower and also stand out like a sore thumb, even without the protective clothing. Like you, Jeff, I haven't used them that much in the game but fire was the single most feared weapon on the battlifield, and extra effort was made to knock out flamethrower operators as soon as they were spotted.

[Apa]

Dorosh:

According to your text, it would be hard for infantry that is "taking cover" to rotate, but it seems that it is not so now. Something to consider for CM2?

Leonidias:

Infantry should be able to rotate something like 45 degrees almost instantly (I don't know what is the effective firing arc of infatry), but as Dorosh said, turning 90 degrees is something that takes time.

Maybe it would be good to say, that I haven't been in army (jet...), so I don't have any facts, only a good feeling, that there _might_ be something that could be done better. Also it would be fair to say, that these aren't any too setious things, but they might make the game better, and that is a good enough reason for me to talk about them.

[jasoncawley@ameritech.net]

The time to change facing should not be uniform for all infantry units. Crewed weapons like HMGs and mortars should take some time, as they do, because of the set-up of the weapon, and the half-squad size of the team. Regular squads may take time because there are many men to reposition. But a 2 man LMG, Zook, flamethrower, FO, or a one man sniper - should be much faster. And HQ units faster as well, for fewer men and better command.

If you've been in MILES gear engagements, you know how restricted battlefield sighting is and how much the positioning of individual men is a matter of sighting. And sergeants are repositioning their men all the time - you two, over there, etc. So the usual facing routines make perfect sense for 8-12 guys. But when it is one weapon and a loader or ammo carrier, and that weapon is man portable without being broken down or people taking different "ends" in a team carry, then the facing should be much faster.

Double the speed would do, and snipers might be three times as fast. It should not be instant, because the men are facing some way and are not seeing everything with the CM camera. But faster would make sense - a tweak for CM2 perhaps.

Incidentally, on the use of FTs, I agree "hard" targets just aren't all that hard in CM. The log bunkers fall to Zooks before an FT opens up from a laboriously achieved close flank. Generic buildings or woods are more promising targets (which is not to say actually promising), just because being alive and close is more likely and the targets themselves more common.