Chad Harrison Posted November 30, 2001 Share Posted November 30, 2001 your 10 man squad is in foxholes with 40 'shots'. you come under tank fire from afar and loose 5 of those men. in CMBO you would still have only 40 'shots'. would it make more sense for those men to have more around 80 'shots'. half the men, same amount of total ammo. yes this would be in a perfect situation where no ammo was lost in the explosion or gun fire. and it could change if you moved from those defensive postions. but if you stayed in your trenches (which i look forward to in CMBB!!!!), why not? thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirill S. Posted November 30, 2001 Share Posted November 30, 2001 I don't think that losing a man is losing ammo, mainly because the ammo can be taken from a dead body. if the guy was shot or killed by an explosion or a fragment, the ammo would be "takeable", but if the guy was "torched" that would certainly make the ammo "untakeable". just my 2 cents Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted November 30, 2001 Author Share Posted November 30, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Kirill S.: I don't think that losing a man is losing ammo, mainly because the ammo can be taken from a dead body. if the guy was shot or killed by an explosion or a fragment, the ammo would be "takeable", but if the guy was "torched" that would certainly make the ammo "untakeable". just my 2 cents<hr></blockquote> thats my thought. as it is, this is not the case in CM. only a direct HE hit or flame would really take out the ammo. gain ammo off fallen comrades in CM2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warphead Posted November 30, 2001 Share Posted November 30, 2001 Isn't this already modelled by the "LOW" ammo? After the men have spent their normal ammo they share, conserve the rest and grab from fallen comrades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted November 30, 2001 Author Share Posted November 30, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Warphead-: Isn't this already modelled by the "LOW" ammo? After the men have spent their normal ammo they share, conserve the rest and grab from fallen comrades.<hr></blockquote> yes, 'low' ammo represents getting whatever they can get their hands on/reserve ammo in my pocket. however, we all know how slow they shoot when 'low' time comes around. it would be nice if they could inherit a few real 'shots' that could be fired when the infantry assault came, instead of having 'low' ammo and looking at their enemy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crash-Neptune Posted December 1, 2001 Share Posted December 1, 2001 Kind of like Close Combat's 'Scavenging'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted December 1, 2001 Share Posted December 1, 2001 err, is there not a misunderstanding here? I interpret the 40 shots as 'every gun in the squad has 40 shots'. Since the squad is modeled as an entity for its actions, that should be it. So since every single weapon has 40 shots, losing a man does not make a difference. FP goes down, but ammo does not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirill S. Posted December 1, 2001 Share Posted December 1, 2001 then shouldn't the squad be able to increase ammo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted December 1, 2001 Share Posted December 1, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Andreas: err, is there not a misunderstanding here? I interpret the 40 shots as 'every gun in the squad has 40 shots'. Since the squad is modeled as an entity for its actions, that should be it. So since every single weapon has 40 shots, losing a man does not make a difference. FP goes down, but ammo does not.<hr></blockquote> Andreas I believe is correct. Each sildier typically carries enough ammunition for 20 minutes of fighting, less if it is brutal, more if it is just advancing fire or the like. Only the squad automatic is dependent on ammo from the men, and perhaps should be treated a bit different, but for the most part the ammo system, although abstract, works well enough. A more complex ammo treatment would individually model soldier ammo load outs, and rifle fire by the round, but is really too much to ask (at least right now) for a battalion level game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted December 1, 2001 Share Posted December 1, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Kirill S.: then shouldn't the squad be able to increase ammo?<hr></blockquote> What would be different? They never run dry now, so that is modeled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapdragon Posted December 1, 2001 Share Posted December 1, 2001 <blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Andreas: What would be different? They never run dry now, so that is modeled.<hr></blockquote> Scavenging is time consuming and not extremely profitable. It is best illustrated in the Bulge when between waves the Bastogne defenders would collect ammofrom the dead and hand it back out again, but this was an organized effort that took hours each night. Rifling someone's pockets for a striper of 8mm is currently modelled in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts