Spook Posted April 13, 2001 Share Posted April 13, 2001 That's right, march right over to the woodshed, 'cause I'm waiting for you with a 2X4 sawed out from hickory! (And if you think of bringing your MP44 or Weasel to cover for you, I'm calling the Feds. ) So you are wondering, what is the reason for this apparent belligerence? :confused: Well, it relates to the "machinegun" thread that has been going on strongly now, and a set of comments you made early on in that thread. First, I will refer to some earlier forum history (12/00), when I expressed a concern about the TacAI giving the impression of "panicky units retreating TOWARDS enemy units" within a certain range. The thread link for reference is: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=013463 And now....your comments of 8th April on the "machinegun effectiveness" thread: ---------------------------- Actually... this point reminds me. Folks have been wondering why a unit gets to within, say, 30 or so meters and still keeps on coming at the firing unit. This is not a sure thing, but if the unit is Regular or above it is more than likely. The reason is that this is realistic behavior (outlined in my previous post). A long time ago we did not have this coded in. Probably before the Beta Demo, but perhaps just before the final version went out the door. I can't remember. The point is, without this logic put in units, even good ones, would get up close to a target, the FP rating would be too much, the unit would turn away (in good or bad shape), and would be mowed down on its way back to some cover or other. This is totally unrealistic behavior and was a terribly unfair penalty to the attacker as it was practically impossible to close on an enemy unit unless it was totally pinned down. So there is a point of "no return" in which a unit will more than likely keep rushing headlong regardless of enemy firepower and losses. Pay attention as you play games from now on and you will see that this behavior, which is realistic, cuts both ways. I have seen full squads get eliminated instead of turning around and perhaps only getting cut in half. Just more food for thought. -------------------------- Ah-ha!!! AH-HA!!!! THAT'S what I was seeing all along in my earlier "bocage tests." Leastways, that's what I THINK I was seeing. Geez, why didn't you BTS guys just tell me this in the first place back then? Now, where's that 2X4?.......... Not that I absolutely agree with the "no return" theory in its present execution, though; but at least you've confirmed for me the mechanics at work here. In the case of my test scenarios, the "point of no return" seemed to be more in the range of 40-50 meters instead of 30. So if indeed this coded "point of no return" (per the rationale you've given above) is within 30 meters distance, I can certainly presume that as valid. But if closer to 40-50 meters....hmmm, I guess I'm a little more hesitant to agree for now. It's kind of a subjective question for which "If it takes X number of seconds to reach an firing opponent across open ground even at a dead run, will I run forward...or...backward?" The one thing I NEVER was able to satisfactorily resolve in my test scenario was the repeated circumstance where one particular German defending squad, deployed in a foxhole behind bocage, kept getting out of the foxhole and rushing towards the Allied squads on the other side of the bocage. It remains an outlier that defies explanation in my case. So in effect, my reason for bringing all of this up is that I consider this "point of no return" coding as something to watch for in erratic or illogical behavior during CM2 testing. IMHO, of course. Carry on. (PS: on that other "machinegun" thread, some of its feedback must have been frustrating to keep pace with, but I commend the level-headed quality of your responses and your willingness to participate.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mace Posted April 14, 2001 Share Posted April 14, 2001 Sorry, there will be no spanking of BTS staff allowed until they complete CM2 to CM4. After that, they're fair game! Mace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spook Posted April 14, 2001 Author Share Posted April 14, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mace: Sorry, there will be no spanking of BTS staff allowed until they complete CM2 to CM4. After that, they're fair game! Mace<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sigghhhh...damned lawyers. Always interfering with corporal punishment. (j/k, Mace. ) Well, I went back to my "test scenario" that has the UK riflemen running across that same old hellish bocage-walled square field of 100X100 meters. This time, I set troop quality of the squads and HQ's to "green" to see if there would be a greater likelihood of ducking down or running away. Nope...once one of these green UK squads took fire AND got within 50 meters of a firing enemy unit, they charged right on in towards the Germans to close the gap. (And as such, they quickly died along the bocage hedge between them & the Germans). At 60 meters average distance away from the Germans, though, they would then "stand" or duck in place, or sometimes run back to the bocage line in the other direction. So I get the impression that this "close with the enemy" distance SEEMS to be more towards 50 meters than 30. If so, I'm not in a credible position to argue this as "wrong," but I don't really have a warm fuzzy for it either right now. Leastways, the "enthusiasm" of lower-quality troops MIGHT stand to be pared down a bit in future CM development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilhammer Posted April 14, 2001 Share Posted April 14, 2001 Well, maybe if I had read the forums more closely in the past I would know this about men running to cover in enemy occupied areas instead of learning it the hard way yesterday as I watched a platoon that had been given Hide orders after moving to take a building instead decided to charge an enemy MG nest and got gunned down. They were about 30-40 meters away, in the open at night and died a stupid death, for if they had fallen back just 10 meters, they would of been behind a crest line. And what was real dissapointing to watch was the HQ, after watching its squads suffer casualties and panic, charged the building itself and was wiped out. Perhaps, in the future, the TacAI could not make HQs so "heroic". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalem Posted April 14, 2001 Share Posted April 14, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>a platoon that had been given Hide orders after moving to take a building instead decided to charge an enemy MG nest and got gunned down.[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sorry, that can't happen. MGs don't work - haven't you been reading the MG thread? -dale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spook Posted April 14, 2001 Author Share Posted April 14, 2001 Presumably a tongue-in-cheek reply? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts