Tanaka Posted April 4, 2001 Share Posted April 4, 2001 Here it goes another infantry fight problem, this one has been talked here in the forum... As we know it's very difficult to make German infantry to use it's PF, even PF-100 (Has any one sow a 90m PF-100 shot ? ). It has been told that it takes a lot of courage to fire a PF at a tank and that all world must be a better place in order for them to fire the damn thing Now, I will not go that way... What I would like to change is the wiliness that these guys have to fire the thing at infantry targets, it's stupid and don't forget that they have infinite grenades. In my umbel opinion and making a wild guess, I think the reason why they do this it's because the "routine" that controls the fire is the same that is used to fire the rifle grenades and other type of "extra" infantry weapons,(but with different ranges) , if it is not, great, then it is easy to end this stupid behavior... Again, prove me wrong or please change this for CM2,thanks in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellros Posted April 4, 2001 Share Posted April 4, 2001 They will fire their PF at infantry that is dug in. I've had PF's fired at infantry and guns in foxholes. I think it's kind of a waste to fire a PF at infantry in the open, especially when the squad's inherent firepower is much more powerful. I see them as hanging on to the PF for use against a 'hard' target. As an example... I doubt you would see a modern infantry squad use its LAW rocket (or equivalent disposable AT weapon) against an infantry target when the possibility of an armored target could appear. I 'could' see them using it against a bunker, fortified position, or if even against a mass infantry assault. Just my 2 cents. ------------------ "No matter where you go, there you are" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FriendlyFire Posted April 4, 2001 Share Posted April 4, 2001 In the CD scenario where Germans in half-tracks are attacking a platoon of Americans at a wooded crossroads on a tiny map - I forget the name of it, as you can see - I was playing as the Axis for a change. I had spent several turns sneaking up through the woods before ordering one squad to rush into the building near the flag. The plan was for them to form an impregnable fire base holding the VL. So they successfully rushed it, took cover... and three seconds later the building went up in flames. Panicking, they ran out into the waiting guns of the Americans and were cut to shreds. Now that my secret was out, there was no way I was going to get any more squads into that house. Before giving up in disgust, I played the movie through from their viewpoint to see what had happened - as their first target from the house, they chose some dug-in infantry, fired their one Panzerfaust, and promptly set the house on fire. Sigh. Some troops you just can't take anywhere... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted April 4, 2001 Share Posted April 4, 2001 This actually was discussed at length in another thread a few weeks back. What a few people (Jason Cawley and maybe a few others) said was that it was not unusual for German troops to use PF against infantry, even though they weren't supposed to. So it's not unrealistic (according to them). EDIT: I found the discussion. Enjoy ------------------ What a bunch of horsecrap. -Steve [This message has been edited by Vanir Ausf B (edited 04-04-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanaka Posted April 5, 2001 Author Share Posted April 5, 2001 Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B: ...was that it was not unusual for German troops to use PF against infantry, even though they weren't supposed to. So it's not unrealistic (according to them)... I agree that a PF when used against infantry behind walls, buildings or anything that might detonate the charge has a good chance of producing a number of kills. I also agree that under pressure and specially when caught by surprise the PF man might be tempted to fire it on everything that moves. Now we both know that in CM these distinctions don't exist, what has been stated above (and in some posts of the other topic) are real situations that in some occasions may minor the game limitation... The truth is,for instances, in an ambush where your troops are in cover and the enemy in open terrain, they will simply fire the PF even if they are Elite troopers and with the Lt just behind the PF man Now, I know this is a game,I also know that they have their hands on a more or less new one, CM2, so to me, these game doesn't need better graphics or a better tank "engine",(off course they are all welcome), but the soft target (Infantry included) fighting abstractions are the ones who need more attention (like the one stated in this topic)... Just my opinion of course PS-Edited because of some spell errors [This message has been edited by Tanaka (edited 04-04-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodyBucket Posted April 5, 2001 Share Posted April 5, 2001 FriendlyFire said: In the CD scenario where Germans in half-tracks are attacking a platoon of Americans at a wooded crossroads on a tiny map - I forget the name of it, as you can see St. Anne's Chapel - a great example of a small scenario. In my experiance, the best way to get an infantryman to do something is tell him not to do it. Thus, I believe that 'fausts were used against everything. ------------------ "Roll on" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts