PIATs and SHRECKS that won't go hand-to-hand - A 1.12 bug?

[TeAcH]

Here's what happened. A regular shreck team with one casualty unknowingly stumbled into a hidden AT gun of mine (unknowingly because I asked my TCPIP opponent later on). The 17 pdr opened up at 20-30 meters and the shreck team/soldier panicked and ran about 10 meters out of the LOF and into some nearby woods where he took a dive.

Meanwhile, the only unit I had close (don't ask...it was near the end of the battle) was a VET PIAT unit with one casualty and 1 or 2 rounds left. I ran the PIAT within 15-20m and he missed the proned out shreck team with both shots.

Fearing that the shreck soldier would regain his composure and move within striking distance of my gun, I decided to take advantage of the fact that he was cowered and had my PIAT close on him to within 5 meters to go hand-to-hand.

For the next two turns, nothing happened. The PIAT stood by facing the panicked shreck soldier. So I moved the PIAT directly onto the shreck soldier trying to force him to engage in hand to hand. Nothing! And that's how they remained for the next ten turns or so until the battle ended; directly on top of eachother.

Question: Why wouldn't they engage in hand to hand? Why wouldn't the VET PIAT soldier do something instead of trading cigarettes with the shreck soldier. All the shreck had to do was regain his composure sooner and march off within range of my gun (or something else) and fire off some shots.

Thanks

TeAcH

[JoePrivate]

Lol, yeah that's funny alright. To answer your question, it's because CM is a platoon/company simulator not a soldier simulator. The AT teams only carry a shreck, piat or bazooka, their only role is an AT one.

[David Aitken]

This exact issue is discussed in this thread:

Anti tank team problems

[Bruno Weiss]

Well I dunno bout yous guys, but if I see any of my Piat or Shrecks holding hands, they gonna be the first ones shot.

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

"Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses

open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth."

-Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916)

[John Kelly]

To demonstate this quirky game element, I will relay an amusing pbem encounter. My Sherman was being stalked relentlessly by a panzerschreck. I was afraid he would get me when I decided to order a TD crew to distract the German AT team and sacrifice themselves. My hope was the crew would give my tank a moment of respite...just enough time to beat the chain of command order delay of 13 seconds. In 13 seconds, the schreck team could make mince meat of the tank. Low and behold, not only did my tank crew distract the schreck team and allow the Sherman to escape, they eliminated them with their pistols. I know that at least one of the schreck crew should have been armed with a Kar 98K, but I didn't complain. I think my opponent was distressed. John

[TeAcH]

Shouldn't they at least have a knife? A can opener? Or two hands which they can use to choke out and subdue the enemy?

Not a BIG deal but a real bugger when it happens to you. BTS is all about details, we know that. It seems this is onne where I (yeah, I know, who cares what I think) would make a slight modification so AT teams engage in some sort of hand-to-hand.

Anyone disagree with that?

Thanks,

TeAcH

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by David Aitken:

This exact issue is discussed in this thread:

Anti tank team problems

In that Thread Steve says this:

posted 08-23-2000 04:05 AM

Everybody... this has been covered about a dozen times before, even prior to the Beta Demo coming out.

In a nutshell...

1. AT teams are, to a large degree, an abstraction. Flamethrowers, Bazookas, Panzershcrecks, and

perhaps in practice PIATs were in fact manned by regular squad members. Panzerschrecks were also

assigned to dedicated AT teams, in particular in Volksgrenadier and Pattern 45 Infantry divisions due to

the lack of AT guns.

2. The assistant in such teams often caried a light small arm, usually carbine for the US and Kar98 for

most German teams. The gunner had a pistol in all cases that I know of, and the assistant often did as

well.

3. #2 applies to other team type weapons, including mortars, AT guns, etc.

There are two problems with doing this in CM:

1. Coding. A huge quantity of code would have to be written to support this. What might seem simple to

the gamer isn't always simple to the programmer.

2. Realism. Although the members of a team had small arms, how exactly do we determine who is in a

position to use them in a given situation? With a 2 man team this is easier to do than with a 6 man team.

Our proposed solution is a compromise, but simply hasn't been important enough (compared to other

things) to warrent the work and cutting to the front of the line. The solution we came up with a long time

ago was to give each team a generic self defense small arms capability based on headcount. This is

something we do, eventually, intend on putting into the game.

Steve