CMBO and Human-AFV interaction

[Dandelion]

Hi all,

I thought the topic of AFV-interior realities (as brought up in the Firefly thread), so interesting it deserved a thread of its own. Notes that might perhaps be of some use for future design.

I'll start off then, but my experience is limited so I'm relying on other people to pick up.

Being used to modern NATO MCVs, and APCs, some points strike me as odd in CMBO:

1. The men in the back of a MCV have no possibility of following the progress of the vehicle. There would be no difference with open topped HTs, as the men wouldn't stick their heads up if they didn't know there were no hostiles within LOS. When they dismount in a combat situation, they have not the slightest idea what the terrain looks like. They could be jumping out into a swamp for al lthey know, and they don't know where nearest cover is. This is actually a highly desorienting factor, difficult for humans to handle. The men dismounting are in a state of confusion, including NCOs, even when acting as trained (fanning out). This seems not to be reflected in the game engine. Perhaps I'm just missing it.

2. Exiting times for a squad in a modern MCV, with hydralic or electric doors of generous size, would normally be around ten seconds minimum, counting to the last man having fannemd out into position and the door closed. WWII HTs did not have large doors, nor any mechanical aid, so exiting times will reasonably be significantly longer. Also, if exiting in any kind of slope, the doors will either be difficult to shut or open, affecting the exiting time (you can't just leave the doors open unless in very dire emergency, it exposes the buddies in the crew). The Germans (and probably others) had the habit of hurling themselves over the sides to speed up exit. Exit was no doubt speeded up, but at the price of landing from a jump of 175cm or so in full combat gear.

3. Both the men in the back and the crew becomes virtually beat-up riding in terrain. No European terrain is really 'flat' and even low speed will send people flying like pingpong balls. There are good reasons for peacetime restrictions on speed. Even with such, every so often your driver will miss, or be unable to avoid, a hidden bump or ditch, and the resulting impact will send the men flying with very painful result, injury not being uncommon. Its so bumpy you have to empty machineguns to not risk accidental discharge (at least with the G1-3 series and GPMG). Its not at all uncommon to be knocked around so fiercely that you become all dizzy and disoriented, even in the commander position (normally a comfortable seat in a modern MCV), especially if wearing old style steel helmet. And thats speaking modern suspension, not 1944 hard suspensions. Modern types of helmets reduce this problem dramatically, but not entirely.

4. Its impossible to fire a weapon and hit anything from a vehicle moving in terrain. Its simply so. You're standing on a surface which is moving, violently, in all 3D directions. Turns are violent with tracks. Aiming at something, you loose the possibility of predicting these bumps and turns. By flexing thigh muscles and avoid bodily contact with the vehicle other than soles, you can act your own suspension, but as you can't predict the bumps, its only to reduce effect, not prevent it. Even a slight bump will send you way off target and make you a liability for any nearby friendlies. Again, this is with modern soft suspension. If your weapon is fastened to the vehicle itself, you can forget about dodging vehicle bumps altogether, if its not a 1985 or more modern softmount. About the same goes if you can't avoid body contact with th vehicle, and have all bumps transported into your body. So all in all, any HT fire during movement is rather a hazard than an asset, and any hit achieved thus is really an anomaly with the game. A starkly reduced area fire ought to be the only thing possible fom any HT moving in terrain, with a risk of accidental fire in the wrong direction.

5. The men riding on tanks - again, the terrain bump factor seems missing. Even riding modern tanks (soft suspension, designated bars to hold on to) its a nervous ride. You are perpetually at a risk of falling off, and its no joke, especially when you're sitting on the forwardmost tank, or riding in low visibility (nighttime). All bumps are felt as keenly by the riders as the crew, and the riders sent flying simply falls off, sometimes spectacularly so. Thus, any tank riding in terrain with riders will either have serious restrictions on what ground to choose (as flat as possible), or serious limitations on speed, or have the riders spread out like a pearlnecklace on the ground behind it. With the Fast command, I find it very reasonable to have casualty probability, as if under fire.

Well, that about sums it up. Any other experiences with HTs/APCs/MCVs that I'm missing in my list here?

Whats the picture on tanks, as for interior realities?

Regards

Dandelion

[lcm1947]

Well my experience in riding in anything other then a duce and a half ( truck ) was limited to 2 rides in a APC and I will vouch for you on the subject of bumpy and existing the little bitty door ways and this was in 1966 & 1967 so vehicles were probably greatly improved by then. I do remember however that even in the duce & half it would have been extremely difficult to hit anything even at slow speed. Hell it's near impossible to hit anything out of a modern pickup truck on dirt roads. I myself have also noticed how fast troops disembark vehicles in the game but just accepted it as something the game couldn't fix or I feel sure BFC would have. They don't miss much.