Sanok Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 What's the relationship between firepower and exposure? Say I have an MG that could fire at one of two enemy squads in woods. Both are at the same firepower rating, but one is 15% exposed, the other is 14%. Obviously, it's better to fire at the 15%, but what does that extra 1% really mean in CM terms? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dschugaschwili Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 The firepower that really reaches the target can be estimated by (firepower rating) * (exposure rating) So going from 14% to 15% exposure would increase your firepower by about 7%. Of course, you also have to take the increased morale effect when shot from the back into account when making your decision. Dschugaschwili 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 There is more to that. Apparently shooting from the back has more than morale effects, it kills easier. The position and movement of the target also plays a role. For whatever reason, standaind/kneeling on pavement a unit takes a lot less casualties than on the groun crouching/sneaking. That leads to the odd effect that if you ambush a target platoon on pavement with a SMG company the first two volleys do almost nothing (they would wipe them out in reality) and then you get more losses for the targer after they go to ground. Same for HE. A 88mm HE shell landing in the middle of ususpecting troops standing on pavement or paved road causes few causalities but causes them to go to ground. And subsequent shells cause more casualties when they are on the ground. That is very much contrary to how it should be. Another thing I want people to look at for CMX2... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junk2drive Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 Civil War Generals 2, or one of those games, the direction of the hex was important. If you attacked an enemy hex head on, least effective. Side was better. Both sides crossfire. Rear attack could be best or surround the hex and it surrendered. I don't see this modeled in CM. Am I wrong? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted October 20, 2004 Share Posted October 20, 2004 Originally posted by junk2drive: Civil War Generals 2, or one of those games, the direction of the hex was important. If you attacked an enemy hex head on, least effective. Side was better. Both sides crossfire. Rear attack could be best or surround the hex and it surrendered. I don't see this modeled in CM. Am I wrong? Yes, troops are clearly more vulnerable from the back. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sanok Posted October 21, 2004 Author Share Posted October 21, 2004 Originally posted by Dschugaschwili: The firepower that really reaches the target can be estimated by (firepower rating) * (exposure rating) So going from 14% to 15% exposure would increase your firepower by about 7%. Of course, you also have to take the increased morale effect when shot from the back into account when making your decision. Dschugaschwili So, if I have 200 firepower, which is quite a bit, firing at a squad that is 15% exspoed, only 30 is actually causing any damage? Other than morale affects and direction of fire, is that really all there is to it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.