MAsta_KFC Posted December 9, 2003 Share Posted December 9, 2003 Just got my copy in the post today. Excellent stuff, and two thumbs up for BFC on their marvelous work. However, I have noticed that, like the demo, units can fire Schrecks, Bazookas and Faust inside a building with impunity, disregarding the consequences of blackbast. You could not do this in CMBB/CMBO and the blackbast was one of the features that made CM series so fun, the attention to detail. This also affected strategy and tactics significantly. There was a thread a while ago regarding this and we were waiting on Charle's reply (ie official word). I'm just wondering now, will there be plans to fix this? Can we have an official word now? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzerjaeger Posted December 9, 2003 Share Posted December 9, 2003 The Schreck and Bazooka backblast effects are only viable when the space in which they are used is tight (no windows open or holes in the wall). In addition, the "danger area" must be clear of any obstacles. I bet that the crews open up the windows, pound a few holes in the wall with a sledgehammer or something like that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soddball Posted December 9, 2003 Share Posted December 9, 2003 Originally posted by Panzerjaeger: The Schreck and Bazooka backblast effects are only viable when the space in which they are used is tight (no windows open or holes in the wall). In addition, the "danger area" must be clear of any obstacles. I bet that the crews open up the windows, pound a few holes in the wall with a sledgehammer or something like that. IIRC, the problem is that the blast from one of those weapons is enough to knock a man flat and make his ears bleed. Confinement of any kind (roof, walls) might be enough to kill him. I don't know what kind of walls you have where you live, but I don't imagine that pounding holes with a sledgehammer as you're rushing forward to take a quick zook at a passing Panzer is going to be a viable option. If the blast from these things is as bad as the users say it was, I think we should be seeing major suppression from the users whilst inside buildings and the blast should affect other units inside that building (assuming it's not a huge heavy 20m long building, obviously). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAsta_KFC Posted December 9, 2003 Author Share Posted December 9, 2003 Originally posted by Soddball: If the blast from these things is as bad as the users say it was, I think we should be seeing major suppression from the users whilst inside buildings and the blast should affect other units inside that building And thats what exactly was modeled in the previous two CM. Firing a schreck or faust in a building immediately put the squad/team on 'pinned' status (and the blast made them subsequently easier to spot). The squad/team needed at least a round to fully recover from the effects of the shot. On occassion, it would even set the light buildings on fire.This effectively made them one shot armor ambush weapons if they were in street fighting. However, like I said, in CMAK, they can churn out the shots without regard of backblast. To be honest, i think BFC forgot the code for the AT backblast, it doesn't seem to be implemented whatsoever. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted December 9, 2003 Share Posted December 9, 2003 The zook bug was first reported just as the CMAK CDs were being packaged for shipping. A bit late to fix on v1.0. Matt's already said they're making a bugs list, checking it twice, gonna find out what part of CMAK is naughty and nice. And eventually, once everything's been thoroughly gone over, a CMAK patch will be coming to town. Don't be in a hurry to see that patch, give them a little time. I doubt BFC's going to be as profligate with multiple game patches as they have in the past. If They rush forward and we miss the first CMAK patch it's not unlikely we will have missed the ONLY CMAK patch! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFCElvis Posted December 9, 2003 Share Posted December 9, 2003 Dear Everyone, I had read a thread before about this and thought..."oh well. It will get sorted out". But I now find myself in a scenario where I intentionaly have not moved a schreck into a building where I could really use it because I was afraid of the backblast. On a scale of 1-10 (10 being the most gamey) how gamey would I be if I moved it into the dream location? Gamily yours, Elvis 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted December 9, 2003 Share Posted December 9, 2003 Originally posted by Elvis: But I now find myself in a scenario where I intentionaly have not moved a schreck into a building where I could really use it because I was afraid of the backblast. On a scale of 1-10 (10 being the most gamey) how gamey would I be if I moved it into the dream location?If you succumb to temptation, a squad from the AGP (Anti-Gamey Police) will come make degrading comments about you and your cat. I'd be very careful from now on if I were you. You're on our list. :mad: Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airborne Posted December 9, 2003 Share Posted December 9, 2003 According to the manual, there is (still) the danger of setting the building on fire from backblast. Haven't seen it yet, though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFCElvis Posted December 9, 2003 Share Posted December 9, 2003 Dear Michael, Your warning is enough to make me "do the right thing" and play it as I normally would (pretty ambiguous, huh). Love, Elvis 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_the_wino Posted December 9, 2003 Share Posted December 9, 2003 Originally posted by Elvis: Dear Everyone, I had read a thread before about this and thought..."oh well. It will get sorted out". But I now find myself in a scenario where I intentionaly have not moved a schreck into a building where I could really use it because I was afraid of the backblast. On a scale of 1-10 (10 being the most gamey) how gamey would I be if I moved it into the dream location? Gamily yours, Elvis That would be gamey like week-old venison....and I would do it in a heartbeat. Especially if it was a game against Soddball or Dave H. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted December 9, 2003 Share Posted December 9, 2003 Mmmm... week-old venison. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzerjaeger Posted December 9, 2003 Share Posted December 9, 2003 Originally posted by Soddball: IIRC, the problem is that the blast from one of those weapons is enough to knock a man flat and make his ears bleed. Confinement of any kind (roof, walls) might be enough to kill him. I don't know what kind of walls you have where you live, but I don't imagine that pounding holes with a sledgehammer as you're rushing forward to take a quick zook at a passing Panzer is going to be a viable option. If the blast from these things is as bad as the users say it was, I think we should be seeing major suppression from the users whilst inside buildings and the blast should affect other units inside that building (assuming it's not a huge heavy 20m long building, obviously). Ok, might be. My information is based on modern AT weapons, which I have used when I was in the army. Dunno exactly about WW2 AT weapons. Sorry. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Demonic Bunny Posted December 9, 2003 Share Posted December 9, 2003 I don't know which AT weapons you're using but unless you're using the urban version of AT-4 or some other AT weapon specialised for urban fighting, then the backblast is just as hellish today as it was back in those days, if not more since the calibre has increased quite a bit(from the old bazooka with a 60mm calibre to the modern 75mm-90mm. The AT4 and M2-M3 using 84mm grenades). I know. I've done my conscription in which we had demostrations of both AT-4s and the M2 Carl Gustav recoilless rifle(with live rounds), as well as a quite extensive instruction on how to use them(not to mention extensive use of the trainingweapons.). Both of them have a backblast that can kill you if you're in an enclosed space...and just bashing a few holes in the wall won't help. ANY form of large-ish surface within 5 meters is lethal, and not desireable at all within 30(but you can still fire without killing yourself)...and you can still feel the backblast within a hundred. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawngnome Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 Well, I never did any AT work in Iraq back in '90-'91, but I certainly know that those weapons are beasts... The one thing I regret about modern warfare, though, is that the U.S. is so advanced that any future wargames about this period would be grossly unfair... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Demonic Bunny Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 The one thing I regret about modern warfare, though, is that the U.S. is so advanced that any future wargames about this period would be grossly unfair...Advanced compared to who they have fought(Iraq/Afghanistan and other third world nations). That I agree with. But I'd attribute any US superiority more to the size of their defense budget than to any supposed technological advantage over the rest of the world(especially western europe, who I might add supplies a large portion of that technological advantage... Germany and GB in particular) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Los Posted December 10, 2003 Share Posted December 10, 2003 It is a misconception that recoiless weapons cannot be safely fired from within buildings. The US Army has conducted extensive testing on the effects of firing recoilless weapons from within enclosures. The Army has been conducting these tests since 1948 using everything from 2.75 and 90mm bazookas up to all the latest LAWs SMAWs and ATGMs. Some facts. (Anyone with access to FM 90-10-1 can verify this for themselves. (a) Firing these weapons from enclosures presented no serious hazards, even when the overpressure was enough to produce structural damage to the building. ( Little hazard exists to the gunnery or crew from any type of flying debris. Loose items were not hurled around the room. © No substantial degradation occurs to the operator's tracking performance as a result of obscuration or blast overpressure. (d) The most serious hazard that can be expected is hearing loss. This must be evaluated against the advantage gained in combat from firing from cover. To place this hazard in perspective, a gunner wearing earplugs and firing the loudest combination (the Dragon from within a masonry building) is exposed to less noise hazard than if he fired a LAW in the open without earplugs. (e) The safest place for other soldiers in the room with the shooter is against the wall from which the weapon is fired. (f) Firers should take advantage of all available sources of ventilation by opening doors and windows. Ventilation does not reduce the noise hazard, but it helps clear the room of smoke and dust, and reduces the effective duration of the overpressure. (g) The only difference between firing these weapons from enclosures and firing them in the open is the duration of the pressure fluctuation. (h) Frame buildings, especially small ones, can suffer structural damage to the rear walls, windows, and doors. Large rooms suffer slight damage, if any. While the results of the tests may have shown that the threat of injury from debris is rare, commanders must ensure that proper safety precautions are followed prior to firing weapons inside a room. For instance: To fire an 84-mm Carl Gustaf recoilless rifle, the AT4, or SMAW-D from inside a room, the following safety precautions must be taken (Figure 7-5). (a) The building should be of a sturdy construction. (Meaning not some ****ty tin covered shack like you might find in some haitain slum) ( The ceiling should be at least 7 feet high with loose plaster or ceiling boards removed. © The floor size should be at least 15 feet by 12 feet. (The larger the room, the better.) (d) At least 20 square feet of ventilation (room openings) should exist to the rear or side of the weapon. An open 7- by 3-foot door would provide minimum ventilation. (e) All glass should be removed from windows and small, loose objects removed from the room. (f) All personnel in the room should be forward of the rear of the weapon. (g) All personnel in the room should wear helmets, ballistic eye protection, and earplugs. (h) If the gunner is firing from the prone position, his lower body must be perpendicular to the bore of the weapon or the blast could cause injury to his legs. If you guys want to worry about something you should be worrying about friendly infantry that are in front or besides a main tank gun when it goes off. Now that something that can cause some damage or pinning, even in world war 2. Likewise units in the forward arc within x dgrees (I could olook it up but it's late) of a gun firing discarding Sabot runs the risk of being hit and killed by the sabot. Los 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.