Auto-sneak-exhaustion not improved in 1.01

[aka_tom_w]

"

But, while it does not take 15 turns to recover from exhaustion, in effect the unit was 15 turns not

"ready" after one single turn of incoming firepower 17 with no casualties. This is by far not in line with

what other CMBB units do in the same situation."

But maybe German HMG units are special in that regard because what they are carrying is so heavy?

Just a thought

in any case, these HMG units seem to have a Special and unique morale and "getting tired" model all to them selves. It would seem that Steve and Charles intend it to be that way, (at least from Steve's posts it one might conclude that )

-tom w

[ November 25, 2002, 01:00 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[Andreas]

Tom

I think Steve's point is more 'what on earth are you doing moving that HMG out of cover across ground overlooked by the nasty people in the first instance?' I would have thought that if you insist on doing that with a Maxim, the result will be similar by the way.

[Tarquelne]

It is not a coherent design, and the reason is not a single one of the supression rate, of the exhaustion rate or of the command overwrite rate, but a combination thereof.[/QB]

If it's realistic for an HMG to become Ex. from player ordered Sneaking after a few turns it's realistic for an HMG to become Ex. from auto-Sneaking too. So, if by "command overwrite rate" you mean the unit's habit of changing Move orders to Sneak when at Alerted-or-worse then I think key is just the command overwrite, not a combination of factors.

Given my druthers I would like to see some more flexibility in HMG behavior under fire. Let them Advance, say, like a squad in that they are more willing to go forward at a higher-than-Sneaking pace while under fire. Or give them the Run option - If cover is 15m away and the incoming fire is sporadic it could easily be worth the risk, esp. if you might be able to move out of LOS of something nasty. ("Hey, look, is that an ISU-122? I havn't seen one of those before.")

But since the Sneak movement rate is so slow for HMGs the best option under the current system seems to be to have them Hide if cover isn't extremely close: While it does seem to be true that a CMBB HMG under fire is an HMG that is very nearly immobile, it doesn't have to be an Exhausted, immobile HMG. Sneak-until-Ex. isn'tinevitable.

[Battlefront.com]

SuperSulo,

Ok... we seem to have reached the end of this,

Yes, and thankfully so

One thing though. I apparently need to restate the obvious. Teams are *not* the same as Squads. I am not talking about in the game, which is obviously true, but in real life. Teams are responsible for lugging around heavy, bulky stuff that is readily distinguishable, to the enemy, from a normal Squad. Therefore, they act differently when they move and when they come under fire. The closer to Squads we make them behave, the less realistic they become.

1. Make the "sneak threshold" worse-than-alerted. It's even supported by the manual (Alerted = "not yet adversely affected by it"). Or maybe even worse-than-cautious. "Cautious units tend to take cover when fired upon". Since noone is firing at them, maybe they should be able to walk?

The logic here is that they are being proactive. They move slower and harder to hide than Squads. Therefore, they are more likely to be uncomfortable when affected by enemy fire. However, I will propose this to Charles and see what he thinks.

2. 17 minutes for a Fit unit, after 10 minutes "workout", to go from Exhausted to Rested *is* a long time, and you said you agreed on this. Maybe there could be an upper limit for that time, say 10 minutes to Rested, 8 to Ready? It's still a long time, but much more reasonable.

Again, I will ask him about this. To me, an upper limit is not necessary because someone has to really screw up to have this happen in a game. Therefore, it is not something that I feel is a high priority to screw around with.

Redwolf,

I must be confused gain. When I open the last savegame by SuperSulu the one HMG that gets into the exhaustion loop gets from "tiring" to "Ready" in turn 15. And when I open the savegame the conditions are perfect weather and perfect ground and 100% global morale and the incoming fire is minimal.

Er... but how long did it take to recover? Not 15 Turns as you stated because that would mean the unit was Exhausted on Turn 1. The only relevant piece of information is how long does a unit take to go from Exhausted to Ready from the time the unit starts to recover. I have seen this happen in as few as 4 turns, which is a factor of 3-4 times less than you suggest is the minimum. This obviously means you are incorrect to say that.

Oh but wait!

But, while it does not take 15 turns to recover from exhaustion, in effect the unit was 15 turns not "ready" after one single turn of incoming firepower 17 with no casualties. This is by far not in line with what other CMBB units do in the same situation.

OK, so you apparently now understand that your previous claims are inaccurate? Good. Now we can put that one to rest And I guess I have to remind you again that incoming firepower and casualties are totally irrelevant. It doesn't matter if the Firepower was 1 or 1001. The point is the unit gets Exhausted from the movement in Sneak mode. In other words, if you took a HMG that has seen *no* enemy action at all, and use Sneak, you should see similar results. Thus it makes absolutely no difference why the unit is using Sneak, only that it does. And contrary to your claims, this Sneak thing is NOT manditory. You can stop a unit from Sneaking provided it isn't still getting shot up out in the open.

But overall, I think you are looking too much at the details and not at the end result.

Noooooooooooooooo!! How many times must I tell you that this is NOT the right way to do a discussion like this? We have tried it your way and it utterly failed. We went around in circles chasing down "end results" that were not as you said they were. I have said this too you many times, and will say it to you again; one can NOT discuss the outcome witout looking at the details. By doing it my way (i.e. looking at the details) we figured out that nearly everything you claimed to be true wasn't. Or at least it wasn't the whole story.

You must remember, that the behavior in the game does not come from the top down, but from the bottom up. If someone says "this behavior sucks" we absolutely must know what the details are so that we can figure out how to modifiy the behavior. Or, in this case, show that the statements of "this behavior sucks" are based on perception problems, incorrect use of the existing game options, and factually incorrect statements. Until we identify what the REAL problems are, or aren't, we can't do jack squat. By focusing in on the details we have determined that, by and large, there is no problem here other than the one the player creates for himself. And that end result is, by and large, completely realistic.

All factors combined, there is still a distortion in the relationship of punishment you give to the player when he gets various different units under a certain amount of firepower. The punishment for the HMG is way out of line compared to the punishment for other units. It is not a coherent design, and the reason is not a single one of the supression rate, of the exhaustion rate or of the command overwrite rate, but a combination thereof.

Which is why I wrote the above piece on why Teams are not the same as Squads We do have a coherent design, it is just that you don't understand that it is. Coherent doesn't mean "everything works exactly the same, even if it runs contrary to how things work in the real world". Rather, coherent means that all the sub pieces work together in a way that produces a realistic reflection of whatever it is we are attempting to simulate. In this case, the differences between lugging around a rifle and person gear and lugging around a clumsy 40 lb tripod, Schreck, AT Gun, loads of ammo, etc. The notion that a HMG Team should be treated equally compared to a Squad is not realistic at all, and therefore is not something we will cater to.

Steve

[ November 25, 2002, 12:27 PM: Message edited by: Battlefront.com ]

[thewood]

Can you guys hold on a minute? I have to take a piss and get more beer. Give me about 30 minutes, I don't want to miss anything.

[SuperSulo]

Originally posted by redwolf:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by SuperSulo:

2. 17 minutes for a Fit unit, after 10 minutes "workout", to go from Exhausted to Rested *is* a long time, and you said you agreed on this. Maybe there could be an upper limit for that time, say 10 minutes to Rested, 8 to Ready? It's still a long time, but much more reasonable.

Before Steve jumps on me for this - this is not quite correct.

For your savegames, it took (in my run) 15 turns (to turn 16) to get the HMG from "tiring" to "ready". </font>

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />But, while it does not take 15 turns to recover from exhaustion, in effect the unit was 15 turns not "ready" after one single turn of incoming firepower 17 with no casualties. This is by far not in line with what other CMBB units do in the same situation.

OK, so you apparently now understand that your previous claims are inaccurate? Good. Now we can put that one to rest

</font>

[aka_tom_w]

I believe Steve and Charles (in v1.01) have this behaviour (HMG sneaking and getting tired) exactly the way they want it to be.

The HMG squads are different and pay a different penalty when forced to sneak or when they panic or break under fire.

I would suggest Steve has looked closely at what has been pointed out in this thread as a questionable (?) HMG behaviour and is satisfied that the tests of this behaviour demonstrate what he and Charles intended when they coded the model for the game.

I suspect this one will not change and we best not get or HMG got in the open getting shot at while moving.

At least we know they looked at it.

Honestly I think Steve really tried to give this one a fair shake, he saw what we pointed out and pretty much said... "Yeah, thats the way we intended it to work"

You can't ask for much more than that.

I can live with it the way it is now.

-tom w

[ November 25, 2002, 03:06 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[SuperSulo]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

One thing though. I apparently need to restate the obvious. Teams are *not* the same as Squads. I am not talking about in the game, which is obviously true, but in real life. Teams are responsible for lugging around heavy, bulky stuff that is readily distinguishable, to the enemy, from a normal Squad. Therefore, they act differently when they move and when they come under fire. The closer to Squads we make them behave, the less realistic they become.

Gotcha. I don't think I said otherwise, if I did, I certainly didn't mean to say I want them to be just like squads . Your last line there is true, but only to a degree - the opposite isn't true: "The further away from Squads we make them behave, the more realistic they become.". The correct behaviour must somewhere between.

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />1. Make the "sneak threshold" worse-than-alerted. It's even supported by the manual (Alerted = "not yet adversely affected by it"). Or maybe even worse-than-cautious. "Cautious units tend to take cover when fired upon". Since noone is firing at them, maybe they should be able to walk?

The logic here is that they are being proactive. They move slower and harder to hide than Squads. Therefore, they are more likely to be uncomfortable when affected by enemy fire. However, I will propose this to Charles and see what he thinks.

</font>

[Panzer Leader]

quote:

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

1. Make the "sneak threshold" worse-than-alerted. It's even supported by the manual (Alerted = "not yet adversely affected by it"). Or maybe even worse-than-cautious. "Cautious units tend to take cover when fired upon". Since noone is firing at them, maybe they should be able to walk?

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

The logic here is that they are being proactive. They move slower and harder to hide than Squads. Therefore, they are more likely to be uncomfortable when affected by enemy fire. However, I will propose this to Charles and see what he thinks.

quote:

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

2. 17 minutes for a Fit unit, after 10 minutes "workout", to go from Exhausted to Rested *is* a long time, and you said you agreed on this. Maybe there could be an upper limit for that time, say 10 minutes to Rested, 8 to Ready? It's still a long time, but much more reasonable.

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

Again, I will ask him about this. To me, an upper limit is not necessary because someone has to really screw up to have this happen in a game. Therefore, it is not something that I feel is a high priority to screw around with.

Actually, sounds to me like Steve thinks some minor tweakage might be in order here. MINOR being the key word.

[thewood]

While I have never dragged a machine gun through an open field, I have had to drag deer through woods and broken gound. With that said, I ask any one in reasonable shape to fill a sack with 100 lbs and crawl or sneak 300 feet across a rough field. I know that it would not take long to exhaust me. And I think 10 or 15 minutes to recover is not unreasonable. Now someone firing a .30-06 over my head will either incent me or de-incent me, depending on my mood or severity of a hang over.

Now what would incent me to keep the 100 lb. bag with me; knowing that my conrades depend on me getting that thing in position to save their lives. Keep in mind that one of Steve's original comments about not moving the darned thing to begin with. That is why light machine guns were developed.

Luckily, few of us can attest to the actual feelings and reactions to being under fire in a similar situation, but just thinking of the physical exertion needed to perform some the tasks simulated in CM helps to understand the reasoning behind BFC's choices. Also, this isn't a flightsim. One can go out and try to recreate, with out the firing, a lot of what goes on. And you get good exercise at the same time.

[Battlefront.com]

Redwolf,

Steve, don't take that personally, but your attention span is really insufficient right now.

Don't take it personally that I have spent more than a dozen hours on this issue and the person that has figured things clearly is SuperSulo (yes, take a bow ). And he did it in a couple of posts.

I never claimed anything else, neither in this thread nor elsewhere.

Who has the short attention span? From your initial post opening up this thread:

that once the unit had its head down once, it will auto-switch to sneak (no matter what the player does) for so long that it leads to unavoidable exhaustion.

The behaviour of always taking control back fromt he player 1 second into the turn does not only apply in turns where these units actually receive fire or there is fire near.

In fact the auto-sneak business is guaranteed to least for enough turns to get exhausted, even after the enemy stopped firing.

All three of these claims of yours are in fact factually incorrect. Exhaustion is not "unavoidable", control is not "always" removed from the player, and it is not "guaranteed" to last until the unit is exhausted.

You take control away, give your own commands for [n] turns as an intended punishment, but since the commands are exhausting you end up with [n*3] turns of punishment.

Sure, if you a) put the unit in a horrible position and chose not to cancel the unit's orders. And it isn't punishment. It is a realistic outcome of a bad situation. I don't understand why this is such a hard concept to grasp.

Excuse me, that is exactly what I mean with "coherent".

Which disagrees with the context of your statement. You are saying you personally do not agree with the way we have it, therefore it is not "coherent". That is like me holding up something I think is green and you saying that I am colorblind because you think it is yellow green.

As evident in your first quoted sentense of this post you still don't get where this is coming from. It is coming from you only looking at the factors of supression, sneaking and exhaustion in isolation. You refuse to follow my argumentation that an enforced sneak and the resulting exhaustion should be seen as their combined result.

No sir, you refuse to understand that there is NO SUCH THING AS ENFORCED SNEAK AND ENFORCED EXHAUSTION. Maybe bold letters and caps will help hammer that point home. You are complaining about something that does NOT exist.

Our discussion goes something like this:

Actually, I would rephrase it like this:

- redwolf: you give too much punishment for too few fire for HMGs

- Steve: how so? I don't see any problems

- redwolf: the too heavy unishment it is from your enforced commands and the overall inavailablity time

- Steve: the command is not enforced because the player can cancel it

- redwolf: but look, you have to add the exhausted time to the punishment

- Steve: no way. Exhaustion is the result of physical exertion, not some mythical "punishment". If you let your guys get to Exhausted, then why on Earth should they recover more quickly than they would in real life?

- redwolf: but it is not ok to force them into exhaustion against the player's will when there is not sufficient incoming fire

- Steve: why have you not admitted that there is nothing being forced? This is just in your imagination, therefore if that is the last stand position you have to make, there is nothing more to discuss.

Each individual factor you look into may seem OK, but the combination of factors you choose on minimal incoming fire is not.

I don't understand how you can continually not get the main point. You are claiming there is some higher level problem that I am not seeing because I am looking at lower level elements. BS. I am not seeing the higher level problem and ALSO can not find any cause for concern with the lower level elements.

Now, look at SuperSulo's recent posts. He focused on some rather low level behavior issues which I, to some degree, agree with. This might have an effect on the extreme problems you think are common place and unavoidable (both are untrue, but whatever). Did I come to these conclusions because SuperSulo because we looked at the lower level elements or some mythical higher level problem?

OK, just to make sure.... Redwolf... do you agree with the following four statements:

1. The "auto-sneak" behavior is not beyond the player's ability to control, either indirectly by using good tactics or indirectly by doing things like cancelling or redirecting the Sneak Order.

2. That Teams, specifically HMG units, have crap for mobility and require more strength to do less than something like a squad.

3. That if two HMG teams, one under fire and one not under fire, both crawl on their bellies for 3 minutes they will see similar ill effects of said move.

4. The recovery rates are NOT minium of 15-25 turns, but can be as little as 4, depending on the situation.

I haven't seen you directly answer these questions, so it would be interesting to see word for word how you respond to them. They are all at the core of this discussion.

Steve

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

OK, just to make sure.... Redwolf... do you agree with the following four statements:

1. The "auto-sneak" behavior is not beyond the player's ability to control, either indirectly by using good tactics or indirectly by doing things like cancelling or redirecting the Sneak Order.

OK. So what we have here is a real improvement in 1.01. Since you made units more prone to stay in open ground if ordered so, you can get around the problem by giving a hide order now, often but not always.

2. That Teams, specifically HMG units, have crap for mobility and require more strength to do less than something like a squad.

This is part of the "coherent" word choice where you thought I meant "same", but I didn't.

3. That if two HMG teams, one under fire and one not under fire, both crawl on their bellies for 3 minutes they will see similar ill effects of said move.

No question that the effects should be the same of the movement style is the same, no matter what the fire is.

4. The recovery rates are NOT minium of 15-25 turns, but can be as little as 4, depending on the situation.

Yes. However, we get 15-17 even in ideal conditions.

My claim is that in real games with mixed weather and mixed ground conditions you see 15+ recovery often, as I did in my actual games. These actual games were in 1.00, so things might have been better when using 1.01 and order a hide instead of switching sneak to move. I do not believe that the 1.01 patch actually solved the problem.

I haven't seen you directly answer these questions, so it would be interesting to see word for word how you respond to them. They are all at the core of this discussion.

I have some for you, too.

Do you really believe that a regular MG team, after a non-injuring burst of fire, will crawl, and crawl in a way that totally exhausts them, for 4 minutes after the last enemy shot was heard, if shouted at by their commander to get up and move instead of crawl every minute?

Do you believe that the one out of six HMG which showed the problem in Supersulo's test will turn into more MGs having the same problem, when global morale is lower, when the weather is hot or very cold or when there is mud or snow on the ground?

[Battlefront.com]

Redwolf,

OK. So what we have here is a real improvement in 1.01. Since you made units more prone to stay in open ground if ordered so, you can get around the problem by giving a hide order now, often but not always.

This might be true, but what I said was 100% correct for 1.0 as well. You could always influence the behavior while you claimed you couldn't. Now that you have aknowledged this, could you please cease stating that the player has no control?

This is part of the "coherent" word choice where you thought I meant "same", but I didn't.

No, I took what you said to imply that the treatment of Exhaustion for teams was totally out of line with the rest of the game system, not that you thought they should be equal. My point is that they are realistically balanced and that making teams behave more like squads, which is what you were advocating, would move things in the wrong direction.

No question that the effects should be the same of the movement style is the same, no matter what the fire is.

Excellent. Now I won't have to read something more from you about firepower and exhaustion, right?

Yes. However, we get 15-17 even in ideal conditions.

No, you get 15-17 when things are bent to the extreme end of the spectrum. That is not "ideal".

My claim is that in real games with mixed weather and mixed ground conditions you see 15+ recovery often, as I did in my actual games.

Then why have so many people stated that they don't see this problem in their own games? Why have so many people being having such a hard time reproducing it? This includes people on this public Forum as well as our core testers who have been attempting to reproduce these affects in the testing forum.

I will say this again... NONE of our testers, nor myself, nor most of the people participating in this discussion have had such extreme problems in a real game. You are pretty much the only one. Not THE only one, but statistically... you fall into a tiny minority for sure. I wish you would see that and cease painting this as some big, horrible, constantly evident, problem that is beyond players' control because it clearly isn't.

I have some for you, too.

Fair enough

Do you really believe that a regular MG team, after a non-injuring burst of fire, will crawl, and crawl in a way that totally exhausts them, for 4 minutes after the last enemy shot was heard, if shouted at by their commander to get up and move instead of crawl every minute?

Well, seeing as I have seen plenty of cases in tests and in real games where the guys got up from Sneak after less than a minute and used Move... sure, I agree. But if the unit is under fire and is Sneaking and getting tired, only a foolish commander would ask them to do something stupid. What do I do as commander? I tell them to sit still and wait it out. I try very hard not to get my units into do or die positions, so usually this works out very well.

Do you believe that the one out of six HMG which showed the problem in Supersulo's test will turn into more MGs having the same problem, when global morale is lower, when the weather is hot or very cold or when there is mud or snow on the ground?

Sure, if the commander is not bright enough to keep his 6 HMGs out of extreme danger like the artificial test. And, on top of that, the commander is not bright enough to cancel the Sneak orders when he feels they are becoming counter productive.

Again... the system can not, and should not, compensate for poor tactics and poor utilization of the game options made available to the player.

I do, however, agree that recovery time should be lowered even for extreme abuses. Probably 12 minutes of so should be the max instead of (apparently) there being no max. But then again, as a developer whose testers (who have played more games than you for sure) have never found this this sort of extreme negative situation, I could live happily ever after if Charles made no code changes what so ever. Why? Because this situation never has, and likely never will, come up to bite me.

Can we please put this dead horse into its grave? If you don't understand it now, I don't think I should spend any more time explaining it yet again.

Steve

[ November 25, 2002, 05:48 PM: Message edited by: Battlefront.com ]

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />No question that the effects should be the same of the movement style is the same, no matter what the fire is.

Excellent. Now I won't have to read something more from you about firepower and exhaustion, right?

</font>

[aka_tom_w]

I think we best put this one to rest

Peace

-tom w

[Battlefront.com]

Redwolf,

Now, through careful snipping, you try to make it look I said that the exhuastion should be less when not under fire. I didn't say that, in fact it is the opposite.

Now now... what I was pointing is that you kept talking about "Firepower 17" and why should that should make a unit Exhausted for the rest of the game. This is something you did a couple of times in this thread. Following your logic, what you were saying is "is it fair that a minimal amount of FP leads to making a unit useless". It is an argument that had absolutely no relevance. Now that you have said, clear out, that you agree with me that movement is the issue that you could stop throwing FP into the mix.

I expect this to come up plenty in places like the B&T tourneys, where scenario designers often create non-standard situations and you might actually be forced to go for a long-range attack with infantry only.

I don't agree here. First, because the main problem is moving heavy weapons under fire. In the kind of map you are describing, that shouldn't be necessary. In fact, it should be less likely than one with constant LOS breaks. Plus, as we have discussed... the player DOES have control over the units getting overly exhausted.

As a side note, I only brought this up before the next B&T tourney because you announced that you only want to do one more patch for CMBB and after the tourney would be too late.

I still don't understand why tournies are some sort of special case. I've played QBs with totally flat maps and 1000m of clear LOS. I didn't have the problems you have seen. And I know that others have played such games and also have not had the kinds of problems you have.

I think it would be good if you admitted to yourself, at least, that you have made a mountain out of a molehill. The original set of claims you made (see your first post here and previous threads) were factually incorrect and the majority of people have no problem with the game as is. Most of those have never even seen this problem at all. I just feel like you are grasping at straws now instead of seeing that, at best, your thread here led someone else to figure out that there might be needs for some minor tweaks. That is a fine outcome, if you ask me, because my motivation is to make the game better, not to be right.

Steve

[Larsen]

I have something to add on the question of recovery.

1. The recovery time should be the same for different degrees of tiredness.

2. The unit should never be able to recover fully

after they get exhausted.

Let me explain. If a person for example goes for a 5 mile run he gets tired. Another 5 miles will put him into exhaust state. Now he will never will be to recover to ready status unless he rests overnight which pretty much is out of scope of CM battles. This statement is based upon my own experience and observations of other athelets. Now suppose that after teh guy ran those additional 5 miles he decided to go for anotehr 5. He is already exhaused. So after another 5 miles he will be more exhausted. Now here comes my second point. It will take him the same time to get to what is called "tiring" state in CM after 15 miles run as it would take him after the 10 miles run.

I'm sure there are people here on the board who eitehr train professionally or trained professionally. I'm sure they will be able to confirm what I said.

[Battlefront.com]

Larsen,

If a person for example goes for a 5 mile run he gets tired. Another 5 miles will put him into exhaust state.

OK, by my math you are talking about someone running 10 miles beforee they get into an exhausted sate. My friend, you are obviously not an American! The average American can't run 10 steps without a CheeseyPoof and Beer (Coke for kids) break. Now, this is an improvement -> a cig and coughing break was required at 5 steps

But yes, you are correct. In theory the Condition should never go back to "perfect" after getting to Exhausted. However, I don't think the current game engine can handle this. Especially because many short bursts of energy, less than Exhausted, should also cause this problem. Combat should as well.

I think Charles partially compensated for this by making units already a little more prone to tiring than perhaps a rested unit out of the barracks would be.

Steve

[Barrold]

Cheesy Poofs could be put in a 'fun' size for easier transport during jogs and this lowered weight could provide increased distance before exhaustion.

Naturally this brings up the question of whether troops would panic if their Cheesy Poofs ran out. I am not sure how the type of cover would effect this although I am prepared to become troubled.

BDH

[Panzer Leader]

You know, I hate to keep this thread alive, but I always thought that the stresses of combat (adrenaline mostly) would give the soldiers that extra burst of energy so that physical exhaustion isn't really an over-riding concern during battle (but would be afterwards.)

Most personal accounts speak about this: how they never really realized how tired they were until after the combat when they literally fell over with exhaustion.

I like the model as is, mind you, and I think troops going back to a rested state helps to simulate their ability to recover for "Once more into the breach." It's all abstract, but to me it adds up to pretty realistic simulation.

(Now it can die)

[aka_tom_w]

I think we need some form of We-Go forum (I'm not sure how its just a concept) so that Redwolf and Steve don't keep trying to get the last word in here.

I'm joking really but one of the very BEST things about the CM system (aside from EFOW which is one of the other BEST things) is the we-go system which means no one goes "first" or gets the "last shot in" in the "last turn". Now can we simulate that in the forum here somehow???

Posted in the very best of humour

-tom w

[Battlefront.com]

PL,

Most personal accounts speak about this: how they never really realized how tired they were until after the combat when they literally fell over with exhaustion.

This is very true. Not that this really counts, but a few times I played paintball on a couple of hours of sleep and hung over. All day I played and played hard as if I had a great night's sleep and didn't start off the morning with cotton in my mouth and the damned monkey with his brass hammer slamming away on my head Or Hell Week during soccer tryouts, or an all day hike in 90 deg weather up a 4000 foot mountain with a pack that was stupidly overpacked. Etc., etc.

Yeah, you always manage to find some extra strength to get you through, then you cash hard when you realize how worn out you really are. But does that mean I could lift cars and save babies all day long without stop? No. When it counted, yes, but not time after time.

My point is that units in CM are, perhaps, a little too full of "get up and go" and are too quick to bounce back after the get up and go has gone up and went. Real soldiers can do amazing things under fire, but they don't suddenly turn into Superman for the duration of the battle. They have limits, even if only temporarily realized.

Tom,

I think we need some form of We-Go forum (I'm not sure how its just a concept) so that Redwolf and Steve don't keep trying to get the last word in here.

Well, I for one am just trying to make sure that there are no lingering issues that will come up in another thread I've seen this happen before. I spend hours and hours in one thread and we resolve 95% of whatever issue started it (and then some, usually). Then I think the issue is put to rest. Then I see a couple of days later the same thread with some of the same people rehashing some of the same things again. It gets a bit disheartening sometimes, but I'll survive

Steve

[Gaylord Focker]

I wonder when Steve is going to realise how tired he is from answering so many posts on this thread?

I have to give him credit for keeping up, and making redwolf look like a total fool. j/k.

*this is a humor test i'm running on a certain grog to see if everythig is modeled right.*

[ November 26, 2002, 12:51 AM: Message edited by: Gaylord Focker ]

[StellarRat]

Personally, I see nothing wrong with 15+ minutes to recover. Has anyone here ever tried dragging around 50 lbs. for any distance? Remember, we're not talking about stuff that fits neatly into a backpack here. I think it would be very tiring even if you weren't under fire. These guys are carrying a big ass gun, tripod and several hundred rounds of ammo. That isn't light. Maybe someone ought to go out in a field or woods and try this just to see how long it takes them to get their wind back. But I'm not getting muddy to prove my point!