Question(s) re: Combat Bonus

[Sgt. Schultz]

Does the combat bonus apply no matter what as long as the line is red?

Or does the HQ supplying the bonus have to have LOS to the target(s) in question.

Does the bonus apply to only a target that the HQ is also targeting?

Tiny details .. I know .. but seemed important enough to ask.

It seemed to me that the combat bonus was the only one that had a possibilty of LOS/targeting affecting it.

For instance ... If a +2 combat bonus HQ is hiding his lily-white butt in heavy trees while the ATG and squads he is supporting are fighting it out with targets he can't see ... do they still get some kind of Karmic boost from his mere presence?

It seemed LOS should be a factor .. but not sure if it was modelled.

[ August 22, 2002, 04:15 PM: Message edited by: Sgt. Schultz ]

[tecumseh]

The combat bonus adds points to the firepower of any infantry and any MG that is under the HQs command (connected with red line) regardless of LOS or whether the HQ unit is targeting too.

For the reported effect of combat bonuses improving onboard mortar accuracy, I am not sure - but i imgine the same would apply. ie. the mortar could target directly and still get the accuracy bonus even if the HQ was out of LOS.

As far as I know the combat bonus has no other effect. I don't think it helps guns at all.

[Sarge Saunders]

LOS of the HQ to the target does NOT matter for combat bonuses.

But...Tecumseh is not quite correct. Combat bonuses will effect guns (pretty sure) and especially anti-tank teams (absolutely sure) such as shrecks, zooks, piats to a large degree.

Wanna take out that panzer from 150-200 yards? Pair up your zook with a +2 combat bonus HQ and be happy!

Combat bonuses give infantry squads virtually more FP also.

-Sarge

[tecumseh]

Originally posted by Sarge Saunders:

But...Tecumseh is not quite correct.

Well one of us isn't

It has been pointed out ad nausiem that the command bonus does not increase the displayed "to hit" chance for guns or AT infantry firing on vehicles and armour. This suggests strongly to me it has no effect.

I just did a test with 10 repetitions on the map, run through 10 times = 100 identical shreck shots on shermans, half with +2 combat, half with none.

I could see no advantage to the combat bonus. In fact on the second run-through, every non-combat bonus shreck scored a kill, and every combat bonus shreck died without scoring any.

If there is a bonus effect it did not show up, and it would be very small (1 or 2%). But it doubt it.

Where did you get your "absolutely sure" SS?

[ August 23, 2002, 01:30 AM: Message edited by: tecumseh ]

[Holien]

Would some one settle this debate as I am a doubter and think people are seeing things they want to believe in.

After hearing about people who test it I am in their camp unless others can say / prove otherwise.

Until then I am keeping my combat bonuses for my infantry and the Zookas and AT guns can fend for themselves.

H

[Chad Harrison]

Originally posted by Holien:

Would some one settle this debate as I am a doubter and think people are seeing things they want to believe in.

From what I have heard, and experienced, combat bonus' do not help out AT guns at all (better giving them Morale and Stealth bonus'), combat bonus' DEFINATLY help out mortars (more so than anything else IMO), HQ's do not have to have LOS to what is being fired at, Zooks/Schrecks/PIATs fire better under combat bonus, and infantry firepower is increased by combat bonus.

Hope that helps!

Chad Harrison

[tecumseh]

Originally posted by Holien:

Would some one settle this debate as I am a doubter and think people are seeing things they want to believe in.

Well until Steve, Charles, etc posts The Truth, I guess everyone's opinion is valid. I suggest running tests for yourself - spend a couple of hours this weekend - until you feel confident you know what's right.

Bear in mind test should run over 100 times to be trustworthy, and so it helps to build a map with a large number of identical areas sealed off from each other by tall pines.

Or you could just trust me

[ August 23, 2002, 06:00 AM: Message edited by: tecumseh ]

[xerxes]

I really hope the CMBB manual will fix the problem of "what the hell exactly do HQs do?"

HQs have a very significant effect and it's really bad that this has to be figured out. I'd like to see a simple little set of tables in the CMBB manual, for example:

Combat Bonus

Unit_________Effect

Infantry_____improves FP

Guns_________no effect

etc, etc.

[Sgt. Schultz]

Thanks for the input folks.

So far we have a consensus that the combat bonus definitely helps infantry and MGs, with probable help to on-map mortars and disputed/no help to anything else. LOS/targeting is not a factor.

I would trust any who take the time to test extensively in laboratory conditions. The battlefield is too fuzzy an area to give definitive results. With lab testing, one can eliminate variables that affect the outcome in un-expected ways.

Any others with test results to share? How about a link to your testing maps so others can help?

[Sarge Saunders]

Originally posted by tecumseh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sarge Saunders:

But...Tecumseh is not quite correct.

Well one of us isn't

It has been pointed out ad nausiem that the command bonus does not increase the displayed "to hit" chance for guns or AT infantry firing on vehicles and armour. This suggests strongly to me it has no effect.

I just did a test with 10 repetitions on the map, run through 10 times = 100 identical shreck shots on shermans, half with +2 combat, half with none.

I could see no advantage to the combat bonus. In fact on the second run-through, every non-combat bonus shreck scored a kill, and every combat bonus shreck died without scoring any.

If there is a bonus effect it did not show up, and it would be very small (1 or 2%). But it doubt it.

Where did you get your "absolutely sure" SS?</font>

[xerxes]

Tecumseh has a nasty habit of winning a lot.

I'm right because I'm better than you isn't a very compelling argument.

Given the vageries of the battlefield, the only thing I believe with these issues is something that is tested. We've had too many "I think I saw this, I'm sure I saw this" that turn out to be just plain wrong.

[Sarge Saunders]

Look, I am not trying to say that I'm right because I win! Yet I do win often and I believe I am correct about this. I intend no offense to anyone as I have previously stated. Just stating my opinion.

I don't care if my anecdotal evidence is rejected. I just don't have time to do alot of testing on the subject. I don't even have enough time to search the forum for any possible clues from testers or BFC themselves (given that the BFC forum search feature is notoriously slow).

I am not a beta tester. I am not being employed to test the intricacies of the game in detail. I have no desire to convince anyone of anything ATM.

There are plenty of Master Debaters around here to lay down tons of evidence about this or that. Yet I believe my opinion is valid and IMO correct.

So everybody can have their opinion. Mine is that combat bonuses offer increased combat capabilities to hand-held AT weapons.

(Edit: I actually posted my opinion so firmly because I am currently playing Sgt. Schultz and I hope teaching him a few tricks and techniques. So this is why entered the fray here. It was not to attempt dis-credit of Tecumsah or anyone else.)

[ August 23, 2002, 12:06 PM: Message edited by: Sarge Saunders ]

[tecumseh]

Originally posted by Sarge Saunders:

It was not to attempt dis-credit of Tecumsah or anyone else.

np, I never took it that way. But that's how Cartman would spell my name

Only a few days until the CMBB demo, then all this subtle stuff will be forgotten while we try and work out important things like how to set up firing arcs and how to use ferdinands. That's when the real squabbling will start.

[Sarge Saunders]

Originally posted by tecumseh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sarge Saunders:

It was not to attempt dis-credit of Tecumsah or anyone else.

np, I never took it that way. But that's how Cartman would spell my name

Only a few days until the CMBB demo, then all this subtle stuff will be forgotten while we try and work out important things like how to set up firing arcs and how to use ferdinands. That's when the real squabbling will start.</font>

[flamingknives]

DF Arty and onboard mortars under command with combat bonuses get tighter grouping on area fire. FWIW.

[Silvio Manuel]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

DF Arty and onboard mortars under command with combat bonuses get tighter grouping on area fire. FWIW.

Those double-combat bonus HQ's are really something. I sometimes get frustrated when my indirect fire 60mm mortars are TOO accurate (half the shots sometimes land ON the target spot)...it's more like direct fire than indirect, and I have to spread out my target lines if I want to catch an open-topped AFV.

[Breakthrough]

One could certainly say that HQs commanding heavy weapons types will have a positive effect over the course of a scenario as they will decrease the likelihood of those units becoming Shaken, Pinned, Panic etc., therefore making them effective overall.

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

DF Arty and onboard mortars under command with combat bonuses get tighter grouping on area fire. FWIW.

Mortars yes.

Guns, no.

BTW, the stealth bonus does not in any way help a shooting gun from being discovered. Guess I had wrong priorities for my HQ assignments for some time.

[flamingknives]

Mortars: Yes

Guns: Yes.

The effect is only really noticable over long distances (I tested at 1, 2 and 3 km on a flat map, under platoon leaders with double, single and no combat bonus and one group with no command) Under double command, the guns grouped into half the size as guns under no command.

[Sgt. Schultz]

This is great info. It seems that some folks were testing at regular ranges for increased to-hit or to-kill, while others were checking for increased range period.

So the way I understand it now... (disclaimer .. i know that there are no absolutes in battle.. as there are almost always other bonuses effecting other factors) [g]

Squads/MGs get increased firepower

On-map Mortars get increased accuracy

Schreks/Zooks/ATGs/towed Arty/IGs get a possible range bonus plus tighter grouping/to-hit at longer ranges only

So it looks like terrain dictates who gets the combat bonus HQs.

If it is a long open map... the towed guns would want them to help on those long range shots.

If it is a medium terrain map with decent cover... give them to the mortars and zooks/schreks.

For close-in city or heavy woods.. the infantry and MGs get them. Example ... stripping all the Heavy SMG squads from 2-3 VG SMG 'toons and giving them to a +2 Combat bonus Company HQ, along with two HMGs for a deep woods battle.

I will try these combos in battles and see how it goes.

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Sgt. Schultz:

Schreks/Zooks/ATGs/towed Arty/IGs get a possible range bonus plus tighter grouping/to-hit at longer ranges only

Excuse me?

So it looks like terrain dictates who gets the combat bonus HQs.

If it is a long open map... the towed guns would want them to help on those long range shots.

It would if that assumption wasn't bull****.

I use the combat bonus HQs when I use mortars to snipe at vehicles, otherwise I use them in a medium infantry echolon, for squads. No use for MGs as they don't do anything than hypnotizing tank turrets.

Combat bonus *might* increase they change of a .50cal infantry team to kill a vehicles. I bet it doesn't, but since it is not the normal anti-armor shot code it might.

[Sgt. Schultz]

Red .. I was just summing up what others had said. No need to call it b*llsh*t or an assumption. I went by flamingknives' test in re: to ATG accuracy bonus at longer ranges. I went by sarge saunders' posts re: zook/schrek accuracy bonus at long range. I even put in a disclaimer for any that thought I was stating these items as some sort of gospel fact.

I do greatly appreciate all the many things I have learned from you on many other posts Red, but it is possible that others may have something new/different to contribute as well my friend. I try to keep an open mind until I learn/test/play for myself, which is what I am trying to do. I use many of your posts for help, why not use others' as well if they speak from either experience or specific testing?

It would help if the devs gave some sort of info on these things .. but that way lies formulaic tactics that take total advantage of the game engine over realistic play.

Thanks again to all who helped.

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Sgt. Schultz:

I went by flamingknives' test in re: to ATG accuracy bonus at longer ranges.

But he didn't say anything like that, at least not in this thread.

[ August 28, 2002, 09:54 AM: Message edited by: redwolf ]

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Sgt. Schultz:

I went by sarge saunders' posts re: zook/schrek accuracy bonus at long range.

He didn't claim the bonus of the HQ would apply only at long range, he

said there is always a bonus of combat+ HQs for anti-armor shots, at

any range. All he says is if there is such a bonus, it would benefit

the player best when using Zookas and Schrecks at their maximum range.

This would be a correct recommendation if the underlying assumption

wasn't wrong, there is no such bonus.

I am not the only one who ran actual isolated tests to sort out these

bonusses.

[Sarge Saunders]

Originally posted by redwolf:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sgt. Schultz:

I went by flamingknives' test in re: to ATG accuracy bonus at longer ranges.

But he didn't say anything like that, at least not in this thread.</font>