Traject0ry Posted April 15, 2002 Share Posted April 15, 2002 I'm tired of swearing my 'ead off with scenario projects and a game engine difficulties... So here goes and help me God if all this people around here is of no use: Super morale? As it is most armies consider units suffering 20 percent casualties in a days fighting to be rendered "combat inefficient" and after 50 percent casualties as "unfit for any operations." In CM:BO troops suffer 80 percent casualties, refuse to surrender and manage to put up a fight? Sure we have all read about heroic action performed by paratroopers, grenadiers or even regulars or security troops but these are usually rare occurrences. As it is SS - formations took casualties between 180 and 310 during the whole war (considered heavy, naturally) and even 500 percent casualties have been estimated to some units but we are talking years here! It is probably true that only 60 men of the 6th Fallscirmjaeger were left (1007 if the wounded without prisoners and MIA's are accounted for) when they finally withdrew from the front lines where they had been over a month since the 6th of June. It is also true that whole companies (both allied and axis) gave up arms after a small firefight or routed from the front as enemy seemed superior. In CM:BO it not unusual to reach 80 percent casualties yet with mere a few prisoners and usually not one routed off the playing area. Not even the greens troops?! It is unpleasant to play a scenario with troops whose fire is inefficient, who tend to lay down instead of advancing and who have the unpleasant habit of running away from superior enemy or surrender when they ran out of ammo but it is also realistic. The real killer is that morale can be further boosted in the scenario builder by quarter or half - my eyes are wet. Also troops set up with reduced morale and freshness recover from these nuisances (the idea is to simulate fatigue from continuous fighting over a time span of days or even weeks) with a 10 minute rest. *SOB* Quick sand? How come the tracked vehicles tend to get stuck soooo easily on the wet/clear terrain. It is ofcourse a fact that many vehicles were immobilized during combat but more often the reasons were engine problems or lack of fuel. It is also very likely to get stuck on deep mud but the "in-betweens" to dry ground seem to jam the vehicles with looming certainty after several rounds of gameplay. Damaged vehicles? I can (and do) delete squads and support weapons from the platoons and even split the squads in two. I can also change the amount of ammo carried by the troops. What I can't do is to simulate earlier damage on the vehicles (I can knock out the main gun by reducing it´s ammo to zero) which could simply be done by allowing immobilization or percent damage to armour. Even locked-up units dug-in can be set up as normal vehicles by the more innovative player. Damn... Balsa buildings? Well, I've read about long battles where the defenders were firmly set in defensive positions in heavy stone buildings. After hours under heavy fire the damaged buildings still stand. Not in the CM:BO universe. It would be nice to see even one building standing 15 rounds from 105mm gun witout going up in smithereens. There is also a list of sad gaps in the "fortifications" list of the game but that and a few other problems can wait. The turn-based game is fun and many scenarios are enjoyable. Please help me to overcome these few difficulties and I'll be a happy customer... Thank you in advance! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panther G Posted April 15, 2002 Share Posted April 15, 2002 As it is most armies consider units suffering 20 percent casualties in a days fighting to be rendered "combat inefficient" and after 50 percent casualties as "unfit for any operations." In CM:BO troops suffer 80 percent casualties, refuse to surrender and manage to put up a fight? In the Second World War, it was not uncommon for small level units (especially on the Axis side) to suffer horrendous casualties and still be fighting. This aspect is accurate. I think the numbers you have are from the higher levels, such as regiment, brigade, and division level units which would be pulled out if having so many casualties. Since CMBO is a Battalion sized game this aspect is accurate IMO. It is also true that whole companies (both allied and axis) gave up arms after a small firefight or routed from the front as enemy seemed superior. This could be modeled, but would it be any fun? On turn 5, the entire intact German rifle company surrenders to the reinforced American Rifle Company after only exchanging a few MG bursts. CM models engagements where both parties actually did fight. If this was modeled the name should be changed to: "Combat Surrendering: Beyond Overlord" . In CM:BO it not unusual to reach 80 percent casualties yet with mere a few prisoners and usually not one routed off the playing area. Not even the greens troops?! The way to get prisoners is to degrade his morale, while keeping yours high. The computer will auto-surrender when this happens, making it able to bag many prisoners. With regards to capturing prisoners under fire, I would say it happens a realistic amount of time, especially with conscripts and greens. The real killer is that morale can be further boosted in the scenario builder by quarter or half - my eyes are wet. No. Morale can not be boosted. What you refer to is fanaticism, which has these modes: All units 50% All units 25% Regular or better 50% Regular or better 25% This is accurate too, reflecting units (SS, Airborne, Commandos, Hitler Youth...) that would stand their ground to the end if ordered to, not panicking, routing, or breaking like regular units would. This did happen in real life, so I would say it is accurate. However, this brings a good point about how many scenario designers abuse these tools, making any German units after January of 1945 fanatic which was not the case. Also troops set up with reduced morale and freshness recover from these nuisances (the idea is to simulate fatigue from continuous fighting over a time span of days or even weeks) with a 10 minute rest. Not from exhausted, they don't. CM does not simulate morale from continuous battles very well, granted, but give them lower amounts of ammo, make them exhausted, and have them pinned down, and that is effective at simulating a tired, battle weary force. Quick sand? How come the tracked vehicles tend to get stuck soooo easily on the wet/clear terrain. It is of course a fact that many vehicles were immobilized during combat but more often the reasons were engine problems or lack of fuel. It is also very likely to get stuck on deep mud but the "in-betweens" to dry ground seem to jam the vehicles with looming certainty after several rounds of gameplay. Sorry, but the plain truth is that this happened in combat very often. Just because it says open ground does not mean it is neatly mowed, dry, firm, and level grass/ground. The fact is that vehicles especially the heavy ones bogged often (especially when wet/damp/muddy/snow). Vehicles are worse than tanks in this aspect, bogging representing getting a wheel stuck in the mud. However, bogged doesn't always mean immobilized, fortunately, so you can get out of it sometimes... Damaged vehicles? I can (and do) delete squads and support weapons from the platoons and even split the squads in two. I can also change the amount of ammo carried by the troops. What I can't do is to simulate earlier damage on the vehicles (I can knock out the main gun by reducing it´s ammo to zero) which could simply be done by allowing immobilization or percent damage to armour. Sure, that's accurate and would be nice, but it's not modeled in CM, so... Even locked-up units dug-in can be set up as normal vehicles by the more innovative player. True, but if you state specifically not to in the briefing, the player shouldn't. Balsa buildings? Well, I've read about long battles where the defenders were firmly set in defensive positions in heavy stone buildings. After hours under heavy fire the damaged buildings still stand. Not in the CM:BO universe. It would be nice to see even one building standing 15 rounds from 105mm gun without going up in smithereens. CM does not simulate "strongholds" very well, but a tall heavy stone building is close. BTW, most modern buildings wouldn't be standing after one round from a 105 gun (unless specifically made for it), so count yourself lucky if a building stands up to 15 shells from a 105. 105's are very big (have you ever seen one of those shells?!) and have a lot of destructive power, so 15 hits would do serious damage to even a blockhouse. There is also a list of sad gaps in the "fortifications" list of the game but that and a few other problems can wait. Could you name some? We have mines, barbed wire, pillboxes, bunkers... I know it's missing a few, but I think compared to other war games, that the fortification list in CM is adequate. I hope this helps answer your questions. Regards, Ryan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russellmz Posted April 15, 2002 Share Posted April 15, 2002 Originally posted by Traject0ry: I'm tired of swearing my 'ead off with scenario projects and a game engine difficulties... So here goes and help me God if all this people around here is of no use: Super morale? As it is most armies consider units suffering 20 percent casualties in a days fighting to be rendered "combat inefficient" and after 50 percent casualties as "unfit for any operations." In CM:BO troops suffer 80 percent casualties, refuse to surrender and manage to put up a fight? yeah cm troops are fairly tough. use green/conscript troops. and watch out for double bonus officer hqs. Originally posted by Traject0ry: Quick sand? How come the tracked vehicles tend to get stuck soooo easily on the wet/clear terrain. It is ofcourse a fact that many vehicles were immobilized during combat but more often the reasons were engine problems or lack of fuel. It is also very likely to get stuck on deep mud but the "in-betweens" to dry ground seem to jam the vehicles with looming certainty after several rounds of gameplay. use fast or hunt to go over risky terrain. it actully decreases chance of bogging (for fast, hunt i think) Originally posted by Traject0ry: Damaged vehicles? I can (and do) delete squads and support weapons from the platoons and even split the squads in two. I can also change the amount of ammo carried by the troops. What I can't do is to simulate earlier damage on the vehicles (I can knock out the main gun by reducing it´s ammo to zero) which could simply be done by allowing immobilization or percent damage to armour. Even locked-up units dug-in can be set up as normal vehicles by the more innovative player. Damn... place the tank somehwere in preview, then in the editor drop a rough/rubble tile over it. voila' immobilzed sorta. it can still rotate. percent damage to armor is a bit odd i think since there is no guarantee it gets hit in the same place. plus it is not likely to happen that hitting twice would have an effect for most engagements. for example a sherman hits a panther in the face twice with a 75mm in the same spot. Originally posted by Traject0ry: Balsa buildings? Well, I've read about long battles where the defenders were firmly set in defensive positions in heavy stone buildings. After hours under heavy fire the damaged buildings still stand. Not in the CM:BO universe. It would be nice to see even one building standing 15 rounds from 105mm gun witout going up in smithereens. fewer HE rounds for tanks? idea i just thought up: put a tall stone bridge in front of a building. does that affect the firing of inf guys inside? Originally posted by Traject0ry: There is also a list of sad gaps in the "fortifications" list of the game but that and a few other problems can wait. The turn-based game is fun and many scenarios are enjoyable. Please help me to overcome these few difficulties and I'll be a happy customer... Thank you in advance!hope that helps. sounds like you put a lot of time and care into scenario making. let me know when you got one made up! [ April 15, 2002, 01:53 PM: Message edited by: russellmz ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traject0ry Posted April 15, 2002 Author Share Posted April 15, 2002 Thank you for your long answers, I try to use what I've got. (Also sorry about the typos - heh, heh)I'll clonsider my case closed but I'm happy to receive more tips via email : traject0ry@hotmail.com Yours truly, -T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts