American infantrymen are to difficult to kill.

[ieatnoobsforbreakfast]

Yesterday, I've seen a Syrian recon squad, regular experience level, fire at a single pinned down a American soldier in the same trench they were in for 3 minutes. He didn't die. Will this bug be fixed in 1.04?

[bwgulley]

My guys get killed from 300m by a blind guy with a sling shot. I do argee it seem hard to kill the last man in a unit however.

[kipanderson]

Hi,

US infantry are also too lethal.

In fact in the tests I did way too Uber in every way .

All good fun,

All the best,

Kip.

[jBrereton]

And in the game.

[Mishga]

They pack a lot of firepower. Jav Chav's not included. US squads also have body armour which I doubt most Syrians would have bar the SF guys.

Yup..they are tough cookies.

[ChrisND]

I think that must have been a Finnish immigrant who joined the Army.

[Mishga]

LOL I did see a guy called Finn leading a squad before. Sure of it.

Along with a Grammont, Charles and a few other "forum" names.

[Ritter_85]

finnish soldiers are very tough soldiers.. At least I am

I am trained to use the Russian PKM Mashine gun.

[Zemke]

In real life we have far less losses and kill MORE enemy than this game. If anything, I would say the American Squads are too easy to kill by small arms fire.

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by Zemke:

In real life we have far less losses and kill MORE enemy than this game. If anything, I would say the American Squads are too easy to kill by small arms fire.

This assumes that (a) engagments depicted in most CM:SF scenarios are similar in all relevant aspects (force balance, terrain, objectives, etc.), to RL engagments, and ( that the typical CM player is as skilled a tactical commander as the typical US Company commander.

I would not make either of these assumptions.

[Battlefront]

CMSF simulates the body armor the soldiers wear, including the ability of various different bullets to penetrate it effectively. So all else being equal, you'll see US Soldiers suffer less damage from hits than "regular" Syrian soldiers (who do not have body armor) do.

[thewood]

Originally posted by YankeeDog:

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

In real life we have far less losses and kill MORE enemy than this game. If anything, I would say the American Squads are too easy to kill by small arms fire.

This assumes that (a) engagments depicted in most CM:SF scenarios are similar in all relevant aspects (force balance, terrain, objectives, etc.), to RL engagments, and ( that the typical CM player is as skilled a tactical commander as the typical US Company commander.

I would not make either of these assumptions. </font>

[ChrisND]

Originally posted by Ritter_85:

finnish soldiers are very tough soldiers.. At least I am

I am trained to use the Russian PKM Mashine gun.

Aren't they born with a PKM straight out of the uterus?

[thewood]

Do all Finnish soldiers have a uterus? Maybe you are confusing it with something else that sticks out.

[jBrereton]

Originally posted by Zemke:

In real life we have far less losses and kill MORE enemy than this game. If anything, I would say the American Squads are too easy to kill by small arms fire.

This is because your average fanatic who's just had his best mate or whatever killed isn't as good a tactician as a player of CMSF who can take a little time and repeat missions where they bugger up, leading to an increase in experience in the future.

Something you don't get if you take a pot shot at a squad of Marines and then have no real plan to deal with the consequences.

[JasonC]

So if this is supposedly due exclusively to body armor modeling, may I as a Syrian player assume that full power scoped rifles and MGs will not have the problem carbine caliber AKs have? And that the problem will be range dependent, and vanish at close enough distances?

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by JasonC:

So if this is supposedly due exclusively to body armor modeling, may I as a Syrian player assume that full power scoped rifles and MGs will not have the problem carbine caliber AKs have? And that the problem will be range dependent, and vanish at close enough distances?

I believe you should see that modeled accurately in the game. IMO

On the receiving side playing as the Americans, I have seen MG's tear through body armour resulting in 9 red dots on the ground where my squad used to be, almost immediately upon dismount, if you don't dismount the Stryker with extreme caution.

[Leeo]

Hello? It's spelled "too." Arbitrarily animated Assad on an assmonkey, at least get your prepositions straight.

[JasonC]

aka-tom - I appreciate the anecdote, I've shot US squads successfully at close range myself, but what I was actually looking for is something about how it is actually working under the hood. Specifically, if it is armor modeling and whether that armor modeling is sensitive to range and shooting weapon type, or not. If it is just a general resilience to all types of infantry fire, I have to deal with it one way. If it is specific to carbine caliber weapons at medium range, I have to deal with it another way. I need to know what level of realism is modeled under the hood to adapt my tactics effectively. Otherwise I need to run about 4 hours worth of tests. If BTS knows and can just tell me, it will save me the trouble.

[Pandur]

well said.

on the other hand, when you run the test yourself you are one of few players wich have insight in that and can use it to your avantage where the others cant. that wouldnt be bad also, but iam interested too so i hope BFC will say something about it.

[aka_tom_w]

Hi Jason

My understanding is that the body armour is modeled as realistically as possible, as you would expect.

"Specifically, if it is armor modeling and whether that armor modeling is sensitive to range and shooting weapon type, or not."

If you are interested in running tests you should try to prove this is not the case, the body armour should be both sensitive to range and weapon type. However in testing it may be impossible to account for head shots or isolate the variable of a sniper shot to the unprotected facial area resulting in KIA.

You should play the game and adapt your tactics to the most realistic possible modeling of the US body armour, and see how that works. IMO

[Ritter_85]

Originally posted by Normal Dude:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Ritter_85:

finnish soldiers are very tough soldiers.. At least I am

I am trained to use the Russian PKM Mashine gun.

Aren't they born with a PKM straight out of the uterus? </font>

[Battlefront.com]

JasonC,

I know the type of ammunition is modeled for sure. I don't know for sure, but I also expect that range has a lot to do with it too. I know accuracy and stopping power are range dependent, so it is probable that body armor effectiveness is as well. I'd have to ask Charles though.

One thing to keep in mind is the number of soldiers that go to Yellow status. That's because the soldiers are still being hit, just not necessarily in a spot that knocks them out. On the other hand, Syrian soldiers (Special Forces excluded) don't have body armor, so a hit to the torso is probably results in Red and not Yellow status. A soldier can still possibly remain effective with a significant wound to the arm or leg, very likely if the wound is mild. This is not the case with torso and head shots.

IIRC the current US stats in Iraq show that it is roughly 1 soldier killed for every 9 wounded. This is including IEDs, which of course have a much higher chance of lethality than a small arms round. In WWII the ratio was about 1:3 killed:wounded. Body armor has a LOT to do with that.

Steve

[Ritter_85]

Yes. A Body armor make the difference in combat situation.. and this video shows it quite nice

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

J

IIRC the current US stats in Iraq show that it is roughly 1 soldier killed for every 9 wounded. This is including IEDs, which of course have a much higher chance of lethality than a small arms round. In WWII the ratio was about 1:3 killed:wounded. Body armor has a LOT to do with that.

Steve

That's a really interesting statistic but I am not sure the game as it is now is modeling one red dot (KIA) for every 9 yellow dots (WIA).

But to be fair I have never tested it.

My feeling before I read this thread was the US body armour was not effective enough and that there are not enough yellow dots showing up, and for the US with body armour when I play see too many red dots. (But I don't think I can really complain, because I might point the finger at my reckless command style and poor judgement first, because I seem to be able to get all kinds of my troops killed every time I dismount them out of the back of the Styker. I really thought I would see more yellow dots for the US troops in Body armour but the HMG's must be account for the large number of instant red dots I see when I dismount.)