American infantrymen are to difficult to kill.

[KNac]

I may be wrong, but out of the top of my head, I think red dot does not mean KIA all the time, but more like 'not good enough conditions to continue fighting'. These incldue a lot of WIA.

Whatever, I must play 1.04 (haven' played it just a quick etst, unfortunatly my computer OS decided to **** up just before 1.04 was released, didn't lost any important data but had to reinstall it and have lost a lot of time with this ****, oh well), but now that most problematic stuff is being fixed whe should start discuss other aspects of simulation, one that has to do with this all is infantry firefights lethality, accuracy & mroale/supression effects. IMo there is room for "improvement" in these areas, or mroe than improvement, tuning, cause I guess is a matter of changing some constants in the code.

May open a thread about this in the enar future. I think other thing that could use some improvement is command delays, C2 & stuff. Apart of the nice flow of information, some delays in orders would be nice. But maybe we have to wait until WWII for this.

[aka_tom_w]

Fair enough, red dots also model severly wounded.

I believe you are correct.

[Battlefront.com]

Red = combat ineffective (ranges from debilitating wound to death)

Yellow = lightly wounded (some negative effects, but soldier basically is combat effective)

Green = combat effective (not wounded in any significant way)

Because Red represents seriously wounded as well as KIA, the proportion between Yellow and Red will likely be more or less even. That's because out of the 9 wounded about half would be considered combat ineffective wounds.

And of course the statistic I used is after 4 years of combat and hundreds of thousands of troops. Much larger sampling than a couple of games. Plus, I also presume the troops in Iraq are better led than what the average wargamer can muster

Steve

[thewood]

I resemble that remark also!

[aka_tom_w]

What....??!!!?

Since when is reckless not a characteristic of strong and effective Leadership???

[KNac]

the average officer don't have to babysit every trooper at their charge neither

but, i don't agree with the statement this thread makes that's what i pointed out about infantry firefights lethality, I specially think uncons are too accurate, specially when under fire & supressed.

again i'm basing my statements on 1.03 or older, couldn't try 1.04 to a good degree yet. IMO US soldiers against Syrian regular army (or republican/special forces) veteran are fine. But when you go below the regular or less mark (greens, conscripts & uncons <veteran) they still absorve too much small arms or small caliber fire & are too accurate when they fire back.

[Omenowl]

What....??!!!?

Since when is reckless not a characteristic of strong and effective Leadership???

I hope that idea ended in WW1 for most of Europe.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Battlefront.com]

Adam,

Why does the DShK spot further out than the PK? Both units have binocs.

I don't have time to double check, but I think it is because the DShK team is larger than the PK team? Certainly more eyes means a greater chance of spotting. The chance of spotting is also affected by distance. So the more guys you have the better the chance you'll see something further away.

edit - Well, I take that back. It seems that if a unit is prone facing the fire, it is likely to be killed by the fire, however testing the effects of grazing fire revealed that US infantry can run through a wall of PKM fire at 400m and will get more yellows than reds. In the first case the units were being targeted directly by the Syrians (not necessarily with a target command, but there was no difference between targeting and letting the units open fire for results). In the second case, producing more yellows, the target was down range and the units were running through the fire, ie., intercepting the shots "accidentally."

Neat Well, this is one of the unsung virtues of the new engine. Grazing fire is inherently simulated in CMx2 because the flightpath of the bullets is traced from muzzle to wherever the rounds hit. In CMx1 this was not the case so we had to do special coding (starting with CMBB) to simulate grazing fire. It was still pretty generalized and limited to MGs, whereas in CMx2 it applies to all weapons.

Steve

[MikeyD]

Does the DShK 'spot' further out or simply open fire from a greater range? A PK gunner, especially when the mg's using the bipod instead of the tripod, might not bother firing on more distant targets as a waste of ammo.

It would be interesting to test the differences between the U.S. 7.62 mg and the Syrian PKM in bipod and tripod modes. We can mix & match Red & Blue units in the editor so it could easily be done. Comparing DShK to a Humvee mounted .50 cal should be doable too.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Battlefront.com]

There should be no huge difference between teams like that unless there is a significant hardware advantage in one vs. another OR a significant eyeball advantage. As you say, one extra set of eyeballs shouldn't matter that much and neither weapon has any sort of inherent capability over the other.

What exactly do you mean by "enormous" differences? I'll check into it.

Steve

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Ritter_85]

When I was in the Finnish Army becoming a good PKM gunner.... one time we learned how to shoot with PKM medium and long range targets (Max. 700 m) with your co-gunner using binoculars and helping the gunner to put bullets right to the target. It was quite easy to shoot those metal targets because your co-gunner was watching where the bullets hit...

[Zemke]

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>

[aka_tom_w]

18 US soldiers in Afghanistan fought for over an hour against 150 Taliban and killed over 60 and had one KIA,

Is there an AAR on the web somewhere to read about the engagement?

It sound utterly unbelieveable..

(NOT saying its not true, I am sure it is true, I would just like to read more details about the encounter/ambush).

[Zemke]

Originally posted by jBrereton:

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. [/QB]

Yes Sir, they seldom live to learn from their mistakes.

[Zemke]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> 18 US soldiers in Afghanistan fought for over an hour against 150 Taliban and killed over 60 and had one KIA,

Is there an AAR on the web somewhere to read about the engagement?

It sound utterly unbelievable..

(NOT saying its not true, I am sure it is true, I would just like to read more details about the encounter/ambush). </font>