Lethality knob or counter

[General_solomon]

Steve,

this is my official request for a lethality counter/knob set before the start of every battle. Those that would like to see this happen please repond with a yes.

thanks,

General Solomon

[Dennis50]

No for me

Regards,

Gunz

[Wiggum]

Yes !

I hate these unrealistic WIA and KIA numbers...

[c3k]

Nor for me. Unless....

To counter the lethality issues, why not have a switch which turns bullets into paintballs? Then, at the end of a scenario you could zoom in and see all the color splotches on your men? (Use paintBAGS to simulate the large guns and grenades.)

Regards,

Ken

[Hev]

I dont understand, where did you get "unrealistic" from re the kill and wound rate?

Dont just bitch about something, prove that the game isnt right as it is and argue your point!

And if someone makes a paintball mod for this game ill give them my missus.

[aka_tom_w]

Hey!

Maybe BFC's next project:

a paintball mod for this game I'll give them my missus.

Combat Mission: Paint Ball!

That sort of sounds like fun!

[Wiggum]

Originally posted by Hev:

I dont understand, where did you get "unrealistic" from re the kill and wound rate?

Dont just bitch about something, prove that the game isnt right as it is and argue your point!

And if someone makes a paintball mod for this game ill give them my missus.

Infantery dies to fast in this game.

Look at this thread:

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=52;t=003438

[aka_tom_w]

"Infantery dies to fast in this game."

this is not a statement of fact (it is an opinion as you may have guessed there are PLENTY of differing opinions floating around here, but at this time I would say we are a little short on facts and statistics )

There are two sides to this issue and one of the sides are combat veterans that BFC listens too closely that have first hand experience with small arms in real life combat situations. Those folks are difficult to disagree with and make a case for change.

Infantry dies too fast in this game, is a gross over simplification of what could be multiple compounding factors, all of which could or might be adjusted (likely EVER so slightly at first) with the hopes of improving the game to make it more like a combat simulator and less like a video game. FWIW

(we hope)

[ December 22, 2007, 11:55 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[Other Means]

No. I mean, not for me, maybe some would enjoy it and I've no objection to it being introduced but I want as close to reality as possible.

Currently I think there's things a little out, mainly the cover values and reaction to fire but for me, I want it accurate and as close to real life as I can get.

[Thomm]

EYSA had a lethality slider!!

My personal opinion: instead of letting me fool around with sliders, supply the developers with info and data for them to get their data right and be done with it.

Best regards,

Thomm

[Beastttt]

need to stop putting your men out in the open get shot at

use the terrain to give you cover

if you are going to give the enemy a shot at you make it a hard 1

like long range if you are the US

hide and let them get in close if Syrian

then ZAP them from all sides

in the first thunder scenario I sent 1 squad onto the berm(slow to get to the top unseen with 3 javilins)the other ramp up the berm I sent 1 M1

M1 takes on the armor

javilens for the bunkers

everybody else heads to the road

behind the berm

81mm AP for the trenches

155 when it shows for the barracks and the other buildings then mop up the other trenches

that I have been blasting with M1's, MGS's, Strykers and infantry at long range

the game is lethal enough

Originally posted by Wiggum:

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

I dont understand, where did you get "unrealistic" from re the kill and wound rate?

Dont just bitch about something, prove that the game isnt right as it is and argue your point!

And if someone makes a paintball mod for this game ill give them my missus.

Infantery dies to fast in this game.

Look at this thread:

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=52;t=003438 </font>

[Pandur]

i definitely dont need or want that feature...

[JasonC]

Personally I'd prefer it if the designers get the overall lethality right, especially by tweaking cover effects and the like in "design for effect" fashion. I don't need a dial to do this for them, and a global dial would change too many things that need to be able to move independently, anyway (e.g. cover effect of suppression, cover-losing effect of upright movement, cover benefit of being prone, reduction in cover for good penetration appropriate for autocannons, level appropriate for HMGs - etc, etc).

Get the design right instead, in other words.

[Hev]

I dont see a problem with the game, when i do something stupid my troops die, when i plan carefully and bring maximum firepower to a manouver my guys usualy scrape through.

[JasonC]

Well, you can go read the whole 6 page thread if you like, but the problem from my perspective is that I don't need to maneuver at all, or use "my guys". It is quite sufficient to brings some MBT and fire continually, until everything in front of them stops twitching. That is the issue. Firepower rules, absolutely, to the point where the dismount "squishies" are an afterthought, and even with them the right thing to do is get in a building and pull triggers until everything visible is dead. Not maneuver anything.

The issue is not "I can't maneuver". The issue is "who needs to?"

[76mm]

Originally posted by Rollstoy:

My personal opinion: instead of letting me fool around with sliders, supply the developers with info and data for them to get their data right and be done with it.

+1

[Pete Wenman]

Guys hi

Being drawn into this one, although I only have opinion to offer.

I served with the BOAR in the mid to late 80's (never saw combat) but as an infantryman the one advantage we felt we had over the tankies was our ability to go to ground. Through a combination of concealment and cover you could normal get out of LOS leading to getting out of LOF and thereafter manoeuvre to either attack or avoid the firer. (Worked with the laser geared we trained with)

I sense it is infantries lack of ability to drop into concealment that is missing from the game at the moment. Too much aimed/accurate firepower against units just a little too slow to move out of LOS. (Not talking ambush here, rather general engagement and small arms fire only). Once LOS is lost accuracy should fall off even if LOF exists. Once LOF is lost units should be safe unless someone manoeuvres.

I'd like to see prone units harder to hit (if over 100m from firer), unless really caught out in the open. I guess this could be a problem with the Syrian setting as I know Steve has mentioned the terrain effects are specific to the setting, and so perhaps the concealment element is lower due to the more barren setting.

[Hev]

Jason C- I still dont get what your saying, isnt that how firefights work?

IE: Two opposing forces meet, in your example one side has more firepower to bring to bear so that breaks the deadlock. If both sides had even firepower THEN you would need to manouver.

The question to me seems to be, why would you WANT to manouver if you didnt need to?

[PeterLorre86]

Set up a symetrical blue vs blue situation in fairly open terrain at 200-300 meters distance and see if you end up doing anything other then telling your guys to fire. There is no flanking or manuver of any kind once the firefight starts, and this leads to boring gameplay. It all boils down who starts killing more of the other guys first.

Player adjusted leathality is not the solution, how can you talk tactics if everyone is playing a different setting?

I think the solution more accurate small arms fire model with respect to cover, los/lof, and accuracy, all which i think should be looked at and improved.

[JasonC]

Hev - I again recommend reading at least parts of the other relevant thread (on small arms accuracy) if you really want to know.

But no, that is not how real firefights work. It is how CM firefights work. And that is the issue.

In a real firefight, if you do nothing but sit still and pull triggers forever, the enemy will worm into cover out of LOS to your specific shooting locations, and your fire after the first few minutes will not accomplish diddly squat. The enemy can no longer be seen. He has gone to ground. Small arms and MG fire in particular loses effectiveness against infantry in particular, as the infantry adapts to where the fire is coming from, by fully exploiting the defensive characteristics of the terrain.

In real firefights, to continue effective fire after that point you have to move. The previous fire has accomplished one objective - it has driven the enemy deep, aka suppressed him, and this limits his ability to spot and to fire back. But he has also achieved excellent protection against your present firing positions. And no, you can't just pull the triggers for 10 extra minutes and kill them all.

Instead, some units have to overwatch in case some of the enemy pops back up into more exposed firing positions. And others have to bound forward to get LOS again from a new angle, or get close enough to use grenades or enter enemy held cover or what have you. It is called fire and movement and it is the centerpiece of modern tactics, since at least WW I.

But if cover is never very effective, and continued firing will simply kill everyone opposite without any further ado, all that tactical rigamorole becomes pointless. Just go stationary and pull triggers and watch the losing side die. Hope it isn't you - if it is, oh well, firing back as long as you can was still your only effective move.

That simply isn't interesting. It also isn't accurate. Fire should not so totally dominate maneuver. And the reason it doesn't in real life, is cover is more effective in real life than it appears to be in the game.

At Lz X-Ray, 2000 NVA regulars and 500 US air cav sat within 400 meters of each other for 36 hours shooting each other to heck, with numerous determined close infantry assaults and ongoing indundations of 105mm howitzer and air support. The US side took all of 200 casualties. Try duplicating that in CMSF, or any portion of it, with only vegetation cover and a bit of uneveness to the ground. It'll be over in 15 minutes and no one will walk away alive. Without anyone having done anything but shoot and bleed.

[Hev]

Ok, i sort of see what your saying now. I havent quite had the same experience with the game as you and im not sure why we have seen different things.

With out resorting to HE most of my fire fights (in urban areas) end with a final assault on the enemy possition. And even when i do call in the tanks to add thier wieght i can still find someone tucked in a corner holding onto life.

Im currious if theres a way that we could test the idea. Maybe two tranches oposite each other, both occupied, if one force can kill another with out moving then we have a problem.

Im off to try it now

[Secondbrooks]

I tend to think that lethality knob won't fix anything, things just starts to get more bizare. Same discussion in one First-person-shooter forum, they suggested lower shooting accuracy, which would prolong firefights, but would result some very many unhealthy things.

Another thing.

Look at how thightly packed infantry squad is... We weren't allowed to stand that close even when waiting our turn to get "dailymoney" from our sergeant-major of the company (i took first word which dictionary gave me).

One burst from 30 mm is enough to kill most of the squad, expacely in trench. Basically everything that blows up is very-very lethal.

JasonC got things right aswell.

[General_solomon]

I ran some test playing around with the units settings. If you want to play with lower lethality change your unit settings to:

conscript

fanatic(to compensate for conscript setting)

poor weapons

basic trainning

these settings brought down the lethality and my games were more enjoyable.

[General_solomon]

bump

[DavidFields]

And this was less evident in CM1 because of the decreased lethality?

ie--I could have 3 german heavy MGs pounding a Russian infantry squad in woods at 200 meters, and have it first "go to ground", and then break and run, with only a few casualties. But the equivalent in modern warfare? How much of this is a modeling issue, and how much a firepower issue?

[Actually, I see this is being dealt with in another thread]

[ December 26, 2007, 09:39 AM: Message edited by: Rankorian ]