Will infantry animations be fixed in 1.05?

[Guest]

Or we could make *everybody* hard to hit, since even trained marksmen would likely have a hard time hitting things that get hit by Bunny the Happy Badger (he's in the OPFOR list under "Animals") with his beady little eyes closed in this game.

Overall accuracy reduction? Priceless.

Edit: Of course we'll have to see what the magical, gem-encrusted runes of 1.05 provide us in terms of changes here, so this is purely idle speculation on my part.

[Other Means]

I wonder what it would look like if the soldiers "sank" a little into the ground when lying down, to show that they've found cover you can't see.

Might look crap, might get the point over.

I agree though that accuracy feels high to me, especially when someone's shooting back.

[aka_tom_w]

my statements and conclusions about small arms accuracy are the result of observations at close range in a target rich, urban environment playing the US mostly.

The Syrian AI runs guys out into the street and the US mows them down if they are on near by roof tops.

If the US units run out into the street Syrian units mow them down.

I am not sure I see a problem, but I will be looking a lot more closely for it for sure now.

thanks

[skelley]

The problem is the scenic route infantry takes to get from point A to point B. It is much easier to kill infantry when they are marching merrily down the road than it would be if they hauled butt into the house that I have ordered them to

[DaveDash]

I can handle infantry getting mowed down in the open, but some of the shots in this game by your average untrained guy with an AK make me wonder.

Often I see my guys mowed down by AK fire from 400+ meters as soon as they stand up, or exit from a vehicle. Often, running across a small alley can result in two guys down.

Usually it's the defender that can do this. The attacker constantly 'forgets' where the enemy is after they've fired a few rounds and popped their heads down.

Doesn't seem realistic to me at all.

1) I'd like to see some time taken for aimed shots at range. None of this bot like accuracy you find in games like Counterstrike.

2) I'd also like supporting units to hose know enemy positions if they, or nearby units are taking fire. It annoys me that if one vehicle gets fired upon, thats the only vehicle that actually fires back. Even if the other supporting vehicles can't see the enemy unit (even though they do have LOF or LOS) I'm sure they'd swivel their guns and area fire at the general target area where the shots are coming from. There's no need to wait for this info to be passed around the CoC when the friendly supporting unit is RIGHT there.

3) Units shouldnt forget so fast the position of enemy units. Memory of the enemy unit should 'fade' after time. This is done in operation flashpoint. If a guy shoots at you, then is pinned, your guys shouldnt forget he was there and should have their guns pointed in his direction.

4) Increased amounts of ammo for all units proportionally to reflect the much higher ammo consumption. It would be nice for defenders to have ammo dumps they can run to and rearm at also.

I've fired a few weapons and even a guy running without cover is pretty fricken hard to hit at 400m's with optics. Unless you have some sort of automatic weapon or you're at close range with a shotgun you're not gonna hit them as much as is currently modelled.

I've seen videos of Bradleys struggling to hit guys on the run at relatively close ranges. They basically had to wait till the guys dived for cover before they mowed them down. I've also seen a video of an insurgent sprinting for about 50m through open ground with an entire marine squad unloading at him, from about 150-200m away, including .50 cals, and they didnt hit him until he dived into a phonebooth.

I think decreasing the accurace of small arms and increase the ammo would allow for some pretty intense firefights. Right now it's just small bursts of extreme lethality which basically cause you do keep your infantry stationary and blow up enemy positions with tanks or javelins.

[ December 10, 2007, 01:10 PM: Message edited by: DaveDash ]

[Lethaface]

Note: I've never have been under fire from live rounds, and never hope to do so

In my opinion the accuracy is quite ok... I *think?* i've seen much variance in accuracy when comparing ak47 fire from unconventional troops to fire from well trained us soldiers with scope's on their rifle's. Their seems to be difference between reserve and regular, Rep. Guards & Special forces. Trying to hit a few men running in the field at few hundred M. with ur Syrian reserve HMG, can be quite a bitch :mad: At point blank range off course even that Mujadeen on opium can shoot a squad to pieces from any window.

At 50-200 meters I can imagine it's not hard to hit someone totally exposed and slowly moving. But if the target's arent exposing themselves for any second longer then necesary, it would be much harder to hit them.

In game, there are however many missions I finished having very few to none casualties. I use a lot of suppressing fire at suspected enemy positions and advance under overwatch whenever i can. I look for houses with doorways wiht such placing that I know my soldiers can go in without doing silly. Sometimes the level design makes it harder to keep them from doing silly. Infantry moving to a position come under fire and hit the ground 4 meters in front of some cover, crawling in cirkels untill half gets shot and half reaches the corner. They get stuck under fire in a doorway, etc. Using certain commands (assault) this can be avoided a bit. I would welcome some more ability for soldiers to seek cover, finding action spots that provide most cover (and against known enemies).

When I would be under fire I'd crawl/run/jump, whatever it takes, off to the nearest place of cover. If I know there is OPFOR in the vicinity, I would never stand still exposed to all sides. In game infantry sometimes seem to have a little dead wish themselves.

Whether it be the "deathcrawl" or just showing of your face while staring in any barrel; infantry can be too slow to get to cover ingame.

Luckily for me I can still enjoy playing the game , and I think it'll stay on my HD for long.

I hope 1.05 fixes something which give infantry some more brains and handling speed at certain points.

Big Support to BFC who keep working to improve this game.

DISCLAIMER: Everything above is just my opinion, if I wrote anything like a 'fact', that's because I can't be bothered by nuancing myself too many times

[DaveDash]

Well a good example of small arms fire is Webwings Crossroads map. It's infantry only, with no artillery. You also only get three Javelins.

Try doing that map without taking casualties. It really goes to show just how over-accurate some of the small arms is in game.

On the other hand, snipers seem to be USELESS.

I also find it hard to believe you take no casualties even with overwatch. Most of the time in this game your overwatch units will sit helpelessly doing nothing waiting for the info to be passed through the CoC while the unit they are overwatching gets hosed down.

A classic example is the first campaign mission. Try assaulting the barracks through a breach in the wall with half a fricken division of vehicles overwatching. They'll all sit there doing nothing while your infantry get hosed to bits - even with target arcs. Overwatch currently basically means just area target whatever you're assaulting. Which in WEGO is a huge pain because you have to stop shooting eventually otherwise you'll hose your own guys, and then they have 60 seconds of doom to survive.

The only way to keep your infantry casualties down is to basically blow up everything in their path, or use tons of smoke to get them into buildings, which can only be done with Strykers, since Bradley smoke is far more ineffective for moving troops from A to B. That of course means you have to get your Strykers close, yeah, good luck doing that with all the RPG's around. =P

[ December 10, 2007, 01:21 PM: Message edited by: DaveDash ]

[Battlefront.com]

As I said, we can look into small arms accuracy and avoidance for version 1.06, but understand there are a variety of opinions. We've adjusted things up and down over the past two years as a result Things to keep in mind:

1. Casualty rates will ALWAYS be higher in a game than in real life. That was true for all the previous CM games as well as all wargames ever made IMHO. There are tons of different reasons for this, many of which CMx2 tries to mitigate more than CMx1. But there is only so much we can do.

2. There is no such thing as "open ground" the way some of you think. Just like CMx1 there is visual abstraction, just a lot less of it. Ground clutter is simulated by affected basic defensive qualities of terrain. But this is an arid environment folks... so if the map is devoid of significant terrain features, then you're pretty much talking about the worst sort of terrain from an attacking standpoint.

3. It is not true that all shots in CM are aimed. Far from it. ROF, weapon type, Experience, Morale, and Suppression all have an impact on how accurately the weapon is fired. Other factors can also creep in, such as lighting, when relevant. We only have one animation for firing so that's all you'll ever see. Someday we might get some Rambo animations in there, but animations are extremely difficult and expensive to get in and working.

Steve

[DaveDash]

Someday we might get some Rambo animations in there, but animations are extremely difficult and expensive to get in and working.

LOL.

[Garm]

Thanks for the information, Steve. But I think DaveDash is right concerning snipers. They could be a bit more effective and accurate. By the way, I have the impression that they rarely shoot at ranges above the usual engagement range of a normal rifle squad. And...when can we expect the patch? This week?

[Lethaface]

I had similar probs with the first mission (among others) as well, vehicles from outside the compound would not fire at enemys in the compound by themselves. Since i play RT i'll pause to direct fire manually, but thats another "not-optimal" AI routine i guess. The infantry problems seems similar to me, they seem not to realise they are walking in a war zone indeed. However, in my experience soldiers in cover or prone at larger distance are relatively safe from enemy small arms fire.

Ill try the scenario you mentioned, and keep you informed. Probably gonna be a big slaughter

[DaveDash]

Oh yeah, if they're in cover or prone they're almost impossible to kill. That's cool. You can have some real good firefights trying to route guys out of trenches or cover. My beef is when a unit which is sprinting across an alley and is exposed for about one second gets 2 casualties from a lone AK guy 150m up the alley, or guys about 400m away sprinting from cover to cover take half their squad in casualties from some machine gunner across the map as soon as they stand up.

I guess I just hate losing infantry, especially as the U.S. side and especially when I'm being extremely careful. You don't have many guys to lose.

[c3k]

Accuracy and snapshot effectiveness does seem a bit too good.

I've fired at a lot of targets at various ranges up to 300 meters, pop up torsos, and with iron sights it is very hard to even tell if you SEE a target at that range, or if the bush is just blowing in the breeze. Add in some lateral movement, at any speed, and that target probably won't get hit.

Bringing the range in closer helps, of course, but then lateral speed at closer ranges increases angular velocity (whilst reducing required leads). In short, a moving target is HARD TO HIT!! Except in CMSF.

As for overwatch, the reaction of forces is a bit under-represented. You don't need to identify a specific target to return fire. If your buddies are taking fire from "over there", well, you aim "over there" and hose the place down!

Sure, get fancy, and assign specific targets "over there" to your guys, e.g. "Smitty, take the top right window; Johnson, suppress the top left. The rest of you guys hose the first floor!"

Too accurate fire vs. moving units, and/or units at range, and a lack of overwatch responsiveness. Combine that with lowcrawls in open ground and others who can't find the front door (or dive into a window) and you get everyone wiped out.

Waiting for 1.05.

Thanks,

Ken

[Barleyman]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

3. It is not true that all shots in CM are aimed. Far from it. ROF, weapon type, Experience, Morale, and Suppression all have an impact on how accurately the weapon is fired.

Uh-huh. There's also a big difference between blind spraying and taking very quick shots while being mortally afraid for your life. With the latter actually getting fire into the general vicinity of the bad imperialists. You can squeeze off 2-3 shots semi auto from an assault rifle kind-of-sort-of aimed in a second.

Heck, there's huge difference between the guy actually using his weapon and the guy who does not. Latter is much much more common than you'd think.

AFAIK, Spray + pray is more or less result of more modern infantry training WRT boys who "previously" would not shoot at all.

[ December 10, 2007, 03:42 PM: Message edited by: Barleyman ]

[Barleyman]

Originally posted by c3k:

Bringing the range in closer helps, of course, but then lateral speed at closer ranges increases angular velocity (whilst reducing required leads). In short, a moving target is HARD TO HIT!! Except in CMSF.

Short range, against assault rifles, you're dead meat unless you have severe suppression going on. Assault rifles are not really that great at anything. They're cumbersome in trenches, they're not that accurate over range.. but they're damn good in medium distance of about 50-100m ..

Just one squad of 8-10 guys (depending on TOE) can put out frightening amounts of lead not accounting for SAW and/or LMG .. Multiply that by a platoon of 30-odd guys and you've got severe firepower in medium range.

Making things worse, during an assault, unless you've got smoke/supression on your side, *they* can see you perfectly well for ages, while *you* can see the head of *them* while you're about to trip over their unfinished sixpack..

[c3k]

Barleyman,

Oh, absolutely the assault rifle (M-16, M-4, or AK-47, etc.) is very effective at ranges of around 50-100 meters. I'm not doubting that.

Your scenario sounds like a straight up run at a defended location. I agree the firepower available to the defense would shred any attacker.

My scenario presupposes short engagement times with lateral targets. A man RUNNING across a street 150 meters away. Now, if he ran down the street for 10's of seconds, he'll be hit. You could just walk your rounds on him. But I'm talking a pop-up target on the run and visible for only a few seconds. CMSF tends to hit them far too often. And their buddies tend NOT to fire at the location where the deadly fire came from.

1.05.

Thanks,

Ken

[RT North Dakota]

Guys,

The accuracy of Hand Held weapons is entirely a function of Human factors, and most notably firing position and fear.

Without going to my research folders, the data I have seen, and what I have witnessed doing OA testing, is that Standing is about 75% less accurate 200m, versus prone. Add fear and stress and the nearest a standing man might get hits is probably below 50m. Felt recoil and sights also have a very high proportionate effect. - this can be modelled fairly easily. The best way to cure "AK fever" is to let the guys go down the range and shoot it!

Remember, fear and stress are not absolute or measurable. It seems to me what we have to agree on, is the effect of the modelling that degrades the theoretical accuracy, due to fear, shooting position and range.

Hope this helps

[RT North Dakota]

Originally posted by DaveDash:

.

On the other hand, snipers seem to be USELESS.

. =P

Agreed. The BG Sniper teams I have tired to employ shoot like School girls on uppers. Now, IRL snipers are not as good as they always tell you they are, but we do need to improve the CMSF sniper model

[M1A1TC]

Originally posted by RT North Dakota:

"School girls on uppers"[/QB]

What does that mean?

[Other Means]

Originally posted by M1A1TankCommander:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by RT North Dakota:

"School girls on uppers"

What does that mean? [/QB]</font>

[SgtMuhammed]

Is it getting hot in here?

[Splinty]

Originally posted by Other Means:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by M1A1TankCommander:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by RT North Dakota:

"School girls on uppers"

What does that mean? </font>

[Other Means]

Fine by me

[Taki]

Usually it's the defender that can do this. The attacker constantly 'forgets' where the enemy is after they've fired a few rounds and popped their heads down.

Thats one of the Problems that i have seen so far. I described the Same Problem a Few Month ago. Hope it get changed one Day. The Protection in Building against Small Arms Fire is also too good. No not the Protection but the Suppression is to low and gets away to fast. After you had been fired upon by a Whole Platoon sitting in a House and they stop firing you wont pop out your Head 5sec after they stop firing. You get your ass up search for the next Escape Route and Run.

[ December 11, 2007, 02:37 PM: Message edited by: Taki ]

[c3k]

^^^^^^^^

Agreed.

1.05,

Ken