Map and Building Height

[mav1]

What's the map and building height limit. I remember BFC saying the building height limit will be 6 stories is this still tha case?. But I haven't read about what the map height limit will be.

[Wicky]

Six looks like plenty enough

[Battlefront.com]

We've currently got it set to 4, but we can go higher. Probably will stop at 6.

Steve

[mav1]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

We've currently got it set to 4, but we can go higher. Probably will stop at 6.

Steve

Have you decided on the height limit for the map and the size of the battle map?

[Battlefront.com]

No. In theory there are no limits to either. CMx1 had inherent limitations for height because there was no dynamic lighting and that meant we had to make custom artwork for each level of terrain height. Not so with CMx2. Map size will simply be decided by how much the target hardware can handle.

Steve

[rudel.dietrich]

Is there a turn limit? Can we have an afternoon long battle if we wish?

[Battlefront.com]

Yes, I think that should be possible. In WeGo mode this might be very boring (Kip excepted ), but in RealTime it might be kinda fun if done right.

Steve

[rudel.dietrich]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Yes, I think that should be possible. In WeGo mode this might be very boring (Kip excepted ), but in RealTime it might be kinda fun if done right.

Steve

I was thinking about that WEGO concept and long battles, as well as thinking about people who might not like real time battles.

Are you able to change from real time to WEGO in the middle of a battle?

I hope so

If not, maybe it could be made where if the forces are not in contact the game simply plays in real time mode until contact is made and then it drops back into WEGO mode

[hoolaman]

What about resupply during a battle? I am guessing not, but don't know what the current plan is.

[cassh]

I really want to see ammo re-supply and access /proximity to supply source such as a vehicle covered in the game model. The timescales of the game are irrelevant as running low on ammo is an omnipresent problem when heavy contact is expected (as will be the case in most CMSF and CMx2 scenarios).

For MOUT ops that I think may dominate CMSF this is a critical factor. He high rates of expenditure required to suppress enemy locations and allow FF movement mean you quickly run low on small arms ammo.

Where your next slab of 5.56mm is coming from is very important – and it will make the Strykers much more important as military assets in game terms.

It will also mean more realistic use of heavy weapons etc where ammunition scales and supply are key.

The need for sustained-fire machine-guns (SF GPMGs/tripod mounted M240) and mortar teams to be near their wagons and bring ammo up to the firing point is one of the real life limitation that in CMx1 is modelled a little unrealistically.

The ability in CMx1 of a gun team to haul vast amounts of ammunition about the place gives the commander too much flexibility and means there is a lack of consideration for deliberate moves forward of support weapons to establish overwatch.

In reality the company and battalion command teams not only need to get their heavy weapons in place to support any advance – but they must also ensure the heavy weapon’s ammo comes forward too. Now with 25,000 rounds per gun as an SF GPMG gun team’s wartime ammo scale you can see that this cannot be carried forward by hand!

I’m with Kip to a degree. I have always been uncomfortable with the accelerated combat times alluded to above and feel that certain key aspect of infantry combat were abstracted in CMx1 due to the hardware considerations at the time of development.

There is no realistic modelling of heavy weapon ammunition requirements which means rifle companies and their heavy weapons move about the map with far too great a degree of flexibility as mortars and machine guns can be moved about willy-nilly. In reality you’d be thinking “I cannot put my guns there as I won’t be able to get their ammo wagons in close as there is no covered approach.” In CMx1 you just move them where you want them.

Ammo weighs a **** load and is awkward to carry, and most SF GPMG gun teams (two men in British Army) would be hard pressed to carry more that 600-800 round plus their guns (GPMG and assault rifle), tripod, barrel bag and sight unit.

In CMx1 there is no linkage to ammo dumps or ammo carrying vehicles which would make things much more realistic. Move the gun teams up on their own without their ammo wagons, or move them away from their static ammo dump and their ammo supply should drop dramatically. So where a mortar or MG team is in close proximity to their ammo vehicle/dump they have 120 ammo units, but if they become isolated or move away from the ammo source then their ammo available is only what they can carry – say just 20 ammo units.

This is not meant as criticism of CMx1 in anyway as I fully understand many things had to be abstracted due to processing power. I also fully understand that Charles maybe is already operating at the bounds of the processing envelope as it stands now without these additional details. I merely ask that it be considered for later CMx2 releases as the effects of Moore’s law kick in.

[flamingknives]

Is it really only two guys per gun in the SF platoon?

[cassh]

Yup - gunner and gun commander.

Gunner - GPMG, barrel bag, 200 - 400 rounds of ball or 1-and-4, hessian sandbags (empty)

Gun Commander - SA-80/personal weapon, tripod, C2 sight case, 200 - 400 rounds, binoculars, target sheet, indelible OHP pens or chiagraph pencil, hessian sandbags (empty), non-issue laser ranger finder, non-issue spare mounting pin.

Three two-man gun teams per section, with a section commander (7 men), three gun sections per SF platoon (9 guns 21 men) plus HQ section (PC, PS, signaller, two runners).

To give an example of ammo scales and consumption when firing SF - I've fired off approx 11,000 rds per gun in just over an hour in live fire exercise (manoeuvre not range) in Canada. A rate of about 140 - 160 rpm or 7 to 8 20-round burst per minute.

In game terms of 30 or 40 turns that would mean each gun would need about 4200 rds (30 turns x 140rpm) at the bottom rough approximate and 6,400 rds (40 turns x 160 rpm) on the gun position to sustain fire throughout the game. If we take the German MG-42 six man squad as an example that would be the equivalent to 700 rounds per man at the bottom end or 1,066 per man at the top end.

I don’t know if you have ever picked up 200 round ammo box for belted 7.62mm – but they are not light. In fact shifting a four-slab 800 rd pallet of these from your wagon onto the gun position is back-breaking work. So having the equivalent of five boxes of belted ammo broken down about your body, and then being expected to haul arse tactically is on the edge of practicable.

Now if you have ever had to haul a mortar handbag (green plastic case that carries two 81mm mortar bombs) or worse two or three forward to drop off for the mortar platoon during an attack then the problems of the SF gunners pales into insignificance. I’d be seriously impressed with a six man team carrying 40 bombs forward – plus tube, bipod, base plate, sighting unit and other crap (AGLS, TLE, aiming lamps, survey post etc.) as it takes two men to just carry the mortar – that leaves four men 10 bombs each to carry. That doesn’t sound a lot until you add the first pair at 4.2kg or 9.25lbs each to your bergan (18.5lbs). So 10 bombs of HE would equate to 92.5lbs or 42kg of load per man – and that’s a **** load of a load.

Hence my call for an injection of ammunition reality for heavy weapons.

[Battlefront.com]

Don't worry fellas, I saw too it that this was taken care of Vehicles are mobile armories. You can move units into the vehicles and task them with picking up whatever is in the vehicle you need. Be this a Javelin, 5.56 ammo, AT-4s, grenades, 60mm mortar rounds, or what have you. The Javelin is going to be the main thing you need in a quick firefight, but for longer battles it is probable that you'll need some small arms ammo.

For example, a Rifle Squad can section off 2 men as an Antitank Team. These guys can then move back to the Stryker independent of the 7 others of the Squad. Once the Antitank Team is in the Stryker they can be instructed to pick up a Javelin (if present, of course), then ordered to a firing position. The Antitank Team can rejoin the Squad when its mission is complete. However, it should probably first go back to the Stryker to drop off the CLU (Command Launch Unit), otherwise it will be lugging it around the battlefield.

The "Acquire" Command is already in the game and works wonderfully. What isn't in yet is how to resupply a unit itself since the guys going back to pick something up might simply be a detatchment. I'm thinking there will be a Resupply Command that gives the extra carried items (such as 7.62 ammo) to a designated unit.

The control you guys will have over this sort of thing will not be as micro as some will like, since we have to balance this stuff against playability. But it is in there

A reminder that for short firefights it is likely you won't use the Acquire Command much at all. But for intensive fights, even if short, you probably will need to get some more ammo at the very least.

Steve

[cassh]

Awesome!

[flamingknives]

"acquire"?

That sounds dangerously like a "gizzit"

[Capt. Toleran]

This acquiring concept is intriguing. Can the relative forces acquire the other teams weapons? Meaning, if a squad comes upon a RPG gunner they just wasted, and his weapon is still operational, can they turn it around and fire back?

Also, just would like to express my appreciation for all of the feedback info from Steve these past few weeks, I am getting really excited about the game.

[cassh]

Will any Brit mods (WWII or any period) have a "fetch brew" command for hot beverage replen?

[rudel.dietrich]

Originally posted by cassh:

Will any Brit mods (WWII or any period) have a "fetch brew" command for hot beverage replen?

Only for the most critical of tasks, like coming to the aid of the 1st airborne division.

[cassh]

Ah film myths - God bless Hollywood.

[Battlefront.com]

cassh,

Ah film myths - God bless Hollywood.

If it weren't for Hollywood, war would be boringly brutal. MUCH better to have British tankers taking tea while brave Americans die. As the scriptwriter for Braveheart said, when criticized for bastardizing the history, "I'm not going to let the facts get in the way of a good story". I could have lived with this if the guy hadn't gone on to write speeches for certain politicians prior to a certain military campaign. At least that is what I am saying happened, since I also don't want facts to get in the way of a good story

Steve

[vincere]

Ah film myths - God bless Hollywood

I believe that a tank regiment stopped to brew up on a hill just the outside Normandy's Villiars Bocage? just befor Wittman lead a counter attack catching several tanks of guard.

Oh, and I'm also very pleased to hear in scenario ammo resuply is in.

[Tarkus]

Originally posted by cassh:

Ah film myths - God bless Hollywood.

Mmmm, maybe not only film myths I'd say though. Here's an except of Mark Bando's Vanguard of the Crusade, P. 179:

Later, angered by lack of concern of the british tankers to keep on schedule, Colonel Jonhson had words with a tank commander of the British Guard Armored Division on Hell's Highway. The Colonel interrupted the tank commander's tea break, saying. "If you don't get moving, I'll have one of my boy's come out with a screwdriver and a pair of pliers and have him take your tank apart!".

I guess it's one of those case where one will not let facts get in the way of a good History.

[ August 27, 2006, 02:35 PM: Message edited by: Tarkus ]

[cassh]

Yes because advancing tanks alone up a highway against German AT guns and deployed defenders is really sound. They'd have been sitting ducks - and you can hardly rescue someone when you're on fire!

You don't think the delay might realistically have been due to the tanker knowing they couldn't progress without infantry and arty support as a combined arms package was the only way to get up the highway - as they had found thus far?

[Tarkus]

Originally posted by cassh:

You don't think the delay might realistically have been due to the tanker knowing they couldn't progress without infantry and arty support as a combined arms package was the only way to get up the highway - as they had found thus far?

No I don't. This isn't about what is sound or not tactically. This is about the origin of a myth. My comment was not to say Market Garden and an airborne division were lost because of tea either.

Cheers

[ August 27, 2006, 04:03 PM: Message edited by: Tarkus ]

[vincere]

You don't think the delay might realistically have been due to the tanker knowing they couldn't progress without infantry and arty support as a combined arms package was the only way to get up the highway - as they had found thus far?

Nah, 30 corps just issued PG Tips.