tactics limitors ? Worst 3 in your opinion ?

[LRC]

Despite CM2x qualities & progress there remains some limitations that seriously hinder game tactics and realism. I'd be curious to gather your opinions.

Here are my top 3 :

In MOUT, tracked vehicles can not cross rubble (if the street is under enemy AT fire,the slow path via the rubble may be the best choice)

In MOUT, squad can not enter/exist building via windows ( (if the door is under sniper/MG fire window entrance/exit is the best choice)

In open ground, impassable terrain is unclear. This can kill the best plans when you realize that this slope is actually a cliff...

[JonS]

Actually, cliffs are pretty clearly marked.

[Sergei]

In MOUT, tracked vehicles can not cross rubble (if the street is under enemy AT fire,the slow path via the rubble may be the best choice)

But is that an option that is there? I suppose yes if it is a nice and clean looking rubble like it is in CM, but if you Google up with words "collapsed building" you'll find images like this:

It would make a lot of sense then to make these block even infantry from moving, especially for larger buildings, but that could then turn into a defender tactic... even ruin an infantry attack (pardon for pun).

[ChrisND]

1. Night vision modeling leaves something to be desired. Especially thermals.

2. Lack of friendly small arms fire.

3. Units located in the same tile can't share spotted targets.

[Secondbrooks]

1. Night vision modeling leaves something to be desired. Especially thermals.

Really? I have to admit that i haven't payed much attention to spotting abilities. It seems to be there alteast in some degree... And that is pretty much all i can say

I agree also with your 3rd. It would be nice to be able to share info outside of COC in some degree. I'm not expert but it would seem to be easy thing to do. :cool: (Yeah right!)

My list.

1. Use of windows. Haven't much thought about it, but i guess there are enough situations where this would have been very usable option.

2. Well that information sharing with near by troops

3. i really can't tell. There are some but i don't wish to whine. Maybe that small arms fire. It doesn't have to kill anyone, just suppress. But i don't know. There are situations where it would be reasonable to work somewhat as it is... for-example well planned building assault, where friendly troops waves white cloths in windows as mark for firesupport to switch fire to next window... Sort of.

[Flanker15]

1/ Not being able to use a certain weapon/ammo, without using the other weapons in the unit/vehicle (shoot just a RPG at a building, fire a single HE shell etc...).

2/ The hunt command is actually "move to contact" not having a proper hunt command ties down units that need to be micromanaged.

3/ No seek hulldown command makes armor combat somewhat guess work.

[Thomm]

Inability to place infantry smoke grenades.

Inability to split Syrian squads.

[Other Means]

Units DO share info when in close proximity.

Hull down is easy to check. Set the waypoint and select it. Target from it and see if the tooltip says "spotter is partial hull down".

I agree with Thomm on the smoke and Syrian squad splitting and I'd go with no infantry passable/vehicle impassable terrain.

[Flanker15]

Really, is that what that means?! Ok thanks!

An order would be good for less micro-managment sake.

[Sergei]

In CMx1 the hulldown status was binary - either you were or you weren't (in a way you never were, because even in hulldown your upper hull could be hit). Now there's a limitless number of degrees between the two, both vertically and horizontally. Your hull might be 10% covered, or 70% covered. Or the left half of your hull front could be behind cover but right half vulnerable. So it's not as simple. At how good cover should the unit stop? Would a unit under Seek Hulldown order stop when it's 40% covered, when there's better cover available just a dozen feet ahead? Or would 50% not be enough, and the AFV would keep seeking for cover that it won't find?

Doing it manually I can also optimize cover to more than one direction, which is why the order didn't get much used by me in CMBB. Well, that and the goof-ups when the tank rumbled past the intended area... it didn't feel safe to use.

[Thomm]

Sergei,

Your (rhetorical) question is easy to answer: The unit should stop as soon as it has acquired Line-of-Fire for its main weapon to the designated spot, or a virtual point in space hovering, say, 1 meter above the ground, to err on the safe side as targetting the ground might expose the vehicle too much.

Best regards,

Thomm

[Sergei]

How does that result in hull down?

[Flanker15]

The gun on a AFV is generaly higher than the hull?

Your tank has no LOS to the target point because of a elevation, you give it a hull down command to a point. The tank drives up one side of the elevation and stops as soon as the gun has LOS, then the hull will still be behind the hill with the turret sticking out.

[Thomm]

How does that result in hull down?

I am thinking of approaching a potential hull-down location from a starting point that is out of LOS to begin with (no "reverse to hull down"). Then, if this does not result in hull down then there is no hull-down position relative to the target spot.

Best regards,

Thomm

[Sergei]

Okay, I was thinking of it working like in CMBB - you can give the order whether your vehicle starts in cover or not. A 'move to LOS' command would work a lot of the time, and it could be extended to infantry.

[stoex]

i wish there was a way to hold fire with certain weapons and only use others. particularly a problem for infantry...in a MOUT environment where infantry is up against a combined force, it would be really nice if the first thing my squads did upon spotting an enemy infantry squad was NOT to waste their only RPG on that squad just to find a BMP come round the corner 10 seconds later...

Sergei, a "move to LOS" command would indeed be interesting...select the order, click on the spot you want the unit to be able to see, then place some waypoints along the path you want them to take for the purpose - and the unit stops as soon as it has LOS to the designated spot. "Move to (sight) contact with a certain terrain spot" is another way of phrasing it.

[c3k]

Hmm, search under "c3k" as thread starter.

1.) Lack of HOLD ability for special weapons within infantry squads, such as Javelins, RPG's, AT-4's, etc.

2.) Inability to get coax machineguns to fire from Bradleys and other AFV's, without using their autocannons.

3.) UI tweaks: focusing primarily on the obtuseness of the artillery screen which does not allow the player to know how long or how many shells will land or how many missions can be called in; similar issue with air support which obscures the types of weapons, how many runs are available, etc. All these would be known to the FAC calling them in.

4.) Peaking around corners.

5.) Room clearing BEFORE running to the windows.... (I know the game abstracts internal walls/hiding places, but an abstract room clearing if HUNT or ASSAULT is used to enter a building would be useful to limiting casualties/reducing reaction time to ambushes.

But, it's still a good game!

Regards,

Ken

[Thomm]

4.) Peeking around corners.

Ahh, yes, how I could I forget that one!

Perhaps we should also include "... and fighting around corners"!

Best regards,

Thomm

[c3k]

And, perhaps most substantially but often forgotten, HOW DOES CHAIN OF COMMAND AFFECT FIGHTING?

Currently I have no idea how being in or out of command affects anything. I simply ignore it. In fact, without constant referencing to the manual, I frequently forget what the four unit attributes are. (Tiredness levels are self-explanatory, but is fatigued worse than tired? I don't know...) That whole section of the UI is something I ignore.

Oooh, let me say that again: That whole section of the UI is something I ignore.

A tooltip would help. If I hover the mouse over that part of the UI, open a box which states, for example: CURRENT UNIT FITNESS LEVEL: READY. Then list the entire possible spectrum; Outstanding; Very Ready; Ready; Tired but willing; Gasping for Air; Fatigued; Can't lift a finger; Unconscious . Make it a vertical list and have the current status bold and highlighted. Then I, the PLAYER, would know where they are in the possible spectrum.

Put a red bar at the limit they could achieve. Like, if a conscript, out of shape, squad could only be Very Ready (at best), then the list would be the same as above, but between Outstanding and Very Ready there would be a limiting bar and Outstanding would be in dull grey, signifying it was unobtainable for that unit.

Similar UI for each of the other attributes.

Oh, one more thing: let me DROP items I've ACQUIRED. Please.

Regards,

Ken

[Holman]

Inability to place infantry smoke grenades.

Inability to split Syrian squads.

The manual describes this as a doctrinal issue. (The better trained Syrian SF and AB forces are able to split, for instance.)

[birdstrike]

1. peeking/fighting around corners would be great

2. rename the current hunt command to "move to contact" and bring back the old hunt command ("stop and go")

3. probably the least severe, but since it's not been mentioned yet: please add a targeting line for unarmed vehicles (RV Humvees) to check LOS.

[TheVulture]

The ones that most frequently frustrate me when playing:

1) artillery - not knowing how many shells or what duration I have called in, and how many shells in total I have access to (or just what fraction of total stores I am using up with a mission).

2) smoke grenades - infantry not being able to aim them

3) moving into a room you know to be occupied. 'hunt' will probably get your guys stopped by some other contact before they even get in to the room (particularly if there are exploding vehicles nearby ) any other move will have them run in to the room and head for the far wall before turning around to engage the enemy. Which makes gamey area fire on a building your own men are in pretty much a necessity.

There are others that interfere with trying to do reasonable things (control of what rare special weaponry is used, fighing around corners), but the above three seem to cause me to try and work around them in just about every game I play.

[Splinty]

Fighting positions for armor and IFVs would be nice to haves, also the ability to go between hull-down (turret above ground level) and turret-down (sights/sensors above ground level) would be useful.

[Other Means]

3) moving into a room you know to be occupied. 'hunt' will probably get your guys stopped by some other contact before they even get in to the room (particularly if there are exploding vehicles nearby ) any other move will have them run in to the room and head for the far wall before turning around to engage the enemy. Which makes gamey area fire on a building your own men are in pretty much a necessity.

Give a covered arc. If you press shift+cover arc it gives a 360 arc around the unit.

Not that I'm advocating hunting into an occupied building.

[meade95]

2. Lack of friendly small arms fire.

I disagree with this one - I think how CMSF has it modeled right now, with no small-arms-friendly-fire makes the most sense -