Flak, Panzerfaust, Units, DRM/Modules

[Kauz]

Hello @ Battlefront team and fans,

My points and questions:

A) Flak discussion:

1) no light Flak (AA-Guns) ?!

-If you think the service numbres of 20mm "Flakvierling" or 37mm Flak 18/36/43 were too low i would accept this ( with stomache ).

But there are no single barrel 20mm Flak 30/38! barely comprehensible...

OK... OK.... i read in a other Thread that you may want to implement them later together with sightable Warplanes.

So my next questions:

1.1)

In old CM games light AA-Guns were capable of fighting not rendered Planes too. Why not now?

1.2)

Why i am NOT allowed to use these Guns at least in ground support role?

1.2.1)

Suppressing Infantry in houses would be easier for germans. And Destroying/damaging hard targets (tank guns or THE TRACKS) would be a useful point too.

You may say: "The allies do not have light AA-Guns too...so it is fair!"

Yes ... but they have the .50 Cal mounted on nearly every vehicle.

This gun has about 3-5 times higher kinetic energy and about 2-3 times bigger penetration than a standard german rifle/machine gun round.

Despite this you NEITHER gave the germans a flexible Fla-MG42 mounted on Tank-turrets NOR the light AA-Guns (which only the germans have in this specification and numbres ---especially the 20mm Flak 38).

So...in my opinion the light AA guns have a big ground support role for the germans. Not mentioned the moral effect and the so caused lower efficiency of enemy low level fight-planes.

The "old" Panzerfaust problem.

Well...i can imagine that this discussion is old.

Nevertheless it seems to be not easy to decide what is historically correct or what is appropriate to simulate it the most meaningful way for this game.

I talk about the restriction for Bazookas, Panzerfaust, Panzerschreck using them in closed rooms/buildings:

2.0)

In some CM games or versions/updates you could use at least one of them from a building.

So it seems to me you were not sure about handling this, too !

In my opinion/(knowledge) (i had army training on modern versions and read about the WW2-variants, studying physics) the use of the a countermass principle working Panzerfaust or a rocket propelled Panzerschreck needs "only" a "free" area behind jet-direction ensuring to harm no person standing straight behind the launcher.

2.1)

Your AAR Video Beta tester said in one of his videos, that the high "pressure"( i hope i remember correct) would NOT allow the use them in a room. ...

what shall i say?...that isn´t the problem. I rate the disappearing of gas in a room and pressure compensation fast enough for this relative low volume of gas in a standard room.

The leakage of energy of the pulverized countermass shouldn´t allow a dangerous elastic collision on the wall. .......

Other possible statements:

- You may argue that you either can´t ensure that no person is behind the launcher (These are soldiers, able to think, see and check and in reading the technical bulletin additional after their instruction-phase )

- OR there could be a ricochet of the countermass or rocketgases in the room harming the gunner himself.

This may the only point which could be interessting...

But these weapons (especially the Panzerfaust) are made for close combat ambushs. In this concept it would be cock-eyed developing them not for such purposes like shooting from Houses/rooms/closed spaced rubble.

I saw historic news reel which insinuate this kind of use.

In the following link you can see the use of a modern RPG in a room (may using both propelling principles) ( from Minute 2:00 to 2:27 ):

Ok.......After i tried to explain why your "No-house"-decision sounds very dodgy to me in terms of plausibilty and historical correctness i would mention a aspect of balancing:

2.2)

It is easy to spot infantry on open field or next to a house.

And you coerce the infantry into being there cause they can not set Panzerfaust ambush in house....!

In the following Link you see your AAR and please watch the instant, intelligent and effective (behaviour)/spotting/fighting of the Sherman and the nooby behaviour of the Panzerschreck team (00:24:41 -00:24:57):

http://www.youtube.com/battlefrontcom#p/c/86315E4B5BF37E6A/0/gRqTkKVSrSo

As german Panzerschreck team it should be a easy to sneak shortly respectively watch close around the house corner and instant fire the already prepared/loaded rocket into Shermans Flank armor....

But they walk like headless chicken unnecessary into open field and get raped instantly by Tank-Coax-MG......

So on the one side there is a (Sherman) Tank spotting, reacting and fighting fast and deadly and on the other side is infantry which isn´t allowed to ambush in a house (with their AT weapons ) and have a bad KI for using their AT-weapons effectivly against this overpowered tank!!!

This aspect somehow reminds me of simular disgusting scenes from "Theater of war" (infantry was mostly underpowered-tanks seemed almighty ....and i "hated" the useless/vulnerable AT-Guns respectivly the absence of entrenchment-options for these).

So my suggestion:

Give infantry better KI respectively a better "ready to fire"- time included in the "hunt"-order AND/OR let them establish themselves in a house (with their RPG´s). Then the infantry has a advantage in urban warfare against tanks -like it should be-.

C) Tiger II tank.

I recognized the absence of Kingtiger and Jagdpanther.

Doesn´t matter on the one side (low service numbres at the beginning).

On the other sides you sometimes can read about funny situations ... Big allied formations spotting a Kingtiger and falling back because they are scared in charging him. They have to call airsupport with atomic bombs first before they engage again. So they might have a influence despite their low numbres. And they are fun!

D) Updates, DRM, Modules, price

I bought old CM series two times to support your work.

but i heard about the 60 $ steel book price and DRM-company-strategy and these funny modules thing.....

Adding some features (like light AA-Guns) a new unit (kingtiger) and a few maps may lead to MODULES.... and not an update...

This sounds like a money-printing machine....

I know ...it is all about money ...but can you tell me how much one module will cost? Do i have to pay always 40-60 $ for every new unit and few maps which "should" be implemented in the original game already?

For me it would work like that:

You implement "ALL" (quantity or influence relevant) units of the time and area you choose (D-day +3 month you told us) and the modules bring new units of the time AFTER these 3 months and some historic correct scenarios and campaigns ....this all reasonable priced ( I do NOT pay 20 $ for a King tiger and 3 new maps and 1 operation).

DRM:

This game is for fans/freaks/geeks ( i am one of them...you know what i mean). This ISN´t Battlefield bad Company 2 !!!

So why you have to spam around with this DRM, registriation and unlock stuff??? And credit-card paying is silly too.... (i do not have one and i do not want one of them)

Sometimes i wish myself back to the good old times....

Thanks

P.S.:

E)

Why the developer didn´t think of ti give more than 2 players the chance to play.

I mean there are still 2 parties and 1 goal:

There are Allies (with 3 players) fight against Axis (with 3 players) and everyone has his credit points to spend in units and place them on map. The calculation work like before. Only difference is that i am able to play with some friends together and talk about tactics....everbody commands his own choice of troops on the same map.

[Lets_All_Fight]

Well, That's some first post...

I can't speak about the domestic training of Panzerfausts or bazookas in the game or even in the real world, but as for BFC's policy on modules, I'm guessing you never played Shock Force or any of the modules available for that title. If you had you'd know that they crammed in a huge amount of content in each release, from new units, new nations to dozen of new campains, maps and scenarios. They also benefited from the extra skills the scenario makers had developed since the game first came out. Each modeule was a better buy than many full price, full games I've bought. I've no reason to think it will be any different with the new title.

[Kauz]

Thx...good to know...

I only play CMBO,BB,Africa.

This new Shock force stuff i never tried...

I was so glad that the WW2 scenario get a new chance again in the CM tradition.

[Magpie_Oz]

I think the thing with the back blast weapons in buildings is that they WILL case some form of harm to the firer however there a numerous variables that make it difficult to model so it is better to simply not allow it.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

Hi, welcome to the forum.

First off though, may I beg you to ease up on the formatting cacophony? It does your post no favours.

On the inclusion of light AA guns, I kinda agree. They really ought to have been included if only in the ground role. Possibly it is an animation issue? THey would, I assume, require different animations then are currently being used. One can only hope that when BFC get round to doing them they will do them justice.

Do disagree on the pintle mounted MG42. The Germans do not seem to have used them very much. So I don't mind their absence much. I expect British armour to not have them either.

On the indoor use of man portable anti tank weapons, you are barking up the wrong tree. With the exception of the PIAT, it was BAD to use them indoor. And when I say bad, potentially fatal. Your modern Panzerfaust 3 you linked to is indeed modern and has design features to counter act these effects. But BFC are probably better of disallowing their use. Short of a full simulation dealing with rapidly expanding gasses there is no single accurate way to do it.

On the video of the in use game, Tyrspawn himself make it very clear it was his fault, not the AI. He gave a poorly conceived order and it was faithfully executed by the AI with the expected results.

Oh, and overpowered Sherman? You may want to back that statement up. We have had several lengthy discussions on its strengths and weaknesses.

On the Tiger II:

There weren't low numbers of them. There were NO King Tigers opposite the Americans at this time. They hardly saw Ye Olde Tiger I! BFC's chief motivation in including the Tiger I was to prevent a riot.

I'm sure that with the appearance of the Brits, we will see the King Tiger.

Modules: Look in to the CMSF modules for an idea what to expect in regards to price and amount of features. Currently the full game will included the fighting in the American sector. Brits, SS and various Paras will be for the 1st module. Forces for Market Garden in the second module, and odd bits of remaining equipment in a 3rd module.

Sounds fair to me.

DRM:

That is a discussion that has come and gone. DRM is perceived, not unjustly imho, as necessary. BFC have chosen protection that won't be too much of a hassle so I am not worried on that score. Not every DRM is Starforce/SecuRom!

There are other options then credit card payment. Have you tried PayPal?

[Wodin]

I for one love the module way...all have been superb value for money and it gives me something to look forward to....and if you don't want one you don't need to buy it...I never bought NATO as the Brit module and marines is more than enough for me..I may buy at some point though...

Most DRM issues people don't like...but it's all a part of gaming life now...if you don't like ti no one forces you to buy the game...it's something I have taken as all part of PC gaming and nothing at the moment will change it...

As for gameplay I say again the best way to have got a feel for it was to download the CMSF demo...bit late now though with the release around the corner and a demo

I also found your post very hard to read also a very in depth critique for your first or second post...

[olap]

First of all, I would like to say hello to all forum members as this is my first post on the BF forum. I've been lurking here around for a while, also played BF titles back in early 2000 and the new CM:SF titles as well.

On the no indoor AT weapons issue:

Panzerfausts were fired from inside buildings and they do not seem to be fatal. One example:

http://books.google.com/books?id=8zHAjH62OMsC&pg=PA106&lpg=PA106&dq=panzerfaust+Budapest+Stalingrad+of+the+SS&source=bl&ots=LlyD2WgoMx&sig=Pd7IBZdME-Pavtwvwd8oXXJf3b8&hl=hu&ei=YR24TaSjKdiusgbJyNi6Ag&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false

From the book Budapest: Stalingrad of the Waffen SS

"Through a hole in the wall we fired our last Panzerfaust at him. The backfire scorched our uniforms. Then we tossed a few hand grenades and rushed out"

No word about serious injuries, they were able to run after.

We do not need to simulate the blackblow, a small blast will do, I guess it's already included in the game engine. It would be better than not allowing Fausts to be fired from inside buildings. Well it's only my 2 cents, I guess it has been much more thoroughly discussed and tested.

[rune]

From the book on German Field fortifications, the panzershreck could only be fired from inside a building like a warehouse due to the backblast and toxic gases released byt he firing. You can see the article here:

http://books.google.com/books?id=Vt20q0s2uqwC&pg=PA32&lpg=PA32&dq=panzerschreck+fired+from+inside+buildings?&source=bl&ots=vZbSxr0s9g&sig=7hL2fEUrZXDRsGsiquqQYFNPtrM&hl=en&ei=USq4TcWPAsrDgQfinOBQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&ved=0CFkQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q&f=false

Rune

[olap]

The manual didn't allow firing Panzerfausts from confined space for sure. Did it happen? Sure it did. Worth to be included in the game? Well I think so.

Firing a panzerfaust from a bunker is a suicide, from a room with several windows, doors not that much. It will be interesting to see how it is going to influence gameplay in built in areas. Panzerschrecks, bazookas are different though, they had a much larger blackblast.

[Barkhorn1x]

And credit-card paying is silly too.... (i do not have one and i do not want one of them)

Sometimes i wish myself back to the good old times....

But you like to play PC games on a COMPUTER.

OOOOOKKKKK.

[sburke]

But you like to play PC games on a COMPUTER.

OOOOOKKKKK.

LOL yeah I can imagine telling that to the bank when I wanted to buy my house. Credit history, why that's stupid why would I need that?

[Elmar Bijlsma]

But you like to play PC games on a COMPUTER.

OOOOOKKKKK.

Credit cards may be crazy common in the US, they are far less well established in Europe. Most people do not use a CC.

[stikkypixie]

The manual didn't allow firing Panzerfausts from confined space for sure. Did it happen? Sure it did. Worth to be included in the game? Well I think so.

Firing a panzerfaust from a bunker is a suicide, from a room with several windows, doors not that much. It will be interesting to see how it is going to influence gameplay in built in areas. Panzerschrecks, bazookas are different though, they had a much larger blackblast.

It's not a manual, it's a study on how the German prepared there defences. It says that firing from inside buildings is not possible (it does not say not allowed, but not POSSIBLE) unless it was "a very large room, such as a warehouse, with open windows and doors" and the same goes for the Panzerschreck.

Do you have any other sources by any chance? I could not read the first book you linked?

[Kauz]

Hi, welcome to the forum.

... There were NO King Tigers opposite the Americans at this time. ...

Taken from wiki:

"The first combat use of the Tiger II was by the 1st company of the Schwere Heeres Panzer Abteilung 503 during the Battle of Normandy, opposing Operation Atlantic between Troarn and Demouville on 18 July 1944; losses were two from combat, plus the company commander's tank which became irrecoverably trapped after falling into a bomb crater made during Operation Goodwood.[36]"

----

To the other points:

-Your "arguments" for "House" problem do not convince me of your point of view. Far from it! The sources the other told are further indication for RPG-in-room using.

Sure you shouldn´t use it while you hiding yourself in a wardrobe ;-)

-the Mg42 turret mount i saw several times on Photos. If they used it or not is a matter of marching and behaviour orders. Mounted if on march and used in generally if the OKW give order to spend more attention again in anti-air-selfdefense of the units. Including the infantry (i read that a german officer conclude that 20-30% of enemy plane looses were cause by well guided infantry fire).

The german changed their orders for the troops several times owed to the fact they had no real airforce left and lack of Anit-air-guns for the Anglo-american warplane spam. Normally they wouldn´t use rifles and light machine guns in that role cause it cost a lot ammo.

Nethertheless i do not know how the allied used their .50 Cal . I think regulary the hide in the halftrack or Tank to not get a headshot.

They may only use it if they fight on high distance and try to suppress enemy in fortificated position/houses.

And for this case the germans had their light anti air guns (20-37mm)...they had no ultra heavy machine gun like the .50 Cal in series production (only several 13mm Mg131 bipod and sometimes 20mm MG FF/151 on lafette "stolen" from the "Luftwaffe" for ground support at the end of the war)

-Paypal: I do not want use Paypal.

I want a remittance for the amount payable, EC-card or paying the mailman in cash while he bringing me the hardcover-version of the product.

[ChrisND]

-Paypal: I do not want use Paypal.

I want a remittance for the amount payable, EC-card or paying the mailman in cash while he bringing me the hardcover-version of the product.

Call me nuts, but I would think that the support page would be a better place for this stuff than a community forum.

[Sergei]

Taken from wiki:

"The first combat use of the Tiger II was by the 1st company of the Schwere Heeres Panzer Abteilung 503 during the Battle of Normandy, opposing Operation Atlantic between Troarn and Demouville on 18 July 1944; losses were two from combat, plus the company commander's tank which became irrecoverably trapped after falling into a bomb crater made during Operation Goodwood.[36]"

Which was against the Canadians. The base game only covers the fighting between US Army and Wehrmacht.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

Taken from wiki:

"The first combat use of the Tiger II was by the 1st company of the Schwere Heeres Panzer Abteilung 503 during the Battle of Normandy, opposing Operation Atlantic between Troarn and Demouville on 18 July 1944; losses were two from combat, plus the company commander's tank which became irrecoverably trapped after falling into a bomb crater made during Operation Goodwood.[36]"

That would be the British sector.

-Your "arguments" for "House" problem do not convince me of your point of view. Far from it! The sources the other told are further indication for RPG-in-room using.

Sure you shouldn´t use it while you hiding yourself in a wardrobe ;-)

Sorry if my "arguments" fell short but in replying to such a long post I don't go in to exhaustive detail.

It was possible, yes, under some circumstances. But on the whole not common. BFC have a longstanding tradition not to model uncommon occurrences, because the player would make that uncommon behaviour the new norm.

-the Mg42 turret mount i saw several times on Photos. If they used it or not is a matter of marching and behaviour orders. Mounted if on march and used in generally if the OKW give order to spend more attention again in anti-air-selfdefense of the units. Including the infantry (i read that a german officer conclude that 20-30% of enemy plane looses were cause by well guided infantry fire).

The german changed their orders for the troops several times owed to the fact they had no real airforce left and lack of Anit-air-guns for the Anglo-american warplane spam. Normally they wouldn´t use rifles and light machine guns in that role cause it cost a lot ammo.

Again, never said they weren't used. They weren't used very much. Which if you look at a selection of period photos of German tanks, you will have to agree with. Not a lot of pintle mounted MGs to be seen. Again, the uncommon should not be the norm.

-Paypal: I do not want use Paypal.

I want a remittance for the amount payable, EC-card or paying the mailman in cash while he bringing me the hardcover-version of the product.

Well, CCs and PayPal are the two common ways of payment on the internet. If you scoff at both then you are making it needlessly difficult for yourself. I would try PayPal if I was you.

[Kauz]

But you like to play PC games on a COMPUTER.

OOOOOKKKKK.

This isn´t a part of the general discussion, but "Elmar Bijlsma" already mentioned it.

In America every 16 year old teen get his credit card. About 80% of your students have credit card.

In Germany only about 20% of all people have use credit cards.

BTW.: "Your" mentality respectively your credit liabilities are a the most important cause for the bank crisis and following the world economy crisis.

[sawomi]

...BTW.: "Your" mentality respectively your credit liabilities are a the most important cause for the bank crisis and following the world economy crisis.

That is true. (I say this as someone rised in GDR).

I never take credit. Only the money I have earned, I can spent. End of story.

[Andrew H.]

BTW.: "Your" mentality respectively your credit liabilities are a the most important cause for the bank crisis and following the world economy crisis.

And "your" mentality led to the war CMBN simulates.

Or maybe we should stay on topic and not attack the mentality of an entire country whose banking crisis, in any event, was not caused by people buying computer games on the internet.

[Kauz]

here a link that insinuate the using of Panzerfaust from closed space (at Minute 01:57):

[sawomi]

The point is not about buying as such, but about taking interests.

Yes, that was one of the real reason for WW2, as most other wars after and now.

[Kauz]

And "your" mentality led to the war CMBN simulates.

Or maybe we should stay on topic and not attack the mentality of an entire country whose banking crisis, in any event, was not caused by people buying computer games on the internet.

This wasn´t an "attack" this was a fact!

And i mentioned this fact after Barkhorn try to tell me that my behaviour (no credit card using) isn´t normal and insinuate that credit-card using is a matter of course / the correct way of paying.

On the other side, Andrew, is your comment out of place...

[Schrullenhaft]

I'd be careful referencing a propaganda film with Volkssturm as the participants.

That bunker of rubble referenced in the video looks dark inside from the camera's viewpoint, but it may still be open ended in some way. If it was truly as small as it looks, then those Volkssturm are in for an unpleasant surprise if they were to actually fire their panzerfausts from within.

As for purchases without a credit/debit card or Paypal.... I'm not sure what can be offered. I don't think we can accept any method of "payment on delivery", since that can still involve a bit of fraud (which is even delayed). You can use Paypal if you don't have an account, but if you do not have a credit/debit card, then I don't think that route will work either. The easiest method would be to get a Paypal account and link it to your checking/bank account and pay that way. But if you are adverse to doing that, then there may be no way to purchase CMBN until we decide to contract with a retail distributor at some point in the future (when and if that will happen, I don't know).

[MikeyD]

Despite this you NEITHER gave the germans a flexible Fla-MG42 mounted on Tank-turrets...

If memory serves, I believe the flexible flak mounts on PzIV used the hull mg pulled out of its ball. Do you really want to yank the hull mg and have the commander ride into combat waist-high in his cupola?

Also you're making suggestion on how to 'improve' the game without ever having touched. it. Wait a few weeks, play the demo, then demand your must-have improvements.