inf assault

[Wdll]

Is it normal for an inf squad to assault twice on its own? For example I move a vehicle next to it (say the inf squad is hidden), and I see them attacking with rifles like assault, killing all or half of the inf carried in the vehicle (if it's apc), then immediately after without me having time to react, also assaulting (and destroying) the vehicle. With 100% success rate too.

Inf squad in question US Army Rangers June 2009.

[valo2000]

i guess us aarmy rangers have very high experience and moral ratings.
Assaulting adds surpression. if moral is high enough they willnot get pinned by this surpression.

if they are not pinned they can assault again even if propability is lower.

[Koh]

Happens to me pretty much every time a loaded APC is assaulted. Interestingly enough the loaded infantry always seems to die, even if the APC is only immobilised.

[Wdll]

Yes, it just doesn't feel right. This is the first time I face US army rangers and the first time I keep having 100% success of assaults against my apcs with at least half the inf getting killed. This at the first assault, as I said earlier, immediately as soon as the first assault is over the second happens and kills off the APC which is not destroyed in the first.
I was just curious for both of them. First about the success rate and inf casualties and the ability of them to automaticaly assault twice. Glad to see I am not the only one noticing this.

[gila]

I was just curious for both of them. First about the success rate and inf casualties and the ability of them to automaticaly assault twice. Glad to see I am not the only one noticing this.

I wouldn't say they automatically can assault twice.
It depends on suppression after the first assault and whether they can rally enough for a second assault.

[Imp]

Its a suppresion thing.
So unit in questionan US Rangers are elite & a big squad so have a higher chance of success (more men to distract). If they fail will be suppressed & thats assulting over.
If they pass doing any sort of damage they are as they would be pretty pleased with themselves & more than willing to have another go. If they now have another go at a previosly targeted (unsure) suppressed or damaged vehicle there success rate has gone through the roof or more likely his.
Suppresion only jumps if they fail.

If however you are saying you moved a vehicle 1 hex & it is attacked 2 times thats 2 squads you failed to see.
Op Fire is one round of shots per unit for an action, move or fire so 2 units reacted.

Does that make sense?

[Suhiir]

When a loaded APC is attacked the first thing the game does (due to game mechanics) is offload the infantry.

The infantry suddenly appearing in observation range an enemy unit (in this case Rangers) triggers an oppertunity fire.

Since the offloading unit is partially supressed - due to the offloading, considered "in the clear" - due to the offloading, and at point-blank range they get the sh*t shot outta them.

THEN !

The enemy unit checks its morale and assaults the APC.

Simply a matter of game mechanics...specifically the order in which actions/fire are resolved.

This help?

[Koh]

Except that APCs don't unload infantry when attacked. That only happens when the infantry is riding on top of the vehicles. My money is on this is intended behaviour and the game just represents it in a somewhat confusing manner. But then again I'm not exactly sure why killing the tracks of a CV90 kills everyone in the passenger compartment.

And I'm gonna have to vote against this being related to the experience levels much, given how I've had this happen to me the same way fighting against 60 experience rookies and 90 experience smooth operators. And I could just be having bad luck, but if the assault succeeds the carried infantry always dies, irregardles of what happens to the vehicle.

[Imp]

Except that APCs don't unload infantry when attacked. That only happens when the infantry is riding on top of the vehicles. My money is on this is intended behaviour and the game just represents it in a somewhat confusing manner. But then again I'm not exactly sure why killing the tracks of a CV90 kills everyone in the passenger compartment.

And I'm gonna have to vote against this being related to the experience levels much, given how I've had this happen to me the same way fighting against 60 experience rookies and 90 experience smooth operators. And I could just be having bad luck, but if the assault succeeds the carried infantry always dies, irregardles of what happens to the vehicle.

WOW you guys really pay attention to what happens possibly. Not given much thought but I am behind Suhiir here 95% of the time they do indeed unload. Makes perfect sense its not a healthy option but at that range they know an assualt is on the cards so try to protect it. Plus its safer than staying in the APC thats probably about to go bang.
So sequence of events is unit unloads & gets shreded then assualt occurs which is why I asked 2 distinct attacks or one.

As to infantry taking damage when the vehicle is unharmed imobillised.
Track hit? what about drivers compartment, transmision, engine etc they might stop it.
Hiting the passenger compartment but missing the parts previosly unharmed would kill passengers but leave the APC driveable.

So the infantry nearly always dies or gets mauled pretty bad sounds spot on to me they are trying to exit at point blank range & somehow I think the other guy will be spraying the exit with everything hes got.

At 2 hexes then they probably dont unload as the safest option might be to stay on board & hope the driver gets you out of there.

[Wdll]

When a loaded APC is attacked the first thing the game does (due to game mechanics) is offload the infantry.

The infantry suddenly appearing in observation range an enemy unit (in this case Rangers) triggers an oppertunity fire.

Since the offloading unit is partially supressed - due to the offloading, considered "in the clear" - due to the offloading, and at point-blank range they get the sh*t shot outta them.

THEN !

The enemy unit checks its morale and assaults the APC.

Simply a matter of game mechanics...specifically the order in which actions/fire are resolved.

This help?

So

friendly apc moves into a hex
hidden rangers assault, damage or not the apc, but infantry squad in the apc gets heavily damaged or destroyed and gets out of the apc.
Rangers attack assault again and destroy the apc.
so at the end of that one hex movement by the apc, the rangers have assaulted twice, killed off both inf and apc.

The above is game mechanics and normal? I just want to know to change my tactics.

[Suhiir]

When a loaded APC is attacked the first thing the game does (due to game mechanics) is offload the infantry.

The infantry suddenly appearing in observation range an enemy unit (in this case Rangers) triggers an oppertunity fire.

Since the offloading unit is partially supressed - due to the offloading, considered "in the clear" - due to the offloading, and at point-blank range they get the sh*t shot outta them.

THEN !

The enemy unit checks its morale and assaults the APC.

Simply a matter of game mechanics...specifically the order in which actions/fire are resolved.

This help?

So

friendly apc moves into a hex
hidden rangers assault, damage or not the apc, but infantry squad in the apc gets heavily damaged or destroyed and gets out of the apc.
Rangers attack assault again and destroy the apc.
so at the end of that one hex movement by the apc, the rangers have assaulted twice, killed off both inf and apc.

The above is game mechanics and normal? I just want to know to change my tactics.

1) Friendly APC moves into hex
2) WinSPMBT detects an infantry assult VS vehicle situation
3) Friendly infantry is offloaded from friendly APC
4) Enemy infantry oppertunity fires at friendly infantry
5) Enemy infantry checks morale and assults APC if it passes morale test

There is only one assult...the fire vs the friendly infantry is oppertunity fire vs the "moving" (i.e. unloading) unit.

So the friendly infantry could be missed, injured, or destroyed by the oppertunity fire.
And the friendly APC could be missed, damaged, or destroyed by the SEPERATE anti-vehicle assault.

I could be wrong about the sequence of events here, and if so I'm sure Andy or Don will gladly (*wink*) correct me if I am.

[Wdll]

Then why between 3 and 4 the APC gets damaged or destroyed?

[Imp]

Then why between 3 and 4 the APC gets damaged or destroyed?

As said previosly Suhiirs powers of observation seem good to me (FOO training, recon or a sniper rifle if you can hit stuff might have used those skills better)

Without seeing or a more blow by blow acount how are we supposed to answer that?
If the squad is succesful as said its still unpinned so concievably can keep assaulting till run out of shots though I have never seen that. Twice maybe which goes back to my are there 2 squads? Multiple vehicles could concievably be taken out if Ranger Eng with a DC due to splash.
Ask your opponent after its over but I have to ask why after finding infantry the hard way are you piling more units in to there death knowing he probably has friends.

[PatG]

I just ran a very quick test game. BMP VS single Ranger squads. In almost every case, the BMP runs up to the ranger, The ranger op fires on the BMP, inf unloads and gets slaughtered then the ranger assaults the BMP killing it.

Very ugly for the Russians.

Re-ran with reg US squaddies - same results but a few more Russian infantry survived

[Wdll]

but I have to ask why after finding infantry the hard way are you piling more units in to there death knowing he probably has friends.

I have my reasons.

[valo2000]

well if you have your reasons send in a company. eventually they will overcome the ranger squad especially after they are out of AT-Weapons.

[Suhiir]

I just ran a very quick test game. BMP VS single Ranger squads. In almost every case, the BMP runs up to the ranger, The ranger op fires on the BMP, inf unloads and gets slaughtered then the ranger assaults the BMP killing it.

Very ugly for the Russians.

Re-ran with reg US squaddies - same results but a few more Russian infantry survived

Since the Rangers have better base experience and morale I'm not the least suprised they're more effective.

[EJ]

Suhir,
Good analysis. The Rangers are real "bad boys". Given their higher than avg morale and experience they must be significantly more expensive than regular infantry?

[RERomine]

I agree that Suhiir's analysis is right on. What in reality would happen all at once is broken down into separate steps for game purposes.

[Suhiir]

Suhir,
Good analysis. The Rangers are real "bad boys". Given their higher than avg morale and experience they must be significantly more expensive than regular infantry?

I'd have to do some unit analysis I can't do that the moment (not at home where I can actually look at or run WinSPMBT) but yes morale and experience do effect the unit cost.

Weather it effects it "significantly" is somwhat a matter of opinion.

[DRG]

Weather it effects it "significantly" is somwhat a matter of opinion.

"Weather" ??:D

A "Ranger Squad" unit ( UC 111 ) would be roughly 15% more than an equivalent "infantry" ( UC 1 )unit and that's before the experience and morale modifiers Rangers have which would boost the actual game cost up even further bringing it up to approx 30% more than the same "infantry" unit with no special abilities and no experience and morale mods

Don

[Koh]

What I'd like to know is the rationale behind the infantry squad dismounting before the vehicle is assaulted. This does not seem consistent with their behaviour whenever their vehicle is fired upon at other times.

[Imp]

For normal purposes i.e greater range if the transport survives the shot its up to you the player to decide the course of action, stay on board or bail.
At close range take it as they either see it coming & bail just before its assulted or try getting out while its in progress. Probably represents more the second despite the mechanics.
Do not take as correct but I have definetly had infantry unload remain relativly intact & had an assualt aborted message or something like. I think sequence of events is
Squad unloads assulting unit fires at squad, if it can squad fires back then if still able the unit assualts.
Try running up against a crew or unit that used its full movement last go the attacker might take casulties.

[Koh]

or try getting out while its in progress. Probably represents more the second despite the mechanics.

Good enough for me. Kinda explains why they pretty much always get torn to shreds, too.

[c_of_red]

Actually, those were my Rangers and there was two units in that hex, a Ranger squad and a Law team. If, of course, we are talking about the same firefight. IIRC, both were pinned and made their rally. I left them in the same hex because they still had a rally roll and I wanted the Program to take it. I had planned on moving the zero sized unit out first as a scout, sort of. IIRC, I was stalking one of those HEL Leos along that little ridge line above the lower V-flag cluster. The rifle squad would have gone first, since it is higher up in the que then the Law team.
I can't really say anything about chasing Infantry around the woods with armor since I do it myself every now and then. Afterwards, as I stroll out of the woods, gaily swinging the basket containing my head, I say "NEVER Again". Then a few games later going thru the woods seems better then dodging ATGMs crossing that open spot. After all, there can't be a RPG behind EVERY tree, can there?

[Wdll]

Only one of them made the assault, not both. But since this is game mechanics, I will make sure to remember it for the future.

[Imp]

RPG teams I think dont assault they do not have enough men to have a good chance of pulling it off, fire there weapon instead unless out of ammo.

[Suhiir]

Weather it effects it "significantly" is somwhat a matter of opinion.

"Weather" ??:D

Don

Hey!
I'm a tech weenie not a spelling champ!
Yeah, yeah, yeah...use a spell checker...
>grumbles<

[Suhiir]

RPG teams I think dont assault they do not have enough men to have a good chance of pulling it off, fire there weapon instead unless out of ammo.

If I'm not mistaken (and I may well be) ANY infantry unit that has a vehicle pull up adjacent will attempt to assault it.
Game mechanics, no more, no less.

Personally I "love" it when a MBT passes by a sniper and gets killed. How the hell one guy with a sniper rifle and a couple hand grenades kills a tank I havn't a clue but I've seen it happen.

[Lt. Ketch]

I can't really say anything about chasing Infantry around the woods with armor since I do it myself every now and then. Afterwards, as I stroll out of the woods, gaily swinging the basket containing my head, I say "NEVER Again". Then a few games later going thru the woods seems better then dodging ATGMs crossing that open spot. After all, there can't be a RPG behind EVERY tree, can there?

Been there, done that. Carried my smashed pride and ego out with my head. Did it again.

RPG teams I think dont assault they do not have enough men to have a good chance of pulling it off, fire there weapon instead unless out of ammo.

Not that they have to assault to take out a tank. That's part of the problem.





Weather it effects it "significantly" is somwhat a matter of opinion.

"Weather" ??

Don

Hey!
I'm a tech weenie not a spelling champ!
Yeah, yeah, yeah...use a spell checker...
>grumbles<

That's the worst part. You spelled it right, but it's the blasted homophone (sounds the same, spelled different, deffinition different). Don't worry about it too much. I'm know that I fit into the "bad speller's" catagory and even more of us fit into the "Bad Grammer" group.

Personally I "love" it when a MBT passes by a sniper and gets killed. How the hell one guy with a sniper rifle and a couple hand grenades kills a tank I havn't a clue but I've seen it happen

He somehow got the gas cap off. Or maybe he shot the HEAT shell that had loaded into the cannon. Oh, oh, oh! I know! He used the can opener on his pocket knife and used it to make a hole in the turret and then threw the hand gernades in! I love this game. Talk about ways to foster your imagination!

Question for anybody out there. As a fairly new player to MBT (playing mostly WW2) What means to you employ to counter AT threats whether (just of you Suhiir :D) they be ATGM long shots or RPGs behind trees? Is it how you deploy forces? Scouts attached to your Armoured formations? Nuking everything in front of you with rockets, bombs, shells and HMGs? What works the best for you?

[valo2000]

what should work is a mortar barrage in front of your tanks. pinned troups can not assault. they still have their AT weapons though.

[c_of_red]

No silver bullets Lt. Ketch. What works in one game won't in the next. I can even say what worked last turn might not work this turn.
If you want a 'rule of thumb', Overwatch. Try to put higher experience level units up front. Move that 'point' ONE hex at a time, right clicking thru your frontal arc. You will still get fired at by surprise ever now and then. The key is what happens if you get shot at and survive.
I have an ambush post somewhere ( Blitz, I think) and I'll try for a synopsis her.
1st don't panic.
2nd, don't do ANYTHING yet with the unit that has been ambushed. Take your hand off the mouse and scratch something with it.
Take these steps in order
3.A) see if any other units can fire on the hex you are being ambushed from. Don't need a target or LOS to one, 'Z';'key will do fine, you are trying to get some MORE suppression on the bushwacker. Remember, if the ambush failed, the ambusher has suppression. If another unit has LOS, you prolly can see the bushwacker.
3.B) Rally your ambushed units
3.C) Try moving another units to where the Bushwacker has a LOS, you are trying to break it's target lock.
3.D) Now is the time to select your ambushed unit. If you rallied them, either take a shot or move, or both, what ever seems best to you. This will change according to circumstances.
3.E) blow smoke and run like 'ell.

You can also use a 2man scout section or weapons team in a vehicle with lots of MP's as cannon fodder (ambush fodder? Tripwire Charlie?) by moving them close, 2 or 3 hexes to a potential ambush site and unloading the bait. This will cause SOME units to OP fire. Remember loading and unloading burns MP's equal to the units men ever time, so it affects how far you can go in a turn. I stretch this out by using multiple vehicles and scout teams. 2 or 3 is about the max, which means a scout platoon stays together and scouts 1 axis, which is what you want to do anyway. Plus you need help when you get ambushed, which will happen no matter what.
The only way I can think of to completely avoid being ambushed is to find an opponent that promises not to set any. Or a FNG that doesn't know how. If you do, promise to share them?
Setting an Ambush is too lenghty a topic to get into here and now. Check out some of the tactics guides and see what they have to say.
The key is to not panic, get thru the moment and take advantage of it.

[Lt. Ketch]

Thanks, Valo. I always try to have mortars in my group and this will give them something productive to do.

C_of_Red,
No silver bullets Lt. Ketch. What works in one game won't in the next. I can even say what worked last turn might not work this turn.

I realize this. Heaven knows how many times I've pulled something off to have it blow up in my face the next time. I looking for some of the things that players do for variety's sake, more than for a silver bullet.

If you want a 'rule of thumb', Overwatch.

Good rule of thumb. This is something that I certainly need to work on. Thanks for a good step by step on having it happen.


I have an ambush post somewhere ( Blitz, I think) and I'll try for a synopsis her.

Thanks for the run down. It is a good refreasher. I use 3E the most. Needless to say, I go through my fair share of smoke gernades

Remember loading and unloading burns MP's equal to the units men ever time, so it affects how far you can go in a turn.

I knew that load/unload burned MP but didn't know how much. Thank you for this info.

The only way I can think of to completely avoid being ambushed is to find an opponent that promises not to set any. Or a FNG that doesn't know how. If you do, promise to share them?

Sorry, no promises. But at times I consider myself in this catagory.

The key is to not panic, get thru the moment and take advantage of it.

I don't know how many are fimilar with Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker Guide to the Galaxy, but your advice is proven in the series. Not that anybody ever follows it, but it's good advice none the less. Thank you.

For anybody else that would like to contribute, I'm looking for ideas and what people are doing out there, not the proverbial cure all. My tactic was to avoid playing MBT all together to avoid the heartache and grief that comes from this, but seeing as it's just too tempting to avoid playing, I have taken to fielding only a few MBTs and other vicheals or playing eras that don't have ATGMs. My current PBEM opponent will tell you when we're done with this game that his T-55s walked all over my infantry company because I didn't have much to counter them. So I am turning to the educated, experienced, and formitable combatants of the forum for what has worked for them.

[Imp]

Question for anybody out there. As a fairly new player to MBT (playing mostly WW2) What means to you employ to counter AT threats whether (just of you Suhiir :D) they be ATGM long shots or RPGs behind trees? Is it how you deploy forces? Scouts attached to your Armoured formations? Nuking everything in front of you with rockets, bombs, shells and HMGs? What works the best for you?

Probably your best option is to find God & pray
Seriously esp if think you are entering ATGM territory overwatch in the sense of infantry on the ground with a LOS to possible locations, basically everywhere :D. In ideal circumstances the vehicle does not test the water unless several eyes are there to spot the firer & foot sloggers are best at this.
Once you find it pinning will stop fire or at worst reduce to 1 shot so pull out your vehicle by reversing if need be.
On that point if its untested terrain lead vehicles should never use there last MP as if fired on you are kippered unless pre TI & have dischargers.<!-- / message --><!-- sig -->

[Suhiir]

I find that armored HUMMWV's work great for flushing ATGMs.
Their size makes them hard to hit.

Once the enemy MANPADS run low or out of ammo helos seem to make the best overwatch units, and if they're armed they do well at supression too. I always disable any non AT weapons on helos during the enemy turn so they have shots available during mine. And disable their AT weapons as well if I moved them during my turn (if they moved more then a pop-up during my turn they seldom hit).

Since I commonly play the USMC I usually have a fair number of Scout/Sniper teams which are excellent for both spotting and the occasional sniper shot at ATGMs or MGs.

The real "key" is overwatch, overwatch, and more overwatch.

[gila]

I find that armored HUMMWV's work great for flushing ATGMs.
Their size makes them hard to hit.

Once the enemy MANPADS run low or out of ammo helos seem to make the best overwatch units, and if they're armed they do well at supression too. I always disable any non AT weapons on helos during the enemy turn so they have shots available during mine. And disable their AT weapons as well if I moved them during my turn (if they moved more then a pop-up during my turn they seldom hit).

Since I commonly play the USMC I usually have a fair number of Scout/Sniper teams which are excellent for both spotting and the occasional sniper shot at ATGMs or MGs.

The real "key" is overwatch, overwatch, and more overwatch.

So an occasional pop-up with a scout helo far back will spot,and then smoke them rascals with arty.

[c_of_red]

AFAIK, helios don't see things ( observe, search) as well as leg units. Sort of between a ground vehicle and a leg unit. Or at least that is the way the original SP2 worked. Not sure if that was changed or not during the port to windoze. What little testing I have done says 'no', but an 'expert' told me I was wrong. I think it is confusion created by the term 'spotting'. which in the real world means seeing something but in the SP world it means calling artillery and nothing else. I suppose that helps keep the confusion level down, at least if everyone is aware of the jargon.
A thread at the blitz went past the post limit on this topic. It seems every SP player ( about 15,000 on the 'net, and growing) has an opinion on this topic.
No absolutes in SP. I like to 'hide' my FO's, 2-man scouts, sniper teams and snipers. By hide I mean find a hex with concealment (cover is better, but sometime Mars isn't that helpful), redline your weapons and stay quite as a mouse at an Ally Cat convention. I have had enemy tanks park in the same hex. I have had AH's hovering over an FO while it called in arty.
So you never really know how much of the enemy you are seeing at that moment. Nor do you know how much of your force he can see.
FoW.

[Suhiir]

AFAIK, helios don't see things ( observe, search) as well as leg units. Sort of between a ground vehicle and a leg unit. Or at least that is the way the original SP2 worked. Not sure if that was changed or not during the port to windoze. What little testing I have done says 'no', but an 'expert' told me I was wrong. I think it is confusion created by the term 'spotting'. which in the real world means seeing something but in the SP world it means calling artillery and nothing else. I suppose that helps keep the confusion level down, at least if everyone is aware of the jargon.
A thread at the blitz went past the post limit on this topic. It seems every SP player ( about 15,000 on the 'net, and growing) has an opinion on this topic.
No absolutes in SP. I like to 'hide' my FO's, 2-man scouts, sniper teams and snipers. By hide I mean find a hex with concealment (cover is better, but sometime Mars isn't that helpful), redline your weapons and stay quite as a mouse at an Ally Cat convention. I have had enemy tanks park in the same hex. I have had AH's hovering over an FO while it called in arty.
So you never really know how much of the enemy you are seeing at that moment. Nor do you know how much of your force he can see.
FoW.

Yup, if you "redline" your weapons it's actually fairly easy to keep units hidden. In fact since I use the CD version I spend a lot of my set-up time assigning ranges and fire limits (via the armor min/max and unit type settings) telling my units who they're allowed to shoot at and when.

And yes, helos are HORRIBLE at seeing (not spotting for arty) non-firing enemy units. But I've found them very good at seeing those units that do fire.

One thing that undoubtedly effects this massively is that I've modified my non-transport (i.e. Light Attack, Attack, and COIN) helo formations so that they have a bonus to their experience and sometimes morale.
My reasoning is very simple. The "best" helo pilots are the ones that fly the attack helos, "average" pilots fly transports.
Given that I play the USMC 90% of the time I'm not playing a pre-set scenario the base morale and experience is already 80 so adding 8 (a mere 10% increase over the base) to this virtually guarentees vet status to my helos. Yeah, the unit cost goes up slightly, but supposedly the game balance isn't effected because the total unit cost for each side doesn't change...I will have less units in terms of total numbers then I would have. So far my testing and experiments are giving me pretty much the results I want and expect.

[c_of_red]

"My reasoning is very simple. The "best" helo pilots are the ones that fly the attack helos, "average" pilots fly transports."

Maybe. I think that depends on what you mean by best. My Son and a Nephew are helio pilots. My son is flying Blackhawks now in the DC area. I think his 2 year tour is up this fall,, then it's off to an operational unit. When he was in Iraq, he was a Weapons officer in an Apache. After flight school, he was assigned to the Helio pool that the Pentagon uses. I'm not sure what Squadron that is.
My nephew was shot down twice in Iraw, winning the Silver Star the second time. He flew the bird he was assigned to. He is IP qualified in the 58, 60 and 64. I last saw him about 2 years ago when he was back here recovering after being shot in both legs ( same round. I suggested he change his call sign to 'daily double') In his unit, they don't have a bird for each pilot. More pilots then helios, with a pilot being assigned to a helio by whatever methood the operations officer used. He could be flying a scout one day, a BlacKhawk the next. He said the Apaches were mostly assigned to officers and being a ring-knocker didn't hurt.

[c_of_red]

I haven't played around much with the new range features. I should, since seems to be less risky then redlining. Ever now and then redlining will bite you in the butt. I'm real interested in what looks like the old Squad Leader 'bore sighted' feature. If it works the same way, it would be an excellent way to kick off a layered ambush.

[Suhiir]

I quite agree that there are certain to be some transport pilots that are "better" then average.
For instance I'm sure the USMC pilots that fly Marine One (The US Presidents copter) are amoung the best there are.
But in general - much like fighter pilots VS bomber or transport pilots - the ones flying the more "aggressive" types of birds are more likly to be the "better" pilots.
With my method of giving combat type helos a +8 formation modifier to their experience they are statistically likly to be "better" then transport helos without the modifier, but given the random experience generation used by WinSPMBT some transport pilots will be, and are, better then some combat pilots.

While I'd be the first to admit my method and reasoning WILL annoy some players (and game designers *wink*) and/or seem to be cheating or mini-maxing I find that the actual in-game results of this modification to do a pretty good job of better simulating "reality" then the current methods. Does this mean I'm "right" and they're "wrong"? Hardly...as with ANY morale/experience issue its a VERY subjective thing. That's why any non official OOB modification is properly viewed quite skeptically by the game designers and labeled "Use at your own risk" by players.

[Imp]

The only real snag with it is it should be applied across the board to all nations, also it could be argued tank crews are better than AFV or truck ones.
I have noticed quite a few things that have crept in as diffrent people have a go at OOBs, its a lot to check before saying its correct.
Now this might be due to National traits which is what I think the experince rating is a partial reflection of.
Take for instance as can remember South Africa its set up with very good C&C giving extra rally chances.
You can buy a Mech Platoon which has its own Company Leader, forget the name & no doubt tryiing to represent a special formation.
Its artillery to is arranged nicely allowing you to buy in 2 groups of 3 or 4 with the first unit a Company Leader. Very handy now you can cross attach other support elements like AAA to him. Yet most nations will come as a battery of 6-8 units not 2 troops one being the Leader.
If you buy ATGM jeep type vehicles as a company they come as one lump so a large platoon & being a company makes no diffrence except you can cross attach & add even more units!! Yet the stock:D USMC version comes with them split in platoons, this I agree might be because they are a staple vehicle in that force.

As I said it may be done on purpose in some cases to represent a good or poor command structure like the WW2 Russian tanks, its certainly nice playing the likes of South Africa because it is a flexible force due to the number of Company Leaders.

[Suhiir]

The only real snag with it is it should be applied across the board to all nations, also it could be argued tank crews are better than AFV or truck ones.

One could attempt such an argument :D
But in my case at least, I've made it a point NOT to allow myself to succumb to them.
On the ground side I give scout, Recon, and SEAL a bonus, but such units already had one in the vanilla game and across all OOBs anyway.

If you buy ATGM jeep type vehicles as a company they come as one lump so a large platoon & being a company makes no diffrence except you can cross attach & add even more units!! Yet the stock:D USMC version comes with them split in platoons, this I agree might be because they are a staple vehicle in that force.

Actually this is exactly the sort of "administrative" orginization that exists in the current USMC OOB I'm eliminating as part of my OOB revision.

[DRG]

My reasoning is very simple. The "best" helo pilots are the ones that fly the attack helos, "average" pilots fly transports.


It's a valid point and somewhere on the to-do list is a note to give some consideration to this idea for ground attack airstrikes and attack helos.

Don

[Wdll]

Eh, any chance of allowing airplanes to be part of your core units?

I would also ask about increasing the 200 limit, but I think I know the answer to that one. :(

[DRG]

Eh, any chance of allowing airplanes to be part of your core units?

I would also ask about increasing the 200 limit, but I think I know the answer to that one. :(


No. They are meant to be support only in the context of a campaign

and

impossible without breaking way too many things.

Don

[Wdll]

ok, thanks for the replies.

[Suhiir]

My reasoning is very simple. The "best" helo pilots are the ones that fly the attack helos, "average" pilots fly transports.


It's a valid point and somewhere on the to-do list is a note to give some consideration to this idea for ground attack airstrikes and attack helos.

Don

WOW!

Not only do I not get shot for making such a statement I actually get a sideways complement.

>feints<

[Imp]

Come now Suhiir you ladys have a way of doing these things, if by the time Don gets round to looking at it he thinks it was his idea balance will be maintained.
I have come to accept that half of my "great ideas" were never mine at all it just dawns on me later I have been bushwhacked .......again:D

[Cross]

The key is to not panic, get thru the moment and take advantage of it.

I don't know how many are fimilar with Douglas Adams' Hitchhiker Guide to the Galaxy, but your advice is proven in the series. Not that anybody ever follows it, but it's good advice none the less. Thank you.


Great book, and excellent advice.

Intuitively, it doesn't sound right that you need to be careful - in a turn by turn computer game - not to panic, but you do.

It's all too easy to over react and abandon caution in order to attempt to rescue a situation that went poorly, or take risks hoping for a lucky outcome.

I agree that the way to make a 'come back' in fire fight or battle that's not going well, is to stay calm and make careful and sound tactical and strategic decisions. You can't make these decisions while in panic mode.

I've made some very unlikely comebacks, when I've managed to heed this advice.

[Suhiir]

Come now Suhiir you ladys have a way of doing these things, if by the time Don gets round to looking at it he thinks it was his idea balance will be maintained.
I have come to accept that half of my "great ideas" were never mine at all it just dawns on me later I have been bushwhacked .......again:D

Shushhhhhhhh....
Don't tell anyone you'll ruin the "balance of power" between the sexes !

[Imp]

"Balance of power"!!!!
Not a betting man but I know where my money is going on this one.;)

Behind every good man........
I can approximate multi tasking if I try.

[DRG]

WOW!

Not only do I not get shot for making such a statement I actually get a sideways complement.

>feints<


feint (fnt)
n.
1. A feigned attack designed to draw defensive action away from an intended target.
2. A deceptive action calculated to divert attention from one's real purpose. See Synonyms at wile.
v. feint·ed, feint·ing, feints
v.intr.
To make a feint.
v.tr.
1. To deceive with a feint.
2. To make a deceptive show of.

So, I'm curious now what form this "feint" is going to take

I hope I don't faint........ :D

Don

[DRG]

Come now Suhiir you ladys have a way of doing these things, if by the time Don gets round to looking at it he thinks it was his idea balance will be maintained.
I have come to accept that half of my "great ideas" were never mine at all it just dawns on me later I have been bushwhacked .......again:D


It was brought up in mid to late April but it's been kicked around before if a para unit rates a bonus then perhaps "elite" status should be given to pilots entrusted with multi-million(billion) dollar aircraft.

Don

[Suhiir]

WOW!

Not only do I not get shot for making such a statement I actually get a sideways complement.

>feints<


feint (fnt)
n.
1. A feigned attack designed to draw defensive action away from an intended target.
2. A deceptive action calculated to divert attention from one's real purpose. See Synonyms at wile.
v. feint·ed, feint·ing, feints
v.intr.
To make a feint.
v.tr.
1. To deceive with a feint.
2. To make a deceptive show of.

So, I'm curious now what form this "feint" is going to take

I hope I don't faint........ :D

Don

Typical male response - logic.

[Suhiir]

Come now Suhiir you ladys have a way of doing these things, if by the time Don gets round to looking at it he thinks it was his idea balance will be maintained.
I have come to accept that half of my "great ideas" were never mine at all it just dawns on me later I have been bushwhacked .......again:D


It was brought up in mid to late April but it's been kicked around before if a para unit rates a bonus then perhaps "elite" status should be given to pilots entrusted with multi-million(billion) dollar aircraft.

Don

Overall I obviously agree.
However this could be a bit of a ticky situation in that in some (mostly third world) nations the main qualification for being a fighter jock is social/political connections.
Fortuantely for me I'm only looking at one OOB not all of them.

I'll wish Don and Andy luck with this project - they'll need it.

[c_of_red]

Suhair, I have yet to meet a pilot of anything that didn't think they were the best.....ever....period. So gathering data will be a challenge. IIRC, pilots in squadron are rated by hours. Not sure that is the same as 'best'.
What to you do with the Osprey, which is neither plane nor helio, but some unnatural mix of both? I had an Uncle that flew both slicks and guns in Nam. (Marines). He liked the slicks better, with the 47 being his favorite. I never asked him how pilots were assigned.

[Imp]

I think DRGs education was a lot better than mine, or more to the point it stuck. Seems quite good on the grammer & think he is going for strike 3 on the spelling.
Thank heaven hes not started on me could get 3 strikes in one post never mind one thread. Its sometimes that bad I have to go back & edit to at least attempt an improvement.
You should have seen my attempts at French:doh::deadhorse:

[DRG]

Overall I obviously agree.
However this could be a bit of a ticky situation in that in some (mostly third world) nations the main qualification for being a fighter jock is social/political connections.
Fortuantely for me I'm only looking at one OOB not all of them.

I'll wish Don and Andy luck with this project - they'll need it.



Yes we are aware that for some nations being the presidents second cousins son counts far more than it should when the "good jobs" are doled out and the overall capability of the pilots may be that they can get the aircraft into the sky and down again without breaking it and that ability is "good enough" for the yearly flypast on armed forces day but in real combat he's last less than 3 minutes


That said there are a number of ways to look at this and I am confident that no matter what we do some bright light will disagree but that's been the nature of this project from the beginning.

One way would be to look at every nation listed, do some research and make adjustments to the experience/morale ratings based on how that will translate into the game once all the random factors are taken into account. That way one nation might get +5, another +10 and another +3 and maybe another gets -2. That way is, to be frank, a PITA because the random toss most of that detail work out the window. What we would try to do at it's most basic is decide if under most circumstances do we want to boost the ability of a standard pilot up one level beyond where they are now. For example if the pilots for a nation are appearing half the time as "corporals" ( so experience below 80 ) adding 5 to that nation would ensure that the vast majority of pilots would have experience levels above 80. A nation that starts out at 55 experience getting that extra 5 won't do much of anything but a nation that starts out at 55 would fall into the category of nations discussed in the first paragraph. Even +10 would help that much whereas +10 for the nation that starts out at 80 is still going to keep most pilots under elite but give a few that status. In cases like that just adding +10 experience to all strike elements / attack helos for all nations gives us what we want.......the good nations get a good boost that pushes them up the ladder and the mediocre ones get a boost but it doesn't push them to the next level.......

.........and that saves a whole lot of time deciding if Angola should get any kind of increase or +5 or +10 because any one of those isn't really going to make them all that effective relative to a USMC/Navy Pilot even though both nations may have +10 experience ratings for their strike elements.

OR the +10% rule could be applied so that a nation with 80 experience gets a +8 and on with 60 gets +6 but that really doesn't do all that much in the big scheme of things that a flat +5 or +10 doesn't do as well and it's much simpler to apply ( most times simple is good )

Don

[Suhiir]

Overall I obviously agree.
However this could be a bit of a ticky situation in that in some (mostly third world) nations the main qualification for being a fighter jock is social/political connections.
Fortuantely for me I'm only looking at one OOB not all of them.

I'll wish Don and Andy luck with this project - they'll need it.



Yes we are aware that for some nations being the presidents second cousins son counts far more than it should when the "good jobs" are doled out and the overall capability of the pilots may be that they can get the aircraft into the sky and down again without breaking it and that ability is "good enough" for the yearly flypast on armed forces day but in real combat he's last less than 3 minutes


That said there are a number of ways to look at this and I am confident that no matter what we do some bright light will disagree but that's been the nature of this project from the beginning.

One way would be to look at every nation listed, do some research and make adjustments to the experience/morale ratings based on how that will translate into the game once all the random factors are taken into account. That way one nation might get +5, another +10 and another +3 and maybe another gets -2. That way is, to be frank, a PITA because the random toss most of that detail work out the window. What we would try to do at it's most basic is decide if under most circumstances do we want to boost the ability of a standard pilot up one level beyond where they are now. For example if the pilots for a nation are appearing half the time as "corporals" ( so experience below 80 ) adding 5 to that nation would ensure that the vast majority of pilots would have experience levels above 80. A nation that starts out at 55 experience getting that extra 5 won't do much of anything but a nation that starts out at 55 would fall into the category of nations discussed in the first paragraph. Even +10 would help that much whereas +10 for the nation that starts out at 80 is still going to keep most pilots under elite but give a few that status. In cases like that just adding +10 experience to all strike elements / attack helos for all nations gives us what we want.......the good nations get a good boost that pushes them up the ladder and the mediocre ones get a boost but it doesn't push them to the next level.......

.........and that saves a whole lot of time deciding if Angola should get any kind of increase or +5 or +10 because any one of those isn't really going to make them all that effective relative to a USMC/Navy Pilot even though both nations may have +10 experience ratings for their strike elements.

OR the +10% rule could be applied so that a nation with 80 experience gets a +8 and on with 60 gets +6 but that really doesn't do all that much in the big scheme of things that a flat +5 or +10 doesn't do as well and it's much simpler to apply ( most times simple is good )

Don

Obviously you guys have batted this issue around a bit at the office. And to the suprise of no one with a working brain you've come up with a tentative solution that hits most of the main issues with such a project.

Just to throw an additional very subjective monkey wrench into the works one wrinkle I'm considering is the difference between "Strike" and "COIN" aircraft.

In general Strike aircraft tend to attack vehicle targets more often then COIN aircraft, and often have a weapon load more suited to do so effectively (for example AP VS HE cluster bombs). Also in general COIN aircraft tend to be dedicated ground support types rather then "fighters" performing ground support missions. And while of course there are many many cases where the aircraft are one in the same in both cases it's also often the case that the pilots of dedicated ground support have better training in ground support then fighter jocks hauling a load of bombs because they're not otherwise occupied do.

Unfortunately game mechanics only allow for two types of airstrikes, and the formations tab uses the same formation ID# from 1946-2020 for airfract so differences in pilot training between the two types of pilots and over time are near impossible to model in-game.

That said...one might want to attempt to consider, if possible, national (and due to game mechanics the USMC is a "nation") differences in the amount of bonus (if any) one gives "SEAD", "Strike", and "COIN" formations.

For myself I've given "SEAD" formations a larger bonus in both morale and experience then "Strike" or "COIN" formations and "COIN" formations a larger experience bonus then "Strike", and "Strike" formations a larger morale bonus then "COIN".

I'm still playtesting to determine if all this complication is worth the effort and results is a more "realistic" simulation of airstrikes in general.

Just a little something to help your head explode when you guys go back to tossing this whole idea around at the office...no need to thank me :D :eek:

((BTW - any chance of getting your web site guru to add a "spell check" button ? ))

[Imp]

I think you may be overcomplicating things now & like the simplicity of Dons idea, in effect it will just tip over the guys that are nearly there. So with that in mind just add where it makes a diffrence rather than pushing up cost for no benefit possibly.

Also giving further thought & could be wrong here if anybodys air should be given special preference it is the Marines. I feel they use air in in direct support rather than against rear areas far more than any other nation so the boost could reflect they train for this more than most.

[Suhiir]

I think you may be overcomplicating things now & like the simplicity of Dons idea, in effect it will just tip over the guys that are nearly there. So with that in mind just add where it makes a diffrence rather than pushing up cost for no benefit possibly.

Also giving further thought & could be wrong here if anybodys air should be given special preference it is the Marines. I feel they use air in in direct support rather than against rear areas far more than any other nation so the boost could reflect they train for this more than most.

I agree I may well be overcomplicating the issue, that's exactly why I took this oppertunity to bring it up and get some feedback.

I also agree that unlike any other "air force" in the world that I'm aware of the USMC is dedicated to direct support rather then operational or strategic support. The battles between the US Air Force and USMC on this subject are legendary. And unfortuanately (from the USMC prospective) the 400# gorilla, i.e. the USAF, usually wins them due to political clout. But I freely admit a bias :D

But at the same time we have to keep "game balance" in mind.
While a certain amount of tweeking to provide "national flavor" may be allowed or justified there are also inherent limitations in the game mechanics to take into account. As was said long ago WinSPMBT is NOT a combat simulation - it is a game. And as I said earlier in this thread the game mechanics do allow the game to do a very good job of showing the differences in weapons and vehicles they don't handle troop quality nearly as well. Again no fault of anyone involved in its design or current support, the game was never designed or intended to do so in the first place.

What I'm saying is Don and Andy MUST keep game balance in mind whatever they do, or don't do, no matter what any of us may desire. And we have to respect that.

At the same time we're free to create anything we want as a "Use at your own risk" modification.