.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

ATF: Armored Task Force- Save $7.00
The Falklands War: 1982- Save $7.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > The Camo Workshop > WinSPWW2
Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old May 23rd, 2006, 01:37 PM

narwan narwan is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nijmegen
Posts: 948
Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
narwan is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Some issues?

The weapon in the first slot of an infantry type units gets a multiplier effect for number of men in the unit IF it is a primairy weapon type (rifle, carbine, smg, etc). Weapons in another slot don't get a multiplier effect (even if they're primairy ones) nor weapons in the first slot of an infantry unit that are not primairy weapons.

So part of the why a tank has more problems of hitting the infantry is that he has fewer weapons to aim and these often face the same direction (main gun and cmg for example). The enemy infantry is not conveniently packed together so they can't all be aimed at simultaneously by the tank. Although they can score the lucky hit that will take out multiple enemies, they'll usually have to pick them off one at a time (but splash effects can also result in additional casualties).
Infantry squads have many different weapons, usually a collection of rifles, an lmg and maybe something else of use against enemy soft targets. These can all aim at different targets at the same time, potentially taking out multiple targets with 1 'shot' (ie a shot in the game).

Narwan
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old May 23rd, 2006, 02:41 PM

snake snake is offline
Private
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 31
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
snake is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Some issues?

Narwan,
That seems to be the case as it's the infantry's rifle fire getting the kills and not the secondary mg, mortar, etc.
So I guess any tank's main gun and mg's are the equvalent of a squad's secondary armament.
I just can't rationalize that ten men shooting 6 bolt action rifles (6 men), 1 Lmg (2 men) and 1 mortar (2 men) at a target can put so many more rounds on a target than a tank crew firing a main gun and two Lmg's that the casualty results are so skewed.

After all, the 75 mm gun is better than a mortar, 1 LMG equals 1 LMG and the other LMG equals 6 bolt action.
But I suppose the number of targets chosen is a good thought since 6 rifles can pick 6 targets and 1 LMG can pick just one.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old May 23rd, 2006, 03:08 PM
Mobhack's Avatar

Mobhack Mobhack is offline
National Security Advisor
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dundee
Posts: 5,154
Thanks: 38
Thanked 1,157 Times in 809 Posts
Mobhack is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Some issues?

Tanks are rather good against infantry, if you use the correct tactics!.

It is not the job of an AFV to close to knife range on enamy infantry. It is the infantrys task to do so.

If you charge in to sabre range with tanks, you will be firing from a bouncing moving target. Any enemy infantry left within 1 hex, may well rally and assault you in thier turn for your temerity

If you have infantry targets to engage with tanks, then stay at least 2 hexes away and within about 3-500m, and engage halted. Even a panzer 1, with its TMG used this way is a real killer for infantry. It is a nice stable, mobile pillbox which the infantry have no real reply to.

Always try to engage infantry with tanks from outside any anti-tank range the infantry have.

Do not expect "Hollywood" instant evapouration of the infantry, you will need a turn or 2 do deal with a rifle section. More if the enemy is dug in.

But the tanks engage the infantry from the halt, and supress or rout them. Your accompanying infantry can then close with the enemy, and if any are still around on the engagement line when these arrive, they can execute the survivors. Or if the enemy infantry is retreating or routed - simply gun them down while halted and stable, do not try to close with a "cavalry charge". The "charge" uses MP, which uses up shot opportunities, and the movement will tend to make these fewer shot opportunities at close range less accurate, and the act of closing can put you into danger from any of the infantry that happen to rally, or you may trip over previously unseen infantry or inf-AT. far better to stay halted and fire 6 rounds of CMG while halted at any infantry in LOS.

Meanwhile, as you have located enemy infantry, call in some mortars on the position. If they are still fighting back when these rounds arrive, they will help your task. if the enemy is departing when they arrive, mortar fire is an excellent way of killing off routers,or encouraging such to keep on going.

If you need to close, then your infantry skirmish line (one or 2 hexes in front of the tanks) should advance 1 hex a move (max), with your tanks advancing behind at a similar slow rate. The infantry should lead onto the objective and clear the route for the armour. Your artillery of course should prepare the position for your grunts as they do so. Remember that in real life (as opposed to Hollywood , an attack is done in slow-slow time, and not as a wild "cavalry charge".

It is very rare for armoured forces to charge into the middle of an objective area. The only time to contemplate doing so is if you can guarantee that the enemy is 100% neutralised (retreat or worse), and you should really only do this with APC or tank rider infantry which will dismount and "take names". If any tanks join this charge - then they should remain behind the infantry line, or at least, share the same hex as the tank-desant infantry. About the only time you can be reasonably sure of such neutralisation is when running into the impact zone of a batallion (16 - 24 or so guns) of field arty, and even then if one or 2 squads have kept thier heads, this can be a recepie for disaster. Better to dismount on the forward edge of the beaten zone and fight through the objective cautiosly (1 hex a turn movement, max), while continuing the arty support on the area to be traversed, and tanks 1 hex behind the infantry skirmish line (or sharing a hex with a squad, with the riflemen advancing first, tank moving up only when the grunts have cleared the way).

Cheers
Andy
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old May 23rd, 2006, 09:45 PM

Charles22 Charles22 is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 274
Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Charles22 is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Some issues?

Quote:
snake said:
Charles,
My gripe is more along these lines:
My tanks move in close and blaze away with minor effect. Folks say thats OK, it's the way it should be - fair enough. I don't know, I guess tanks in WW2 weren't very good against infantry.......
Except, in the exact same game turn (replay a save), I don't move the tanks up but rather fire my infantry at the same targets at much longer ranges and the enemy gets chewed up.
So how come the tank main guns and MG's at 1 hex can't cause casualties but rifle and mg fire from several hexes distant can?
I figure it's the act of moving and shooting - not weapons. So I replay the save where I don't move the tanks and fire their guns and mg's.
Gee, same results.....why are the tank mg's not the equivalent of infantry rifles and mg's at the same targets?

My guess is the code that says 1 unit (the tank) fires so gets X times 1 shooter kills per shot where the infantry is X times 10 (10 men for instance) shooter kills per shot.
So do the tanks not do as well as an infantry unit with the same mg weapon because the casualty routine takes into account the number of men firing a weapon at a hex in which case a squad of ten men will get more results than a single man in a tank?

Is it one tank fires one main gun and one mg compared to ten men firing ten rifles and ten men firing ten mg's or something similar?
The reason I ask is because this was exactly an issue in some earlier versions of the 'other' steel panthers game. The fix was too adjust the values of the secondary weapons slots.
I'm sorry snake, but in all my experience playing the various versions of SP, I've never seen that tanks were worse off than rifle fire. I'm just pleased to be hosing them down pretty much to any extent. Though if you're correct, be that a good thign or not I cannot say, but one of the things you may be seeing is taking account of the number of guns. Perhaps out of proportion, but perhaps that all the same. Is it reasonable at very close range that you can kill more men with 13 pistols (though we're not talking them here, I'm just trying to exaggerate the point more) from 13 men than with one MG? The end result is the same, but if the targets scatter the 13 pistols will do the job quicker. Why? Well part of the reason is the MG mount itself, as it has a very limited arc (as a BMG anyway) and the tank will have to turn to shoot all the scattered guys. Same with a CMG though with less restriction. OTOH, an AAMG comes pretty close to the pistols and in some cases might exceed them. If the men all stay together then the AAMG has the quickest kill, but if they do then you have the problem of only one gun though it shoots very rapidly. Sometimes, of course, the 13 guns having 13 shooters cam be a problem, as some of them can be really bad shots.

Naturally, you're wanting to say that these guys are at 50m and not a 0m (but of course they're never truly at 0m, but for the hex description this will pass for an adequate description), such that there is little angle and the tank has to turn very little if any. Well, then again, it may not be right, but the formula may have too high a respect for the advantage of having 13 guns as opposed to the more rapid one MG.

BTW, just for the respect that people would hav for MG's you would figure that it would have diminishing returns (sort of odd) for the longer it fires at the same target, because the surviving targets will be more apt to scatter and find cover, as opposed to mere pistols for example. The aim on the gunner will get better, but the men sometimes harder to hit (of course some could find decent cover, see MG shots closeby, panic, and then get out into the open again) with more shots.

You might be on to something, but for what little I've had of range 1 MG's firing off, not that much, I don't see a problem, but then again if I do any range 1 fighting it's almost always with AFV MG's and very little with rifle fire. I have had very little, if any, rifle fire at range 1 in this version.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old May 23rd, 2006, 11:02 PM

narwan narwan is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nijmegen
Posts: 948
Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
narwan is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Some issues?

Quote:
Charles22 said:
Naturally, you're wanting to say that these guys are at 50m and not a 0m (but of course they're never truly at 0m, but for the hex description this will pass for an adequate description), such that there is little angle and the tank has to turn very little if any.
Wrong conclusion I'm afraid. You're assuming that although both units are in the same hex all the enemy are still in front of your unit. Not so. They can (and more often than not are) all around your tank, front, rear, side, possibly even up and under. So the tank has extreme angles to deal with at range 0.

Narwan
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old May 24th, 2006, 02:19 AM

Charles22 Charles22 is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 274
Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Charles22 is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Some issues?

Quote:
narwan said:
Quote:
Charles22 said:
Naturally, you're wanting to say that these guys are at 50m and not a 0m (but of course they're never truly at 0m, but for the hex description this will pass for an adequate description), such that there is little angle and the tank has to turn very little if any.
Wrong conclusion I'm afraid. You're assuming that although both units are in the same hex all the enemy are still in front of your unit. Not so. They can (and more often than not are) all around your tank, front, rear, side, possibly even up and under. So the tank has extreme angles to deal with at range 0.

Narwan
I think I mixed you up on that one. I was triyng to make a point that gunning down men with a BMG, if they scattered, would not work as well as with pistols, BUT that would only be true at 0m. I was trying to then imagine that who I was responding to would then say "but we're not talking about 0m, we're talking about 50m."

In other words:

0m - good for pistols or rifles, no so good for BMG's.
50m - Not quite as good for pistols or rifles, better for BMG's.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old May 24th, 2006, 12:47 PM

snake snake is offline
Private
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 31
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
snake is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Some issues?

I suppose I should have mentioned that all the enemy infantry were routed. I would expect that AFV's chasing routed men at 0-50 meters would somehow have more effect than men shooting at them from 200-400 meters. I would expect more surrenders or dispersals from the remaning enemy squads from the tanks proximity and ability to pursue yet it's actually quite quicker to 'eliminate' the enemy by shooting at long range with infantry rifles rather than closing in and surrounding/overruning? them.

Certainly all the points mentioned earlier are excellent concerning infantry not running for the hills and only a fool would close with AFV's against entrenched/determined or well-supported infantry.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old May 24th, 2006, 01:09 PM

narwan narwan is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nijmegen
Posts: 948
Thanks: 1
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
narwan is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Some issues?

Quote:
snake said:
Certainly all the points mentioned earlier are excellent concerning infantry not running for the hills and only a fool would close with AFV's against entrenched/determined or well-supported infantry.
Just to make it clear, routed units are not the equivalent of 'troops running for the hill', at least not if that means what I think it does. Casualties in this game are not just kills but also include WIA, MIA, those surrendering individually (so without the whole unit giving up), and those fleeing on their own probably without weapons anymore, being shellshocked, dazed, etc.
In other words, when units are retreating or routing, they are still exactly that, a UNIT, not a collection of individuals. They are still more or less functioning as a group of soldiers. The ones running off on their own, are part of the 'casualties' inflicted earlier.


Charles:
Okay, I see what you mean. I do think though that up to 10 rifles are probably more useful than a BMG for ranges up to several hundreds of metres when it comes to taking out multiple enemy troops per game shot.


Narwan
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old May 24th, 2006, 05:28 PM

snake snake is offline
Private
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 31
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
snake is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Some issues?

Narwan Said:
Just to make it clear, routed units are not the equivalent of 'troops running for the hill', at least not if that means what I think it does. Casualties in this game are not just kills but also include WIA, MIA, those surrendering individually (so without the whole unit giving up), and those fleeing on their own probably without weapons anymore, being shellshocked, dazed, etc.
In other words, when units are retreating or routing, they are still exactly that, a UNIT, not a collection of individuals. They are still more or less functioning as a group of soldiers. The ones running off on their own, are part of the 'casualties' inflicted earlier.

I agree with you for the most part except routed troops (supressed enough to be listed as 'routing') can't move or fire without successful rally by their leader. So yes, they are still cohesive enough to be called a unit and any 'casualties' have already left but, are they not on the verge of collapse only salvageble by the possible force of leadership of the officer/NCO's? And if so, wouldn't the appearance of tanks chasing/firing at them from VERY close range make that rally a great challenge compared to taking cover from long range rifle fire?

What I'm hinting at is that given a 'routing' units state of existence, why does rifle fire from 200-400 meters cause more men to run away/surrender (become casualties) than tanks bearing down on them (scary enough if you aren't already retreating/routing)at 0-50 meters?

Let's remember these are not troops just supressed a little or retreating but routing. A retreat implies some rearguard retrograde movement to better cover/terrain as oppossed to rout which implies the unit is getting the hell out of Dodge City even if they are running close enough together to be called a unit. If left alone after army morale goes the units usually keep on routing right off the map!

It's just a game engine and you play with what can be accomplished - my hat is off to all the programmers and contributors.
I'm just trying to understand why there seems to be an inabilty for armor to 'persuade' routing infantry to give up either by surrender or fire (casualties) when the army is running and I'm all over these guys with my tanks. They give up just fine (casualties) from long range rifle fire, why not close range tank fire?
Where is the armor "shock value" factored in? I'm not seeing it. Perhaps I am but it does not have the effect that I thought blitzkrieg doctrine suggests.

Love the game BTW......
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old May 24th, 2006, 05:32 PM

Nick_Hyle Nick_Hyle is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 38
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Nick_Hyle is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Some issues?

Quote:
DRG said:
Quote:
snake said:
1. On the first mission of a campaign, almost all my units had smoke. On the second and all subsequent missions none of my units have had any smoke and I've been in a defend, delay, assault, advance and river cross battles. Is this some sort of campaign bug that smoke never gets reloaded between missions?
******* I'll look into this. I know this had been brought up before and I'm certain it's been fixed at least once before


Don
Don, Andy, I know (think?) we had this licked once, but it was broken in the last (couple?) SPWW2 releases, and it's Broken here.

I've tried to do some poking around. The units that "lose" their smoke in a campaign game are armor units. Infantry and and artillery that start a campaign with smoke keep it through the campaign; armor that have it in the first battle, never have it again. This includes tanks, armored cars, tank destroyers.

As a hopefully-useful clue, the ONLY armor units I have seen NOT lose their smoke in a campaign are units with a "parent" artillery-class unit.

For instance, there is a unit available as an "OrPo Panzer" formation, the Geshtzwagn B2, a 105mm cannon on an ex-French carriage. It appears (the "parent") first as an SP arty unit, then later as an OrPo panzer. This sort of oddball keeps its smoke in a campaign; Panzer IV, VI, 75mm armored cars, etc, have smoke in the first game of a campaign, and then never again.

If you have trouble replicating this let me know and I'll generate some some campaigns and send you first and subsequent game saves to illustrate. But I think you see it as soon as you look.

Caveat; I am mostly playing German Long or Generated campaigns, if that matters.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2018, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.