infantry

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

infantry

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> infantry

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

infantry - 6/6/2000 11:31:00 PM

dufrasnes

Posts: 5
Joined: 5/11/2000
From: Bernissart, Belgium
Status: offline

SPWAW is really a good game and I enjoy playing, nice job. But a small thing disturbs me a little. AI infantry opening fire on armoured targets like tanks and pillboxes. I'm playing a defend scenario with Russian and I just spend 5 minutes looking (almost) every infantry units on the map firing on my pillbox from 8 or more hex. The only result was 5 points of suppression and when my pillbox fires, the same again, it took me 10 minutes to shoot 3 times. Generally, is it realistic for infantry to fire or return fire with small arms (rifle and MG) on tanks at great ranges (more than 5-7 hex) with low hitting probability. I think it's useless, except sometimes a little suppression, dangerous to show yourself to a tank and � time consuming. German half-tracks have the same problem; they also fire on tank at their max range with MG34. Do the others players have the same point of view?

_____________________________

Post #: 1

- 6/6/2000 11:38:00 PM

Wild Bill

Posts: 6821
Joined: 4/7/2000
From: Smyrna, Ga, 30080
Status: offline

I'm not sure what your point is here, dufrasnes. Are you unhappy with the amount of time it takes for this fire or for the fact that the units are firing at what seems to you unreasonable targets. Or did I miss the point entirely. That would not be the first time

The game can be speeded up with the settings in the preference menu. The ranges on weapons can be shortened if you wish to avoid that problem of impossible fire, or some weapons can be shut down so they won't fire if you wish. True, you can't control what the AI (the computer)commander is doing, but you can exercise some control on your troops if they are not doing what you want them to do. Wild Bill ------------------ Wild Bill Wilder Coordinator, Scenario Design Matrix Games

_____________________________

In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Independent Game Consultant

(in reply to dufrasnes)

Post #: 2

- 6/7/2000 1:06:00 AM

Seth

Posts: 737
Joined: 4/25/2000
From: San Antonio, TX USA
Status: offline

Or it could be both that bother him. I know it bothers me both to have infantry positions revealed to me because they're firing at extreme range at targets they couldn't damage even point blank, and to have to sit and wait while they do it. I think the AI might still be under the impression that this is as useful as it was in SP1, where incessant rifle fire seemed to be enough to make any tank crew give up. The AI should be able to look at units coming toward it, and at least know better than to rattle small arms harmlessly off armored vehicles. Maybe if they would be smart, I might not spot them, and then drive a truck past the same spot for them to destroy.

_____________________________

(in reply to dufrasnes)

Post #: 3

- 6/7/2000 1:34:00 AM

victorhauser

Posts: 318
Joined: 5/29/2000
From: austin, texas
Status: offline

The Real Reason... When units take fire, several things happen. One is that their to-hit percentages go down--try it and see. Say a unit that has been fired upon and another unit that hasn't both have zero (0) suppression. The unit that hasn't been fired on will have better to-hit chances (all other factors being equal). In addition, units that are fired on have their movement rates reduced. The computer is not wasting its or your time. To quote Polonius from Hamlet: "Although this be madness yet there is method to it."

_____________________________

VAH

(in reply to dufrasnes)

Post #: 4

- 6/7/2000 1:51:00 AM

Seth

Posts: 737
Joined: 4/25/2000
From: San Antonio, TX USA
Status: offline

Actually, since they tinkered with the supression values, AFV's seem to take no supression from small arms, even on the rare occasions that they are hit. I didn't notice one way or the other on movement. I wonder what the real-world tactics were in these situations. Snipers don't really count, because they shot at the people sticking out of vehicles.

_____________________________

(in reply to dufrasnes)

Post #: 5

- 6/7/2000 1:51:00 AM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

You can also lose a shot if you get shot at too... Lots of reasons to ensure you shoot at least once at as many enemy units as you can!

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to dufrasnes)

Post #: 6

- 6/7/2000 2:21:00 AM

Windo von Paene

Posts: 174
Joined: 5/16/2000
From: Seattle, WA
Status: offline

Right click on a defending unit of yours and then click on the "Set Range". Enter a low number. Now your unit won't opp fire at an enemy unless there within that range. As for the enemy doing this to you, well that WOULD be in the hands of the programmers...

_____________________________

(in reply to dufrasnes)

Post #: 7

- 6/7/2000 2:56:00 AM

schmoe

Posts: 26
Joined: 5/25/2000
From: Portland, Oregon, USA
Status: offline

I for one would really like it if units didn't fire at things they can't hurt, or things that 95% of the time they can't hurt. The small chance of damage not happening would be worth it to me in terms of increased playability. I've had to stop playing, at least temporarily, because of the very long time it takes me to complete one turn. The primary reason for that is unnecessary combat resolution that I can't keep from happening. My schedule just doesn't allow me that much extra time, but I suppose I'm the exception here.

_____________________________

(in reply to dufrasnes)

Post #: 8

- 6/7/2000 2:57:00 AM

Charles22

Posts: 912
Joined: 5/17/2000
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline

Think of it this way. Suppose some of us wanted to fight an infantry dominated force every once in a while, with our more armor-oriented ones. If the infantry never fired, or fired very little at the armor, or at least ONLY waiting for them to get up close, it would be probably a gross mis-match. All the combined forces guy would have to do, was spot the infantry and have artillery and tanks pound them with no return fire. If it has to be either/or, I would rather the infantry fire at the ranges it does, than only fire very short. From what I've observed, given the common light arms fire, the infantry ALWAYS add suppression, but only if the prior suppression was zero. Maybe somewhere down the road, every fourth small arms fire, striking the vehicle would add a suppression point in addition? I think the prior system (was it SP1?) of letting every bit of small arms fire, that hit, cause suppression, was definitely too dominating a force. [This message has been edited by Charles22 (edited 06-06-2000).]

_____________________________

(in reply to dufrasnes)

Post #: 9

- 6/7/2000 3:17:00 AM

Mike Wood

Posts: 2095
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Oakland, California
Status: offline

Hi Folks... When computer controlled infantry fire small arms at a tank, they are shooting at the main gun optics. Hard to hit, but worth it. In addition, the tank suffers a "to hit" penalty and looses half of its movement points, if fired at. The infantry also assumes that some unseen enemy infantry might be in the hex with the tank and hopes to kill a few with collateral damage. Also, if the infantry is close enough (200 yards or so), enough fire will cause the tank to button up. And, of course, in a campaign, the unit gets experience every time it fires at an enemy unit. Bye... Michael Wood

_____________________________

(in reply to dufrasnes)

Post #: 10

- 6/7/2000 3:20:00 AM

Seth

Posts: 737
Joined: 4/25/2000
From: San Antonio, TX USA
Status: offline

Infantry versus armor is pretty much a gross mismatch anyway. The only way the infantry can do well would be to stop shooting all the time and hide until they can assault. Tanks are really bad spotters, but if the infantry persist in blazing away, they will be revealed and destroyed.

_____________________________

(in reply to dufrasnes)

Post #: 11

- 6/7/2000 3:57:00 AM

Charles22

Posts: 912
Joined: 5/17/2000
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline

Mike: Wow, that's pretty neat, the infantry having hopes of hitting unseen infantry, the optics bit, and especially that they hope to slow the tanks. Now that I think about it, I recall how speedy my tanks are at the beginning of a scenario and how seemingly cumbersome they are later; it's nice to know why.

_____________________________

(in reply to dufrasnes)

Post #: 12

- 6/7/2000 4:57:00 AM

dufrasnes

Posts: 5
Joined: 5/11/2000
From: Bernissart, Belgium
Status: offline

My question was about computer controlled infantry, I know how to control my infantry. I also spoke about long range fire, more than 5-7 hex. I understand very well that short range fires ( less than 5 hex) may have some effects on optics,killing the commander,... but if the hitting chance are very low, can't the computer hold his fire. I also see that units with only 1 man left are still firing at long range. I'm a former officer and on the fire training, very ( very ) few soldiers are able to hit something at more than 300 meters, specially a moving tank optics. 300 meters, it's more less 6 hex. I'm not sure that a soldier would open fire on a tank with his rifle even if he hopes to kill some unseen troopers. To resume, I'm speaking about computer infantry fire with a range superior to 5 hex against ARMORED targets with very low hitting chances ( 2-5 %). And last, please forgive my english, I'm living on the wrong side of the Atlantic.

_____________________________

(in reply to dufrasnes)

Post #: 13

- 6/7/2000 8:12:00 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

I guess my take on this issue would be a word of caution. SP:WWII attempted to take inoculous Inf vs AFV interactions into account, but the result was IMHO to skew things a bit more. in the current version, INF *rarely* if ever fire at an AFV, prefering to shoot at soft targets 99% of the time. sounds great right? even logical right? depends. It might be nice to shoot at a target that you have some chance to get a kill from but what happens when the 'soft' target is 15 hexes away, but the AFV currently spraying your hex with M.Gun fire is only 3 hexes away? Even though SPWWII greatly reduced the supression effect of small inf fire on tanks at greater than (i think if memory serves) 3 hexes away, not being fired on at all leaves these unhindered AFV's the ability to cause great higgidy piggidy. (fortunatly inf casualties in the game are so low!) 2ndly...with the orig SP and the first version of SPWWII, it was all too easy for AFV's to be supressed and even routed by inf fire. In fact, it was my #1 tactic when fighing as the Germans against the French. My Pz-I's and II's could'nt do much against the French beasties, but unload some Panzergrenadiers within 5 hexes, have them fire away and wella! your AFV problem is solved. Realistic? maybe up close but longe range MG fire really should'nt bother a trained tank crew all that much. I'd much rather see lower supression for tanks vs long/medium range MG fire than to see a replay of my first Sov vs Germ campaign where the #1 cause of my defeat was German halftracks spraying my inept tank crews with fire causing them to scatter to the four corners of the earth. heh, forget the Panther, or the TIger....in that 'reality' the most dreaded German weapon of the Great patriotic war was the MG-34 armed Halftrack!!!! :-)

_____________________________

(in reply to dufrasnes)

Post #: 14

- 6/8/2000 3:23:00 AM

victorhauser

Posts: 318
Joined: 5/29/2000
From: austin, texas
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Wood: Hi Folks... When computer controlled infantry fire small arms at a tank, they are shooting at the main gun optics. Hard to hit, but worth it. In addition, the tank suffers a "to hit" penalty and looses half of its movement points, if fired at. The infantry also assumes that some unseen enemy infantry might be in the hex with the tank and hopes to kill a few with collateral damage. Also, if the infantry is close enough (200 yards or so), enough fire will cause the tank to button up. And, of course, in a campaign, the unit gets experience every time it fires at an enemy unit. Bye... Michael Wood

I'm very happy with the current way this works, and I'm also happy to see that Mike has no plans to "fix" this. Thank you, Mike.