Misc. errata and observations (long)

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Misc. errata and observations (long)

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 >> Misc. errata and observations (long)

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Misc. errata and observations (long) - 7/2/2000 5:52:00 AM

sjuncal

Posts: 50
Joined: 5/21/2000
From: VA
Status: offline

I noticed something the other day when testing the previously broken campaigns. (at least I hope the past tense applies as they seemed still broken after 2.3, but I've reinstalled the game + patches and will try again). Take 1 German HQ and 2 platoons of US Engineers neither is entrenched (though the Gerry HQ is unmoving due to it being the defender)... In open ground no smoke no shell holes etc.: Advancing on the HQ unit (even one hex at a time) required getting within one hex of it to sight it initially. The HQ unit returned fire almost every single time it was fired upon OR an Engie squad moved within view of it. Now I'm estimating but that's about 6 times for movement, and more than 12 times for counter fire. This is a very low estimate as the Engineers -- though suppressed -- still often had 3 shots each for a total closer to 18 counter fire shots from the HQ; and at least one of the squads was fired on twice when it moved more than once. So around 25 op fire shots were delivered by the Gerry HQ. The HQ also inflicted multiple instances of heavy casualties to the US Squads as many as 4 in one shot (SMG burst from 2 hex range). Where as closing the distance and assaulting the HQ with Rifle/grenade/Flamethrower/Sachel charge combinations -- when the Engie's got a chance to use them without interruption by opfire -- did no more than 2 damage. End result was 20+ US casualties to kill (presumably) 5 German Command staff (crack paper shufflers, and Elite radio men to be sure) and one Oberst Stiener, err.. rather Col. Ziegler. Though even had the HQ unit been elite paratroopers I would still find the results somewhat remarkable. This was tried multiple times, and as tactics go I used suppressing fire from 3 unmoved Engineer squads (2 to 3 hex range), then closed with the other 3, afterward moving the platoon that had already fired. Disregarding the (logical) lower accuracy of the moving Engineers, I think close/infantry combat might need some tweaking. Basically 6 guys shouldn't be able to effectively fire on 6 squads of 9 men each in the course of 60 seconds... especially not 20+ times. Suppression seemed to have minimal effect on the HQ's accuracy, perhaps suppression effects should be raised. Also it's amazing that they were never suppressed to the point of being unable to fire. Which I might add happens to my troops all the time, and indeed in this little test scenario repeatedly. Other things: AIP units seem to be able to retreat multiple times without regard even to their maximum possible movement. I've had Ranger squads chase fleeing AI units to the full extent of the Rangers movement(s), and then still further when another of my units took after them in the same turn. My units never retreat like this, in fact human controlled units often seem content to be annihilated where they sit instead of retreating one hex, let alone 6 8 or even more hexes. A sniper can kill a Jeep (and I presume any other unarmored vehicle) with one shot... because of their high fire control they not only have an extremely high chance of hitting, they also seem to have an overwhelming chance to blow it up. I've seen recon Jeeps take MMG and HMG shots and survive with "suspension damage" etc. The sniper is almost the perfect soft vehicle killer. Which brings up my next question: does the speed or fact of a target's movement make it any harder to hit? In one instance a moving Jeep was blow'd up by a sniper who had a 90 some percent chance to hit. I don't know if you've ever tried to fire a scoped weapon at a moving target (much less a fast moving one) but it's not all that easy to hit, much less hit a Jeep in such a way as to blow it up. Units that have absolutely no explosives can do close tank assaults... Crewmen and Snipers specifically. I could see a Sniper with a Grenade pulling the Hero bit and dropping the grenade into an unsuspecting unbuttoned tank from his Tree or the window of a house... But with a bolt action rifle and without so much as a hand grenade? 8-0 (I've edited my OOB's to give them a couple grenades just so this doesn't look so peculiar)

The Kar 98 Mauser is an effective anti-tank weapon =) well... Okay maybe that's an exaggeration

I lost an M8 Greyhound to the rifle fire of a depleted Gerry Squad! At 3 hex range, not a grenade not an AT weapon but a k98 bolt action rifle... I'll probably think of some other oddities after I post this, but whatever you guys do, take your time, get some rest. Any tweaking can wait for 3.0

Simon

_____________________________

-- Simon Moderator Capitals@his.com Aka Alhazred http://capitals.washington.dc.us/ http://members.tripod.com/~sjuncal/shooter/

Post #: 1

- 7/2/2000 6:53:00 AM

crazyivan

Posts: 189
Joined: 5/12/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

if you read the unit data in the changes made in 2.2 and 2.3 snipers now have handgrenades these compined with there very high moral and exp leval make the grenade attack leathal.i my self have done trianing as a sniper in the NZ army it was a corse 4 weeks that you could do if your shooting stats were high enough and shooting a moving target is easyer than you think it all depends on the distance,if you are over 50m this becomes easy as you do not have to move your mpi(mian point of impact)but is harder up close as you have to move more to your targets bearing and speed. the hqs that you mention are very high in moral and therefore recover quicker and it takes a lot to suppress them.there exp leveal also is high this gives them a high rate of oppertunity fire as the new code says in the manual rate of oppertunity fire has a lot to do with exp. i have had the same thing with most hqs like in real life they are not just made up of pen pushers but often protected by exp troops.after all is siad and done you have to protech the big guy. i hope this helps it reads much better than i can write in the manual. 9 main point of impact)

_____________________________

"The best form of defence,is attack"

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 2

- 7/2/2000 10:27:00 AM

sjuncal

Posts: 50
Joined: 5/21/2000
From: VA
Status: offline

Hmmm I just got finished re-editing my 2.3 US OOB and added them. I don't think they were there already. I see they are in the German OOB though... Maybe I imagined adding them in the the US sniper? Hitting a fast moving target using a scoped bolt action rifle is hard I didn't say impossible. Hitting a Jeep moving at 30 miles per hour, in such a way as to actually destroy it in one shot, is a feat more fit for hollywood movies and TV cop shows than a war game. I can't really buy into the idea of HQ units being a crack squad of fighters. I doubt the average staff/"squad" of a Col. in WWII had more than one or two grizzled combat vets, it certainly would have had signals men, more than likely a secretary/assistant and other organizational logistics types. But that's not really my point (as I said I would have found the results to be remarkable even if it had been a squad of elite paratroopers) my point is I don't think a 6 man squad should be able to inflict about 4 times it's size worth of of casualties in 120 seconds, in open ground, fighting a force that outnumbers it 9 to 1, that has superior fire power over it, 40 some odd carbines or SMG's, 12 BAR's 6 flame throwers, and more bags of TNT than the HQ unit had men to throw them at. Anyway, just noticed that the GE HQ unit has a fire control rating of 4 which is the same as their fallschirm, so I guess the elite paratroops remark wasn't to far off

Simon

_____________________________

-- Simon Moderator Capitals@his.com Aka Alhazred http://capitals.washington.dc.us/ http://members.tripod.com/~sjuncal/shooter/

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 3

- 7/2/2000 12:35:00 PM

Paul Vebber

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

What was the HQ's Experience and Rally rating? Are you talking an HQ tent or the A0? I assume the A0 from the 6 men. I just tried the situation with the German A0 in rough and the GI's advancing over clear terrain and teh HQ got smoked 5 for 5 times with 4-8 GI casualties. That was with a 90 experince German HQ. You likely got an HQ with very high experience, morale and rally rating. Or just got extremely unlucky. Retreating units of both sides tend to be able to run away faster than the enemy can follow. This is by design. The retreaters know they are likely retreating into controlled territory, the advancers don't know what might be about to shoot them. As to snipers shooting at jeeps, think about that a minute, if you are driving a jeep 30mph and the windshield say suddenly shatters form a bullet impact, there is a good chance you will lose control and crash the vehicle. Maybe you just jump out. If the sniper is moderatly good and actually hits the driver, this is even more likely. Also remeber that if you kill all the crew of a vehicle it immediately "blows up", so hitting the driver of a crew size 1 jeep, and BOOM... The manual describes the game effects of movement and suppression. If a unit has a very high Rally rating it will always rally back. It sounds like you had an extreme encouter. Things like you decribe can happen. Whole companies were decimated by a single machine gun, or group of well hidden riflemen. Play a couple dozen scenarios and see what you think. Lots of things can be improvised and scrounged on the battlefield. Don't assume that because a unit has no grenades you are aware of, doesn't mean a Good Joe doesn't have one squirrelled away the Squad Leader isn't keeping track of :-) The default is the number of men as the percentage of successful close assault. If there is a 4% chance of a close assault happening it is human nature to ignore the 96% of the time nothing happens and remember the runs of bad luck. I wouldn't give snipers grenades - the game assumes a small chance of troops having something, or finding something, when they need it. Again, stuff like that happened! With so many folks out there playing the game, a few of you will see an "unlucky streak" of maybe three or 4 or theses things happening in a game. I remember the ASL game where the enemy kept rolling snake eyes for his single leaders in close combat with one of my squads. 3 times in one game. I also rolled 2 key 12's that broke my two tanks guns the first time each tried to shoot. Were the dice loaded... they were MY DICE:-) But bad runs of luck do happen and with dice we chalk it up to happenstance, but in the computer immediately assume the thing is cheating... [This message has been edited by Paul Vebber (edited 07-02-2000).]

_____________________________

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

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 4

- 7/2/2000 8:01:00 PM

sjuncal

Posts: 50
Joined: 5/21/2000
From: VA
Status: offline

I don't know if you read the first post, but I tried this multiple times (3 i think) the fewest casualties I suffered was 24 if I remember correctly. Now that you mention it the Engineer squads might have been greenish (60 to 70 xp) and the A0 was probably high experience. What I have a problem with isn't only the A0 units performance, but the fact that they had virtually unlimited opfire... That said the Gerry A0 unit had a 4 fire control, so I doubt now that I've edited this mistake out of their OOB, that they could reproduce this performance. Re: Snipers, yeah is reasonable that a sniper could cause a jeep to become combat ineffective... it's not reasonable that he should be able to do so 9 times out of 10 hits... Mock up a scenario put a couple snipers and Jeeps/trucks in it and drive them within range of the sniper, and see how many times a hit (not a shot but a hit) translates into a blown up Jeep

I saw one single instance of a GE sniper only managing suspension damage, one instance where the Jeep's crew survived the brew up, and 8 or 10 other burning Jeeps. Hardly scientific I admit, but none the less... Re: snipers with unofficial hand grenades. The German sniper has two of the official kind

Now so do my US boys, who are undoubtedly just as good at scrounging things as any other nationality. Simon

_____________________________

-- Simon Moderator Capitals@his.com Aka Alhazred http://capitals.washington.dc.us/ http://members.tripod.com/~sjuncal/shooter/

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 5

- 7/2/2000 11:23:00 PM

troopie

Posts: 996
Joined: 4/8/2000
From: Directly above the centre of the Earth.
Status: offline

Re: snipers brewing up jeeps. Actually that shouldn't be too difficult. You get a sniper, shoots in the 90's (percent that is, not his golf score), he can hit a jeep every time, unless that jeep is moving fast. Jeeps are not armoured, you can disable them with a pistol, and if you hit a tender spot, they go right up. They carry a jerry can of petrol on the back. Hit that with a tracer and see the fireworks. Suspension damage, I interpret that as shooting out the tyres, is easy too. WW2 jeeps didn't have run flat tyres, so you're SOL if you get a shot flat. Oh the men on board can try to jack the beggar up and replace the flat. So Jerry our sniper shoots our another one. The crew, if they're smart, bails, grabs their personal weapons, carbines or SMGs, and goes hunter hunting. troopie ------------------ Pamwe Chete

_____________________________

Pamwe Chete

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 6

- 7/3/2000 2:14:00 AM

sjuncal

Posts: 50
Joined: 5/21/2000
From: VA
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by troopie: Re: snipers brewing up jeeps. Actually that shouldn't be too difficult. You get a sniper, shoots in the 90's (percent that is, not his golf score), he can hit a jeep every time, unless that jeep is moving fast. troopie

I don't know if you've ever seen one of those cop pursuits on TV but it's pretty obvious that a car doesn't come to a screeching halt upon losing even all four tires. I'm guessing a WWII era sniper was not carrying any tracer ammo... Unless he's really keen on giving his position away. Blowing up a fuel tank or gas can with a copper jacketed lead bullet, is the stuff of hollywood. Again... "hit the jeep in such a way as to cause it to blow up" (or become useless)... Yes it's easy to put a bullet into some part of the jeep, but I'd wager you could put three or four clips of bullets into a jeep before it becomes (instantly) useless either by blowing it up or causing enough damage so that it no longer works. Most of the things that are integral to a jeep's function are encased in inches of carbon steel. Hit the carb, gas line, or driver and it stops working with one bullet... but most of the rest of it: Fuel tank, it runs until the all fuel leaks out. Alternator, it runs for another half hour until the battery is dead. Starter, it wont start again. Axle, nothing. Engine block, nothing. Tires, it runs on the rims etc. I'd just like to know that my veteran recon jeep (with 3 crewmen) has at least a reasonable chance to survive one bullet from a sniper.

_____________________________

-- Simon Moderator Capitals@his.com Aka Alhazred http://capitals.washington.dc.us/ http://members.tripod.com/~sjuncal/shooter/

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 7

- 7/3/2000 2:30:00 AM

troopie

Posts: 996
Joined: 4/8/2000
From: Directly above the centre of the Earth.
Status: offline

Right about it not stopping immediately, but shoot out the tyres and it will stop. I've had flats on rough ground, not shot flats, Thank God, and you stop. Quicker on rough ground than on a road. The exploding lorries and jeeps are from bullets are something that I've always had a problem with. They should just stop moving. The problem is with the engine. It interprets "destroyed" vehicle as "exploded". Your jeep crews should be able to survive. I feel the jeep should not. Later a repair crew should be able to fix it, but that's beyond the scope of the game. troopie ------------------ Pamwe Chete

_____________________________

Pamwe Chete

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 8

- 7/5/2000 12:58:00 PM

Scipio Africanus

Posts: 76
Joined: 6/21/2000
From: Somerville, Ma, USA
Status: offline

I've found that snipers are a bit too effective as well. I agree that properly placed elite snipers should be capable of holding up entire platoons, shooting drivers out of vehicles, killing squad leaders etc. I mostly do PBEM and at this point I buy a dozen or more snipers for a battle. Why? because they have shown themselves in many cases to be much more effective than squads when exchanging fire with the enemy. Note please that in saying "when exchanging fire," I mean that my snipers are not sniping, their positions are known to an enemy who is raining fire upon them. In my current game, playing as the Communist Chinese against the Nationalists, I have a sniper in the woods exchanging fire with a platoon of Nationalists and 2 Shermans. In the hex beside my sniper, I have a squad of Garand riflemen. The Nationalists are hunkered down in cover and can clearly see my sniper, but they can't hit him. Of course, neither can my Garand squad hit the nationalists as everyone has around a 2% chance of hitting. Well, everyone except my sniper, who's around 21%. I think he's picked off 5 or 6 men at this point, while nobody else has done anything to effect(including my unsuppressed rifle squad). Eventually he'll get killed, but I'll just rotate another guy into his place, or if the situation warrants, plink from a new spot. From a game balance standpoint, I think this is a problem. I may never buy another mortar or infantry gun again, they can't come close to the effect of a single sniper poorly placed! And for all of 3 or 4 points to boot. I'm not being ironic or nasty here, I'm just trying to point out that a dozen snipers standing in a line can give a pretty good account of themselves against a rifle company in a head on battle. A single sniper regularly outperforms a squad (even your own squads), without using any sort of "fire and move" tactic, just by standing there and blazing away. Along a similar line, I've noticed that, in another current battle, I'm having 1 tank immobilized by 50CAL fire every other turn. These are front and side hits on Tigers and JgPzIVs. I've had 3 or 4 immobolized in this manner, often at ranges of 400-600 yards, and in my previous games I've experienced a similar frequency of 50CAL effectiveness. So, are there really that many historically attested tank kills courtesy of 50CAL? If so, then this is astounding enough that one wonders how it could be that trench warfare found itself out of fashion in the 40s. I think this is a great game. I do know how hard it is to do this sort of project, and I think the Matrix guys have done and continue to do a great job. This post is an attempt at constructive criticism and only one person's opinion. I merely wish to point these issues out so that others will consider them, then either correct them or correct me. Cheers, ------------------ Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus

_____________________________

Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 9

- 7/5/2000 1:44:00 PM

Michael Wermelin

Posts: 60
Joined: 7/3/2000
From: Karlstad, Sweden
Status: offline

And all the effectiviness of a row of snipers holding up a rifle platoon would end if the opposing side also had some snipers, to pick out the other snipers. Fight fire with fire. Besides, I know the effectiviness of a hunter's rifle (much the same as a WWII sniper rifle). I have no problem hitting a can from 100 meters. A model of an elk moving at tthe shooting range at 200 m, no problem. It cannot be a problem for an elite sniper to hit the driver of an open veichle at 100 m either, regardless of speed.

_____________________________

Attacking is the best of all defences.

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 10

- 7/5/2000 2:09:00 PM

Voriax

Posts: 1719
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: Finland
Status: offline

Like I mentioned on another thread, currently a sniper can kill maximum of 5 troops with just a one shot. Lowering this to one as he is firing just one bullet at a time would make snipers less powerful but it would still keep their long range kill/harassing possibility they should have. Voriax

_____________________________

Oh God give Me strength to accept those things I cannot change with a firearm!

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 11

- 7/5/2000 8:49:00 PM

JJU57

Posts: 54
Joined: 6/9/2000
From: Chicago, IL. USA
Status: offline

My problem is with snipers and crew close assulting a Tiger tank and killing it. OK so the crew found a lose grenade on the ground. And boy are those bazookas ever strong. Killing a King Tiger through the front armor. The Shermans had their shots just bounce off but those bazookas are the real tank killers.

_____________________________

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 12

- 7/5/2000 9:50:00 PM

Voriax

Posts: 1719
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by JJU57: My problem is with snipers and crew close assulting a Tiger tank and killing it. OK so the crew found a lose grenade on the ground.

I have no real problem with this. After all the chance is in the 1-2% range. I think there were occasions when a sniper knocked (temporarily) out a tank via shooting the driver thru the vision slit.

quote:

And boy are those bazookas ever strong. Killing a King Tiger through the front armor. The Shermans had their shots just bounce off but those bazookas are the real tank killers.

This feels a bit fishy for me too

I think the M9 bazooka is overrated. It's maximum penetration is listed as 176mm in the oob. I browsed thru few web sources and they claim penetration up to 5", 125mm. Another thing to be checked within the oob team. With the current value it is indeed possible to penetrate King tiger frontally, with the secons value it would not be possible. Jju57, do not underestimate the HEAT warheads, they were the main tank killer rounds after the WW2 before the current saboted rounds came in use. Sherman's original 75mm gun wasn't too hot in the first place and loses energy = penetration power when distance increases, which is not what happens to shaped charge round. Voriax

_____________________________

Oh God give Me strength to accept those things I cannot change with a firearm!

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 13

- 7/5/2000 9:53:00 PM

sjuncal

Posts: 50
Joined: 5/21/2000
From: VA
Status: offline

*** Along a similar line, I've noticed that, in another current battle, I'm having 1 tank immobilized by 50CAL fire every other turn. *** Hmmm the .50 is probably the weapon system I fire most. I buy M16 halftrack's (Quad 50), an M3 command car (50 and two 30's) M3A1 HT's (ditto), M15A1 HT's (37 mm flak and two 50's lovely firepower here), M20 Scouts (6 shots of 50 cal) and M8 Greyhounds (37 mm gun 50 and 2 30's). Now I'd be the first to say that the .50 caliber HMG is a somewhat effective light AFV killer in the game... However I've never seen CLOSE to one tank (actual tank and not armored car or soft AFV) immobilized per turn. I use a WHOLE LOT of them. I'd guess I've seen an actual tank immobilized three or four times in 20 or 30 battles. Now fire a 50 at some 6 or 10 mm armored HT/APC and watch the fireworks ensue... It's useful against any number of deficiently armored light Tanks and Armored cars (such at most of the Italian armored inventory heh heh). I'd say it's just right where it is. Part of the "problem" may be that it's all over the place. Equipped on almost every single US vehicle. I can't attest to the actual penetrating power of the .50 however I can point out that it is an inherently accurate round and gun. Having at least one documented sniper kill at or around 1500 yards by a USMC sniper in Vietnam, using an improvised scope and sandbagged rest. Anyway there's probably a good reason why the .50 has remained relatively unchanged yet still used over almost a century of warfare... Up to even being the AAMG/CMG of the M1 Abrams (not sure if coaxial MG is the right term in this case as the Abrams also has a lighter turret mounted MG. I'm sure the tankers among us can chip in). Next time a .50 is firing at one of your AFV's imagine three or four hundred "softball sized"[1] accurate rounds shattering all over your tank and the near by area... make it a thousand or twelve hundred rounds in the case of a Maxson Quad .50 If inexperience tank crews can throw a track just driving a tank, I imagine a handful of half inch diameter bullets weak some havoc on tread, hydraulics and suspension. [1] anecdotal description of a pilot in Nam observing "softball sized tracer" rounds as the .50 bullet tumbles like most all bullets do. Simon

_____________________________

-- Simon Moderator Capitals@his.com Aka Alhazred http://capitals.washington.dc.us/ http://members.tripod.com/~sjuncal/shooter/

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 14

- 7/6/2000 1:08:00 AM

Larry Holt

Posts: 1969
Joined: 3/31/2000
From: Atlanta, GA 30068
Status: offline

Picky, picky me. The .pdf files for the patches refer to ordinance (a regulation) instead of ordnance (goes boom). At the Ordnance Officers' Basic course one of the first things they covered was the correct spelling so don't feel bad. ------------------ An old soldier but not yet a faded one. OK, maybe just a bit faded.

_____________________________

Never take counsel of your fears.

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 15

- 7/6/2000 1:15:00 AM

Elvis

Posts: 86
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: Clarion, PA
Status: offline

<<< I can't attest to the actual penetrating power of the .50 however I can point out that it is an inherently accurate round and gun. >>> A standard 710 grain .50 BMG ball round will penetrate 1 inch of RHA (Rolled Homogenous Armor) at ranges less than 100 yards, as far as penetration at range, I don't have that information with me. I do know that it has a muzzle velocity of 2930fps and an effective range of 2500 yards. << Having at least one documented sniper kill at or around 1500 yards by a USMC sniper in Vietnam, using an improvised scope and sandbagged rest >>> The sniper was Gunnery Sergeant (then Sergeant) Carlos Hathcock II, and the kill was made in February of 1967. The weapon used was a standard tripod-mounted M2 .50 that was fitted with a 10x Unertl scope. A single shot was fired, and the range was later determined to be 2500 yards. ------------------ alea iacta est [email]sooperduk@hotmail.com[/email]

_____________________________

People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. -- George Orwell

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 16

- 7/6/2000 4:41:00 AM

Tombstone

Posts: 764
Joined: 6/1/2000
From: Los Angeles, California
Status: offline

That's a hell of a shot. Tomo

_____________________________

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 17

- 7/6/2000 5:55:00 AM

Desert Fox

Posts: 171
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Ohio, that is all I can say.
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Tombstone: That's a hell of a shot. Tomo

It sure was, especially considering that at that range, his target had a few seconds to move out of the way before the bullet got there.

_____________________________

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 18

- 7/6/2000 12:06:00 PM

Scipio Africanus

Posts: 76
Joined: 6/21/2000
From: Somerville, Ma, USA
Status: offline

Coupla things: First, I love seeing all the responses, that's why I posted

As far as the 50CALs go, It looks like I'm just having a tremendous run of bad luck concerning getting my tanks disabled (I just had an SS Panther's movement cut in half by a "suspension damage" in this same battle). The 50 CAL is a great weapon- I've had optics damage, and radio masts knocked off etc. My opponent in that battle does have A LOT of 50s

Which points to an area that German equipment seems to be tactically deficient- they just don't have a lot of 50CALs in their platoons or vehicles, while the Americans simply seem to have 50s just laying about in the mess tent

As far as snipers are concerned, I agree with everyone that these are elite troops, with high levels of training, motivation, skill, and morale. It is my current doctrine to assign 1 sniper per squad to fulfill various functions. My opponent has recently upped his number of snipers and utilized them to counter my own. This creates a whole sub level tactical engagement that has a real effect on the outcome of battles. All of which is, honestly, darn nifty. I agree with Voriax, however, that these snipers getting 3-5 kills a shot, against unmoving targets in good cover, is a little out there and needs to be adjusted. Further, for being such elite, and I would think relatively rare unit,(What? 1 per platoon; 1 per company? someone out there knows this), snipers should be a bit more expensive: 8 points; maybe 10-- this doesn't seem like much, but it would make a real difference. Cheers ------------------ Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus

_____________________________

Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 19

- 7/6/2000 4:32:00 PM

O de B

Posts: 136
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: France, Paris
Status: offline

I would think at last one per section, maybe on per group. I know it's high but when i made my military service a few years ago, each sergeant was designating an 'Elite firer' (as we say in french, i guess this would be translated by 'sniper' in english/american) under his command. But it was still equipped with the standard FAMAS. Never seen a scoped rifle through my whole military service. No more used ? The point is : in WW2 were there enough good scoped rifles to equip so many people ?

_____________________________

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 20

- 7/6/2000 9:09:00 PM

Mike Wood

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

Hello... According to Hart, only about 10% of the soldiers in combat fire anything. Unlike normal troops, who fire in the general direction of the enemy, the sniper shoots at a specific person. He must not only be an exceptional shot, but must be able to take a bead on another human and shoot him dead and do it without excitement or passion. In other words, this odd duck must be a cold blooded killer. In Stalingrad, the war actually stopped for a couple days while a famous German sniper and an equally famous Soveit sniper stalked each other. In Italy, a German sniper pinned the advancing American Army for two days. The Americans called several artillery stikes and even carpet bombed the mountain side, before the sniper ran out of ammunition and left a number of American soldiers dead on the road.

quote:

Originally posted by O de B: I would think at last one per section, maybe on per group. I know it's high but when i made my military service a few years ago, each sergeant was designating an 'Elite firer' (as we say in french, i guess this would be translated by 'sniper' in english/american) under his command. But it was still equipped with the standard FAMAS. Never seen a scoped rifle through my whole military service. No more used ? The point is : in WW2 were there enough good scoped rifles to equip so many people ?

In World War II, the USA line company had 1 scoped rifle per company in the table of equipment. There was no billet as "sniper". If any one was a good enough shot and was a loner type, he became the sniper. They were an uncommon breed. We may adjust the cost for these creatures in the orders of battle. Bye... Michael Wood

_____________________________

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 21

- 7/7/2000 7:35:00 AM

troopie

Posts: 996
Joined: 4/8/2000
From: Directly above the centre of the Earth.
Status: offline

About snipers and knocking out vehicles. Anyone ever do a study on the use of big bore hunting rifles in war. I have a picture of South African and Ethiopian troops in Ethiopia in 1941. A few of the South Africans and two of the Ethiopians are carrying what look like elephant guns. Wonder what the effect of those would be on lightly armoured vehicles. I know what the effect is on people. It's not pretty troopie ------------------ Pamwe Chete

_____________________________

Pamwe Chete

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 22

- 7/7/2000 4:12:00 PM

Hans

Posts: 36
Joined: 6/29/2000
From: Hamburg, Germany
Status: offline

re: "I don't know if you've ever tried to fire a scoped weapon at a moving target (much less a fast moving one) but it's not all that easy to hit, much less hit a Jeep in such a way as to blow it up." by sjuncal Remember JFK's asassination

re: "My problem is with snipers and crew close assulting a Tiger tank and killing it." by JJU57 I read a book by Wolfgang Paul called "Erfrorener Sieg" (Frozen Victory) about the history of the 18th Panzer Division he mimself served in during the war. He wrote about a delay battle in which infantrymen had to fight russian armor (T34). In this battle some soldiers who had no mines left climbed on a T34 whose driver had stalled the engine. When the tank rotated its turret to use the MG, they held on to the turret to get rotated with it, and covered the vision slits/periscope with mud. Afterwards they opened the engine-cover and used an axe to cut the cables to prevent them from restarting the engine. This done they poured gasoline over the tank and set fire to it. There are ways to immobilize/destroy a tank without grenades. Hans

_____________________________

dulce et decorum est pro patria mori.

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 23

- 7/7/2000 7:03:00 PM

cward

Posts: 40
Joined: 7/5/2000
Status: offline

[QUOTE} Hitting a fast moving target using a scoped bolt action rifle is hard I didn't say impossible. Hitting a Jeep moving at 30 miles per hour, in such a way as to actually destroy it in one shot, is a feat more fit for hollywood movies and TV cop shows than a war game. Well, what is the crew of a recon jeep? if its only one and its driving straight forward or away from you, it seems that shooting the driver of a fast moving jeep is the easiest way to wipe it out.. probably using a rifle would be easier than using an AT weapon, at least a rocket maybe not a BOYS or something..

_____________________________

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 24

- 7/8/2000 12:06:00 AM

JJU57

Posts: 54
Joined: 6/9/2000
From: Chicago, IL. USA
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Hans: I read a book by Wolfgang Paul called "Erfrorener Sieg" (Frozen Victory) about the history of the 18th Panzer Division he mimself served in during the war. He wrote about a delay battle in which infantrymen had to fight russian armor (T34). In this battle some soldiers who had no mines left climbed on a T34 whose driver had stalled the engine. When the tank rotated its turret to use the MG, they held on to the turret to get rotated with it, and covered the vision slits/periscope with mud. Afterwards they opened the engine-cover and used an axe to cut the cables to prevent them from restarting the engine. This done they poured gasoline over the tank and set fire to it. There are ways to immobilize/destroy a tank without grenades. Hans

SO one or two tanks during the entire war were taken out this way. But two to three tanks a day!

No Way. Famous Quote: "To a New Yorker like you a hero is some type of wierd sandwich, not some nut who takes on three tigers"

_____________________________

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 25

- 7/8/2000 12:47:00 AM

Wild Bill

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

Contrary to popular belief, a tank is a piece of mechanized equipment and can be somewhat fragile in combat, or in movement. I think we sometimes attribute to much invulnerability to tanks. While a powerful mobile weapon, there were ways to immobilize and neutralize them. Vehicles when destroyed show an explosion. I would like to see a tank or other vehicle killed without always seeing an explosion. Some did not explode. A jeep destroyed by a sniper need not explode. Don't get me wrong, I want explosions. I'd rather have too many than too few, but kills could also be shown by smoke curling from the vehicle to indicate its destruction. WB ------------------ In Arduis Fidelis Wild Bill Wilder Coordinator, Scenario Design Matrix Games

_____________________________

In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Independent Game Consultant

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 26

- 7/8/2000 12:51:00 AM

Seth

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

Actually, I know this would be a lot of work, but it would be nice to have the vehicle actually look destroyed. Maybe if hit by something large a jeep could become a crumpled little thing on it's side, tanks could lose pieces, etc.

_____________________________

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 27

- 7/8/2000 1:44:00 AM

Nikademus

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

Vehicles when destroyed show an explosion. I would like to see a tank or other vehicle killed without always seeing an explosion. Some did not explode. Hey WB, any possibility of working back in the 'animated' graphics of destroyed tanks as shown in SP-I and II? SP-II mixed things up by providing both an animated burning tank icon and a smoking tank icon. I'd love to see this somehow written back into the SP:WAW code. (along with the moving dust cloud when a tank was disabled)

_____________________________

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 28

- 7/8/2000 6:34:00 AM

troopie

Posts: 996
Joined: 4/8/2000
From: Directly above the centre of the Earth.
Status: offline

I would like to see a non-exploded destroyed vehicle icon. I once had the misfortune to see a Rover that had been knocked out by bullets, not by snipers but riddled my LMG fire. The inside had burned but nothing else. It did not explode. troopie ------------------ Pamwe Chete

_____________________________

Pamwe Chete

(in reply to sjuncal)

Post #: 29

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> Misc. errata and observations (long)

Page: [1]