H2H - machine guns

H2H - machine guns (Full Version)

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

Message

Panzer Leo -> H2H - machine guns (3/9/2003 8:46:38 PM)
While following the discussion on Heavy Flak being able to move and fire the same turn, I started to work on a long term issue of mine...the machine guns... I think I made up my mind to take away the ability of Heavy Flak to move and fire, as the main problem is, that the time of a turn is kind of foggy...if a gun was loaded, than moves and unloads to take a few shots, this might be realistic for some special weapons like the 88. But the problem is, that the transport does not "go ahead" in time with the gun as it fires...means although the gun is using time, the transport keeps it's movement and can pick up the gun after it used up all the actions for it's turn...the two units are simply not time-synchronized and as I can't find a way for guns to be only loaded/unloaded once in a turn, taking away the move and fire seems to be the best solution... But I thought of other weapons that maybe should be able to move and fire, but can't do right now... I always wanted to model the heavy water cooled and the lighter aircooled machine guns a bit better then they're now, but I was very limited (simply didn't know how one could do that)...as it is, one cannot really see the advantage of the new Russian design SG43 over the M1910 Maxim...actually it is a bit weaker, as in terms of sustained fire the Maxim is superior and therefore even a bit more lethal...if a MG can advance a hex more or less in a turn, it does not really make that much difference...this becomes pretty obvious when you look at the US M1919A4...this machine gun had only about two good things you could say about it: it was reliable and by far the lightest of the medium/heavy machine guns...but where is the advantage in the game ? What I think of is now: :cool: - Make all aircooled (as soon as they are significantly lighter and easier to handle then water cooled - the Breda M37 is not, e.g.) able to move and fire the same turn (ofcourse all penalties for movement to accuracy have effect) - keep all water cooled and real heavy (50 cal; 12,7mm) as they are: they can move almost the same distance in a turn, but need more time for that (heavier and often need to be set up again)...therefore they cannot fire anymore In the league of aircooled I then also would be able to model a bit with the speed of the guns - the M1919A4 would be the fastest to move around, while a MG42 Lafette is slower a.s.o. What do you think ? Does that make sense ? Will it improve game play or did I miss severe setbacks ? :eek:

Irinami -> (3/9/2003 8:54:43 PM)
Considering the accounts of MMG operators moving from one end of a position to the other and laying down a fire without such a 3-5 minute delay (one of the US's M-191x MG operators won the Congressional Medal of Honor for just such a situation, e.g.), I see this as reasonable. It'll make MG's good for something besides... er... um... ;) Good for something besides a static defense. Always seems as soon as I get them into position, I've overrun the positions they're overwatching. I likes!

Gary Tatro -> Leo I like the idea also (3/9/2003 10:28:46 PM)
I think that it would be very useful. I was always frustrated with the inability just to move one hex and ussually only used my MG's as rear area defense. Now this would add an additions benifit to being the offensive weapons they were suppose to be.

tracer -> (3/9/2003 11:15:17 PM)
Great idea! Like John g pointed out in the other thread, not all MG's could be moved and set up quickly...but your suggestion of weeding out the less mobile MGs should account for that.

Svennemir -> (3/10/2003 5:31:52 AM)
Excellent, Leo! This will finally make MGs worth their cost! About the movement speeds: presently the MGs lag behind always, which is a problem when they're on the move on foot. One could think that the MG squads would have enough men to carry their equipment at a speed similar to that of regular infantry. So this speaks in favour of increasing general movement speed of MGs a bit (maybe not to 9 points like regular infantry, but a fair increase would sure help). Of course it might be risky to improve both movement speeds AND move+fire ability. Just an idea. What do you think about it?

Belisarius -> (3/10/2003 5:40:41 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Svennemir [B]Excellent, Leo! This will finally make MGs worth their cost! About the movement speeds: presently the MGs lag behind always, which is a problem when they're on the move on foot. One could think that the MG squads would have enough men to carry their equipment at a speed similar to that of regular infantry. So this speaks in favour of increasing general movement speed of MGs a bit (maybe not to 9 points like regular infantry, but a fair increase would sure help). Of course it might be risky to improve both movement speeds AND move+fire ability. Just an idea. What do you think about it? [/B][/QUOTE] I'm not sure. A (light) MG is just one piece - you can't disassemble it for transport. Thus I think that the mobility for MG teams should be as is. :) The heavy MGs can be taken apart, but in case with the lafette for the MG34 and 42, it weighs in at at least twice that of the gun. So again, no increased movement. My $ .02

Panzer Leo -> (3/10/2003 6:35:24 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Svennemir [B]Excellent, Leo! This will finally make MGs worth their cost! About the movement speeds: presently the MGs lag behind always, which is a problem when they're on the move on foot. One could think that the MG squads would have enough men to carry their equipment at a speed similar to that of regular infantry. So this speaks in favour of increasing general movement speed of MGs a bit (maybe not to 9 points like regular infantry, but a fair increase would sure help). Of course it might be risky to improve both movement speeds AND move+fire ability. Just an idea. What do you think about it? [/B][/QUOTE] The machine gun still needs a bit more time to get ready, like inserting a belt or locating the mount in a stable position, also the ammo amount hurled around is pretty heavy. I know how it feels to run around with a MG3 Lafette, so my impression of an MG42 Lafette is 99.9% accurate - and you're definately slower then a normal squad :) The MGs will not be fast..it will look like this: M1919A4: speed 8 (the by far lightest has almost squad speed of 9) SG43: speed 8 (heavier, but comfortable wheeled mount) Type 92: speed 7 (quite heavy, but carried with two poles) MG 42 Laf: speed 6 (lighter then the two above, but tougher to handle and tons of ammo, 9 men squad will have 7) Breda 37: Speed 5 (40kg for this piece of crap and no carrying aid at all !!!) All the above MGs do not get disassembled when being moved Some heavy MGs: Maxim M1910: Speed 8 (very heavy, but Sokolov wheeled mount) Vickers: Speed 7 (this is standard for almost all watercooled) .50 cal: Speed 6 (heavy stuff) So in speed the heavy MGs look equal to the MMGs, but they get transported only during a turn, while the above now will fire after moving. Ofcourse one could say if you do not fire, the MMGs should be much faster then HMGs and therefore should be able to travel more, but I cannot model that-so if you don't use your time for firing, it's your problem :)

Redleg -> (3/10/2003 9:38:56 AM)
Great stuff. I really like the move and fire capability the way you describe it. In scenarios, I sometimes create MG sections that can move and fire. I haven't seen any negative to it. This will also help the AI little (that's what I use them for in scenarios).

rbrunsman -> (3/10/2003 10:20:19 AM)
Will there be a way to easily determine which MGs can move and shoot in the Buy Screens? Perhaps a "&" or some character at the end of the name so it is a simple matter, rather than having to memorize the various MGs of all the nations. How serious of a loss of accuracy will there be after the MG moves? I would think it should be significant.

Panzer Leo -> (3/10/2003 5:07:01 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by rbrunsman [B]Will there be a way to easily determine which MGs can move and shoot in the Buy Screens? Perhaps a "&" or some character at the end of the name so it is a simple matter, rather than having to memorize the various MGs of all the nations. How serious of a loss of accuracy will there be after the MG moves? I would think it should be significant. [/B][/QUOTE] The MGs will easily be detected, as they now are a different class called "MMG" and have their own formations. A nation like the US will have three different MG type formations to purchase from: .50 cal MG Hvy MG MMG so you will not mix 'em up About the accuracy I can't do anything, it is like with other units and movement...if you move fast, it runs down dramatically, but also recovers after the first shots...that should be o.k. :)

BryanMelvin -> (3/14/2003 12:21:13 PM)
For the record - during the beta test of spwaw - it was decided that MMG and HMG fire after movement made the combat system not work realistically as had hoped. So it was dropped. What does work is to make an units and infantry class and have it carry a LMG. This works far better than the latter. Just wanted to give you a heads up after much play testing this feature.

Irinami -> The Inevitable Question: (3/14/2003 1:21:29 PM)
How so, on both counts?

Belisarius -> (3/14/2003 2:23:45 PM)
Leo, On regard what BryanMelvin said; isn't the 2-man MG-Sch�tze teams something to work from? They move and fire, a real asset for infantry support. (I haven't even played 7.1 for so long that I've forgotten if they're in those OOBs as well...I got the feeling they're unique for H2H?? :confused: )

Panzer Leo -> (3/14/2003 4:43:31 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by BryanMelvin [B]For the record - during the beta test of spwaw - it was decided that MMG and HMG fire after movement made the combat system not work realistically as had hoped. So it was dropped. What does work is to make an units and infantry class and have it carry a LMG. This works far better than the latter. Just wanted to give you a heads up after much play testing this feature. [/B][/QUOTE] Thanks, Bryan ! Can you recall what these problems were in specific ? Were they technically related (the MG-class did not behave as wanted, e.g.) or were they more sort of gaming balance issues ? Up to now all the testing went fine, as I'm not using original MG-classes for the MMGs, but instead made a complete workaround going to a different class, that behaves like infantry, but displays a single MG icon...no odd behaviour till now... The LMG teams were introduced by .70 or so in the UK OOB, with a two man Bren LMG...they were the basis for the German MG-Sch�tze with MG34 or MG42 on bipod, a very common feature for German infantry tactics. So as I can tell up to now, the new MMG class behaves like the MG-Sch�tzen, but displays a HMG-icon, exaclty what I wanted :D But I will do further testing, to make sure we don't get unwanted results...

BryanMelvin -> (3/16/2003 12:06:52 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Panzer Leo [B]Thanks, Bryan ! Can you recall what these problems were in specific ? Were they technically related (the MG-class did not behave as wanted, e.g.) or were they more sort of gaming balance issues ? Up to now all the testing went fine, as I'm not using original MG-classes for the MMGs, but instead made a complete workaround going to a different class, that behaves like infantry, but displays a single MG icon...no odd behaviour till now... But I will do further testing, to make sure we don't get unwanted results... [/B][/QUOTE] Answers below the questions.. Can you recall what these problems were in specific ? Were they technically related (the MG-class did not behave as wanted, e.g.) or were they more sort of gaming balance issues ? ANSWER: No - nothing with the class of MGs. The effect was noted in game play and balance. This really messed up play balance in exsiting scenarios as well as in PBEM games/head to Head play etc.. by providing a pandora's box of game cheat techniques. Up to now all the testing went fine, as I'm not using original MG-classes for the MMGs, but instead made a complete workaround going to a different class, that behaves like infantry, but displays a single MG icon...no odd behaviour till now ANSWER - can you write me in privet and let me know what class you changed this too? This sounds interesting. I hate to mess with the coding in the exe file :eek:

BryanMelvin -> (3/17/2003 1:27:21 PM)
Panzer Leo - I sent a privet message to you about HMG movement issue - just in case it did not go thru since your email box was full when I sent it. Spwaw is a You Go - I Go system. This is why the MMG-HMG fire and move creates game cheats. The side that moves these MGs first will have an advantage. A player moves - sets up his MGs to fire before the other player can move. If both sides moved in Real Time - the MMG-HMG fire and move feature would work. This was one main reason it was dropped from spwaw. As it is now, you would say to the other play hold up - I am setting up my MGs and after I do so - you can then move into my kill zone. Now. if both sides moved at same time - the other players side would be upon the MG team setting up its MG!

Panzer Leo -> (3/17/2003 5:31:08 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by BryanMelvin [B] Spwaw is a You Go - I Go system. This is why the MMG-HMG fire and move creates game cheats. The side that moves these MGs first will have an advantage. A player moves - sets up his MGs to fire before the other player can move. If both sides moved in Real Time - the MMG-HMG fire and move feature would work. This was one main reason it was dropped from spwaw. As it is now, you would say to the other play hold up - I am setting up my MGs and after I do so - you can then move into my kill zone. Now. if both sides moved at same time - the other players side would be upon the MG team setting up its MG! [/B][/QUOTE] I would say you're right, if SPWAW was a 100% I-Go-You-Go and no movement and fire would be allowed...but as it is, some classes do move and fire (and therefore have an advantage when used first over the enemy - this can be negated by scenario and battle setup). So when some classes are able to move and fire and some are not, it should only be important to decide what the criteria is whether a unit should be able or not. And any soldier under my command who needs 5 minutes to move a M1919A4 100m and is not able to get off some cover fire would be sent back to training camp or becomes the new company clerk ;) So if it is not a technical issue, I think all balancing problems can be adressed once you realized how the units now behave...in terms of realism it surely should be more accurate...and remember, that only light air-cooled MGs are able to do so...the really heavy stuff still behaves like MGs we have now...but testing goes on...

Irinami -> (3/17/2003 9:13:40 PM)
I have trouble with getting my mind around this sort of thing (true story: SPWAW has helped my mental flexibility), but it seems to me that with opfire coupled into the equation, Player 1 could only move up unaccosted if he were out of range. If that's the case, then the player has 2 options. Sneak up to or go around the MG. Which seems to me to add up just right.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.171875