Charles2222
Posts: 3993
Joined: 3/12/2001
Status: offline
|
Irinami: quote:
Yes, same here. My problem is that it seems enemy units cohabiting the hex are causing a break in the firing order.
Cohabiting the same hex as what? The player attacking unit or the defender's hex (IOW, more than one defender in the hex attacked into)?
Causing a break in what unit's firing order, the attacking player unit?
Perhaps you're playing SPWAW but you're recalling something from another variant of SP. For example, in SPWW2, and I think SP too, there's reaction fire, but not in SPWAW. With reaction fire, your Tiger fires 88L56 and the enemy retreats. This retreat being an action, causes, beyond your control, for a number of your units to respond, which I'm not sure about this, might even include the unit originally firing on it. I've played SPWW2 recently and it's not uncommon for retreating units, to spur off four or five of my units firing back in reaction to them.
from werderwayne's quote again: [QUOTE]The situation occurs frequently. I have an unsurpressed squad that sneaks behind a tank in woods. It has not fired and has 3 or 4 PF rounds left. It gets one hex away and fires. Instead of firing the PF, it fires its rifles. When it does, the tank turns around and blasts it, forcing it to retreat.[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure what he speaks about when he says "3 or 4" rounds. While taking it strictly as he wrote it, 3 or 4 rounds in ammo don't matter if there no more orders remaining for that weapon slot. Seems I recall that the act of moving an infantry unit, usually coincides with it's orders being able to fire often going dramatically down. For example, what was perhaps a 6-6-4-3 infantry unit, upon moving, might become 3-3-1-0. If that PF is the empty slot, that weapon, with that particular squad, will pretty likely only have sufficient orders to fire that weapon when it "hasn't moved first". What I mean by "particular unit" is that more highly rated units will typically have more fire orders from the start, and suffer perhaps fewer order loss on suppression or movement. IOW, the '41 Wehrmacht, might, on movement, have at least an order left to fire a flamethrower (I use flamethrower as an example because PF's are only available late into the war), or comparable anti-tank weapon, but in '44 a lot of their units may be so poorly rated that moving and firing flamethrowers or other such weapons is problematic. I'm not saying this is absolutely the case, but what I am trying to emphasize is that units which have lower experience/morale have less capability in even just a simple task of firing a round irrespective of the mechanics behind passing checks to fire them. You need not only the ammo, but the orders to fire them. If your unit moves, and whether you notice it or not, it's PF weapon slot hits zero, that weapon won't fire. As I think we realize, even if it still does have an order, and that unit fails it's check for that weapon (a different thing from having an order to fire it), it won't fire. The unit gets fire orders subtracted for not terribly good experience/morale (as opposed to what it could've been from the start) subtracted for moving, and all that is all for naught if it still doesn't pass that hidden check for the weapon, which in itself is subject to experience/morale. Understand, when I say "experience/morale" it may be one or the other, or both, I just don't recall.
Understand one last factor which comes to mind, though I'm not sure it could ever make that big a difference. You ever see how an unsuppressed, "unspotted" unit loses movement when spotted? The same could be happening to the fire, but often not showing up to where it's obvious. If infantry move in the manner from an unspotted position, to being able to spot it's target, I think the program automatically considers that infantry unit then spotted, though the target may or may not be able to opfire it. What I'm trying to say, is that if you took the exact same infantry unit and checked it's orders when stationary, say 6-6-4-3, it may move full or partially and look 4-4-1-1, BUT, if you applied the same test to a unit whose movement went from spotted to unspotted, it's post-movement figures might look like 3-3-0-0.
Another key, if we can get really technica to the quote, is he says "sneaks behind a tank in the woods". In the woods, huh? Woods take a MAJOR hit to move in, such that having multiple orders taken from the previously stationary unspotted unit, would be none too unusual. I don't think it's all that uncommon for us to lose track of whether those weapons we hardly ever fire, the PF's and flamethrowers, et al, are that readily available for use when moving. We probably just watch the rifles and assume, for example, that if there were even a 6-6-3-3 lineup for the unit unspotted and unsuppressed, that when those rifles go down to 3, therefore losing 50% of it's orders, that the secondary weapons lose 50%, but what they may be doing is losing the same thing the rifles do, IOW, 6 rifle orders going down to 3 is a loss of 3. Apply a loss of 3 to weapon slot 4, and what do you get? Zero.
Maybe, anyway. I'm just not all that convinced that there are that many of us that having a real thorough careful knowledge of what's happening to secondary infantry weapons upon moving, and still complicating matters more when they're going through unclear terrain, and still more from being unspotted to spotted.
|
Printable Version
I don't get it! - 
" Look alive!! Here comes a Buzzard" 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread