Matrix Games Forums

To End All Wars Releasing on Steam! Slitherine is recruiting: Programmers requiredPandora: Eclipse of Nashira gets release dateCommunity impressions of To End All WarsAgeod's To End All Wars is now availableTo End All Wars is now available!Deal of the Week: Field of GloryTo End All Wars: Video, AAR and Interview!Ageod's To End All Wars: Video, AAR and Interview!To End All Wars: Artillery
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Beta 4.4.256 Observations

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command Ops Series >> Beta 4.4.256 Observations Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/1/2013 11:34:52 AM   
dazkaz15


Posts: 1244
Joined: 12/14/2012
Status: offline
Playing Elenborne Ridge last few days has been incredibly frustrating.

Infantry V infantry fighting hardly produces, any casualties.

As an example there is a 1 plt B coy 393 Regt entrenched in the wood line.
I moved in with 3 Coy's from the woods, and an assault from the open side with another 3 coy's from II BN 991 Regt.

He has been completely surrounded from about 9am until the current time 1730, and has taken 3 casualties!
My Coy's on the woodland side have now completely run out of all ammo of all kinds, and are not in supply as there in the woods, and the 3 Coy assaulting from the open are getting no where.

I suspect that the Allied Plt has also run out of ammo, as the only damage being taken is from the occasional devastating arty barrage, but he has still not routed, and taken incredible light casualties.

This is an extreme example of what is happening, in all the battles.
Or maybe it's meant to be like this? I'm only a beginner here so maybe this has been thrashed out before?

I don't have enough knowledge to say if it's realistic or not, but from a gaming perspective it sure is frustrating.
I have no chance of meeting the scenario deadline's after this delay.
Post #: 1
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/1/2013 12:36:44 PM   
phoenix

 

Posts: 1856
Joined: 9/28/2010
Status: offline
Interesting. Dave may have changed something, since there were comments about the game casualties being much higher than the historical casualties. If he changed it he was responding to that.

(in reply to dazkaz15)
Post #: 2
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/1/2013 1:54:56 PM   
wodin


Posts: 7928
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline
Dazlaz..the casualty issue has been mentioned to Dave..I believe he is looking into it. Rockin Harry first noticed it after doing alot of small scale tests.

_____________________________

My Tactical wargame facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/Tacticalwargame


(in reply to phoenix)
Post #: 3
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/1/2013 2:54:54 PM   
dazkaz15


Posts: 1244
Joined: 12/14/2012
Status: offline
Thanks for the replies guys.

I was wondering how hand to hand/close quarters fighting is handled?

I mean these guys were being overrun big time. Not just out flanked but completely surrounded, and pressed in on all sides.

There is 46 of them in the Platoon, I think they started with 50 about 8 hours ago, against 300+ troops on top of their footprint from the south, West, and North with another 300+ in successive lines from the East.

Any advice on getting these guys out of their fox holes would be greatly received.


Also is there an over run/shock modelled for tanks assaulting infantry in various types of terrain?

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 4
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/1/2013 3:07:02 PM   
dazkaz15


Posts: 1244
Joined: 12/14/2012
Status: offline
The final order icon where you can change the orders for a command unit, is randomly disappearing.

Where it used to stay on the map all the time so you could change the orders by clicking on it, on occasions now the unit just stops and the selectable order icon has gone.

Just read what I wrote and had to laugh, its so hard to describe this one lol

If you don't know what I am talking about let me know, and ill try to go into more detail.

(in reply to dazkaz15)
Post #: 5
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/1/2013 3:12:55 PM   
GBS

 

Posts: 814
Joined: 7/3/2002
From: Southeastern USA
Status: offline
Since the patch I too have seen this. In We Fight and Die Here, A 23 man AT Plt with 1 gun was only dug in and in open ground and held up two SS Btn at the first objective for 24 hours and took no casualties. My intell was excellent the whole time so I assume this was correct. It just can't be right. It almost seems like the AI doesn't play under the same rout/retreat rules the player does.

(in reply to dazkaz15)
Post #: 6
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/1/2013 3:18:30 PM   
GBS

 

Posts: 814
Joined: 7/3/2002
From: Southeastern USA
Status: offline
NM

(in reply to dazkaz15)
Post #: 7
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/1/2013 5:21:50 PM   
wodin


Posts: 7928
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline
Again the close combat issue and lack of casualties is being looked at;)


_____________________________

My Tactical wargame facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/Tacticalwargame


(in reply to GBS)
Post #: 8
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/1/2013 8:37:26 PM   
RockinHarry


Posts: 2948
Joined: 1/18/2001
From: Germany
Status: offline
I solved that temporarily, by trippling my ESTABSs small arms accuracy at ranges below 100m. So if a rifle/MG has normally 0,9..... something, it´s now 2,9.... With this I see some very close range infantry casualties again.

Generally it´s not quite credible, that dug in defenders rarely see casualties from enemy small arms fire, no hand to hand combat resolve ect and instead retreat into the open without taking a single casualty, just to get smashed by quick response Arty. To me that´s a comnplete reverse of battle mechanics.

_____________________________

RockinHarry in the web:

http://www.myspace.com/rockinharryz
http://www.youtube.com/user/rockinharryz
https://www.facebook.com/harry.zann

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 9
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/2/2013 2:20:29 PM   
phoenix

 

Posts: 1856
Joined: 9/28/2010
Status: offline
Well, as a further example, in From the Meuse to the Rhine, I've just played out the first few hours and there is a little band of 10 men camped out on the railway line on the northern approach to Arnhem Rail bridge. I asume they are dug in etc. They are called BUTLAR. Pic below. Prior to being assaulted (as you see in the pic), 8 x 75mm guns bombarded them for nearly 2 hours, using nearly all ammo. Casualties? None. Still 10 men there. (I surrendered to check). This seems absurd, I think. Even if approx 350 75mm shells poured down on that tiny area did no harm whatsoever they have been under fire from close assault for about half an hour. Needs fixing, I think.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by phoenix -- 2/2/2013 2:22:17 PM >

(in reply to RockinHarry)
Post #: 10
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/2/2013 9:00:42 PM   
wodin


Posts: 7928
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline
Well again..we know it's being looked at...Dave has said he ran tests and as seen the behaviour..so we just need to wait now.

< Message edited by wodin -- 2/2/2013 9:02:31 PM >


_____________________________

My Tactical wargame facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/Tacticalwargame


(in reply to phoenix)
Post #: 11
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/2/2013 9:47:31 PM   
dazkaz15


Posts: 1244
Joined: 12/14/2012
Status: offline
I have been trying to edit the estabs files, to try and make the game more playable, and nearly all the Performance data for the weapons is missing, with the exception of a few, which seams to be inconsistent anyway?

For instance the 8.8cm Flack 37 has an accuracy of 0.10498 at 3000m then deteriorates as expected at 1000m intervals until 8000m where the accuracy is listed as exactly the same as for 3000m 0.10498.

Is this right or are the estabs messed up, and might be why we are seeing some strange results in game?

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 12
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/3/2013 5:00:42 AM   
RockinHarry


Posts: 2948
Joined: 1/18/2001
From: Germany
Status: offline
No, the ESTABs are not messed up, but the data in there is closely related to how the ingame combat mechanics are coded, as well as with various other unit/leader stats, as training, experience and such.

Best to wait now and let Arjuna finish works on formation improvements first. Other issues, if they exist will surely be dealt with next.

Editing ESTABS is good for learning about the data interrelating with each other and it takes lots of testing, as well as re reading the game manual, before one gets a grasp.

_____________________________

RockinHarry in the web:

http://www.myspace.com/rockinharryz
http://www.youtube.com/user/rockinharryz
https://www.facebook.com/harry.zann

(in reply to dazkaz15)
Post #: 13
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/3/2013 8:31:24 AM   
phoenix

 

Posts: 1856
Joined: 9/28/2010
Status: offline
Mmm. I thought Dave said a long time ago - before the first beta 4 - that this casualty thing was being considered for patch 4, and hence I understood that the behaviour we see now (from too many casualties to too few) is as a result of changes he already made. So - if my memory serves me well - it's well worth pointing out this to him, Wodin, because I think what we're looking at now is the fix for the complaint about too many casualties. No? But if that's the case then it seems to have gone too far. Perhaps a separate - and equally important - issue is what RH is talking about - the too few casualties in close combat situations. In the post above, I'm primarilly talking about the effects of about 300 x 75mm shells on a group of 10 men dug into polder and railway embankment with 2 machine guns. They were unscathed and ready for action when my advance guard got to them. And whilst I know that arty is less effective in mud etc (though I don't have a clue if this is actually modelled in the game) and that it's anyway all a bit hit and miss, I do think that it's counter-intuitive that they wouldn't have taken one hit at least out of 300 shells. They did have fuses in RL, I think, to allow air bursts, but again, not sure if this modelled in game. At any rate, I would like to know, of course, whether it's either a feature or a bug that you can rain 300 shells onto 10 men and not kill or injure even one.

(in reply to RockinHarry)
Post #: 14
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/3/2013 10:43:34 AM   
dazkaz15


Posts: 1244
Joined: 12/14/2012
Status: offline
Phoenix

I think it is feasible that the 10 men dug into the Polder might get away with very light casualties from artillery bombardment.

As you know Artillery is an area effect weapon, so the more men you have in the area off effect of the bombardment the more chance of getting casualties, where the inverse is true for a small number of men.

The effects of the mud are incorporated into the area hit chance, which for polder is one of the lowest in the game, 13% chance.
My issue is when these same men are attacked by a much larger infantry force who once closed on their position also share the same terrain characteristics, and are using direct fire, but still can't seam to hit anyone.

Anyway I'm glad its being looked into. I'm looking forward to playing again, once its been looked at.

RockinHarry

Obviously the ESTAB are not as easy to comprehend as I had hoped, so I think Ill leave them alone for now ;)


< Message edited by dazkaz15 -- 2/3/2013 10:55:10 AM >

(in reply to phoenix)
Post #: 15
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/3/2013 10:53:26 AM   
dazkaz15


Posts: 1244
Joined: 12/14/2012
Status: offline
Phoenix

Are they only dug in or entrenched?

If they where entrenched that implies overhead protection as well as the terrain effect. That would imply some serious protection from artillery if they where.

Once again though your 2 companies and the platoon, should be easily able to overrun them given that they also have the benefit of the 12% direct hit from the terrain which implies, very good cover to be able to get very close to entrenched enemy.

(in reply to dazkaz15)
Post #: 16
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/3/2013 12:09:47 PM   
phoenix

 

Posts: 1856
Joined: 9/28/2010
Status: offline
Thanks Dazkaz. Maybe I'm wrong. Wouldn't be the first time. They do get flushed out fairly quickly (after about an hour) by the 2 attacking companies. That sound right - takes 200 men about an hour to flush out 10 men in 2 machine gun nests? I would have thought it is easily possible. They are dug in, not entrenched. But if the polder effect is modelled, as you say, then maybe it's poss they would take no hits. I ran it again and tried again. Dropped about 320 shells on them (from 2 batteries - 16 guns - firing at max rate) in about 20 mins. Wouldn't have liked to have been there, under it - 16 x 75mm shells landing every minute for 20 mins! Same lack of effect though.

(in reply to dazkaz15)
Post #: 17
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/3/2013 12:52:41 PM   
wodin


Posts: 7928
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline
I know there is something wrong with small arms fire..but I think Arty fire is fine..blimey I'd hate it to be even stronger as then the scenarios wouldn't be fun at all.

_____________________________

My Tactical wargame facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/Tacticalwargame


(in reply to phoenix)
Post #: 18
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/3/2013 2:34:13 PM   
dazkaz15


Posts: 1244
Joined: 12/14/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: phoenix

Thanks Dazkaz. Maybe I'm wrong. Wouldn't be the first time. They do get flushed out fairly quickly (after about an hour) by the 2 attacking companies. That sound right - takes 200 men about an hour to flush out 10 men in 2 machine gun nests? I would have thought it is easily possible. They are dug in, not entrenched. But if the polder effect is modelled, as you say, then maybe it's poss they would take no hits. I ran it again and tried again. Dropped about 320 shells on them (from 2 batteries - 16 guns - firing at max rate) in about 20 mins. Wouldn't have liked to have been there, under it - 16 x 75mm shells landing every minute for 20 mins! Same lack of effect though.


Yeah, I think it is probably about right, with regards to the artillery.

75 mm shells are not really even that big in the grand scheme of artillery.
Given the terrain type unless they had air burst (Mechanical timed caps) which I think is unlikely, you would need to actually hit them with the round to get a kill.

You just need to look at the Falklands campaign to see how ineffective point detonating HE rounds where in the boggy conditions there, and they where mostly 105mm and 155mm rounds.

Only when they started using the Proximity fuses, for air burst effects did they start to really shine.

(in reply to phoenix)
Post #: 19
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/3/2013 5:39:39 PM   
dazkaz15


Posts: 1244
Joined: 12/14/2012
Status: offline
Wow!

Just found this on the WIKI, so I will have to withdraw my comment about the artillery not being effective in polder.
Sorry about the missinformation.

General Dwight D. Eisenhower protested vehemently and demanded he be allowed to use the fuzes. He prevailed and the VT fuzes were first used in the Battle of the Bulge in December 1944, when they made the Allied artillery far more devastating, as all the shells now exploded just before hitting the ground. It decimated German divisions caught in the open. The Germans felt safe from timed fire because they thought that the bad weather would prevent accurate observation. The effectiveness of the new VT fused shells exploding in mid-air, on exposed personnel, caused a minor mutiny when German soldiers started refusing orders to move out of their bunkers during an artillery attack. U.S. General George S. Patton said that the introduction of the proximity fuze required a full revision of the tactics of land warfare.[15]

The Germans started their own independent research in the 1930s but the programme was cut in 1940 likely due to the fuhrer directive (Führerbefehl) that, with few exceptions, stipulated all work that could not be put into production within 6 months was to be terminated to increase resources for those projects that could (in order to support Operation Barbarossa). It was at this time that the Germans also abandoned their magnetron and microwave radar development teams and programs. Many other advanced and experimental programs also suffered. Upon resumption of research and testing by Rheinmetall in 1944 the Germans managed to develop and test fire several hundred working prototypes before the war ended.

(in reply to dazkaz15)
Post #: 20
RE: Beta 4.4.256 Observations - 2/3/2013 5:54:33 PM   
dazkaz15


Posts: 1244
Joined: 12/14/2012
Status: offline
Just realised that the scenario in question is in September 1944, so the VT fuse was not yet available, but from what the WIKI is saying, because the weather was nice, they would have been able to spot in the MT fuse. so the barrage would have been more effective in that terrain, than the point detonating, if they had the MT fuses available.

(in reply to dazkaz15)
Post #: 21
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command Ops Series >> Beta 4.4.256 Observations Page: [1]
Jump to:





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
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.102