Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2014 9:49 am Post subject: Re: Historical realism mod :)
Yes, always obey orders helps in this case. However, it also disables the morale - surrendering component of the psychological engine. Troops will never surrender when always obey orders it turned on...
Yes, always obey orders helps in this case. However, it also disables the morale - surrendering component of the psychological engine. Troops will never surrender when always obey orders it turned on...
well, we've played quite a lot of battles into BFC GC and after a while you don't really notice GS. Just takes you a little bit more micromanagement.
Yes, always obey orders helps in this case. However, it also disables the morale - surrendering component of the psychological engine. Troops will never surrender when always obey orders it turned on...
Crackwise, did you get this confirmed by the "developers"? I also didn't notice much surrendering happening with "always obey orders" on, but I didn't notice any surrendering when "always obey orders" was off either. I'm not 100% certain the two are linked.
Posted: Sat Aug 23, 2014 6:38 pm Post subject: Re: Historical realism mod :)
@Troger: It is my own observations. We had played 3-4 turns of the GC with Pzt_Kami with "always obey orders" and "never act on initiative" checked (i.e. 70% realism). There was no single surrendering soldier throughout the GC. Also iirc, during our Ops with you we had this option on and as such also did not have any surrendering troops. Check our saved games if you want to be sure
I have noticed troops actually surrender quite often when you don't have always obey order checked, since individual team morale is generally lower in this game than, let's say CC5 GJS. Or to put it in other words, you can not select and deselect individual teams in GtC until you get the best teams from the forcepool as we all used to do rigorously in CC5. Therefore, due to this limitation you eventually end up with a platoon full of more varying team morale, which is actually a good thing. It makes your HQ units much more important and urges you to keep them close to your troops.
I have noticed troops actually surrender quite often when you don't have always obey order checked, since individual team morale is generally lower in this game than, let's say CC5 GJS. Or to put it in other words, you can not select and deselect individual teams in GtC until you get the best teams from the forcepool as we all used to do rigorously in CC5. Therefore, due to this limitation you eventually end up with a platoon full of more varying team morale, which is actually a good thing. It makes your HQ units much more important and urges you to keep them close to your troops.
I have noticed this too since PiTF, it's not a bad change to me as I got used to CC4 with all their green units at the start.
Posted: Sun Aug 24, 2014 1:29 am Post subject: Re: Historical realism mod :)
For me, it's just completely unplayable without always obey orders on. This problem has been around since the first "remake" Cross of Iron, and they have simply refused to acknowledge it or fix it since then. It wasn't broken in CC5, it didn't need to be tinkered with.
For me, it's just completely unplayable without always obey orders on. This problem has been around since the first "remake" Cross of Iron, and they have simply refused to acknowledge it or fix it since then. It wasn't broken in CC5, it didn't need to be tinkered with.
my bet that they don't know what they did to activate GS and that's why they can't fix them.
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 1:00 am Post subject: Re: Historical realism mod :)
Hi all!
It's great to see modding and rework on just released game! At one side this means that there are some points to improve))
To make it more realistic historically is an obvious way of improvement. I used to change Stalingrad Operation Circle, great mod but lacking of information about Russian BGs and other stuff. My work has been finished but hasn't been published though)))
Back to this mod, I have several suggestions.
1. Immobile PaK40 due to trails buried into a soil. Strongly convinced this is a myth, started by one of Russian authors and popular at VIF2NE, for example. Among lots of pictured gun positions I've never seen any with gun trails completely dug in. But there are a lot of pictures with PaK40 firing standing on a plain ground supported only by its own weight and two crew numbers hanging on trails. Or fired without trail tails placed into soil properly. Anyway, crews are able to solve the problem putting logs or something like under trail tails to prevent digging in. The gun with carriage isn't a feather though, but it could be replaced by crew members compared to 17-pounder that could not.
2. Don't you think that diminishing power of mortars isn't real historical improvement? Of course something should be done, because it's very frustrating to see my only ATG spotted after killing it's first tank and being put out of action by 4-5 "bombs" of miserable 2inch. But gun crew is still vulnerable to shells blasting behind and aside of the gun shield. Also in reality mortars were effective infantry instrument to slow and stop enemy infantry advance. So, mortar bombs should kill soldiers effectively.
I don't have the plan how to rebalance mortars to stop them being super antitank and antipersonnel weapon but facts above should be taken in account somehow.
3. 17 pounder story. Without any doubts this is most capable Allied gun in terms of armor piercing. With APCBC it is capable to deal with Panther at standard CC ranges ~200-300 meters in frontal projection also. And Tiger is more vulnerable here. I was surprised to receive burning tank after 2 shots from Firefly. Tiger stood at 40 degrees angle to the opponent. But after some investigation, I've realized that there is nothing strange here. And this difference between two German heavies should be reflected IMHO.
4. Available ammunition for guns. For 17 pounder APDS based on the 6pdr APDS design was made available in June 1944 with the first ammunition being filled for service in July. During 1944 only 37000 APDS had been produced compared to 510000 APCBC and 679000 APC (and 1,6 mln APC and APCBC on stock after 1943). Are you sure APDS should be available for every Firefly in July? The same for 6pdr.
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 2:19 am Post subject: Re: Historical realism mod :)
Quote:
I used to change Stalingrad Operation Circle, great mod but lacking of information about Russian BGs and other stuff. My work has been finished but hasn't been published though)))
That was the most difficult of pzjager's Stalingrad mods. I gave up trying to "win" at that one vs the AI. Supply is just horrid, as was in real life. Guns with half dozen rounds.. SdkDK is nearly as difficult for same reason, though mods would have been great other than that. Der Kessel still rules.
Quote:
it's very frustrating to see my only ATG spotted after killing it's first tank and being put out of action by 4-5 "bombs" of miserable 2inch.
Interesting and only because the amount of ammunition given to the 2" was upped early on during the beta to the final 10-12. They originally only had 4-6 as remember. Cathartes would be the one to ask about this, tho he already turned down the lethality of 3" mortars and that has been gone over numerous times here, the Matrix site and on the beta forums before.
I cant play the game anymore.
I'm hoping this and a Patch will get my interest up.
Nomada is still working on his '46 mod also Platoon. He's started a site over at Moddb, in addition to at his own forums to feature updates on it's development:
Back to this mod, I have several suggestions.
1. Immobile PaK40 due to trails buried into a soil. Strongly convinced this is a myth, started by one of Russian authors and popular at VIF2NE, for example. Among lots of pictured gun positions I've never seen any with gun trails completely dug in. But there are a lot of pictures with PaK40 firing standing on a plain ground supported only by its own weight and two crew numbers hanging on trails. Or fired without trail tails placed into soil properly. Anyway, crews are able to solve the problem putting logs or something like under trail tails to prevent digging in. The gun with carriage isn't a feather though, but it could be replaced by crew members compared to 17-pounder that could not.
2. Don't you think that diminishing power of mortars isn't real historical improvement? Of course something should be done, because it's very frustrating to see my only ATG spotted after killing it's first tank and being put out of action by 4-5 "bombs" of miserable 2inch. But gun crew is still vulnerable to shells blasting behind and aside of the gun shield. Also in reality mortars were effective infantry instrument to slow and stop enemy infantry advance. So, mortar bombs should kill soldiers effectively.
I don't have the plan how to rebalance mortars to stop them being super antitank and antipersonnel weapon but facts above should be taken in account somehow.
no, mortars still kill moving/running infantry reliably and you just need more bombs to kill guns and proned soldiers. 81mm mortar bombs didn't have enough HE to affect proned soldiers like artlllery shells, their main advantages were numbers and trajectory.
Quote:
3. 17 pounder story. Without any doubts this is most capable Allied gun in terms of armor piercing. With APCBC it is capable to deal with Panther at standard CC ranges ~200-300 meters in frontal projection also. And Tiger is more vulnerable here. I was surprised to receive burning tank after 2 shots from Firefly. Tiger stood at 40 degrees angle to the opponent. But after some investigation, I've realized that there is nothing strange here. And this difference between two German heavies should be reflected IMHO.
?
Quote:
4. Available ammunition for guns. For 17 pounder APDS based on the 6pdr APDS design was made available in June 1944 with the first ammunition being filled for service in July. During 1944 only 37000 APDS had been produced compared to 510000 APCBC and 679000 APC (and 1,6 mln APC and APCBC on stock after 1943). Are you sure APDS should be available for every Firefly in July? The same for 6pdr.
there is no APDS for 17pdr in mod, why?
6pdr APDS were issued prior to Invasion.
PaK40 is sitting on the line between mobile and immobile. If there is intended way to move it by crew, I will make it mobile for my playing. Hystorical realism BTW, will it be possible to tow it? Seems not.
Quote:
no, mortars still kill moving/running infantry reliably and you just need more bombs to kill guns and proned soldiers. 81mm mortar bombs didn't have enough HE to affect proned soldiers like artlllery shells, their main advantages were numbers and trajectory.
OK with this.
Quote:
?
The idea of my suggestion was that you should remember Tiger is far more vulnerable to 17pdr in frontal than Panther. Not only hull, but gun mask also but not so far. Hope you've done it this way. What type of ammo do you simulate for 17pdr, APC or APCBC?
Quote:
there is no APDS for 17pdr in mod, why?
6pdr APDS were issued prior to Invasion.
Want to support you in that APDS dispersion discussion. All that I know about poor results for 17pdr APDS should be translated to the small brother. 6pdr should demonstrate great dispersion for just moderate distances.
A very interesting testing results for 17pdr
http://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/us-firefly-17-pounder-vs-90mm-vs-76mm.285284/
PaK40 is sitting on the line between mobile and immobile. If there is intended way to move it by crew, I will make it mobile for my playing. Hystorical realism BTW, will it be possible to tow it? Seems not.
it is possible to tow guns in GTC ;)
Quote:
The idea of my suggestion was that you should remember Tiger is far more vulnerable to 17pdr in frontal than Panther. Not only hull, but gun mask also but not so far. Hope you've done it this way. What type of ammo do you simulate for 17pdr, APC or APCBC?
well, it is obvious and it is like that in all my mods sine TRSM .
both types.
Quote:
Want to support you in that APDS dispersion discussion. All that I know about poor results for 17pdr APDS should be translated to the small brother. 6pdr should demonstrate great dispersion for just moderate distances.
A very interesting testing results for 17pdr
http://forums.spacebattles.com/threads/us-firefly-17-pounder-vs-90mm-vs-76mm.285284/
yes, I familiar with these documents and first implemented low APDS accuracy in TRSM like 2 years ago
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2014 5:36 pm Post subject: Re: Historical realism mod :)
Great! Seems, most of technical aspects already implemented in right way. Waiting for you finishing the work.
What type of AP ammunition do you simulate for 17 Pounder APC or APCBC and why? AND for 6pdr also.
Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2014 9:24 am Post subject: Re: Historical realism mod :)
Good to see the progress on your mod.
Please make ground attack aircraft less accurate and their weapons weaker.
According to wikipedia Typhoons were able to attack armor with 4% succes rate! wikilink
At this moment tactical air strikes often causes annihilation of tanks. I would say with 50% succes rate. This is way unrealistic and unbalances the game in Brits favor.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
In August of 2004, Zappi, Homba, Bambam887, RedScorpion and MOOXE all pitched
in to create this Close Combat site. I would to thank all the people who have visited
and found this site to thier liking. I hope you had time to check out some
of the great Close Combat mods and our forums. I'd also like to thank
all the members of our volunteer staff that have helped over
the years, and all our users that contributed to this site!
