Sorry for the delay in the update. It's still on tap, but up against a couple of big work-related deadlines and it's derailing proper attention. I do intend to have something out before the core holidays hit.
Thanks again for this ... really appreciate what you've done!
Also, if you need a hand with the patch ... just make a list, and I'd gladly help out
thanks Cathartes i also noticed that in the german roster, you can get your 80 mm mortor in either the regular or support slots. this is how it should be in the allied roster with the 3 in mortor as we have already noted and the MMG vickers IMHO.
I didn't realize LSA restricted the selection of unit types to specific columns. But now that I do, I think it's an excellent design feature ... and something I hoped would make its way into CC.
Main reason being ... this limits medium mortars. In LSA you have to decide between a mortar and a vehicle (for example). And, sure you may want a mortar to suppress troop movement ... but you probably won't grab two or more of them, if they reduce you ability to select AFV's
In previous CC versions you could select 5 or more tanks as well as 3 mortars ... which in my opinion puts more focus on the unrealistic abilities of CC mortars, and less focus on simulating combat.
So, in my opinion having mortars only selectable in the support column, is a step in the right direction
As steiner mentioned though, German BG's can select 8cm mortars in their Infantry column ... which seems unfair compared to the Allies' not being able to. I'd prefer to have all medium/heavy mortars only in the Support column ... and be the same for both sides.
Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:00 am Post subject: Re: GJS-LSA bugs, suggestions, and comments thread
i can see where crewman is coming from but i dont fully agree. i think with the specific columns for picking certain troop types, you dont get caught up with having too many mortors and if you have an inf BG you might want 2 mortors. [ the columns are diff for each type of BG IE: Inf vs Mortorized etc. ] as there support is limited already.
well if we go with all medium/heavy mortars only in the Support column ...make sure it is the same for both sides. germans are diff from allies right now as we have mentioned.
i really think the MMG vickers needs to be availible for the allies in the regular column AND the support column as the allies are terribly under gunned vs the german inf and there small arms and MG's....also the vickers ammo load could be upped to 2000 rds from 1500 rds.
same with the bren ammo load....its just not enough to compete with the MG 42.
WHEN THE PIN IS PULLED "MR GRENADE"IS NOT OUR FRIEND !
Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 8:06 am Post subject: Re: GJS-LSA bugs, suggestions, and comments thread
had a freeze up on my side when opponent crashed ... playing GJS with Operation Perch at Villers Bocage.
First time used air, next two times crashed without using air.
Truced before 12 minutes expired (15 min battles) on the four time ... and that got us past the crash and we've continued on.
Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 6:49 pm Post subject: Re: GJS-LSA bugs, suggestions, and comments thread
any crashes with your H2H custom op since you moved past?
Regarding the support units and BG selectoion--it was intended that both German and British MGs/Mortars should be available in support column only, so it's a bug that the Germans have the advantage of selection.
I realize there are two lines of thought on the theory of support teams. The compromise might be making the Medium/Hvy MGs available across all columns and medium mortars "support only" column--same for both Brits and Germans.
Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2013 8:42 pm Post subject: Re: GJS-LSA bugs, suggestions, and comments thread
Hi Cathartes
we have only played a couple of battles past the crash....they worked fine.
im in for your compromise on the support. IE: making the Medium/Hvy MGs available across all columns and medium mortars "support only" column--same for both Brits and Germans.
WHEN THE PIN IS PULLED "MR GRENADE"IS NOT OUR FRIEND !
Regarding the support units and BG selectoion--it was intended that both German and British MGs/Mortars should be available in support column only, so it's a bug that the Germans have the advantage of selection.
Hi Cathartes,
I looked at the GJS axsteams.txt file and noticed that the German 8cm Mortars use team type "12" in column "F" (which is Lt Mortar) ... but should be team type "39" Med Mortar.
Correcting that would put the German med mortars back into the Support column, and not selectable in the Infantry column.
And about the Vickers and MG42:
1. I think the Heavy MG42 should remain in Support (team type "13") ... since the Germans also have lots of Light MG42's available (team type "11").
With Heavy MG42's also available in the Infantry column ... the Allies will get pinned down even more, and make infantry movement much more restrictive.
2. As a compromise, the Vickers could move to the Infantry column to even things up a bit ... but I'd prefer it left in Support if it meant also moving the Heavy MG42 into the Infantry column.
3. From a purist standpoint though ... I think all Heavy MG's should be in Support only
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 1:20 am Post subject: Re: GJS-LSA bugs, suggestions, and comments thread
in the GC H2H....as ive stated earlier...the allies are heavely out gunned as far as the inf vs inf...there out matched armour wise with all the panthers IMO but thats another story......its not inconsivible, as a purist, to have the MMG vickers in the inf column. its got a 3 man crew [ is this historical? ] as opposed to the german HMG 42 with a 5 man crew and for playibility something has to be done to even it up a bit. theres not that many Vickers in most of the allied rosters either......should be more also, to help balance the fire power issue. ]
what is always missing in CC is the fact that you cannot give the allies the full weight of the arty support that was always availible to them historically, in a game sense. that evened the odds on the historical battle field, time and again for the allies.....large german armoured attacks were broken up by the arty support avalible to the allies all the time. this isnt easily copied in CC and thus causes a problem in the above stated issues...especially in the inf vs inf where the germans always out gun the allied inf. the MG 42 was a deadly weapon historically...theres no doubt about it and the game DOES portray that fact well but the bren in the game is a lame duck for some reason and the ammo loads for the bren and vickers just arent useable / historical? they need more to be able to keep up a sustained fire against the enemy. the allies didnt usually have a lack of ammo issue. ..the germans did.
thus as ive suggested as a good improvment also...more arty and mortor support for the allies... especially the arty.
the planes just dont work well....they typically dont destroy any thing, and miss as much as they hit ...50/50?? so that also takes away from the allied fire power and tank destroying capibility's. perhaps this could be looked at?
crewman...you see the inequities of the game in a GC over time... with the german steam roller thats hard to stop.....you will see as you play GJS LSA more
the allies NEED more of a punch that cannot be equalized with just allied tanks. thats why i sugessted not only the vickers MMG be in the inf slots and the support slots but the 3 in mortor for the allies as well.
the bottom line is still a bit more playability that is not out of the historical realm even for a purist. the historical battle field make up of any german or allied company was NOT as it appears in the official TOE's...thats a fact.
all this being said, this is still a great mod and a great job Cathartes....i salute you and the time you put into CC
these are just my suggestions and my input into trying to help improve IMHO what is a great mod.
WHEN THE PIN IS PULLED "MR GRENADE"IS NOT OUR FRIEND !
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 2:49 am Post subject: Re: GJS-LSA bugs, suggestions, and comments thread
Hi steiner,
you make some helpful comments.
1. I agree with having the Vickers in the Infantry column, but keep the Heavy MG 42 in Support only.
2. I also agree about the Allied air support ... I think it should knock out a tank 90 percent of the time
3. 3in Mortar should stay in Support only ... imo
4. Maybe some more artillery support too ... edit (maybe not, since I haven't tried the GC yet).
as you've said, really great mod Cathartes ... just offering some feedback.
Last edited by crewman on Fri Nov 22, 2013 7:54 am; edited 1 time in total
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 5:57 am Post subject: Re: GJS-LSA bugs, suggestions, and comments thread
The strategic level air, artillery and mortar support quantities should greatly favour the Allies (along with a greater number of tanks in the forcepool and possibly deployed) should provide the additional firepower to offset the better MG and tanks....
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 6:50 am Post subject: Re: GJS-LSA bugs, suggestions, and comments thread
Makes sense Tejszd
Also, thought I should comment of GJS a bit too, since I've had a chance to try some battles.
1. maps are really well done ... has the Normandy feel, and seem well coded
2. sounds are great, and nicely balanced
3. BG's look well thought out and detailed. I like the LSA style of columns for different types too.
4. Vehicles graphics are top notch
5. Gameplay works well, both tactical and strategic
5. LSA features are the best CC so far ... imo
6. GJS LSA = best CC ... imo
Last edited by crewman on Fri Nov 22, 2013 7:40 am; edited 1 time in total
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 6:54 am Post subject: Re: GJS-LSA bugs, suggestions, and comments thread
agreed Tejsez......we need the quantities upped to reflect this IMO.
just finished playing some battles in crewmans Op. i was using a shreak team vs his shermans. i have been on the allied end of the shreaks in the GC [ still playing it too ] and my german opponent has used many shreaks against me. he is of the same opinion.
what we are finding is that the shreak is horribley inaccurate and it fails to penetrate allot of the time when it does get a lucky hit.
here is two recent descriptions / experiences....tonite in op perch i had a shreak team at about 60 m hit a sherman 2 times in a row. no damage at all. now this time the shreak did hit 2 times out of three.
later tonite in a test battle i had a shreak team in a hedge that shot at the side of a firefly at 53 m. the shreak missed the Firefly 5 times at 53 m...then the team died from being over run by allied inf. it was not suppressed or under fire at the time of the 5 shots.
my experiences with the piat are similair.....horibbley inaccurate.....i have had the piat kill a couple of mk 4's after multiple shots are fired, but usually the piat team is spotted no matter what cover he's in..and killed before he can shoot.
IMHO at ranges under 100 m for the shreak and under 80 m for the piat, both weapons should be able to have a reasonable probabilty to hit. and BOTH these weapons if they hit they should kill. they both have large armour penatration ability's......off the top of my head...200 mm for the piat and 280 mm for the shreak.
my experiences with and against the Faust are as expected. the faust is nasty and kills a high percentage of the time at 30m or less.
can we look at the shreak and piat and perhaps give them a nudge???
WHEN THE PIN IS PULLED "MR GRENADE"IS NOT OUR FRIEND !
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 7:39 am Post subject: Re: GJS-LSA bugs, suggestions, and comments thread
about Artillery Support:
I can't comment on the GJS GC, cause I haven't played it yet ... but I did check the campaign text file, and there seems to be some on all days.
I decided not to add any Artillery Support in Operation Perch, but may enable it for the Allies ... after some more testing
what is always missing in CC is the fact that you cannot give the allies the full weight of the arty support that was always availible to them historically, in a game sense. that evened the odds on the historical battle field, time and again for the allies.....large german armoured attacks were broken up by the arty support avalible to the allies all the time. this isnt easily copied in CC and thus causes a problem in the above stated issues...especially in the inf vs inf where the germans always out gun the allied inf. the MG 42 was a deadly weapon historically...theres no doubt about it and the game DOES portray that fact well but the bren in the game is a lame duck for some reason and the ammo loads for the bren and vickers just arent useable / historical? they need more to be able to keep up a sustained fire against the enemy. the allies didnt usually have a lack of ammo issue. ..the germans did.
thus as ive suggested as a good improvment also...more arty and mortor support for the allies... especially the arty.
...
the planes just dont work well....they typically dont destroy any thing, and miss as much as they hit ...50/50?? so that also takes away from the allied fire power and tank destroying capibility's. perhaps this could be looked at?
stiener, a British 43-45 type infantry division had Three Field Artillery Regiments - each with twenty four towed 25-pdr guns plus eight 4.2-in mortars in their divisional machine gun battalions and in action, further support for offensive and defensive actions was almost always available from heavier artillery regiments (corps or army assets). With no shortage of ammo, and with tactics perfected since the Great War, the british field artillery was able to rain down almost a constant bombardment, severely hampering the german abilities in defensive and offensive actions. Translating this on CC environment, a similar arty support would most likely obliterate anything on a close combat typical map thus greatly imbalancing the game.
Same could be said about the german mortars: the most feared weapon by allied troops in Normandy (and incidentally, in another prolonged battle, at Monte Cassino) was the mortar, not the MG 34 or 42, partly because of numbers deployed by heer, waffen ss and fj units: at the company level there were 5cm mortars - german or captured russian types, 60mm mortar from '40 french army, or an ever increasing number of kurz 8cm mortar; at battalion level further 6 normal 8cm mortars were available and finally at regimental level, 12cm mortars (captured or copied models) replacing the 15cm infantry support howitzers. Some units deployed more 8cm or 10.5cm mortars instead of 12cm in their regimental companies or the 12cm were deployed at battalion level (the fj units in '44 were authorized to have such mortars in the heavy companies).
stiener, regarding the "mighty air-power" trials against captured German Panther tanks showed that the rockets fired from aircrafts, like Typhoon, could penetrate the armour except on the front of the tank. The accuracy of the rockets was however low, even when fired in salvos of eight. At trials on training ground in England the probability of achieving a hit on a tank was at most 4 %. On operations, when the aircraft was subjected to AA fire and the targets not stationary on an open field, hit rates must have been even lower. Also, in fact on the six most casualty-intensive days suffered by 12. SS-Pz.Div. during June 1944 the weather either prevented or hampered air operations. The worst day for the division was 26 June 1944, when it suffered 730 casualties. During this day it rained.
Three British studies of captured Panther tanks (or wrecks of Panther tanks), two of them during Normandy and one during the Ardennes battle gave the following results:
Armour Piercing Shot -> 63 panther tanks lost
Hollow Charge Projectiles -> 8 panther tanks lost
High Explosive Shells -> 11 panther tanks lost
Aircraft Rockets -> 11 panther tanks lost
Aircraft Cannon -> 3 panther tanks lost
Destroyed by crew -> 66 panther tanks lost
Abandoned -> 43 panther tanks lost
Unknown causes -> 24 panther tanks lost
In all 96 were destroyed, disabled or damaged by allies and 133 panther tanks were abandobed and destroyed by the crews or lost to other causes;
During the '44-45' period a german panzer regiment was organized in two tank batalions one equiped with panther tanks and second with mark IV panzer tank so about the loses for panzer mk IV could have similar proportions.
So, once the artillery fire halted, the role of the infantry soldier is that of war itself, namely to close with the enemy and destroy him using his rifle and hand grenades, perhaps some flamethrowers, satchel charges or even tanks in direct support if he is lucky enough. Fundamentally, it is the role of commander, even in CC environment, to be aware of strengths and weakness of both sides and to find the less costly way to achieve victory.
Last edited by sample on Fri Nov 22, 2013 11:24 pm; edited 1 time in total
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 10:13 pm Post subject: Re: GJS-LSA bugs, suggestions, and comments thread
crewman & tejezd......arty barrages are availible in the GC along with mortor barrages. just the arty needs to be upped IMO.
sample.....some very in depth and great info you have provided. thanks.
im aware of all that info...have read the books and the reports etc.
im assumming your ok with the way the mod plays then?
as you stated above the allied arty assets were huge, but as i mentioned it is hard to copy those capabilitys in CC, and obviously we dont want to obliterate the CC map. my suggestion is to up the amount of arty barrages.
regarding the "mighty air-power" what you quote is true, altho there was also a psychological factor involved. no tanker liked being shot at by aircraft even rocket firing typhoons, so that had an effect on weather they would break off an attack or not. this also cannot be copied on the CC battle field.
historically ground attack aircraft attacks did destroy and damage some tanks and did drive off/ break up armoured attacks.
in the bigger picture of the CC game play tho as ive stated, the air support isnt up to par IMO.
i like the last quote you gave about infantry and commanders the best..very true.
i am aware of strengths and weakness of both sides in CC and thats why were trying to improve the game play in ways that are still close to historical.
were just trying to improve the game play of this great mod and balance the fire power issue a bit with things that we can control on the CC battle field. after all, it is a game / mod that was built and it needs to be polishied up a bit to make it an enjoyable game for us all to play.
WHEN THE PIN IS PULLED "MR GRENADE"IS NOT OUR FRIEND !
also, didn't get the Vickers into Infantry columns ... cause the game will sometimes select more than one of them. And besides, I think the Bren Group and Section provide quite a bit of firepower.
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 can 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!
i also noticed that in the german roster, you can get your 80 mm mortor in either the regular or support slots. this is how it should be in the allied roster with the 3 in mortor as we have already noted 
and the MMG vickers IMHO.
it was not suppressed or under fire at the time of the 5 shots.
what you quote is true, altho there was also a psychological factor involved. no tanker liked being shot at by aircraft even rocket firing typhoons, so that had an effect on weather they would break off an attack or not. this also cannot be copied on the CC battle field.
