Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 12:38 pm Post subject: What the problem with CCMT weapons, a consumer debate..
What the problem with CCMT weapons, a consumer debate..
“What’s wrong with CCMT, I can’t find any wrong with it” says Schrecken (S3 / Matrix man)…
What the problem with CCMT…
People are dying like flies in CCMT.
Weapons performance is way off and totally unrealistic in every category..
Weapons are set wrong, weapons that have not HE in reality have HE in CCMT, weapons that have AP / Sabots rounds in reality lack em in CCMT (not a single tank or AFV has Sabot / AP ammo in CCMT)…
If one takes it step by step. One may starts with “why” does the ppl die so easy by small arms fire. More why they die so easy from HE later.
Here we go…
This is just a few comment on the file you can see here, plz have a look for your self.
Let the debate start.
The small arms setting in CCMT is a bit strange.
The M4A1 and M16A4 (class 72&12&90) with its 5.56 is set to have a penetration of 8mm steel at 500 meter, in reality its more like 3.5mm.. Maybe even more important is that the PB = Point Blank values are 100 meter for the M16 rifle in CCMT, but in a combat situation the rifle has just some 40- meter as “Point Blank”…
It has a “long range” of 800 meters. But in combat situation most soldiers can’t use the M16 like that, max some 3-400 meters…
This is the same LMG, one in US hands and one in UK hands, they both use the same 5.56mm nato round:
Same MG in US hands under name M249
In Brittish hands…
The (Class 87) Brittish L108A1 5.56mm Light MG is a 5.56mm NATO MG, In CCMT it can penetrate 25mm steel at 500 meters… How about that for a 5.56 round, in reality is like 3.5 mm… It’s the same MG as Sweds use (Ksp 90) or US (M249), its made by FN under name Minimi.
The US version “M-249 5.56mm SAW” (Class 9) has lower values then the same weapon in British hands.. (se a bow) But still the values are totally off there too, In CCMT it penetrates 8mm steel at 500 meter..
As aditional strange thing is that they hav in CCMT a point blank at 120 meters… In reality its maybe less then half.
The “Type-68 AKM Assault Rifle” (class 35) … Has a standard WP 7.62*39 (Kalashnikov round)
IN CCMT this is the one mother of a gun, it has a “long range” of 2500 meter, and can penetrate 6mm steel at that distance… (about the same performance as a 37mm AT gun… at that distance)
The “AK-74 Assault Rifle” (Class 33) is the modern Kalashnikov, in CCMT it has a Point Blank at 100! meters and a long range of 1000 !!! meters… At 1000 meter it can penetrate 6 mm steel !!!. It has the 5.45mm*39 WP round……………….
The “RPK-74 Light MG” (Class 3 in CCMT this LMG has a POINT BLANK at 250 meters, well, let’s say in reality it’s something like 1/5 the of that… and most interesting is, it has a longer “Point Blank 250meters” then the SNIPER RIFLES!!! The Sniper Rifles in CCMT has a Pont blank from 150 - 225 meters... Very interesting LMG I must say…
The “AK-47 Assault Rifle” (Class 32) in CCMT it can penetrate 8mm steel at 500 meters… in reality it can hardly do that at 100 meters, with normal rnd…
And, the Machine“DSHK 12.7mm HMG” (class 71) is set to penetrate 18 mm steel at 3500 meters in CCMT. But in reality the standard Bzt2 bullet can just make 15mm at 100 meters, or the B32 bullet 20mm at 100 meters…
(( as for penetrating power, the 12,7mm DShK penetrates 18mm at 3500 meter that can be compared to a Pak 38 5cm AT-gun but just at 2500 meters but ONLY in CCMT))
Here we have 3 types .50 HMG in CCMT:
In CCMT this .50 on a tripod this has 3000 meter range and higher accuracy of all .50. Its POINT BLANK is 300 meters!
In CCMT this AA mounted .50, has a point blank at 50 meters
In CCMT this .50 HMG is on a Stryker, it has v good sensors and optical aiming devices, its Point blank [b]is JUST 30 meters and, it has a long range of just 1000 meter its has less range and less accuracy then the tripod monthed 50 HMG, wich has a range of 3000 meters! ...[/b] !!
Also the Amphibious Assault Vehicle use this Coaxis .50
In CCMT notice that the .50 Coaxis AFV MG with optics (class 1) has a point blank at just 30 meters!!!... And the AA .50 (class 64) has a Point blank at 50 meters!!, and the tripod mounted .50 (class 20) has a point blank at a stunning 300 meters!!!. But in reality the Coaxis should have longest range and best accuracy... Here its all reversed!
Notice how all of em has different penetration data in CCMT... The tripod mounted .50 has grater range and higher accuracy... Puzzelinge... The Coaxis stable optical sensor has the lowest range and lowest accuracy, but only in CCMT...
And its more on the .50 front in CCMT:
Even more strange is the US made .50 in UK hands, its called "L1A1 12.7mm HMG" (class 99) monted on a tripod in CCMT. It must have some fun ammo, as as it can penetrate 200mm steel at 600 meters, and 150mm steel at 3000 meters, with a aoutstanding accurracy! Well, not even the King tiger 88mm L71 can do this, not even close (King Tiger can penetrate a humble 132mm at 2000 meters! Stupid germans! They shold have replaced the 88 L71 with the CCMT .50 HMG!)
Well, this is a start… Any thoughts…??
(edit and fixed broken image link, and spellings)
Last edited by AT_Stalky on Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:32 pm; edited 3 times in total
Useless thread as seems noone from the developers gonna reply here becoz:
Looks like they don't understand what u r talking about.
Looks like they didn't make any research at all and answering in this thread will point that out.
Looks like they just copy pasted random data from different versions of CCM and CC3/4/5/mods as they don't understand what they r doing. And answering in this thread will point that out.
Why bring that crap here and discuss it? They seem to be statisfied with sales so why should they bother chnging anything...
...u were stupid enuf to buy it - now be even more stupid to remake the game to make it playable .
I don't really understand how Matrix allowed such "product" to be released - prolly corruption .
And i will never believe such kind of "product" was chosen for the USMC as the training simulator....
It's like simulator of CC, well untalented parody on CC.
I think that we need some documented data on RL weapons and their performance first.
As for ranges:
What do they mean?
IMO point blank range is point blank range (according to teh internets, point blank range of M4 is about 300m), medium range is maximum effective range and long range is maximum range.
Long range for AK-47 seems to be based on maximum range.
On the other hand M4 long range isn't maximum range.
Nightmarish data weirdness aside, I think that the main problem is that CC is pretty obsolete when it comes to weapon stats.
It derives penetration and accuracy from the same stat (weapon range), which means that one or both of these stats are probably wrong.
It means that for example it can't simulate the same weapon being fired with different optics.
Similarly, there's no division into penetration and stopping power, which means that weapons that have high penetration but leave small wounds can incapitate target that they would need several shots to incapitate in real life.
Also, there's a question of loss of performance of weapons on battlefield.
IMO it should be handled by the game engine, not the weapons data.
There are many states that should affect accuracy:
Accuracy, experience, morale, suppression, wind, etc.
In a good system one should expect to be able to enter weapon tests data, weapon/projectile stats and get a realistic battlefield result.
If the results are wrong, then there's something wrong with calculations.
If soldiers can hit targets at maximum range that is much longer than maximum effective range, then there's something wrong with calculations.
More, the game should be able to differentiate between penetration and stopping power.
Na, then you don’t understand what “Point Blank" row is in CC... It’s at point blank range in battle...
300 meter as Point Blank???? Point blank is a high prob range for hit mate... In battle with an AK its like 40 or 50 meter depend on the gunner, even 30 meter for some gunners. Some Snipers or marksmen have far longer PB ofcose..
Qoute: “There are many states that should affect accuracy:
Accuracy, experience, morale, suppression, wind, etc.”
Apart form wind... Man, have you played CC so little so you have not seen that theas things are effecting accuracy in CC??? You should probly pay more attention when you gaming… And probly play CCMT less… This is what CC simulates best…
Qoute “In a good system one should expect to be able to enter weapon tests data, weapon/projectile stats and get a realistic battlefield result.”
What?? Its what the values are used for and what made CC so grate from other games. PB- Close – medium – Long and Acc and penetration at them different ranges….
Qoute “It derives penetration and accuracy from the same stat (weapon range), which means that one or both of these stats are probably wrong.
It means that for example it can't simulate the same weapon being fired with different optics.”
What are you talking about??? It can simulate same weapon used with or without optics man… You just make a new weapon for it…. In CCMT all M16/M4 have same values… It don’t matter if they have optics, or red dots, or just open iron sights (only DM is set difrent)…
This is the REASON we have many weapon slots mate… So each of them weapon should have had its own set of data… A red dot should have faster time for fire, and grater accuracy at close range and be same as open iron in long range.. A Scoped shall have better accuracy, but take longer to aim, thus make it less good in close combat (as in real life).. The open iron sight shall have a middle of them values… Its just to make a weapon with them values for EACH WEAPON man…
Don’t you understand this??
IMO it should be handled by the game engine, not the weapons data.
There are many states that should affect accuracy:
Accuracy, experience, morale, suppression, wind, etc.
apart from wind it seems that's exactly what CC engine does .
Quote:
If the results are wrong, then there's something wrong with calculations.
About the M4A1 5,56 DM ”designated marksman”
1) M4 DM version has THE faster reloade time compared to the other regular M4 – M16 its just (10) = 1 secund.
2) its time to fire is 0.1 second same as the rest of the M4 and M16, (its a sniper rifle..)!!!!
3) ….and its SETUP TIME is fastest of them all (10) = 1 secund (its a sniper rifle..)!!!!
Na, then you don’t understand what “Point Blank" row is in CC... It’s at point blank range in battle...
300 meter as Point Blank???? Point blank is a high prob range for hit mate... In battle with an AK its like 40 or 50 meter depend on the gunner, even 30 meter for some gunners. Some Snipers or marksmen have far longer PB ofcose..
So, it's a point blank like in coloquial speech.
Then what real point blank range would be in CC? Short range? Medium range?
Also, could you link to sources of your data? They could be useful for modding.
AT_Stalky wrote:
Qoute: “There are many states that should affect accuracy:
Accuracy, experience, morale, suppression, wind, etc.”
Apart form wind... Man, have you played CC so little so you have not seen that theas things are effecting accuracy in CC???
I have seen them affecting accuracy.
Which is nowhere near using 9000-11000 rounds to get a kill in battle, that you mentioned in WH40000 thread.
AT_Stalky wrote:
What are you talking about??? It can simulate same weapon used with or without optics man…
I'm talking about how weapon penetration doesn't change when optics are changed. For example a weapon with standard optics may have close range for accuracy 150m and weapon with excellent optics may have close range for accuracy 500m (like Springfield in CC5). Penetration may change between 150 and 500m, so the weapon with 500m will have less realistic penetration (like in for example penetration being different on 150, 300 and 500m).
Qoute "So, it's a point blank like in coloquial speech.
Then what real point blank range would be in CC? Short range? Medium range? "
And why dont you go to library and get some serios books about ammo spending in combat, or how combat effect humans and there ability. Combat is not the shooting range you know where everyone hits half bad to good, only a few operates as on the shooting range on a battlefield.
Which is nowhere near using 9000-11000 rounds to get a kill in battle, that you mentioned in WH40000 thread
brr, u r scaring me
as i've already explain to u in CSO/CCO in combat most of time soldiers shoot toward direction of the enemy not at enemy himself.
take squad in CC and fire at house to suppress potential enemy there while other units maneuvre and then count the number of bullets spent to get 1 kill.
I quote my self:
“”Or try Iraq, since 2002 (to 2007)USA have used a half a billion rounds (500 000 000)rounds. Of em about 20 to 30 % has been used in combat situation, rest in training.
So they used between 100 000 000 to 150 000 000 rounds to kill how many Iraqis?
((this year alone USA will make 1.8 billion 1 800 000 000 5.56 & 7.62 rnds))””
And you shall know that the 500 000 000 (half a BILLION) rounds used in Iraq, they INCLUDE all calibres from 5.56 to largest calibres…..
Think about it, or even better start make some own research..
OK MEN We are drifting, lest Get back to original topic… See first post again plz… And continue from there…
So, why don't you write about why the HE is so deadly? We are dying to hear it.
Personally, I would add the question of helmets and body armour.
Insurgent shouldn't have them and Urbanian body armour should be stronger.
AT_Stalky wrote:
And why dont you go to library and get some serios books about ammo spending in combat, or how combat effect humans and there ability.
I don't have such books in any of local libraries.
AT_Stalky wrote:
Combat is not the shooting range you know where everyone hits half bad to good, only a few operates as on the shooting range on a battlefield.
Which as you and Dima said is already taken in account in to-hit calculations.
Weapons file is about performance of weapons, not about performance of soldiers.
If a soldier can't fire the weapon accurately because of battlefield conditions, then it should be dynamically simulated by the game engine, not by base weapons data.
Dima wrote:
as i've already explain to u in CSO/CCO in combat most of time soldiers shoot toward direction of the enemy not at enemy himself.
take squad in CC and fire at house to suppress potential enemy there while other units maneuvre and then count the number of bullets spent to get 1 kill.
Do they fire toward direction of the enemy when they have clear line of sight too?
Also, if they do, then game should have some distinction between firing at enemy and firing in direction of enemy.
Have you ever seen CC soldiers or AI teams firing towards buildings or muzzle flashes to suppress them?
Again, it's an engine problem.
Oh, I wonder what’s so hard to understand Theiron?
Limits and CC Engine problems? hmm, lets see:
Have you look at the initial post? You fined it “it’s an engine problem” when they set 2 of the same weapons with different penetrating power… The British SAW 5.56 with 25mm steel penetrating power vs the US m249 with less values.. is that a “CCMT engine problem”?
Is the .50 values set in the different weapons “an engine problem” in CCMT ??? A tripod HMG is more accurate then a Coaxis .50? And the penetration of them is set different, is that an “engine problem” ?? And here coaxis have A POINT PLANK of 30 meter, and AA of 50 meters, and the .50 tri pod has 300 METER POINT BLANK… How about that, is that a CC “engine problems” ???
Is the penetration power of the 5.56 and the 5.45 and 7.62 WP round at grate distance is that “ENGINE PROBLEMS” ??
How about the UK used .50 that is better then a 88mm L71 gun.. Is that an “CC engine problem” to??
Is the monster values set in the Type 68 assult rifle an “CC engine problem” where a 7.62 WP round outperforms a 37mm AT gun…???
Is the lacking of Sabots to the main gun of all tanks and AFV in CCMT is that “Engine Problems” to ???
Why is the M4 marksman weapon set to have less time to set up and fire, but in reality a sniper used rifle take long time to set up and get a shot of the a regular rifle… is that “engine problems” ???
Is it an “engine problem” when a LMG has Longer Point blank then the SNIPER RIFLES in CCMT!!! And Btw why does that russian LMG has so long Point Blank, is not better then the Brittish or US LMG... WHY?? Is it an "Engine Problem"
Is it an “Engine problem” when the .50 coaxis HMG has a point blank lesser then the M4 and M16 rifles… !!!!!!!!!!!!!
I sit an “CC engine problem” when the M4 and M16 has same values even if some have iron sights and some red dots rifles… ?
And, what you think they do with all em round in Iraq, 500 millions rounds fired in 5 years?? What they fired em on?
There is nothing wrong with the CC engine, if one know how to set the data…
I have to believe my initial post is so hard to understand that you just cant understand it. Im Swedish and probly v hard to understand. I tried with grapix image side by side compare of the data but I probly failed in making it understandable..
Im sorry, I cant explain it any better.
edit spelling.
Last edited by AT_Stalky on Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:31 pm; edited 3 times in total
This is interesting, here is the UK “L85A2” (Class 84). It’s a 5.56 nato round.
And lets compare it so the US M-4 5,56 rifle. In CCMT the L85 has a penetration of 18mm, US rifle has less then half????! WHY?
Where is the logic in this??
((The UK L85 rifle outpreforms the 2cm Flak L 115 with its Pzgrenade at 500 meters... That is in CCMT... ))
Lets look at the way they set Point Blank and the medium range for some coaxis MGs in CCMT
Lets see the point blank and medium values. :
The “M2 .50cal Coax HMG” has a Point blank 30 meter. A medium range of 400 meters.
The “L94A1 7.62mm Coax” is a coaxis 7,62 nato ammo MG in Challenger tank, has a Point Blank at 100 meters, and can penetrate 25 mm steel…
This 7,62 MG has longer medium range at 500 meters..
The “M-240 7.62mm Coax MMG” is a US 7,62 Nato ammo MG in many AFV. It has a Point Blank at 75 and it can penetrate less then half of what the UK 7,62 MG abow can..
And it has a medium range of 500 meters..
The “PKMT 7.62mm coax” is a 7.62 coaxis in Russian tanks. It has a Point Blank at 200 meters,
It has an outstanding medium range of 1000 meters…
Its double the ranges then the .50 and the nato 7.62 Coaxis MG abow…
This Russian gun PKMT ::
Is an awesome weapon no doubt! But… Not that awesome… In CCMT at 1000 meter it can penetrate 10mm steel, but the US M240 can just penetrate 8 mm at 500 meters... (both are really wrong ofcose)
What is the logic in this? Is there any logic at all?? Anyone have a idea?
Please help me...
Last edited by AT_Stalky on Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:36 pm; edited 2 times in total
Oh, I wonder what’s so hard to understand Theiron?
Limits and CC Engine problems? hmm, lets see:
Have you look at the initial post? You fined it “it’s an engine problem” when they set 2 of the same weapons with different penetrating power… The British SAW 5.56 with 25mm steel penetrating power vs the US m249 with less values.. is that a “CCMT engine problem”?
Is the .50 values set in the different weapons “an engine problem” in CCMT ??? A tripod HMG is more accurate then a Coaxis .50? And the penetration of them is set different, is that an “engine problem” ?? And here coaxis have A POINT PLANK of 30 meter, and AA of 50 meters, and the .50 tri pod has 300 METER POINT BLANK… How about that, is that a CC “engine problems” ???
Is the penetration power of the 5.56 and the 5.45 and 7.62 WP round at grate distance is that “ENGINE PROBLEMS” ??
How about the UK used .50 that is better then a 88mm L71 gun.. Is that an “CC engine problem” to??
Is the monster values set in the Type 68 assult rifle an “CC engine problem” where a 7.62 WP round outperforms a 37mm AT gun…???
Is the lacking of Sabots to the main gun of all tanks and AFV in CCMT is that “Engine Problems” to ???
Why is the M4 marksman weapon set to have less time to set up and fire, but in reality a sniper used rifle take long time to set up and get a shot of the a regular rifle… is that “engine problems” ???
Is it an “engine problem” when a LMG has Longer Point blank then the SNIPER RIFLES in CCMT!!! And Btw why does that russian LMG has so long Point Blank, is not better then the Brittish or US LMG... WHY?? Is it an "Engine Problem"
Is it an “Engine problem” when the .50 coaxis HMG has a point blank lesser then the M4 and M16 rifles… !!!!!!!!!!!!!
I sit an “CC engine problem” when the M4 and M16 has same values even if some have iron sights and some red dots rifles… ?
Of course they aren't. I didn't feel like commenting on them, because those weapon data errors are downright pathetic and speak for themselves.
When I talked about the engine, I referred about your custom of talking about how soldiers perform differently on battlefields and on shooting range.
AT_Stalky wrote:
And, what you think they do with all em round in Iraq, 500 millions rounds fired in 5 years?? What they fired em on?
Judging by videos on YT, they don't know.
AT_Stalky wrote:
There is nothing wrong with the CC engine, if one know how to set the data…
Bullshit, there's a lot of things in this area that are wrong with the CC engine and could use improvement. Starting with enemy AI and soldier behaviour and ending with some of the aspects of how weapons work. Especially mortars. I hate CC mortars .
Try playing Firefight and you'll see.
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!
.jpg)
in CCMT this LMG has a POINT BLANK at 250 meters, well, let’s say in reality it’s something like 1/5 the of that… and most interesting is, it has a longer “Point Blank 250meters” then the SNIPER RIFLES!!! The Sniper Rifles in CCMT has a Pont blank from 150 - 225 meters... Very interesting LMG I must say…
.
.
.
.
