[Stwa]

CCMX Airport 2a

Weapons and range can also influence the AI when it comes to an attack.

Here the AI demonstrates, that using explosives, like low and high velocity grenades, is (at times) preferred to the classic belly down assault.  

[Stwa]

CCMT Mountain 1c

In most cases, in front of every belly down assault is a good belly down defense.  

As you can see, even some teams with defend orders have hit the dirt (snow). Why? So they won't get shot, that's why.  

The problems associated with AI attacks are many, and NOT always due to their belly down nature, but to other circumstances, that I may take up in another thread.

[LoneRebel]

The AI crawl of death is practically a Close Combat fixture. The AI loves crawling, even over open terrain covered by multiple enemy machine guns.

You'd be surprised, though. As Stwa pointed out in the first post, these belly down attacks sometimes actually work, through sheer force of numbers.  

More than once, I've had what seemed to be a perfect trap, defending units in good cover watching over an open killing field. The enemy comes into it - and actually succeeds! Many times, the field is littered with bodies, but who cares - they made it.

Other times, they AI actually doesn't take many casualties at all in these belly down attacks, and that's where I really get surprised. These times, it's usually because of smoke or supressive fire. The AI sometimes uses smoke correctly, rendering my MGs ineffective. Worse, at other times, the volume of fire being thrown at my MG by all the attacking teams is such that even if the MG isn't wiped out, it's not able to fire back at all. Funny how that happens. Shouldn't it be the other way around?

I'm playing the CC5 Battle of Berlin mod now as the Germans. The Russians' huge numbers (10-man squads) will make for some interesting belly down attacks in the truest Soviet human wave tradition. I might post some screenshots...

[MajorFrank]

LoneRebel,

yep, same thing, sometimes the AI just kind of overwhelms my troops. I sometimes put it down to me giving all possible advantage to the AI and make my troops as green as possible to make it challenging.

And yea, that Battle of Berlin mod can get bloody.

[Stwa]

CCMX Airport 2b

Of course, the AI fairs even worse when trying the totally braindead HP Rambo Tactic.

You guys feel free to add some screenies if you want.  

Remember one of the noobs on page one was thinking that when they run, some of them make it.

Well, that would depend on how far they gotta run, wouldn't it.  

[LoneRebel]

MajorFrank,

Yeah, it does surprise me when those massive AI belly down attacks actually work sometimes. The AI does it by the numbers...  

Actually, I've noted that Close Combat, overall, has quite a love of crawling. The average soldier in Close Combat will spend a lot more time prone than the average soldier in, say, a war movie or first-person shooter. So which one is a more accurate depiction?

I believe that the "prone sprite" in CC also includes kneeling, crouching, moving while crouched, etc. (which would partly explain why soldiers spend so much time prone).

[Stwa]

CCMT Desert 2c

But for the ultimate in pure unaldurated belly combat nothing beats the CCMT desert depression scape.  

Just stand up for a few seconds and you will probably get shot.

Running just doesn't work that well in the sand. It just makes the bad guys chuckle when they pull the trigger.  

[Stwa]

CCMT Rural 2b

Players have different viewpoints on the AI belly down assault.  

But before anyone should come to any judgements regarding method or game superiority, players should log a few games where the AI hardly ever goes belly down, for any reason.  

Here, the AI rifle teams have been coded as armored cars.    

In the modern game, you can imagine what the result might be. But try it, its fun anyway.  

[Stwa]

CCMT Mountain 2a

One thing all players, should have realized by now, the AI shoots at pretty much ALL visible targets.

As firearms developed over time, just shooting at the enemy was eventually construed as attacking.

But, in the modern game, runners are heavily penalized, if the area of the battlefield (or map) is large, or the terrain not restrictive or close.

Consider these remarks from a popular game review  

Because high-tech weapons are so lethal and accurate, the general rule in warfare is that if you can see it, you can kill it. That puts a premium on keeping your units hidden and scattered until the crucial moment. Of course, that's great if you're on the defense, but if you're tasked with attacking, you will eventually have to expose your units in the open.

[LoneRebel]

When tanks are involved in these assaults, they become even more interesting to watch. When the AI has lots of tanks, they sometimes lead with their tanks. This makes no sense at all in a normal game, but since the Soviets in BoB sometimes seem to have even more tanks than infantry squads, it makes sense for them. (The AI Soviets can have up to 8 or 9 tanks on the field at a time.)

The tanks will lead since, naturally, they are faster than the infantry and will get to the AIs VL targets first. If the VL is inside a building and the tanks cannot reach it, they will just randomly roll around outside the building until the infantry arrive.

This makes defending building VLs with infantry a nice tactic against the Soviet AI in BoB - over several battles, a large number of wrecked tanks will pile up outside the building/s.

Unfortunately, in the heat of battle I forgot to take a second screenshot when the Soviets assaulted the station itself with three full squads of infantry.

[Stwa]

Muhahahaha  

That is an excellent pic. Maybe that should have been in the Rambo thread.  

The more I look at it the whackier it looks.  

And the infantry support too.  

Anyway, keep em coming if you feel the urge.  

[Stwa]

CC4 Marche

Here is another attack that was a complete bewilderment to me as it was happening.

How is it the AI, just cant see the armored car dead ahead.  

Each AI soldier leaves the Station Depot, only to be blown away 25 meters later.  

[Stwa]

CC4 Clerf

Here is a rare 2 axis belly down assualt. Of course, it is failing miserably.

Looks like only 5 guys are responsible for most of the allied casualties.

The pic belies the true problem with belly down assaults. And that is the axis of advance, once established, it usually remains the same.

But in this case, more than one axis is established, but from the looks of things, the results are about as predicitable as they would have been with a single line of advance.

[Stwa]

CC4 La Roche

For years, I have noticed forumites complaining at length about the AI Belly Down Assault, but rarely do these people offer an alternate tactic.

Generally, recomendations around the 2009 time frame revolved around the desire to modify the "girly soldier" behaviors associated with the re-releases of CC4 and CC5.

These recomendations must have been partly successful, since some changes in the re-releases were re-re-released.    

But rarely do forumites remark at any length about the AI NOT Belly Down Assault.

I think it is important for all of us to be able to distinguish between those attacks that were in fact all belly down, and those that are not.

The AI in Close Combat is very good by any standard, but you won't get a sense for that until you have logged a lot of time against the AI.

Since all soldiers in CC (AI or HP) spend a lot of time on their bellies, it is hard to observe attacks that are not really belly down. Players get distracted or just ignore that this happens more than they think.

[Stwa]

CC4 Forrieres

In addition, the KIA pattern of the usual belly down assault is a long conga line, which generally means more than one squad or team was involved in the assault.

In the pic from the previous post, notice this conga line is absent. To be sure, once a team feels the heat from the German halftrack, they drop to the ground so they wont be shot, and perhaps they can survive or fight better from a prone position.

In fact, the entire history of firearms leads to the modern notion that the even attackers should attempt to remain concealed for as long as possible, and that attacking can be construed as simply firing your weapons. And this can be better accomplished in most cases from a prone position.

But rarely do forumites describe attacks from AI vehicles, specifically tanks. These are not belly down. There is rarely if ever a conga line of attacking tanks. This is your clue, that the AI does not really coordinate the efforts of each squad or team with one another, but simply lets them move and fight as individual units.

In addition, its clear the game (AI) understands very well, that tank tactics are different from infantry tactics.

P.S. dont tell Brake about the Find A Date Today ads at the bottom of the page.  

[US_Brake]

[Stwa]

CC4 Assenois

Usually, when the AI leads with tanks, the infantry just follows and generally are not needed to assualt the Victory Locations.

But, recalling the line (or axis of advance), mentioned in the above posts, it would seem that tanks might be exempt from this policy. Either that, or they can usually capture the location quicky which removes the necessity to employ a second tank (or team).

The conga line of attacking infantry soldiers in a belly down assualt flies in the face of the assumtion that the AI does not coordinate the activities of multiple squads. But me thinks it is an optical illusion.

In the following screenshot, the AI tanks lead the advance and shoot up everthing in their path. The infantry follows close behind. In fact one team ran past my panzerfaust team, which was cowered in a building trying to get a shot off at the AI tank just West of the South bridge.

The AI team ran past my undetected soldiers in single file, across the road to the North, then detected the team, dropped to dirt, and shot my guys up. It's just all part of the crazy things that can happen in CC.

[Stwa]

[Stwa]

CC4 Simmerath

Another point bears mentioning. Forumites are quick to critisize belly down assaults. The main point being that the attack is visible to the enemy, and belly down movement is the slowest form of movement, so the attack is doomed to fail.

It is interesting that the same forumites do not equally critisize the belly down defense, where AI soldiers are again belly down, AND NOT MOVING AT ALL.  

In some CC game systems, belly down soldiers are visible at rather far distances, and this is the true culprit for failure in these situations.

Some game systems, make prone soldiers hard to vis or locate, and the data gurus have to draw a fine balance to not disturb the abstractions imposed when displaying the individual soldiers on the 2d map. Generally using a Small Soldier mod helps to assist this abstraction.

In the following pic AI vehicles (the Scout Cars), attempt to take the center Victory Locations, while AI infantry (in some cases) take to the defense, but are shot up anyway while they were on their bellies, any assault notwithstanding.

[Stwa]

CC4 Wardin

Here is an interesting attack. In pic 1, the AI is feeding runners into a multi (3) axis belly down assault. The target Victory Location is the one mainly in the center of the map.

As the attack progresses in pic 2, and AI teams are targeted by HP squads, they drop to the ground to continue the assault ala belly down.

In pic 3, the center VL has been captured, so the AI changes course with all squads and continues an all out belly down assault on a different VL to the Southeast.

In any event, the AI is taking unacceptable losses because the map is small, and enemy soldiers have taken defensive positions nearby. The small map and the close proximity of the VLs to one another is what allows the multi axis assault to happen in the first place.

Going prone allows these attackers to stay alive longer and prolong the assault. Nevertheless, that does not mean the attack will succeed. CC does a great job of illustrating the vulnerablities of infantry to modern automatic rifles and grenades.