|
|
|
Notices |
Do you own this game? Write a review and let others know how you like it.
|
 |
|

July 6th, 2005, 11:56 AM
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 312
Thanks: 5
Thanked 8 Times in 7 Posts
|
|
Re: Possible bug in airborne drops
Sorry to have stirred up the BDM issue again.
Please take note of my question...
Do different types of LEG Infantry get penalized in the damage calcs for an airborne drop. Not Mechanized Infantry, Not Motorized Infantry. LEG.
Specifically, I'm seeing extreme wierdness in the damage to US Airborne MMG, Scout, Sniper, Rifle, 40mm GL, 81mm Mortar, 60mm Mortar, etc. Are any of these unit types penalized or given extra odds of taking damage?
|

July 6th, 2005, 01:55 PM
|
 |
Major General
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 500km from Ulm
Posts: 2,279
Thanks: 9
Thanked 18 Times in 12 Posts
|
|
Re: Possible bug in airborne drops
Exactly:
Anything that is not Para has higher odds to break their bones upon landing ..
__________________
As for AI the most effective work around to this problem so far is to simply use an American instead, they tend to put up a bit more of a fight than your average Artificial Idiot.
... James McGuigan on rec.games.computer.stars somewhen back in 1998 ...
|

July 6th, 2005, 02:10 PM
|
 |
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sweden, EU
Posts: 75
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Possible bug in airborne drops
Quote:
scJazz said:
Specifically, I'm seeing extreme wierdness in the damage to US Airborne MMG, Scout, Sniper, Rifle, 40mm GL, 81mm Mortar, 60mm Mortar, etc. Are any of these unit types penalized or given extra odds of taking damage?
|
I have no airborne training, but aren heavy support weapons dropped spearalty somehow? A ranger doesnt land with a AGL strapped on his back right?
Havent anyone seen a russian BMD drop? They even use brake rockets for the final decent.
__________________
"The essence of war is violence. Moderation in war is imbecility"
-British Sea Lord John Fisher
|

July 6th, 2005, 04:31 PM
|
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 77
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Possible bug in airborne drops
Quote:
Pergite said:
Quote:
scJazz said:
Specifically, I'm seeing extreme wierdness in the damage to US Airborne MMG, Scout, Sniper, Rifle, 40mm GL, 81mm Mortar, 60mm Mortar, etc. Are any of these unit types penalized or given extra odds of taking damage?
|
I have no airborne training, but aren heavy support weapons dropped spearalty somehow? A ranger doesnt land with a AGL strapped on his back right?
Havent anyone seen a russian BMD drop? They even use brake rockets for the final decent.
|
I'm sorry for bringing the topic from leg to wheel, I assumed "leg" was an abbrevation. 
But @Pergite, rocket brakes? Have you got any pictures of that?! 
__________________
What would Cliff Richard do?
|

July 6th, 2005, 05:41 PM
|
 |
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sweden, EU
Posts: 75
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Possible bug in airborne drops
Quote:
SCAJolly said:
But @Pergite, rocket brakes? Have you got any pictures of that?!
|
Yes it can be dropped either by multi-parachute or parachute retro-rocket system. It was however very hard to find any pictures of the retro-rocket system. I have only seen it in films before, and only managed to find one lousy picture, quite strange really because it looks specatcular. Mybe someone here that is better than me on russian could make a try.
Btw: Does anyone have a good link to the movie about the classic "C-130´s attacks" movie, when they are rolling trucks across an airfield?
__________________
"The essence of war is violence. Moderation in war is imbecility"
-British Sea Lord John Fisher
|

July 6th, 2005, 06:36 PM
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 312
Thanks: 5
Thanked 8 Times in 7 Posts
|
|
Re: Possible bug in airborne drops
OK you guys can have this hijacked thread for the BDM discussion. I'll go start another one.
|

July 6th, 2005, 06:48 PM
|
 |
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Sweden, EU
Posts: 75
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Possible bug in airborne drops
Quote:
scJazz said:
OK you guys can have this hijacked thread for the BDM discussion. I'll go start another one.
|
Or why not go back to the thread where the problem you have allready was discussed. I even think there is a answear for your question there. [Link]
__________________
"The essence of war is violence. Moderation in war is imbecility"
-British Sea Lord John Fisher
|

July 6th, 2005, 07:10 PM
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 312
Thanks: 5
Thanked 8 Times in 7 Posts
|
|
Re: Possible bug in airborne drops
Quote:
Pergite said:
Quote:
scJazz said:
OK you guys can have this hijacked thread for the BDM discussion. I'll go start another one.
|
Or why not go back to the thread where the problem you have allready was discussed. I even think there is a answear for your question there. [Link]
|
That thread is full of stuff regarding... drum roll... dropping tanks and stuff! Not Leg Infantry which is what I'm talking about.
|

July 6th, 2005, 09:51 PM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: GWN
Posts: 12,677
Thanks: 4,111
Thanked 5,900 Times in 2,905 Posts
|
|
Re: Possible bug in airborne drops
Quote:
scJazz said:
OK you guys can have this hijacked thread for the BDM discussion. I'll go start another one.
|
You got your answer right at the start by a couple of the guys but I'll do it again
If by "Leg infantry" you mean NON Para class units they will take significantly higher casualties than any "para" class unit. If you are pushing regular infantry out the door of a C-130, untrained in combat jumping you get high casualty counts when they land. We did this so you WOULD NOT use regular infantry as paratroops. They aren't paratroops, they are not trained as paratroops so when they land more of them get hurt. If you want Para's , purchase paras. The have less chance of injury on landing and once we issue the ver101 patch they will be taking even less casualties.
Part of the reason there were higher casualties even for PARA class units than everyone seems to think is "normal" was squads of paras RARELY all land nice and neat together so we added in a few extra "casualties" to refect the fact that men dropped in combat sometime get separated for many hours from their units so these "lost men" effectively become casualties in a battle that may only last a couple of hours in game terms. There are always men scattered. Less so now but para drops aren't that common anymore either so who really knows? Training drops are NOT combat drops and I doubt there are many people on this list who have actually been dropped in combat. Probably a few who have been dropped in training but that's not the same thing. The code has been massaged a bit to lower para casualty rates a bit to make everyone happy and that will be included in the CD version and the patch we will issue within the next few weeks
Don
|

July 7th, 2005, 08:16 PM
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 312
Thanks: 5
Thanked 8 Times in 7 Posts
|
|
Re: Possible bug in airborne drops
Quote:
DRG said:
You got your answer right at the start by a couple of the guys but I'll do it again
If by "Leg infantry" you mean NON Para class units they will take significantly higher casualties than any "para" class unit.
<SNIP>
The code has been massaged a bit to lower para casualty rates a bit to make everyone happy and that will be included in the CD version and the patch we will issue within the next few weeks
Don
|
Quote:
]scJazz said:
Specifically, I'm seeing extreme wierdness in the damage to US Airborne MMG, Scout, Sniper, Rifle, 40mm GL, 81mm Mortar, 60mm Mortar, etc. Are any of these unit types penalized or given extra odds of taking damage?
|
My question was never answered. Although, it is partly my fault for not asking it clearly enough. I'm only referring to Leg infantry not droppable vehicles. I'm looking at US units: Para Rifle, Para MMG, Para Scout, Para Sniper, Para Rifle, Para 40mm GL, Para 81mm Mortar, etc.
I'm seeing out of control levels of damages to some of these units as documented and described in the attached Excel doc.
After I started this thread I went and created a test. I dropped various US Para units from C-130s which had their Experience set to 80. The drops were all done in the same drop zone. The terrain for the zone was 0 level clear terrain. Units were fairly evenly distributed between all C-130s so that no single bad roll for a plane could screw the numbers up.
Results in brief (more detail in Excel doc): 0.29% casualties to US Para Rifle units. 41.07% casualties to US Para Stinger units. Both figures describe casualties as it relates to the number of men in each unit.
See attached...
Thank you,
scJazz
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|