Improvement proposal I - OP fire draining

[Alby]

The OP fire routine in WAW uses something alot better than the "op fire confirm routine" (which I never use BTW)
There is the "special OP fire" as it is called.
just when you think an enemy has used all its shots, it can sometimes surprize you with more shots. this way, you never actually know if an enemy will return fire or not, after it has used all its op fire shots.
This routine would be much better than the "OP fire confirm" routine, IMHO

[Artur]

Alby said:
The OP fire routine in WAW uses something alot better than the "op fire confirm routine" (which I never use BTW)
There is the "special OP fire" as it is called.
just when you think an enemy has used all its shots, it can sometimes surprize you with more shots. this way, you never actually know if an enemy will return fire or not, after it has used all its op fire shots.
This routine would be much better than the "OP fire confirm" routine, IMHO

The special OP fire results in unrtealistic number of kills sometimes.
1. If you attack a Panther with several(5) T34/85 from different direction it should not have that many OP fire points as it would have in WaW. (CM models this situation the best). So a unit without!!! support but some special OP fire can still prevail.

2. You have ona tank in a keyholed position and have some small calibre ATGs near it. Here the special OP fire helps a bit and because of this situation less unrealistic events occur, however the tanks' op fire can still be burned with scores of jeeps. The best solution would be to set every unit to fire at a specific target type. Even with special OP fire sometimes unrealistic results can occur(example 1.) on the other handt the spec OP fire may not be enough (example 2.)

Artur.

[c_of_red]

It's called combined arms for a reason. If you have a single unit that is unsupported, then it should be swamped and killed. Your 'soak off' is the game version of the single most common tactic every invented. It's presenting one unit with more targets then it can deal with.
This tactic is several thousnd years old and has survived the transition from clubs and spear thru Swords and Pilum thru Heavy Cavalry right up to Star Wars. The current thinking on defeating an ABM system is giving it more targets then it can deal with, which is the same thing the Roman legions did 2,000 years ago.
No, the tactic of swamping a single unit and overwhelming it with numbers is best countered by not leaving a unit out where it can be swamped. The Mil-speak term is unsupported.
In game terms, you need to have another unit with it's range set to where it will op fire at an enemy that is closing in for the kill. What works even better is having the rest of the platoon supporting.
Gaming the system by giving an unsported unit a majic weapon that can fire hundreds of times faster in the game then in reallife and never runs out of rounds is sort of silly, when it is easier to just learn the proper tactics.

[Mustang]

We're not talking about swamping a unit with more units than it can kill. We're talking about sending in two jeeps ahead of your heavy tanks to draw all the enemy fire. Realistically, the movement would happen simultaneously, and your guns would spot the tanks early on and open fire on them.

I have an idea that might work. How about a unit only op-fires once per every enemy unit, except if it fires back? That way, the jeeps, trucks or whatever will only take one hit, and so will the expensive units. Won't solve the problem completely, but its an idea.

[Artur]

Mustang said:
We're not talking about swamping a unit with more units than it can kill. We're talking about sending in two jeeps ahead of your heavy tanks to draw all the enemy fire. Realistically, the movement would happen simultaneously, and your guns would spot the tanks early on and open fire on them.

...

Exactly.

In a real world defense the different squads/teams fire on different type of attackers like MGs on infantry, ATGs on armor light ATGs on armoured cars etc. A heavy tank or ATG will not waste it's shot on the folowing armoured car or halftrack when there is a smaller calibre to do the job. They shoot at the heavy tanks instead.
This cannot be done in SP yet unless Don and Andy find the means to implement this improvement... (hint hint )

Artur.

[DRG]

The game already has built in selective op-fire. I let this debate go on hoping SOMEONE experienced would make this point while I work in WinSPWW2 but I see that is not to be. Tanks will not open fire on jeeps and trucks unless they are right on top of the tank. The game allows secondary units the "privilege" of dealing with things like trucks

Let's examine the assertion that all you need to do is send in two jeeps ahead of your heavy tanks to draw all the enemy fire.

Really? I don't think so.

Please run the attached scenario "Test 275"

You are the Israelis. Your job is to stay quiet until the Syrian T-72's arrive. You will be faced initially by not two but six trucks and jeeps attempting to draw your fire and force you to reveal your position

As this is a test of the games Opfire routine for tanks vs. jeeps and or other tanks all you, as the Israeli player need to do is press end turn and observe how the game behaves. The T-72's will not arrive until turn four and will be destroyed .After turn one the jeeps and trucks will wander around in the Israeli LOS trying unsuccessfully to draw the Merkavas fire.

Now load scenario "Test 276"

Same scenario but with HMG's to take care of the trucks. Just keep pressing end turn .Watch and observe what happens.

In both scenarios the Merkavas have ample opportunity to fire but don't.


Don

[RVPERTVS]

So, why then in my regular games enemy AI infantry and light vehicles often drain my tank´s opfire?

[Artur]

DRG said:
The game already has built in selective op-fire. I let this debate go on hoping SOMEONE experienced would make this point while I work in WinSPWW2 but I see that is not to be.

DRG said:
Tanks will not open fire on jeeps and trucks unless they are right on top of the tank. The game allows secondary units the "privilege" of dealing with things like trucks

Let's examine the assertion that all you need to do is send in two jeeps ahead of your heavy tanks to draw all the enemy fire.

Really? I don't think so.

Yes they will not open fire on trucks and jeeps. If I ever told jeeps is because of my SPWaW past and some old instincts syill work. I tested a hell lot my African campaign I got to know the engine to a certain extent, and yes jeeps don't draim. BUT.

I also modified your 2 excellent scenarios. (OFF the maps are beautiful ON)
In the first scen I changed the trucks and jeeps to APCS and other light armored carriers which can do no harm to the Israeli tanks. I also added an infantry company.

In the second scenario I made all the changes above and I also changed most-but not all- Israely MGs to M136 a light man portable AT weapon. This is a combined arms defense with the tanks dealing with tanks, MGs dealing with infantry and the M136 dealing with the light armoured vehicled in orser not to harass the other units. Now this cannot be done in WinSPMBT.

Look Don, I really appreciate your and Andy's work very much. This is a very good game this is why I am still playing SP -I abandoned SPWaW for good- and not Combat Mission which has a more advanced engine, but this game has the OOB's the modern stuff and the good designer tools. And it looks very cool IMHO of course I like 2D stuff .
You have corrected many irrealistic phenomenons which made the SP engine much better like the reverse moving, the load/unload cost, reentering rebvetments, realistic artillery delay etc.

This op fire draining is the worst disease of the SP engine
and it can be cured as mentioned above. I also know doing this in the C code spaghetti is not simple. But it is very much worth doing it IMHO. (together with the spotting events. Cannot you make them visible only to one side?)

If these phenomenons wuld be solved WinSPMBT would have almost every feature a gamer would like to have. (Some bridge layers on the streams are missing). With these correction I can imagine that I would spend playing with it another 10 years.

Everyone, please try the attached scenarios to see what I am talking about.

Wish you all the best,
Artur.