SPWW2 handicaps vs AI

[DRG]

We were hoping to start hearing from both sides Re:Z-fire ......ALL we have heard up to now are people complaining about it......not a lot of people but it's a theme that re-appears

[jivemi]

Originally Posted by DRG

We were hoping to start hearing from both sides Re:Z-fire ......ALL we have heard up to now are people complaining about it......not a lot of people but it's a theme that re-appears

Don't use it myself much but in a past thread somewhere I mentioned that Rommel's men used it in France, that the Eighth Army used it in North Africa, and someone else said that the US Army called it "reconnaissance by fire." In the Armor in Battle series posted by Old Gamer there's an interesting description of tanks using area fire against ATGs:

"I was more or less stymied along the road. This was not good. I also knew that the higher ground was drier ground. I decided then I’m not going down the road. I’ll see if I can go around. I used the ridge to my advantage to get to Marthille. Well, the
Germans must have known this. They must have gathered up from various sources this supply of antitank guns. They spent a lot of time, because this was November,and they were beautifully camouflaged. They had gotten enough underbrush so that they really...camouflaged these guns.There was no evidence of guns when we were going up. We had the light tanks leading, and they’re mobile. We did reconnaissance by fire [my emphasis]. We used .30 caliber. The light tanks were firing their coaxes,because they thought something was suspicious. They were firing. When you hit something solid, it flashes. Suddenly, we got flashes, so we knew we got something there. One of the light tanks, with its 37mm popped one of these suspicious places. Brush and all came down, and there was an antitank gun.So they started popping all over the place. The minute they saw this antitank gun, we had a medium tank come, and they shot 75mm rounds...In 45 minutes, I think we got the largest bag of antitank guns. We got over twenty antitank guns, about eight of them were eighty-eights, but we got them before they got us."--Brig. Gen. (ret.) Albin F. Irzyk

Additionally, from a gaming point of view, z-fire mitigates the "moving adjacent" problem, in which unsuppressed defenders take potshots at infantry who are theoretically 50 meters away yet are invariably spotted and blasted--even if the adjacent hex was the first they moved into that turn.

[Imp]

Originally Posted by DRG

We were hoping to start hearing from both sides Re:Z-fire ......ALL we have heard up to now are people complaining about it......not a lot of people but it's a theme that re-appears

Z fire is perfectly valid needed in many cases like firing through smoke that just dropped at a known enemy or firing at an inseen hex to provoke a reaction or detect if it becomes more suppresed.
Due to game mechanics it should probably be penalised because we can react instantly, use till detected then switch instantly to aimed fire as an example.

Your suggestion to penalise ammo use & possibly shots hence movement makes sense to me despite a post saying some Z fire does not use extra ammo.

I dont use much mainly detection & sometimes MGs if isuppresion effect looks more beneficial than targeting a unit.
However do bring up my AA if it turns out no planes & Z fire in safety from the rear, low ammo count so it would make me think do I need to if ammo use increased.

Using 2 shots & hence using movement points works for me in most cases as the unit is spending time laying down fire, in the case of using it as a recon tool they are also looking for return fire.
Storming a building behind smoke now needs more units laying suppresive fire to achieve the same effect.
2 squads z fire while 3rd attempts to take the position. Z firing now needs a bit of coordinating to maintain the advance.
Defending it also works, lay down the Z fire only to find you missed someone & are out of shots.

Even bumping heads & getting pinned without seeing the firer works for me.

These changes could impact on the game more than expected.

Should also please PBEM who think the other side abuses, have come across this myself makes the game slow & hence boring if they fire virtualy everything, simple thing dont play them again.
With PBEM has a negative effect to if uses 2 shots per Z fire as harder to detect location its coming from l would think.
Theres nothing to stop you Z firing right back at the location his units Z fired from.
Just remember Z fire rarely kills things aimed fire does, sell a feint so they Z fire at virtually nothing while giving away rough locations.

[Imp]

Originally Posted by DRG

We were hoping to start hearing from both sides Re:Z-fire ......ALL we have heard up to now are people complaining about it......not a lot of people but it's a theme that re-appears

Z fire is perfectly valid needed in many cases like firing through smoke that just dropped at a known enemy or firing at an inseen hex to provoke a reaction or detect if it becomes more suppresed.
Due to game mechanics it should probably be penalised because we can react instantly, use till detected then switch instantly to aimed fire as an example.

Your suggestion to penalise ammo use & possibly shots hence movement makes sense to me despite a post saying some Z fire does not use extra ammo.

I dont use much mainly detection & sometimes MGs if suppresion effect looks more beneficial than targeting a unit.
However do bring up my AA if it turns out no planes & Z fire in safety from the rear, low ammo count so it would make me think do I need to if ammo use increased.

Using 2 shots & hence using movement points works for me in most cases as the unit is spending time laying down fire, in the case of using it as a recon tool they are also looking for return fire.
Storming a building behind smoke now needs more units laying suppresive fire to achieve the same effect.
2 squads z fire while 3rd attempts to take the position. Z firing now needs a bit of coordinating to maintain the advance.
Defending it also works, lay down the Z fire only to find you missed someone & are out of shots.

Even bumping heads & getting pinned without seeing the firer works for me.

These changes could impact on the game more than expected.

Should also please PBEM who think the other side abuses, have come across this myself makes the game slow & hence boring if they fire virtualy everything, simple thing dont play them again.
With PBEM has a negative effect to if uses 2 shots per Z fire as harder to detect location its coming from l would think.
Theres nothing to stop you Z firing right back at the location his units Z fired from.
Just remember Z fire rarely kills things aimed fire does, sell a feint so they Z fire at virtually nothing while giving away rough locations.