Jump to content

Infantry volume of fire or lack thereof


blond_knight

Recommended Posts

Having a blast since buying, only problem is Im spending more time in the mission editor than playing scenarios.

The thing Ive noticed is when infantry engages infantry there doesn't seem to be a lot of "fury" as Id expect. Unless the sound effects aren't synched to the firing. Does increasing the troop skill level help?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, blond_knight said:

Does increasing the troop skill level help?

 

Welcome to the community.

 

Given that you are spending time in the Mission Editor - have you tried it? :)

 

Just adjust the skill level and hit "test".

 

The other option is to use say "Suppress" to increase the volume of fire.

 

Also depending on the level of experience you bring to the Sim your expectations may need to be "adjusted".

 

Whilst YouTube, etc. tend to show a lot of "spray and pray" footage, apart from the initial suppression to regain the initiative, most professional armies are disciplined and fire at known targets, count their rounds etc.

 

Edited by Gibsonm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gibsonm said:

 

Welcome to the community.

 

Given that you are spending time in the Mission Editor - have you tried it? :)

 

Just adjust the skill level and hit "test".

 

The other option is to use say "Suppress" to increase the volume of fire.

 

Also depending on the level of experience you bring to the Sim your expectations may need to be "adjusted".

 

Whilst YouTube, etc. tend to show a lot of "spray and pray" footage, apart from the initial suppression to regain the initiative, most professional armies are disciplined and fire at known targets, count their rounds etc.

 

I havent actually tried the skill level or the suppress options, I guess I was hoping the AI would know to do it automatically.  I can say though that the claymores break up Soviet infantry assaults every bit as well as I was taught.

I'll try your suggestions thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, blond_knight said:

I havent actually tried the skill level or the suppress options, I guess I was hoping the AI would know to do it automatically.

 

This is part of the learning curve.

 

Because its a simulation you have the power to simulate what you want. E.g. What happens if I encounter poorly equipped infantry at low skill level versus well equipped, well trained infantry.

 

The AI will then act as expected.

 

Unfortunately you can't assume that / rely on the AI will do something that isn't in line with what you are simulating.

 

e.g. you will be disappointed if you put conscript militia with low morale in a scenario and expect them to act like elite troops, with good equipment and high morale.

 

Low morale, poorly equipped, conscript militia may well conduct an attack, but they will likely faulter earlier, and possibly break off the attack, or even surrender, depending on what they are up against.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Having some LMG's in the mix tends to raise the volume of fire a fair bit too. Also, you can equip infantry with under-slung rifle grenade launchers (by giving them ammo for it in the mission editor), but i dont think the AI will use them- a player needs to do it. While there is certainly 'room for improvement' with some of the infantry behavior, they work well once you know what to expect from them; not just with engagements, but also on routes and at waypoint tactics.

 Welcome to the forum anyway, maybe see you on the field if you get into the multiplayer side of it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
4 hours ago, Mirzayev said:

Surrendering is based on scripted events in the scenario, but is certainly a good option to include based on unit quality.

But you can just as well have incompetent but fanatic troops; there's ample evidence for that - not the least Germany 1945, or the first Gulf War (the one between Iraq and Iran).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
11 hours ago, blond_knight said:

The thing Ive noticed is when infantry engages infantry there doesn't seem to be a lot of "fury" as Id expect. Unless the sound effects aren't synched to the firing.

They are.

Now, the default load for each soldier is 210 rounds, 6 + 1 magazines effectively. That's sufficient for aimed fire, but not enough for half a minute on full auto; give computer-controlled units unlimited power, and their stupidity will know no limits; IOW, be careful what you wish for... ;)

Another factor we need to consider is infantry survivability. In reality firefights are often drawn out with fleeting targets in a detail-rich environment (just look out of your window and compare the level of detail with what you see in our simulation (and before you bring up a number of shooter games with much more detail, keep in mind that we have to retain the capacity to render maps of up to 100x100km² size (and our customers are actually screaming for even bigger ones, see here (less the screaming, though))).

So, because we don't have that level of detail we need to curb the enthusiasm for fire without making the battles entirely boring. We need to provide some cover in a largely flat world (hence the sink-in feature), and we need to make even our elite troops to miss often because in reality you see your targets often just for seconds as they sprint from one cover to the next. As a human player behind a stabilized coax with a 12x magnifying scope you are actually at a distinct advantage over infantry in Steel Beasts (just as a reminder for those who think that our computer-controlled units are non-humanly good (in some areas, they are). Without these measures infantry would be next to worthless in Steel Beasts, neither threat nor asset.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ssnake said:

But you can just as well have incompetent but fanatic troops; there's ample evidence for that - not the least Germany 1945, or the first Gulf War (the one between Iraq and Iran).

 

Certainly true, but I would argue that in the interest of gameplay in a Steel Beasts scenario, having conditions to surrender based on the quality of the represented Soldiers makes sense. I am not a fan of missions in which you are seizing an objective from an ill-equipped militia, but they NEVER surrender, no matter the difference in combat power, which ultimately leads to a long and not quite fun game of "find and kill the one enemy Soldier still living to seize the Objective." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mirzayev said:

I am not a fan of missions in which you are seizing an objective from an ill-equipped militia, but they NEVER surrender, no matter the difference in combat power, which ultimately leads to a long and not quite fun game of "find and kill the one enemy Soldier still living to seize the Objective." 

Yes you could script surrendering, or you can make the victory/scoring conditions different, such that you dont have to drive around looking for a guy (who may not surrender until you find him and start shooting at him anyway!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
5 hours ago, Mirzayev said:

I would argue that in the interest of gameplay in a Steel Beasts scenario, having conditions to surrender based on the quality of the represented Soldiers makes sense. 

I would argue that this falls into the responsibility of the mission designer. It's impossible for us to know what kind of exact behavior the mission designer is after to allow us to define a one-size-fits-all standard behavior for surrender. The tool to define a surrender condition is there, and it's easy enough to use it - it just needs to be applied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ssnake said:

I would argue that this falls into the responsibility of the mission designer. It's impossible for us to know what kind of exact behavior the mission designer is after to allow us to define a one-size-fits-all standard behavior for surrender. The tool to define a surrender condition is there, and it's easy enough to use it - it just needs to be applied.

I 100% agree. I think we were talking past each other, as can often happen using the Internet as a medium. The use of a surrender condition is definitely the responsibility of the mission designer; I wanted to voice my support for using this feature, and to showcase that yes, it does exist to newer scenario creators. I normally use the quality level of Troops as a guide to their surrender threshold when setting the conditions. For example, an Elite unit might fight to the death or near-death, while an untrained enemy Militia might break at 50% combat strength when faced with a Platoon of Mech Infantry in IFVs. Again, all hypothetical, and very much a product of the mission designer's ideas. 

 

5 hours ago, Bond_Villian said:

Yes you could script surrendering, or you can make the victory/scoring conditions different, such that you dont have to drive around looking for a guy (who may not surrender until you find him and start shooting at him anyway!)

 

Again, it depends on the scenario in question. In my mind, I was thinking this being applied to clearing an objective in a town or city, where you absolutely would have to fight against fortified infantry, and where it is part of a series of objectives. Having enemy infantry surrender based on certain conditions can effectively remove the enemy from the town, so you wouldn't have to leave a Platoon to remain in the town (clear versus seize), for example. 

Edited by Mirzayev
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Apocalypse 31 said:

I've never had good luck using infantry in Steel Beasts

That would already be a good range for a bajonet-charge :P...ah yes, the Infantry(AI) can be sooo anoying.

 

The accuracy problem with the G36 are also worse then we thought :-D

Edited by Grenny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, blond_knight said:

Thanks Red, yes I need to add the avatar.  Id like to join an MP session but Im still in this part of the learning curve:

Battlesight tank!

where?? I don't se-

OOF!  

Destroyed

 

Ahh, thats much better!

 

With regards to MP, don´t worry we will guide you through.  The basic stuff is alot easier then you think, and you will have a great time Iam sure.  You will learn faster online then on your own, me thinks. Just join and check it out for yourself, all nice folks here, as stated before ;)

 

Red

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...