Jump to content

Improvements for Dismounts?


Apocalypse 31
 Share

Recommended Posts

how does counter battery works? can radar detect the tiny rounds in flight and calculate their trajectory?

Yup.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-battery_radar

You then send a "Love Letter" from your own Artillery.

Who then move to avoid Red's "Love Letter"

Rinse and repeat.

British Army used "Cymbeline" Mortar locating radar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cymbeline_(radar)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 115
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

This thread has gone completely off topic from its original infantry subject. Perhaps someone would like to open a new 'Improvement for Artillery' thread? :(

BEEEP!

"Challenge from Tjay"

"Uh, yes challenge is deviation."

"Challenge accepted!

Tjay you have 58 seconds to discuss "Improvements for Dismounts" starting..... Now." :biggrin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait a minute - I'm not ready.:)

For those mystified by Hedge's post, he is referrring to a 'one joke' BBC radio show that had been running for years in which contestants must talk on a given subject for a minute without repeating any words, deviating from the subject, or hesitating for more than a fraction of a second. I suspect it is a singularly British perversion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wait a minute - I'm not ready.:)

For those mystified by Hedge's post, he is referrring to a 'one joke' BBC radio show that had been running for years in which contestants must talk on a given subject for a minute without repeating any words, deviating from the subject, or hesitating for more than a fraction of a second. I suspect it is a singularly British perversion.

BEEEP!

"Challenge Hedgehog!"

"Yes, Repetition, the word "for" I heard it at least four times."

"Challenge Accepted! You have 1 second to discuss Improvements to Dismounts!"

TJay is rigPweeep!

"At the end of that round Hedgehog finishes speaking so he gets a point!"

*Hedgehog does a victory dance*

Personally I love the ones where Graham Norton and Giles BrandPlllurb slug it out! :)

BEEP!

"Challenge Homer!"

"Yes, Deviation! Get back on Topic!"

"Challenge Accepted!!"

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, all this chaff about Arty and the number of round is nice...but what about the original question relating to "cover for dismounts" Yes....yes...before all you die hard turret heads start hurling abuse at the crunchies please consider this...

Currently it is similar to receiving a hit on your MBT and always being destroyed no matter the type of round or how you have positioned your vehicle. No crew damage.....

Realistically a big metal box is a hell of a lot more obvious on the battle field than a section of troops.

May be an algorithm about game time static improving survivability could work......

Please be fair to the PBI......(poor bloody infantry). :biggrin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, all this chaff about Arty and the number of round is nice...but what about the original question relating to "cover for dismounts" Yes....yes...before all you die hard turret heads start hurling abuse at the crunchies please consider this...

Currently it is similar to receiving a hit on your MBT and always being destroyed no matter the type of round or how you have positioned your vehicle. No crew damage.....

Realistically a big metal box is a hell of a lot more obvious on the battle field than a section of troops.

May be an algorithm about game time static improving survivability could work......

Please be fair to the PBI......(poor bloody infantry). :biggrin:

Currently, troops "sink" in the ground making them harder to spot. Plus when you are hit in combat, you are usually put out of action, be dead or wounded... I'm not sure body armor/helmet can wistand .50 or even 7.62!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Currently, troops "sink" in the ground making them harder to spot. Plus when you are hit in combat, you are usually put out of action, be dead or wounded... I'm not sure body armor/helmet can wistand .50 or even 7.62!

Yes well that is called concealment, what I am talking about is cover. Granted, if you get hit by a .50 you not going to be combat effective. From personal experience a hit with a 7.62 will make you combat ineffective, although still capable of returning fire. Just remember body armour/helmets are really only designed to stop frag, and slow down high velocity rounds so that the Doc has something to stitch together.

Remember....Infantry dont just lie on top of the ground, most armies have SOPs that dictate the period of time infantry units are in a position before they look for or develop cover. Cover can be as simple as a fold in the ground, a thick wall, or a dug in position( a 30cm shell scrap is enough to survive significant indirect and direct fire.

Simulating this cover component would add to an excellent simulator.

Well that's my humble opinion:)

Edited by Tac197
Spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

....and it's not the "direct fire" wounding/killing of Inf that's the biggest problem, it's the artillery! Wounding is probably irrelevant for short scenarios.... arguably, by the time you can get the guy treated, the "game" is finished. But by that argument, why bother with repair or resupply at all?

From an Infantryman's perspective, I just want to see a fair(ish) fight....... on my terms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please be fair to the PBI......(poor bloody infantry). :biggrin:

As UKA's Mech Inf specialist :cul:, I am pleased to see that the PBI are about to get a lot better, a lot more realistic, and a lot more dangerous. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cover can be as simple as a fold in the ground, a thick wall, or a dug in position( a 30cm shell scrap is enough to survive significant indirect and direct fire. Simulating this cover component would add to an excellent simulator. Well that's my humble opinion:)

Read 'All Quiet on the Western Front' to learn how WWI soldiers were always aware of the terrain in their immediate vicinity when 'out in the open'. As you say, a slight fold in the ground can be the difference between life and death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Yes well that is called concealment, what I am talking about is cover.

No, troops sinking into the ground in SB is both cover AND concealment. They become harder to see and, depending on the amount they sink in some areas, nearly impossible to hit with direct and indirect fire. The sinking is not cosmetic, they do so to represent folds in the terrain that are otherwise difficult to represent in a simulation.

And yes, body armor is modeled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but do they "Dig In" over time progressively improving their cover and concealment, Does setting them in a defence tactic improve their survivability under indirect fire, and where in the manual does it state that dismounts sink into the ground providing them with both cover and concealment.

Remember Infantry are very tenacious in defence and will withstand the shock and awe of both direct and indirect fire very well. Well trained, well lead professional soldiers are very hard to push of a position if they don't want to go, and history has shown this in examples like Belleau Wood, Bastogne, and Tobruk to name a few.

In AS it can be defined by our role learnt by every baby grunt from a young age:

To seek out and close with the enemy,

To kill or capture him,

To seize and hold ground,

To repel attack, by day or by night,

Regardless of season, weather or terrain.

Please even up the survivability for the PBI....:biggrin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Yes, but do they "Dig In" over time progressively improving their cover and concealment

Technically "Yes" - the first 10 secnds they are on top of the surface, then they sink in. But you might interpret my answer as sophistry - so, for what you probably meant, the answer is No. At the moment the amount of cover that they receive depends on the "Bumpiness" factor of the terrain theme of the scenario, and the terrain type where they are located. The bumpier the terrain, the deeper they sink in. Therefore, infantry has higher survivability in rough terrain, which is probably a realistic effect.

Actually digging in from a shallow scrape to a two-man foxhole will require certain changes to the way how SB Pro handles terrain as such. That's work for a future version.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, but do they "Dig In" over time progressively improving their cover and concealment, Does setting them in a defence tactic improve their survivability under indirect fire, and where in the manual does it state that dismounts sink into the ground providing them with both cover and concealment.

You can confirm this for yourself just by playing Steel Beasts. The infantry will 'sink' into the ground after a time period, and they become difficult to hit with machine guns or coax. Much less of them is either visible or able to be hit. This should depend on slider settings for that particular ground in the Mission Editor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
Yes, but do they "Dig In" over time progressively improving their cover and concealment, Does setting them in a defence tactic improve their survivability under indirect fire, and where in the manual does it state that dismounts sink into the ground providing them with both cover and concealment.

You are moving the bar now. At first you said the infantry sink was just concealment, and I merely said that was incorrect -- it functions as cover too in SB.

And no, they cannot dig-in per se yet, at least not digging in proper (that I assume you are referring to) in which they construct field fortifications over time by digging fox holes and bunkers. But what is the point when you can have infantry sink up to their eye balls in restricted terrain? Also, this is more of a long term thing in battle, the sinking more than adequately covers the quick 5-10 minute "shallow grave" fox hole that is dug (and it does partly represent that too). Further time is required to fortify beyond that, and most scenarios in SB are over well before infantry could be fortified, or they would move away before that would happen anyway.

That said, it is not like we aren't aware of what is needed in this area, and we have ideas on how to improve it, but to say that infantry aren't survivable because of that is just wrong. Not to mention, they can crawl now, which is a huge stealth and survivability improvement. They can crawl into position without being seen, or they can sprint rapidly to get in a good RPG firing position (or to "get out of dodge").

I think everyone will be absolutely terrified of infantry in woods and towns soon, and of course it is an ongoing improvement like everything else in SB. We get it though, infantry should be improved -- there is always room for improvement. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would just like to point out that many members of the E Sim team are current or former military members, including armor and infantry branch members, and so, have at least a passing familiarity with infantry.

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.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...