Soliciting Opinions on Vision Enhancement

Suhiir · #1 May 25th, 2007, 02:50 PM

I'm sure this has been discussed (probably to death) before but I'd like to solicit some opinions.

Using the Cost Calculator we get the following :

US Marine Fire Team (4 men, 1/103-12/114)
M16A4 Rifle (105 ammo)
M249 SAW (90 ammo)
M203 GL (12/4 ammo)
M136/AT4 B (2 ammo)

with 0 Vision = 20 points
with 10 Vision = 23 points
with 20 Vision = 26 points
with 30 Vision = 30 points
with 40 Vision = 100 points

While I'll be more than happy to admit Thermal Vision (40+) is a HUGE advantage (specially under the
right circumstances) I'm a bit concerned about the cost of it on infantry, specifically small infantry, units.

Is the same exact unit worth five units with no vision enhancement?
Is it worth three-and-a-third between 30 and 40 vision?

As with any such question there will, of course, be as many opinions as there are people reading it.
Can we keep this civil and toss some ideas about just to get a feel of what folks think of the issue?

Marcello · #2 May 25th, 2007, 04:06 PM

Noting that I do not play that much (I prefer fiddling with Mobhack or drawing maps) I neverthless think that giving 40 vision to an infantry squad isn't cost effective. But why are you asking this? Are miniaturization efforts regarding thermal imaging to the point where it might be used for standard issue NVGs?

Pats · #3 May 25th, 2007, 04:26 PM

I think it is indeed a huge advantage and worth the cost.
Especially against hostile infantry.
And don't forget the vision 40 is only available later in the game when a good tank cost around 400 points

Marcello · #4 May 25th, 2007, 05:01 PM

The issue is that an US infantry squad has weapons whose range typically do not exceed 10 hexes, while a tank gun or an atgm can shoot much further, fully exploiting TI range advantages. Therefore all you have is the ability to shoot from behind a smoke curtain. And if your squad gets wiped out you will pay dearly for it. I suspect you will need a smoke saturated environment and a fairly open area to get something out of it.

whdonnelly · #5 May 25th, 2007, 05:08 PM

To look at this from another angle, NVG has been standard issue for many US units since the 80s. Therefore it shouldn't cost as much in armies when every line unit has it. It should cost more, but it shouldn't be so much as to throw friendly OOB into something as unrealistic as 2 scout squads and 2 tank vs 2 enemy companies, as I've played a few times.

Marcello · #6 May 25th, 2007, 05:15 PM

"NVG has been standard issue for many US units since the 80s"

But those are built around image intesifier tech rather than TI AFAIK.

Suhiir · #7 May 25th, 2007, 08:08 PM

Quote:

whdonnelly said:
To look at this from another angle, NVG has been standard issue for many US units since the 80s. Therefore it shouldn't cost as much in armies when every line unit has it. It should cost more, but it shouldn't be so much as to throw friendly OOB into something as unrealistic as 2 scout squads and 2 tank vs 2 enemy companies, as I've played a few times.

That's my concern as well.
While I agree it's improbable we'll see TI gear as common issue for infantry units by 2020 I have noticed in the OOB's there are infantry units (and I don't mean specialized recon, commando, or weapon [Dragon, Stinger] units) as early as 1990 (tho most are around 2010) that have TI. And in the US OOB it's hard to find a vehicle, other then common trucks, after 2010 that doesn't have it.

PlasmaKrab · #8 May 26th, 2007, 04:44 AM

To take things from the beginning (sorry, folks, time zones and all that):

-Small arms thermal sights exist in US services since some years (think AN/PAS-13 series), now IDK how current they are in field units.
-There may be an issue with thermal vision range, i.e. there is no way in the game to have thermal vision reaching at less than 2km (several times the range of an infantry squad's small arms). If there was a possibility of having TI with a range of 500m or similar, the cost difference wouldn't be as huge. Now I guess there is no way to change the way vision types are assigned, so that's that.
-Unit cost is only related to unit capabilities. AFAIK there is no way to link unit cost to a specific OOB. Identical units with identical morale/exp ratings have the same cost over all the OOBs. I'd say we need to stick with that rule in order to prevent too large game imbalance.

Thinking about it, it could be interesting to restrict full-range TI to the leading unit of an infantry platoon. That would mitigate the cost issue and provide the long-range recon capability discussed above (up to the arty call ability). Now I don't remember that US platoons use a dedicated command section of any sort, so that may not work in OOBs 12 and 13.

Suhiir · #9 May 26th, 2007, 10:20 AM

I'll be adding a dedicated command section for both platoons and companies and you're suggestion about them only having the capability as an option sounds great, thanks !

Marcello · #10 May 26th, 2007, 05:28 PM

In the meantime have done a little surfing. It would appear that indeed in the last years a variety of very compact, uncooled thermal sights have become available. Typically they seem to have practical ranges around 500 meters or so. This cannot be simulated, as discussed previously.

In regards to command squads the issue is that if they are recognizable they will be targeted first.