Ideas how to improve WinSP MBT/WW2 !

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by rfisher

Just a little thought that occured after reading about the new demolition class. Unless I misunderstood, Mobhack said that the IEDs, booby traps etc of the new class would be able to be deployed outside the usual set up areas, up to the half way point.

So would it not be fun if you could also deploy special forces forward observation type units (SAS, Navy SEALS, maybe even snipers etc) in the same way?

Just a thought.

If you use special forces, then it is a scenario that you will be doing, since these are not the remit of a lowly battalion commander. Such special forces (SAS, Spetz etc) are provided for scenario designer usage, not for regular battles, or to use in a player's core etc.. OK to use for a specific scenario on Pebble Island for example.

IEDS are a regular day-to-day item in Terry Taleban's arsenal, however.

Cheers
Andy

[rfisher]

Thanks for the answer, and fair enough.

(Though I think it is safe to say that you would not approve at all of how I play sometimes. )

[EpoletovSPR]

These are ideas of my friend from S.P.R. : Muhail2
To it to not be registered in this forum, it tried, but unsuccessfully.
---------------------------------------------------------

Greetings.
I have recently played a streak of urban battles, involving different forces, mainly in modern period (80s-90s). At first it was a nice change from battles in somewhat open terrain, but as the battles progressed I found myself quite frustrated by the mechanics of close combat in cover in SPMBT.
Let me describe the problems:
From many field manuals I read (US and Soviet, mainly) I carried on the perception that urban fights are hard, time consuming and quite slow (in meters per hour, in comparison with "normal" maneuver battle). Small weapons fire and MG fire have almost no effect on the defenders of the building - it's even harder to surpress them. If one side wants to achieve decisive succes, they need to bring in really heavy guns, which can literally ruin the building on top the enemy soldiers, or courageously assault into the structure, using light and close combat weaponry in fierce room-to-room battles. In that assaults, experience and morale seem to play a decisive role. I remember reading that soviet assault engineers in WW2 (remember these guys in carapace armor and cool green-black camo?) were doing miracles with their special equipment and specialized training where standard units (although they were MANY more in numbers) were stopped to a halt.
And what we have in SPMBT?
Well, how should I describe it... Infantry racing from one building to another ("oh, Gawd, they wounded Kenny! We should immediatly pull back from this fortified stone bulding right into open plain!") after a single volley of automatic fire from 50 meters, with fast APCs following them and easily routing whole platoons with mere MG fire at close ranges.
Special forces and engineers suffering greivous losses from simple reservists - just because they moved to 50m.
Assaults? Supression fire? Forgeddaboudit. Just drop a few mortar rounds and rush in APCs to rout suppressed defenders.
I'm exaggerating, of course, but you get the picture.

What I suppose and what seems not so hard to implement from my consumer point of view:
-MUCH lesser effect of small arms fire on defenders, even at 50m. A little supression before the close combat assault, nothing more.
Stone buildings may even provide enough cover from projectiles such as RPG greandes and small caliber HE rounds.
Big warheads are nice as they are, maybe make them a little more effecient to suit my taste =)
-infantry clinging harder to their cover. I suppose no pullbacks until 50% casualties in squad, even more with great 80+ morale.
That would make assaults necessary to achieve breakthough in urban combat.
I never really had I chance to test current close combat mechanics in real game situations, so I wonder, what effect does experience has on them?

Yes, many things from here can be also applied to combat in forests and jungles. That could really spice up vietnam scenarios.

P.S. Oh, god! There are also fortifications in game! Trenches, foxholes! They could finally be more than simple "-X% to hitting ya".

[EpoletovSPR]

We have discussed another issue at SPR and suggest improving the accuracy of supressive Z-fire.
At the moment, Z-fire is very dangerous at distances up to 5-6 hexes. Firing squad target a random hex in a big area around the target hex and thus is very likely to supress or even cause casualties in friendly squads.
At distances of 1-2 hexes this becomes ridiculous. Z-fire can target a hex almost behind the firing squad.
It's hard to believe a realworld unit would be spraying bullets and shells like this. If a unit is given a direct order to "supress that building" it won't spray through all the bushes in 200-meter area around it.
To counteract improved accuracy, Z-fire can be made less effective in terms of supression points generated.

[Imp]

On the last couple of posts.
Z fire agree it can be a bit to eratic up close if he cant see the target or is it. I mainly Z fire with heavy weapons MGs MTRs APCs & its reasonably acurate, squads only in rare cases burst at a tree line or hex I have recieved hidden fire from.
If I can see the hex no problem heavy weapons seem more accurate (could be me) but if you cant see the hex what do you expect.
Firing at a hex you cant see means fire traveling through a hex containing say trees buildings lots of both as its 50m so of course the fire can go anywhere its ricocheting everywhere.
Could be handled a bit better fire normally ending up in adj to first dense hex crossed but think code was adjusted to allow in first place. Does the job for me giving the right feel, heavy stuff seems more effective as less prone to richochet & deters mass Z fire at targets out of LOS while still making mass Z firing at that tree line a worthwhile proposition just in case like WW2 USA used to do.
Keeps Z fire what it is a poor substitute for arty with the exception of MGs & GLs which are very good at keeping heads down.

In combination with the previous post where you call for less suppresion effects on units in buildings that would make Z fire totaly ineffective in town. On this post about town fighting how do you suggest improving.
Hex is 50m thats normaly several buildings in a hex or you live in very big houses & 360 field of fire windows etc cannot be modelled.
Artillery has little effect unless big guns for several turns at most blinding the troops so you can sneak adjacent unless lucky. 50m is for all intents & purposes assault range now you can target that window either spraying SMG fire tossing a grenade or hitting the head & shoulder you can see.
This works well enough again giving the right feel allowing some form of tactics & all credit to the game you can tell the diffrence between diffrent troop quality.
Try 60 vs 80exp or scarry 90
High experince troops less likely to be blinded by arty (poor inexperinced guys stopped looking when the shells fell & took cover) may have more shots & more likely to recover & gain a surprise one back if one of his mates does well (I think). Seem less likely to pullback & more capable of dodging incoming fire so taking less damage & fighting longer.
Like I say try the above both ways its experince diffrence that is the worry attacking with 60 exp that arty you dropped means might have pinned yourself or if can move you are now blind & routed before even see the firer.
Close quarters fighting is deadly should be avoided at all costs & especially if your experience is more than 5 worse than his. Do the same battle in open ground where you can start engaging at range & the better exp troops will take far fewer losses.
You mention city fighting is slow WW2 & heavy weapons so do it that way, APCs are heavy weapons. Troops only no or very few vehicles now its pretty slow & painful.
Or try it vs a human & lose those APCs to RPGs unless you are very careful.
Yes there is less CC (in building) fighting than perhaps there should be but thats because the entire squad found windows to shoot out of & in game terms it makes no diffrence.
Starting the next turn with 1 unit facing 3 or 4 units adjacent to it you would be crazy to take the shot pull out if you can. Thats why units in good cover & especially fortifications like trenches tend to stay put unless reasonably damaged & someone is adjacent & about to storm there location. Fortifications also do more than adjust to hit chances I think you get a rally benefit when in them which is why they nearly always recover & I take them over if possible & set up to let me attack the next lot from.

If you can think of a better way to do this that works & gives the right feel I am all for it & agree that sometimes units bug out from an untenable position into a worse one leaving good cover & heading straight into open ground. If you have thought about where they will route to though you can have the reverse problem where the guys decide to stay put & go to their deaths.
In woods this tends to work they fall back 2 hexes & hopefully recover if thats not where your arty is falling so the defensive line shifts.
In Urban may well end up in the street unless you managed to find positions & thought about where they will head to. If you have isolated that city block with a MG down the road etc to stop reinforcing or better then they are in trouble. You can get a lot of squads just giving up & surrendering if do it right & think of this as did from there original hex.
Perhaps except so many variables it would be nice if a unit that started in a building adjacent to a street exited & crossed the street into cover more often rather than running down it. As you know they do this denying the block being isolated is important & often fairly easy pre TI by placing smoke at junctions & units covering. This is your second line giving runners a chance to get there act together the normal 2 platoons forward 1 back dependant on terrain.

[EpoletovSPR]

Muhail2:

You don't need to tell well known facts about Z-fire to me. I know that HMGs spraying at a tree-line some 400m from them do a nice job. I'm talking about z-fire at an unseen target 1-2 hexes away. Would real soldiers spray chaotically in almost 180 degree arc in front of them if they are ordered to supress "exactly this portion of treeline"?

APC is a heavy weapon, enough to make a squad abandon a building? Please, tell this to veterans of Grozny, they'll make a good laugh.
Most HMG's that are installed on APCs can, ocasionally, penetrate a wooden building. But a stone or concrete one? I doubt that.
What I meant by "heavy weapons" in my post was something like a 125mm HE-FRAG or RPO-A.

50 meters in a city is not a close combat. There a lot of cover in real 100 meters (1+1 hexes) so both sides can exchange fire a lot before inficting some serious casualties.

Moreover, think about the changes a little more. That would make fighting in the cities more complex: you'll have to fight for the whole city blocks. Let me explain it:
Game terrain generation engine likes to make towns, cities and villages made of distinctive building blocks, from 5-20+ hexes of different structures, separated by roads or occasional square.
Currently, it's not very important to control the whole block. It gives you no precise benefit.
But if the infantry inside the buildings become VERY hard to supress and rout with fire, you'll really want not to allow enemy soldiers cross the road into your block! If they manage to establish a bridehead, they will basically start to fight on equal terms, which is not good, considering that assaulting side usually have more men. You must really consider counter-attacking and assaulting them in 0 hexes hand-tohand combat to restore control over the block.
I don't know if it's very realistic or not, but that can give urban fighting that much-needed depth, that's currently lacking,

[Imp]

What I was refering to with Z fire at a hex you cant see is it normally passes through a dense hex like woods or buildings. The lighter the round the more susceptable to richochet even foilage will deflect it let alone hitting a tree.
If you fired into woods what percentage of those rounds do you think would miss all the trees & make it to where you are aiming if you cant see it. Most would be deflected or stopped I feel.

I am classing APCs as a heavy weapon simply because they can maneuver to bring multiple units to bear even if they dont drop passengers. They can help force route by causing encirclement if the unit is now surounded on several sides. Like I say try it without vehicles.

The distance is 50m NOT 100m hex centre to hex centre not edge 100m is fire with a hex seperating the two hexes. Call it 30-70m if you like 80m is the next hex.
That being said 50m still offers plenty of cover in an urban setting part of what I think you are after may be due to scale & generic urban hexes.
Concievably 2 squads in the same hex could easily still be in diffrent houses or 2 squads in adjacent hexes could be in the same room say a Factory floor with few lines of sight into from outside. Perhaps this is what you want a building that has a covered arc so can only fire from the windowed side. Should only be able to enter/exit from there to unless you make a hole. Not ideal but try using a bunker as a sort of seperate room.
Its a question of scale & a very old game engine you should probably not really be able to fire that RPG & certainly not an ATG in a 360 degree arc from a building as probably need to change rooms. Now you have a reason to go room by room if the scale allows for doors windows etc.

I need you to explain about holding the block & fighting on equal terms how you think this changes things as I think keeping people out of your block is important anyway & checking its clear is important before moving on.
As the game works now 3 things normaly happen when adjacent in a city
1) Defender in building attacker in street probably moving.
Good cover vs very poor cover & moving - big advantage to defender.
2) Both units in building attacker probably moving - slight advantage to defender
Hence keep him out of your block as stated.
3) Enters enemy hex, if defender has shots this is nearly identical to 2 though the defender has a chance to suppress or hit himself. Several men in a confined space stray shots.

So if he stays how does a unit entering its hex benefit the defender? As you said want to stop him in the street once he is in your block you are in trouble. This is what I am struggling to understand how it would change things.

Also perhaps try playing on a pregenerated map where you can often give more covering fire to other blocks as they are not laid out American style but with windy roads & smaller blocks so stopping in the street tends to be easier.
This will not really help the AI as a defender in fact probably the reverse as you take advantage of the aditional fields of fire but it helps a human defender.

Another thing to try to achieve staying put is build fanatics say exp & morale at 100 but I would adjust Inf command or they will be crack shots. I think these will stay put longer.

Some factors that might cause a unit to run.
Being fired at especially from multiple directions or even seeing you are surrounded.
Outnumbered the closer they are the bigger the threat.
Freinds killed or decide to run.
What causes him to stay is the reverse so if the street is litered with the enemy & burning APCs then despite all the above he still might stay.

What situation do the defenders in your games see?

[EpoletovSPR]

Muhail2:

Ricochets are nicely simulated by small supression around the hex, which receives fire. What I'm talking about is the whole volley of all squad's rifles and MGs going somewhere far from the target. That can't be explained by an ocassional ricochet. By the way, I really doubt that a 120mm HEAT round can ricochet and go as far as 100m from the targeted hex. But it does, in game.

About the blocks:

With the current defence values, soviet platoon can easily rout the german soldiers back into the block and than some with plain fire across the road and than advance unopposed. All in 1 turn, 5-7 minutes. If you're lucky, 3 squads are even too much, 2 could've done the job just as well.
With the proposed changes they'll have to bring down all the fire they can muster and then advance en-masse to sucessfully assault the enemy out of the block edge. 3 squads are the bare minimum to conduct this, just as in real life. And it will take 2-3 turns in most situations.
You see? It just seems so very same at first, but the differences in the details are great. Urban combat can become a serious business =)

BTW, that suggestion is based on the Squad Battles, which have a quite decent urban combat, though with flaws of their own, but I've taken them into account.

Also, you don't need to go in details about rooms, levels and backyards. That's just not in the scale of SPMBT.

Pregenerated maps with separated building hexes, as I understand it, were just made for the same purpose - to spice up the urban fighting. Or to represent a village with few houses. But these are pregenerated and are in minority.
And I don't think we should take AI in consideration. It can't use 70% of SPMBT features, why bother with him now?

[Imp]

Okay now I understand what you are talking about more, there may be a case for better protection adjustment not staying adjustment however if defender gains extra protection so does the attacker of course.

The situation you show lets assume no arty as if attacker has dropped defender should often have done likewise adding time.
Attacking squads first have to get in position if no smoke or arty will definetly need 3 squads as first probably lost a couple of men.
They probably can however take him down because he is a lone squad.
If the defender has chosen terrain correctly though they will face say a platoon so it becomes difficult to get the 3-1 ratio first guys may not even see the defenders as move up before running back.
As the game stands then the easist & safest way to take a block is at its corners normaly due to less defenders then roll it up. This also has the advantage of hopefully letting you isolate the block by getting behind it. The deffender of course is trying to stop this with covering fire from other blocks.
So there are tactics & a slight increase in building terrain cover may improve them making a straight run at the block more dangerous. Hovever as the attacker gets these benefits to he will have less pinned units & so can coordinate attacks & get in position in the first place easier.
So the problem is now both sides take less damage suppresion so getting your squads in position facing the road is easier for the attacker. If he now has 3 squads in position who take less suppresion whats to stop him using 2 to draw all opfire letting the 3rd who has suffered no suppresion due to stray fire nip across the street into his hex?
Just thinking out loud this might make the attackers job easier as he has more good order units & will be subject to less surprise opfire shots as the defender cant lose suppresion it does not have.

The Z fire I said that most shots including the HEAT round should stop in the first dense hex entered rather than bouncing most of the time.
But its fudged old code you could not fire at a hex you cant see & I am fine with it for the little effect it has on the game.
As you tend to use this when you have other units near to the hex you are Z firing like in a woods & you want to move adjacent it represents the fact you might hit them by mistake, yes its abstracted a bit but gives the right feel.

[EpoletovSPR]

To limit shooting in aircraft received before fatal damage.

Such example: S-300 gets in " IDS Tornado " - Damage = 250 point, but another S-300, and then and that that has got for the first time time shoot at this "Tornado" still.

The first aircraft rescues from AA-defence the others aircraft attacking in this turn.

================================================== ============

When vechicle immobilized above it appears specific smoke.
It unmasks this vechicle (even if enemy has no LOS in it) and does by its desired victim.

It is necessary to clean this smoke from winSP, as not realistic.
Crew purposely shows all that it vechicle convenient immobilized target?!