Tournamenthouse.com Forums

Homba · Site Admin

Thanks KEG- that is the best reason for snipers not being able to take VLs!

We need to do some testing to see what each player sees on their interface. Some things you see on your screen are governed by your data, some by your opp\'s data. Not sure which one the names are. Surely something like what you are suggesting can be come up with.

H

upas · Captain

Is it possible to adjust the use of rifle grenades? When a team fires a schreck, you see it on the soldiers monitor, but you can´t see when your team uses rifle grenades.

Is it also possible to make rifle grenades to be fired from buildings? That would make the poles awesome urban close combat warriors.

Homba · Site Admin

You actually CAN see when your soldiers are shooting rifle grenades (RGs). If you look on the soldier monitor, when the men are firing their rifles, you will see they are using AP ammo (bullets). But if they fire an RG, you will see they are firing HE ammo! Put a polish rifle team out in a field and have them fire at the ground. Watch the soldier monitor and you\'ll see!

RGs are definitely a big issue. ATOMIC saw fit to make RGs \"indirect fire\" weapons (like a mortar), rather than \"direct fire\" weapons- thus making it impossible for them to fire from inside a building. There is a simple 1/0 (indirect/direct) setting for all weapons, and RGs are set to 1 (just like gammons- which hopefully Seven will fix).

Now everyone agrees that RGs \"kick\" like a mule when fired, and there has been some debate on whether RGs could be shoulder-fired directly, or whether the rifle butt was placed against the foot. I think the bulk of the research shows they were often direct-fired from the shoulder, and I think this email from a historian consulted by Kunagooda on the issue confirms that. Check it out:

[quote]Hi William,
During and since WWII, Rifle grenades can and typically are, fired from kneeling and standing positions.
The auxiliary grenade launching sights (both US and German) are designed to be used from the shoulder. For anti-armor purposes one needs a high degree of accuracy and these are very much direct-fire weapons. From a foxhole, in the open or from inside a building out a window, it all works the same.

For high angle fire, useful for anti-personnel purposes where you are lobbing a grenade into a general area, the rifle butt is placed on the ground. Also for deploying smoke. Obviously, here, you would not do this from inside a room - indirect fire application.

Firing from a standard full prone position is not recommended as your body cannot \"give\" with the recoil. You would need a stump or something to place the butt of the rifle against and then place your arm over the stock, kind of hugging the rifle. Even so, the rifle will get a lot of stress from the recoil as it now has no place to go.

German and US WWII era H.E.A.T. grenades were rather small & light. The hollow charge however made up for their small size. The US M9A1 only weighed 1.3 lbs but could penetrate up to 2\" of armor. The later German grenades were probably more effective at defeating armor, but that big cup launcher hindered ease of use, and limited the number of launchers in the hands of troops.

The larger, post WWII U.S. grenades no doubt were a real bear to shoot from the shoulder.

Modern rifle grenades tend to be anti-armor designs with fragmentation features for collateral casualty effect. Seems the application here is to defeat personnel carriers, vehicles, or to neutralize buildings or fortified areas. All direct-fire applications. Certainly the literal \"Anti-Tank\" applications are long since ineffective.

WWI was different however. The idea there was to lob grenades out of and into trenches. There was no real anti armor or direct fire application at the time. Your game rules for rifle grenades seem to be out of sync for WWII.

Hope this helps,
Ed
Lafayette, Colorado

At 12:33 PM 3/2/02 , you wrote:

hello there , I noticed in one of the pictures that a german grenadier was shoulder fireing a rifle grenade. could all of the german rifle grenades be fired from the shoulder ? if so were they weaker (destructive power) than american rifle grenades ?

In my limited research i see that all the american rifle grenades (WW2) could not be shoulder fired.Is this true?

i play a tactical ww2 game called close combat 2. and in the game all the rifle grenades for the axis and allied troops cannot be fired from inside buildings.This caused me no end of consternation untill i found that in the game files the rifle grenades were categorized as indierct fire.

Thank you very much for you site.[/quote]

Ok. So I think it is safe to say ATOMIC screwed up. RGs could (should?) be classified as direct fire weapons. Whether they should be in the patch is a different issue.

First thing to consider when asking this question is that ATOMIC also made RGs very under-strength. If you look at the Kill Rating, blast radius, etc, it is positively pitiful- a mere spitball. Definitely no anti-armor capability there. Now in CC4 I had a man take out a hetzer from the side with an RG, so Atomic later fixed the power issue (though I don\'t think they fixed the direct/indirect issue.) In CC2, to make the grenade realistic, you would have to up the power to put it more or less identical to a regular thrown HE grenade. Then you have a problem with getting men to fire it at tanks, as it is just a variety of ammo for rifles, and you\'d have to make sure rifles are set to fire at tanks in the valid-target setting (if you wanted to try to give the RG an anti-armor role at all in the patch).

Once you gave the rifle grenade more power (similar to thrown HE grenade), it would be effective against infantry. This would change the game, making Polish Rifle teams (who are loaded with RGs) greatly more effective than they are now in urban combat, as upas observed. This is a big change, guys. It makes me nervous. German and US/Brit rifle teams also normally have one or two men with RGs (we just never see them used, b/c typically our men are in buildings!!).

Do we want to change the game this way? Not sure. I think some serious testing would need to be done tweaking the RG\'s stats. The range needs to be checked and considered also. I personally don\'t think an RG should be especially accurate at longer ranges.

I think it would be neat, realistic. I also think it would change the game. How much I am not sure. It doesnt really give either side an advantage, tho it helps the poor neglected Poles. It may not change the game very much at all. Hard to say. A recon team would have to fear a rifle team a bit more in a 50m firefight, b/c some RGs would be sailing their way. That kind of thing probably favors the allies, who tend to field more rifle teams than the G, who field recon teams in my experience.

Need to hear what others think on implementing an accurate RG into CC2. Of course Seven, as the patchmaker, has the final say! I will try to get back here soon and post stats about RG vs reg grenade, what squads have RGs and how many, etc. We need to see all that prior to making a decision I think. (Seven if you have time to post these stats go for it- I won\'t get to it until 12 hours from now at least).

H

CB_Recon · Colonel

well in my opinion, most of the new complaints are minor and arent really that important, like snipers taking vls, and mortars firing faster. but heres a list of i think the most important aspects are.
1. Added armor to Tiger. (not much though)
2. Jam Break on Hetz and Croc fixed. (a must)
3. Jam Break on BAR and FG 42 fixed.
4. Added ammo to the bar, ab 30 cal and bren teams. ( in case of the bren and bar, not much added, maybe as little as 100, but the ab 30 call needs at least 1000 rounds in all to be an effective weapon in this game, else is gonna spend that much on a two man team with only 500 rounds?
5. Sherman 105 ammo correction to 30 HE and 3 HT
6. Accuracy of zook/piat/increased at PB and Close range.reason i dont include the schreck and faust is because most the time a tank wont get to point blank as it is, so its not that important
7. Demo charges on sturms and assault teams a little more accurate. I have had alot of bad experinces with assualts missing tanks from point blank on a tank , with his rear turned. Also, even worse, when a guy will throw a charge, only to hit his own men, what a disaster that is.
8. 1 man G flamer,and all flames with a pistol and at least one grenade. (not that weird grenade the brit flames have, i mean a regular old grenade
9. Gammons able to be thrown in buildings. (a must)
10. All at guns able to use pistols in defense.

Now, there may be others i may have forgot but i doubt.the fact of a at gun being moved, well im neutral on that. also the atgun being more invisable seems a little to much, they are hard enough to see as they are.

Homba · Site Admin

[i]My comments in italics. Anything I did not comment on, I agree with.[/i]

4. Added ammo to the bar, ab 30 cal and bren teams. ( in case of the bren and bar, not much added, maybe as little as 100, but the ab 30 call needs at least 1000 rounds in all to be an effective weapon in this game, else is gonna spend that much on a two man team with only 500 rounds?

[i]I agree. Either 750 or 1000 rounds. 750 would be a compromise- this is afterall a light AB team with a \"30cal Light\" (not the same weapon as the Army 30cal). I would also say these guys should have sidearms if they dont already. It wouldnt break my heart to give them 1000 rounds. They are a little-used team and something needs to be done for them. We just want to make sure that they remain valued at 7 pts for what you get. I think 1000 rounds would be fine.[/i]

6. Accuracy of zook/piat/increased at PB and Close range.reason i dont include the schreck and faust is because most the time a tank wont get to point blank as it is, so its not that important.

[i]Of course I like my proposal better for the reasons stated earlier Razz

[/i]

7. Demo charges on sturms and assault teams a little more accurate. I have had alot of bad experinces with assualts missing tanks from point blank on a tank , with his rear turned. Also, even worse, when a guy will throw a charge, only to hit his own men, what a disaster that is.

[i]This is a good idea. In addition to the 1m increase in minimum range, base accuracy might should be increased somewhat for the demo. It needs to be checked. How does it compare to base accuracy of the gammon and HE grenade? If it is lower, it needs to be made the same. I will try to post something on this.[/i]

8. 1 man G flamer,and all flames with a pistol and at least one grenade. (not that weird grenade the brit flames have, i mean a regular old grenade)

[i]I disagree with giving the flamers grenades of any kind. If I have a preference, I always pick the US guy who has no \"special grenade\". The problem with the brit flamers who have this is- they always throw it at the worst time- you are screaming at them to use the flamer, and they throw a freaking grenade... I assume that, historically, grenades were probably assigned to other members of the squad. The flamer was probably to concentrate solely on his flamethrower. Give em pistols and I think even remove the goofy Brit \"special\" grenades. Though I would be OK with leaving them in- they have been such an enigma for all these years- what do others think?[/i]

10. All at guns able to use pistols in defense.

[i]this seems like a decent compromise. Im neutral toward them having weapons at all.[/i]

Now, there may be others i may have forgot but i doubt.the fact of a at gun being moved, well im neutral on that. also the atgun being more invisable seems a little to much, they are hard enough to see as they are.

SS_Ivan · Captain

I like the HE grenade the brit FT has, thats why i always pick him. Ive blown up several APCs with it, although yes sometimes he uselessly throws it. Sometimes he throws it at enemy soldiers too. I dont see a problem with it. Just my preference.

Ivan

CB_Recon · Colonel

well, maybe no grenade but at least a damn pistol as last resort weapon. i still think a 1000 rounds is best, who would buy a mg with 750 rounds? not me, and the zook accuracy thing, i dont really care that much about, ive grown so used to the missing at close range thing, it almost would seem weird them hitting smile

but either way im fine. at least i havent got much negative comments on most the really important issuse.

FJ_Milkman · 1st Lt.

This all sounds to good to be true, how long to we have to wait 7x?

morca2 · Site Admin

Isnt the special grenade of the british flamerman a gammon bomb?

CB_Recon · Colonel

i dont think so morca, but ask homba he\'ll know

Homba · Site Admin

It is not a gammon. It is a \"special grenade\" with its own set of (not especially impressive) characteristics. It is not harmless like rifle grenades are now, but i think it has a much smaller blast radius than an HE grenade. I\'ll have to post something on it. Haven\'t had much time lately, but I think I\'ll have some tonight.

I think we should leave it in for the Brit flamers (the only two units in the game that have one), because some people like it, and just for old times sake. It is a unique and mysterious part of CC2. It would be kinda like removing the magical mystery \"dot\" from Adventure (Atari 2600).

SevenX2 · Lt. Colonel

Great Ideas once again, I like the rifle grenade idea of making it a bit more powerful, I am currently adjusting and testing a patch as we speak and if all works out i will put out a list for final approval and Q&A on Friday morning (Central). Do we want something to tell whether someone is using the new patch? As far as I can tell if you dont have the patch and play someone who is hosting that does have it you will get it. As some data changes automatically take hold. Kind of like a virus, bad word to use but same basic thing. I will make a removal as well so in the case someone does want to remove the patch instead of reinstalling they can just run the removal file. Does anyone know the basic load of a bren mg as far as ammo? I have been unable to find it, but maybe someone would have the info????

Homba · Site Admin

Wait a minute Seven... I don\'t think that bit about the patch being like a virus is correct. Why do you think that?

You are making new weapons, soldiers and description files, right?

My understanding is: If a game-host is using the new files, then guest will also be using the new files, because the host\'s computer is running the show- NOT because anything has migrated to the guest\'s computer and rewritten the guest\'s files.

If the guest (who is using the original files) then hosts a game, or plays the computer, the original files will be in effect again because those are the files on the machine. (This is my understanding. Im pretty sure about it, but it needs to be tested so we know for sure.)

I have a question about the interface on the requisition screen: If you host the game with the new patch, and I have the original files, will I see the G flamer units as costing 12/14 pts on my screen? Is that part ALSO governed by the host\'s files, or is it part of the interface that will only display the info on the local computer\'s files?? This needs to be tested! Somebody help Seven test this stuff ASAP.

On installing and uninstalling the patch: You guys need to learn how to do this the simple way, without having to use an uninstall utility or reinstall your intire game.

You do it simply be renaming the files in question. Bear with me- this is easy:

The game looks for your files and it looks for them by specific filenames \'soldiers\', \'weapons\' etc. and it will only use the files with those specific names. Now here is what you do:

1.Get the files from Seven when he makes them available. I suggest that Seven names them SX_3-0_soldiers, SX_3-0_weapons, etc. (or however you want to name them, Seven- this is just an example name for \"SevenX_version3-0_soldiers).

2. You must put these files into the data/base directory.

3. Change the filenames of the original \'soldiers\', \'weapons\', (and any other files that are being replaced) to \'original_soldiers\', \'original_weapons\' etc.

4. Change the names of the new files from \'SX_3-0_soldiers\' to \'soldiers\', do the same for the other new files.

Now you have replaced your files and you are ready to go. When you want to switch back to the original game, you just rename your files again.

It takes about 30 seconds to perform the switch and it is easy as pie! Learn to do this and all your problems are solved.

-----------
On being able to identify if the patch is being used by the host- YES this would be a good thing to know. If Seven can think of any way it could be done.

Another question- we need to be sure to test this: Host is using original files, guest is using new patch. What does guest see on requisition screen? We also need to make sure once and for all that the guest WILL be using the host\'s files and not his own modified files. I guess we\'ll know that immediately if his 105 has 30 or 12 rounds, or if his G flamer team is 1 or 2 men. Someone needs to help Seven test this.

----------

To summarize:

1. Test to make sure Seven is wrong about the whole \"virus\" thing.

2. Test: host with new patch, guest with original, check for requisition screen and game play issues noted above.

3. Test: host with original, guest with new patch, check for requisition screen and game play issues noted above.

4. Directions for the simple \"file-renaming-switcheroo\" should be posted on the eventual download page. If people learn to do this, the patch will be a lot more popular- and we want it to be popular- we want everyone to use it. If everyone just has both sets of files (original and new-patch) sitting in data/base, and can simply rename at will, it will be a lot better.

German, French and other versions of CC2 may not use \"soldiers\" etc. They may use \"soldaten\" or whatnot. Same name-change principles apply. A note should be made on this point.

H

SevenX2 · Lt. Colonel

Tre Homba i did the test u will need the patch for your files to be changed EUB helped me test it the reason i brought this up was earlier when i first started here people were saying if u got a hacked bm it would change your files, but not so with these data files. So that part is complete.

Homba · Site Admin

Cool.

Did yall find out anything about #2 and #3? The interface and gameplay issues?

H