Hidden soft factors.
- Thread starter semmes'
- Start date
@Josey Wales excellent post on the subject would be a good place to start.
If you're asking or implying that certain nations have hidden bonuses, I doubt that is the case and only the game developers would know for sure.
What we as players find can only be demonstrated by exhaustive testing. (which takes a lot of time)
If you're asking or implying that certain nations have hidden bonuses, I doubt that is the case and only the game developers would know for sure.
What we as players find can only be demonstrated by exhaustive testing. (which takes a lot of time)
Yes, I read that post that's why I included "hidden".
Yes, that is exactly what I suggest, HE rounds are usually killing more Russians than Germans. Developers sometimes leave their jobs or make comments.
What we find are impressions, he tested fortifications-concealment, I tested spotting-capabilities, our impressions are usually right,
So... nobody read anything.
Thanks.
Yes, that is exactly what I suggest, HE rounds are usually killing more Russians than Germans. Developers sometimes leave their jobs or make comments.
What we find are impressions, he tested fortifications-concealment, I tested spotting-capabilities, our impressions are usually right,
So... nobody read anything.
Thanks.
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2015
- Messages
- 2,138
- Reaction score
- 1,616
- Location
- Ontario, Canada
- Website
- www.lesliesoftware.com
They have explicitly said there are no such things. As a tester I can say that the official position of BFC is *NOT* to do that. Ever. I realize that various people feel that <insert favourite weapon here> is not powerful enough or that <insert favourite tank here> is too weak. They are entitled to their opinion but they are not entitled to their own facts. They have made mistakes about weapons system capabilities and those get corrected when discovered. The do not code limitations or bonuses into various armies.
L
Larsen
Guest
There factors like morale (influenced by casualties and suppression - there is a thread pinned to the top of the forum), there are spotting differences between tanks (see Drifter Man thread on that). Other than that I am not aware of any soft factors.
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2017
- Messages
- 809
- Reaction score
- 708
I am pretty sure that in CMX1, the Russians (CMBB) had some downgrades that were not captured by points. I don't remember what they were. Does anyone remember?
I also wonder if those downgrades carried over into CMX2?
I also wonder if those downgrades carried over into CMX2?
I think command delays were longer for Soviets?
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2017
- Messages
- 809
- Reaction score
- 708
Yes! That sounds familiar!
Russian is a tough language man... 
Now, while I believe what @A Canadian Cat said, if @ibm9000 thinks something is amiss, the only way to know for sure is demonstrating it through the type of exhaustive testing that @Drifter Man does, afterall, his tests did turn up that peculiar blind spot on the Pz IVs (or was it Stugs?)
The point being, while I believe that the good folks who made CM put in every effort to have pixeltruppen of any nationality be affected by HE equally in this particular case, the fact remains that CM does have bugs in it, which may unwittingly cause the reality to be different, although if so it would be in a way so minor as to be indistinguishable to us unless proven by testing.
Without such tests proving an issue or bug, such allegations of bias are only worth the pixels they're written on.
Now, while I believe what @A Canadian Cat said, if @ibm9000 thinks something is amiss, the only way to know for sure is demonstrating it through the type of exhaustive testing that @Drifter Man does, afterall, his tests did turn up that peculiar blind spot on the Pz IVs (or was it Stugs?)
The point being, while I believe that the good folks who made CM put in every effort to have pixeltruppen of any nationality be affected by HE equally in this particular case, the fact remains that CM does have bugs in it, which may unwittingly cause the reality to be different, although if so it would be in a way so minor as to be indistinguishable to us unless proven by testing.
Without such tests proving an issue or bug, such allegations of bias are only worth the pixels they're written on.
Last edited:
I can say after fairly exhaustive testing that a Sherman crew has the same spotting ability whether it is American, British or Russian.
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2015
- Messages
- 2,138
- Reaction score
- 1,616
- Location
- Ontario, Canada
- Website
- www.lesliesoftware.com
No such thing was added to the CM2 games. I don't have confirmation if CM1 games has such things but I am sure that if they did not were carried over.
And I think the longer command delay for the Soviets was dropped based on battle date. Maybe 1943 on or so?
These are anecdotes from the match I am playing, that's why I don't show too much.
76'2, Vet Rf / 75, Reg/Vet Gr
3 Germans running, 1 shot , 1 KIA
I had to demolish the house to kill the last German.
6 shots, 1 KIA. -He should have no head-
8 shots, 2 KIA.
2 Germans shots, 6 Russians KIA.
This is happening far too often for my... sense of statistics?
Maybe my Russians are unlucky every time.
76'2, Vet Rf / 75, Reg/Vet Gr
3 Germans running, 1 shot , 1 KIA
I had to demolish the house to kill the last German.
6 shots, 1 KIA. -He should have no head-
8 shots, 2 KIA.
2 Germans shots, 6 Russians KIA.
This is happening far too often for my... sense of statistics?
Maybe my Russians are unlucky every time.
Hidden soft factors always work against the player and cooperate with Murphy on the grand scheme ;-)
Anyway on a more serious note you can be unlucky every time. Same happens to me if I play online poker
Anyway on a more serious note you can be unlucky every time. Same happens to me if I play online poker
What does make a lot of difference with regards to troops surviving HE (from my anecdotal observations of 10+ years of CMx2)
* Troops hiding or cowering (or prone in general) are much more likely to survive nearby impacts compared to running troops
* Micro terrain and foxholes
* Solid cover like slopes, walls, etc. Bushes / hedges help mainly for concealment and only a bit of cover. The CMBN hedgerows are a bit in the middle imo.
* The HE filler; High velocity shells like the Panther's do less splash/splinter damage in open field compared to PzIV 75MM HE for example.
* Being inside sturdy buildings. Sometimes it can pay to have troops on a higher floor to shield against ground impact HE.
* In modern CMx2, body armor also makes a big difference.
There is also plenty of random chance; sometimes troops at 100m get cut down from shell splinters while troops near to the blast survive.
* Troops hiding...* Yes.
* ...foxholes* Yes, of course. -I don't use them, I dig trenches, pretty effective against MG.
* Solid cover...* Yes.
* The HE filler...* They do? Because it seems that they check against number of units instead of number of men and I don't think they use
the butterfly wings pattern.
* Being inside...* Yes... I know.
* In modern...* Certainly it should.
The 'faraway but not those nearby' really annoys me -and it makes perfect sense. It is the under the "same" circumstances that
I find not as random as it "should" be -even if this is a contradiction in itself. I will upload a picture about 2=6/1=0
in the same terrain, PAK40/76'2 Hw.
* ...foxholes* Yes, of course. -I don't use them, I dig trenches, pretty effective against MG.
* Solid cover...* Yes.
* The HE filler...* They do? Because it seems that they check against number of units instead of number of men and I don't think they use
the butterfly wings pattern.
* Being inside...* Yes... I know.
* In modern...* Certainly it should.
The 'faraway but not those nearby' really annoys me -and it makes perfect sense. It is the under the "same" circumstances that
I find not as random as it "should" be -even if this is a contradiction in itself. I will upload a picture about 2=6/1=0
in the same terrain, PAK40/76'2 Hw.
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2017
- Messages
- 809
- Reaction score
- 708
I agree with almost everything said here.
I would say that hedgerows are almost magical. They offer near perfect concealment and cover from frontal fire. In armored combat, they can disrupt games as tanks behind hedgerows are nearly invisible and can fire unseen at your tanks, while your tank's return fire cannot penetrate the hedgerow.
The latest patch may have addressed this as I saw AP shells regularly go through hedgerows for the first time.
CMX1 gave blast values for all guns and artillery. I suspect that these same values carried over to CMX2. It is not that the Panther's HE shell is going fast. It is that it is a lighter shell than the US 75mm shell fired from a Sherman which is a larger shell with more HE. I mention the Sherman because I know its blast value was higher and I don't remember the PzIV 75mm blast value.
The models for buildings are interesting. Some buildings are fortresses, others are frail, and others are in between. A recent game with Titan saw his men in buildings survive heavy 105mm and 155mm bombardments. Look for brick or concrete construction. But even buildings with decent wood construction (not shacks) will allow you to easily survive 81mm mortar bombardments.
Because it is fired at a higher velocity the shell 'walls' needs to be stronger and thus has less grams of explosive inside, at least that's how I understand it.
Must say that I wasn't really a big fan of hedgerow fighting. Often those hedgerows were part solid earth berm and part thick growth, so I can understand it give some good cover; but if one side can shoot through, the other should be able to shoot through as well I guess.
Indeed some buildings are really, really strong.