I agree with you, Lurker. I think the fp factors are unbalanced and not based on reality. How can a MP 40 produce the same amount of killing power as a MG? Not very likely.Originally posted by Lurker
I haven't played the game in any depth yet, just the demos so far. I have looked over the mechanics and numbers though and these are my impressions.
1. new infantry movement - very badly needed. No longer will we suffer moronic troops following waypoints to their obvious death before arriving.
2. improved to hit, to kill and penetration tables - desperately needed. Hopefully common place cmbo impossibilities have been removed. How often have you seen a buttoned up enemy tank moving fast across open country, gun and viewport bouncing around, instantly spot your tank, that fired and missed, even though it's 800 mtrs away and camo'd in a thin screen of trees and hull down. Meanwhile it spots, rotates turret, acquires and places a one shot kill and all within 10 seconds.
3. covered arcs - very needed. Finally the ability to hide and ambush at the desired range and not having to reveal hidden guns that previously automatically gave away their positions when an enemy half squad showed itself 600 mtrs off.
4. improved artillery - I haven't looked at this yet but any improvement is a good thing.
By the fire power factors (fp after this), here are my first impressions.
1. feeble German rifle units - in CMBO the heer and Brit rifle were quite feeble and few of my opponents ever picked them, instead choosing the strongest inf they could buy. In CMBB in 1941 the average Russian rifle squad is 172 to 185 fp while the standard German rifle is 124 fp. A sizable difference there and at first glance I'll give a big edge to the Russians.
While on the subject of fp differential, the Russians have abundant cheap SMG units ranging from 7 to 11 man squads at a huge 350 fp to a terrifying 550 fp! There isn't a German unit in the game, particularly in 1941, that can stand up to this. Of course I haven't played this out yet but my money is on the Russian SMGs.
2. a greatly pared down MG34 - the MG42 light and heavy is 50 and 155 fp while the MG34 is 36 to 120. Does anyone know the historical truth of these guns? Was the MG42 that much better?
My understanding is these are basically the same weapons with the '42 tweaked and improved. They both had cyclic ROFs of 1200 rounds per minute though, so I wouldn't give the '42 that big of an edge. This has the effect of making the German rifle even weaker than in CMBO.
3. no nationality traits and generic qualities in terms of morale, training, discipline and leadership to all units of all nations.
1. was the MG42 that much better than the MG34?
2. at 40 mtrs the MP40 is equal in fp to the MG34. Considering about 450 RPM for the MP40 and 1200 RPM for the MG34 would this be accurate?
3. the Russian SMGs (PPD and PPsh) are rated at 46 fp and 50 fp making them even more effective than the Thompson. Is this accurate? Are the Russian SMGs that superior to the MP40 at 36 fp? I always thought the thompson was equal to or better than any SMG of that era.
4. there's nothing in 1941 that can touch a KVI or II frontally except the 88mm AA gun and obviously those won't be racing around the battlefield. How did the panzer units deal with this historically? I'm guessing they relied on out manuevering the KV's to get flank and rear shots with their 50mm L\42's?
Overall the fp numbers seem to give the Russians a big edge. Imagine several Fusilier COs facing off vs several Brit rifle COs. There's a big advantage to the Fusilier in fp - 324 to 161 or 163 fp. This edge is potentially greater in CMBB, particularly if SMG heavy battles are played. Here we're looking at 324 vs 550 = 226 fp, or worse: 550 to 350 vs 124 = 426 / 226 fp differential!!
If completely unrestricted QBs are played I can see the Russians using vast numbers of dirt cheap SMG units. Apparently unit restrictions may be necessary.
In 1941 the Germans blew away the Russians, capturing vast numbers and gaining much ground. This was done with superior tactics of blitzkreig on a large scale, pincer operations, destroying rear communications and causing great panic, etc, etc.
In a tactical level sim like CMBB this success is very difficult to portray, particularly without nationality traits. The on-paper numbers are quite misleading and given the current values one would think the Germans would have had their asses kicked in 1941 rather than the opposite. These numbers will probably give quite different results in QBs than what really occurred.
Just my first impressions, likes and dislikes; feel free to rebut.
I wasn't trying to imply that they had inferior small arms in reality; rather the CM numerical values assigned to them vs their allied counterparts would seem to imply a relative inferiority, unless I'm missing something in the CM modeling.Originally posted by Scipio
The Germans had excellent small arms, but what is really funny, Adolf H. has personally intervent and hampered procuction, because he had his 'feelings' about that weapons, like the MP-44 or the G-43, or they suffered from general productions problems, like the FG-42, an excellent weapon that inspired for example the French FA MAS F3, the Austrian Steyr AUG77, the Spanish CETME and not to forget, the US M60.
Well, I think the training issue is a very difficult thing. I don't think that a support for some nationalities or even branches or divisions is a good idea. Just look at the Waffen-SS, their quality ranged from terrible to excellent.