project-navigation
Personal tools

Author Topic: How are Heavy Weapons incorportated into squad tactics?  (Read 36505 times)

Sophisanmus

  • Guest
Re: How are Heavy Weapons incorportated into squad tactics?
« Reply #15 on: October 18, 2008, 05:39:34 am »
As I see it, the issue here pits uncontrolled firepower against battlefield morality.  I think that this point will be moot fairly soon, if it isn't already in the WIP version of the game.  From what I've heard, the nations of the world will not take kindly to friendly fire deaths of civilians, much moreso than the oft-inevitable casualties of alien fire.  Conversely, the Earth is facing the greatest threat it has ever known, and as such I doubt that PHALANX would be denied any weapons technology for their most vital mission.  It would then be up to the individual player to make the call as to whether a weapon or tactic is too much of a risk to the civilian population, and deal with the consequences of every bad call. 

With the weapons, they do need to be balanced, especially the heavies.  The Grenade Launcher feels like it needs more range, though accuracy could be cut down at range to prevent total overpowering.  Rocket Launcher could use a bigger blast; an HE explosion can barely fill up a car or outhouse as it is.  Even/especially if it cannot maintain a one-hit kill fr direct hits against decent alien armor, additional splash area could make it seem more like a rocket and not just an over-cumbersome mi-range grenade.  The Machine Gun needs saturation and power.

The primary shortcoming for these heavy weapons is weight.  They need to be heavy, which the team is working on.  Until they have that weight, that burden, I suspect they have to be balanced down to compensate.  This results in them being only on-par with medium weapons, which are already better-balanced for their roles.  In fact, the balancing is probably overly-so.  Once they have the bulk, and their unweildliness is not a mere matter of inaccuracy or reduced damage, they should be much more usable in their proper roles, and will hopefully have their punch and performance adjusted to appropriate levels.

Juni Ori

  • Guest
Re: How are Heavy Weapons incorportated into squad tactics?
« Reply #16 on: October 18, 2008, 12:15:38 pm »
Aiki, who's being personal? :o Darkpriest at least sounds that he has even been there, if he hasn't. Not that I have any reason to doubt, but I don't have any reason to believe either. His points I've read so far are believeable and so does he in general, but anyone could dig out the information and pretend to be almost whatever. I support most if not all his words on topic.

Edit: small fixing.

Offline Darkpriest667

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 149
    • View Profile
Re: How are Heavy Weapons incorportated into squad tactics?
« Reply #17 on: October 19, 2008, 09:12:23 am »
Sophisanmus yes more eloquently and diplomatically put i agree with you on all terms..


Juni The words were meant as help not as a put down.. as you might see except for DoctorJ and a few other people i rarely start my posts with an address its mostly meant as public commentary.


As we're on the topic of heavy weapons I want to ask about a heavy bolter gun with a backpack ... I am lead to understand that since you can power small ones a larger heavier one for eventual replacement of the machine gun may be available in the future? not trying to start a debate about it just curious.

fuuuu

  • Guest
Re: How are Heavy Weapons incorportated into squad tactics?
« Reply #18 on: October 19, 2008, 09:17:19 am »
being sidetracked about morality of war, in my humble opponion; if an alien is alive, he will cause more casulties. the aliens are superior already(supposely) and if protecting civilians are making a huge impact on the combat efficency, it is not worth it. it may just as well cause more deaths in the long run, sure u try to save the civilians, but not to the point you're going to lose your fight, its going to save no one. Think of it this way, if u cant redo a mission and u cant save and load, would you still use the same tactics? human rights and geneva came about after the WII to stop wars and severity of wars, but when survival of humanity is at stake, its of little value. its a contraversial topic and open to interpretation and debate, but moving on to heavy weapons.

First of all, thanks BTaxis for improving heavy weapons, but perhaps information in this thread will be of use.

Heavy weapons contrary to the "Light"LMG that every squad carries, can pump out over 1000 lead per minute, with changable barrels and magazine extensions it will have Greater range, Greater stopping power, greater penetration and sustained bombardment compared to a Assault Rifle. The heavy weapons as such might be too heavy to carry by your average person, and heavy weapons usually involve more than one person operating it. Being the gunner, his assistant and ammunition carrier. The 5.56 have reported having troubles of penetration of Soft covers while 7.62 can break through the same covers, whilst the Real MG rounds, being 13.6mm or 0.5Cal can penetrate brick walls and as a matter of fact demolish them in several rounds. Then we have our Cannons, which i think logically orknoks or soldiers with implants will carry. 20mm - 30mm rounds like what the A10 warhog will have, it goes through tank armor and uses up 20 rounds per second. Most automatic guns you will find in FPS might have information of 600RPM, but do calculations and you'll find that fully automatic will chew through 30 round clips in less than 3 seconds, compared to 10 odd seconds in most video games.

To sum that up tactically, Heavy weapons should be hard to move, operate, uses up alot of ammunition to the point of usually requiring the whole squad to carry ammunition but delivers enough firepower that the whole squad can be based around. Ammunition is usually the biggest issue, as soldiers have a big kit with them already, but since firebird dosnt have a armory in it, its not imbalanced. LMGs are Semi - Heavy weapons.

For rocket launchers, its actually so accurate that you can use as a sniper, and it does splash dmg, and uses small tus as u run out of cover to shoot, dive back into it then reload.

Assault Rifles are called so because its a political term by Hitler himself, it in reality is not really different to a SMG, think of carbines which are half way in between. It was revolutionary because it was more capable than a Rifle at close range, mind you trained british marksman can pump out 10 accurate rounds in a bolt action rifle in less than 5 seconds. It out ranged and had better accuracy and stopping power than a SMG back in WII. it out performed all "standard" infantry weapons. Now it is the standard issue, it offers no advantage and as a matter of fact. Insurgency in Iraq run in 3 cell groups of RPG, LMG and Sniper, where Assault Rifle is complete abolished. ARs are good standard weapons, but offers no real advantage, just something to think about. Since i am chinese, we actually used(not personally) Ak47 as a SMG because of its poor accuracy whilst T81 was used as an Assault Rifle, now phased out of regular army by T95 and T03.

Attached grenade launchers are a different issue, although i am not asking for that to be implemented into the game, i might just be carrying off in a rant so i'll just stop here :) I didnt have time to spell check this time around as i am in a hurry, so just bear with me for abit.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2008, 09:20:08 am by fuuuu »

Offline Darkpriest667

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 149
    • View Profile
Re: How are Heavy Weapons incorportated into squad tactics?
« Reply #19 on: October 20, 2008, 06:37:22 am »

Heavy weapons contrary to the "Light"LMG that every squad carries, can pump out over 1000 lead per minute, with changable barrels and magazine extensions it will have Greater range, Greater stopping power, greater penetration and sustained bombardment compared to a Assault Rifle. The heavy weapons as such might be too heavy to carry by your average person, and heavy weapons usually involve more than one person operating it. Being the gunner, his assistant and ammunition carrier. The 5.56 have reported having troubles of penetration of Soft covers while 7.62 can break through the same covers, whilst the Real MG rounds, being 13.6mm or 0.5Cal can penetrate brick walls and as a matter of fact demolish them in several rounds. Then we have our Cannons, which i think logically orknoks or soldiers with implants will carry. 20mm - 30mm rounds like what the A10 warhog will have, it goes through tank armor and uses up 20 rounds per second. Most automatic guns you will find in FPS might have information of 600RPM, but do calculations and you'll find that fully automatic will chew through 30 round clips in less than 3 seconds, compared to 10 odd seconds in most video games.



I  understand where you are coming from and agree... however you would agree that a good LMG operator can use suppression fire for 2 minutes using 4 to 6 round bursts every 2 seconds... approximately 240 to 360 rounds..Sustained fire is not reccomended past 5 to 10 seconds.. Its SOP to have a 2 to 3 man squad operating the LSW's now used in lieu of "medium to heavy machine guns" .... I dont know a man in the world that can carry the 13.5mm (also known as the great .50 cal) and its best to have 4 men to operate a .50 if its to be mobilized... 1 for barrels (they need to be changed) 1 for ammunition (500 rounds standard barrel man usually carries 200 RDs) 1 for the tripod (also carrying 100 RDS to 200 RDS) and one for the actual gun itself *usually a 2 man job* ... with the soldier limit of 8 MMG and HMG support is not feasable... In my opinion the only 2 heavy weapons in ufo are the rocket launcher (not effective enough with the current engine) and the GL which is seriously under-ranged.... i agree that at range the accuracy should decrease.... also including factors like line of sight etc....


All I would like to see is the ability to have support "suppression" fire... without having to make it reaction fire... other than that i think everything else has been fully explained and discussed...


I as always am still immensely enjoying the game when i have the time to play it


fuuuu

  • Guest
Re: How are Heavy Weapons incorportated into squad tactics?
« Reply #20 on: October 20, 2008, 07:54:19 am »

I  understand where you are coming from and agree... however you would agree that a good LMG operator can use suppression fire for 2 minutes using 4 to 6 round bursts every 2 seconds... approximately 240 to 360 rounds..Sustained fire is not reccomended past 5 to 10 seconds.. Its SOP to have a 2 to 3 man squad operating the LSW's now used in lieu of "medium to heavy machine guns" .... I dont know a man in the world that can carry the 13.5mm (also known as the great .50 cal) and its best to have 4 men to operate a .50 if its to be mobilized... 1 for barrels (they need to be changed) 1 for ammunition (500 rounds standard barrel man usually carries 200 RDs) 1 for the tripod (also carrying 100 RDS to 200 RDS) and one for the actual gun itself *usually a 2 man job* ... with the soldier limit of 8 MMG and HMG support is not feasable... In my opinion the only 2 heavy weapons in ufo are the rocket launcher (not effective enough with the current engine) and the GL which is seriously under-ranged.... i agree that at range the accuracy should decrease.... also including factors like line of sight etc....

but you're forgetting something, you're assuming the targets are human, whilst the aliens + their armor are very resistant to bullets and such supressive fire dosnt work nearly as well. Therefore, it makes sense to use something with greater firepower than our weapons that are designed on the basis to kill humans / animals not aliens. It would appear as if you're using pellet rifle aginest the aliens, and thats where i thought the "heavy" weapons can come in. We're not asking the soldiers to march 30km everyday, all the heavy equipment gets carried to the destination via the firebird. I wouldnt mind having an entire squad supporting 1-2 heavy weapons, whilst the entire tactics can revolve around it. If go we go back to W2, the infantry squads with exception of americans are all based around Mgs, and in ancient times we had our armies in support of heavy chariot / battle platforms. Afterall its all in the sense of variation of tactics, and coming back to modern times mechanised forces or infantry are in support of tanks/IFV, where the main core is revolved around the tank/IFV. Light infantry has advantage of flexibility and surprise, we do not have latter in said game. Mechanised forces ofcource have their short comings, but if used correctly and with initiative, it offers much more raw power. i am using mechanised forces as a reference to tactics, not asking for such an implement into the game since vehicles are already to be implemented.

Offline Darkpriest667

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 149
    • View Profile
Re: How are Heavy Weapons incorportated into squad tactics?
« Reply #21 on: October 20, 2008, 11:56:39 pm »
but you're forgetting something, you're assuming the targets are human, whilst the aliens + their armor are very resistant to bullets and such supressive fire dosnt work nearly as well.


I have only ever experienced combat against humans.... so I can only offer advice on my experience...


I did however bring up the subject in another thread that alien armor technology and other factors such as homeworld gravity and atmospheric conditions would change just how tough the aliens are...


I wholeheartedly agree that the standard SMG and assault rifles we use today would have little to no effect... Although id sure like to take an AK-47 out and see how effective it is against these buggers as the standard assault rifle in the game seems to be the same nato 5.56, Although more accurate, I prefer the punch of the 7.62x39... you can hit your target all day long but if you dont damage the target the weapons effectiveness is negated...  The SMG in this game is entirely too powerful and the heavy weapons not powerful enough...


If the 13.5 was available to use and it took 4 men to handle each one yes i wholeheartedly agree id send 2 squads with 50s and mop up everyone aliens, civilians too stupid to run etc.... Taking into account that our governments dont care about the collateral damage... or hoping they dont...


Fuu on a personal note did you serve in the chinese military or just study them? The reason i ask is they are close to surpassing The United States in overall military capability and strength and I look to them to develop the weapons of the future... factoring in things like population, GDP, industrial capacity etc...





fuuuu

  • Guest
Re: How are Heavy Weapons incorportated into squad tactics?
« Reply #22 on: October 21, 2008, 09:55:40 pm »
I think its interesting how AK47 is told to lack accuracy, but when you have trained marksman, they could still hit an apple at 300 meters, its only a matter that not everyone can do that.

A funny thing is that, the Army was happy with the T81 assault rifle which used 7.62, which had the ruggedness of an AK but 40% more accurate. Many weren't happy to see the new T95 assault rifle with 5.8 rounds, which lead to the development of T03 Rifle, that compliments the T95 bullpup. AK have been completely phased out of all of chinese military, but kept in reserve or for training purposes. Whilst T81 are given to paramilitary forces.

Here is 2 videos of 12.7mm machinegun at work. the first, the gunner was firing tracers, and its interesting to see how rounds perform.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcM3eKO4F1c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwu3ivAJ68U&feature=related
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unfortunately i have not served in the Chinese military, although all Chinese who choose to go to college has military training for usually a week or more. usually disciplinary stuff, to march in formation in sync. but i fully support this aspect, it helps fitness and makes the next generation more disciplined and respectful.

The Army itself actually is improving at a moderate/slow rate due to low funding ratio to the GDP, and since china haven't had conscription for 50 years, the military is actually downsizing to help improve leadership, quality and corruption. The military used to be seen as a job when you cannot get any other jobs, the military tried very hard to change that image, and now they've actually got a proper recruiting process that actually will be hard to get in just as a rifleman. Although, the Chinese only have 2.2million active service, the reserve of roughly 1 million is almost all veteran and can be turned into NCOs turning conflict. The paramilitary service 4 million is used as 3rd line soldiers or irregulars and in peace time it is the "armed" police force, dealing with issues such as terrorism and dangerous gangs. The volunteers that would arise is estimated to be 5 million if china is to go to war, and up to 20 million volunteers if Chinese mainland is to be invaded. This is to cover the huge land mass. The industrial capacity especially in the case of ship building has been advancing very rapidly, i think, china has the more industrial capability in shipbuilding in the world at the moment.

The doctrine itself however is focused on protecting mainland china and the chance of Soviet / Russian invasion. Which is why the military was heavily focused on Depth defence with Army, with little Far reaching capabilities such as Aircraft carriers. At the moment, china has no war experience for over 20 years, and the military itself is untested. The army itself have reduced training from 3 months down to 2, and time served from 3 years down to 2 in the 90s. and in terms of quality, where the army used to have top soldiers, are now in Airborne, Marines and special forces. the army still has good soldiers, but nowhere near the quality of that fought in Korean conflict.

A good website to find out about the chinese military without BS from western or chinese media is www.sinodefenceforum.com
« Last Edit: October 21, 2008, 10:00:32 pm by fuuuu »

Offline Darkpriest667

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 149
    • View Profile
Re: How are Heavy Weapons incorportated into squad tactics?
« Reply #23 on: October 22, 2008, 07:00:02 am »
Thanks fuu... The link is very interesting... .. I agree also that the Ak47 has been given a very bad reputation by mostly western media and american hollywood... no trained soldier fires on full auto... The m16 doesnt start to outperform the AK as far as accuracy goes until about 100 meters.. even then the difference is very small... Ive always preferred stopping power...

Which is why i dont like the "heavy" weapons in this version.. However 2.3 should be interesting as they have added 3 new weapons... I will give my "opinion" after ive reviewed this version of the game...


On a side note.. I fully support compulsory conscription... for both genders.


On the first youtube video you notice the concrete wall the russian is shooting at is completely demolished after the 6th or 7th burst... :-) this is what im talking about in complaints about hard cover soft cover and what size weapon is firing..

AS far as the man carrying the 50 cal.... notice he isnt aiming very well and he doesnt have more than 10 rounds... Also has the weapon on single shot which must be a modification because I have never personally seen a non sniper rifle .50 cal that had anything but Full rock and roll.... however it is an interesting perspective... 1 guy carries and 2 guys trail behind with the ammo belt? I wonder how far he could carry that thing...
« Last Edit: October 22, 2008, 07:03:11 am by Darkpriest667 »

fuuuu

  • Guest
Re: How are Heavy Weapons incorportated into squad tactics?
« Reply #24 on: November 03, 2008, 12:38:41 pm »
AS far as the man carrying the 50 cal.... notice he isnt aiming very well and he doesnt have more than 10 rounds... Also has the weapon on single shot which must be a modification because I have never personally seen a non sniper rifle .50 cal that had anything but Full rock and roll.... however it is an interesting perspective... 1 guy carries and 2 guys trail behind with the ammo belt? I wonder how far he could carry that thing...

For most people, not very far. But, then again you notice all different kinds of people in the army and the world respectively. Someone that is 7 foot and is 90%+ muscle should have no problem carrying such a weapon for hours. With mechanical enhancements like you see in current future soldier concept, which allows soldiers to carry more weight make it quite plausible. Would be interesting to see strength attribute affecting how much a person can carry, or how much ap is required per step with the weight on soldier. Fact of the matter is still, a HMG and MMG will produce enough firepower equivilent to dozens of infantryman with standard weapon.

Juni Ori

  • Guest
Re: How are Heavy Weapons incorportated into squad tactics?
« Reply #25 on: November 03, 2008, 03:14:30 pm »
Interesting "fact". One weapon - one target at a time. Dozen infantrymen, one to dozens targets at a time. Depending totally on target's armor when heavier weapons become more efficient. 5.56NATO or 7.62x39 are both very efficient against unarmored enemy soldiers (and civilians etc...), and even with modern protection the HURT a lot, causing damage through the protection, even if the round doesn't go through. Just to bring feet back to ground.

Exoskeletons might be interesting feature.

Offline Doctor J

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 265
    • View Profile
Re: How are Heavy Weapons incorportated into squad tactics?
« Reply #26 on: December 29, 2008, 06:51:27 pm »
Also has the weapon on single shot which must be a modification because I have never personally seen a non sniper rifle .50 cal that had anything but Full rock and roll....

Long time, no type!  I don't regularly go to this forum anymore, but since my name got mentioned i felt obligated to pay a visit.  The M-2 [or 'Ma Deuce'] machine gun can have its bolt release locked, which means the bolt has to be manually released after each firing.  A USMC sniper [Carlos Hathcock] became relatively famous for using it with a home-brewed scope mount during the 60s in Vietnam.

As to this KORD thing, i don't have any direct experience with it.  However, that barrel looks pretty slim to me, and i don't think it could sustain a very high rate of fire before softening up.  In any case, there's no practical way to aim the thing short of watching where the bullets hit - at least in the standing position, that is.  The prone position would be much better for accuracy as well as to handle the recoil.  However, i don't think any marketing video is going to show the operator trying to stand up while carrying that load.

Talar

  • Guest
Re: How are Heavy Weapons incorportated into squad tactics?
« Reply #27 on: January 22, 2009, 04:58:45 pm »
12.7mm+ weapons like the Barrett M82 or similar would make perfect sense if you are fighting aliens which are much harder to kill than human enemies. But as long as we are talking about highly mobile small infantry squads they would only be used in a sniper role. If you need 12.7mm machine guns as support weapons a small infantry squad is simply not enough for the job.

For machine gun such a squad would rather use 5.56-7.62mm. Even then you will likely need a second man in the team to carry additional ammunition for the machine gun. A machine gun has better accuracy than an assault rifle on full auto mainly because it's heavier and has handles better suited for holding it stable while firing. It is often used as a defensive weapon when the squad is moving. Put it close to the front of the squad and if you walk into something hostile use it to put a lot of bullets in the air quickly and make the enemy seek cover while the squad start to withdraw from the encounter. Another small fact about machine guns is that they are great weapons at distance (300-600m). The technique is to fire long enough bursts (15 rounds) and look at the hits rather than the iron sights to "aim it in". This of course most efficient when you have a good line of sight and much less so with smoke and/or artillery shells exploding all around you. But still a lot more useful than a sniper rifle would be under those conditions.

I would say a machine gun is best used outdoors. Indoors in small confined spaces it's simply not possible to use it to it's full capacity.. not to mention that the sound it makes in a confined space can make your whole team deaf ;)

To make heavy weapon use in the game realistic I think you would have to look at the big picture and balance the whole combat system, then tweak the properties of each individual weapon according to the role you want it to fill. At the moment I am not familiar enough with the game to offer any advice on that, but if you need any input on infantry tactics I would be glad to help.

Offline Captain Bipto

  • Squad Leader
  • ****
  • Posts: 115
    • View Profile
Re: How are Heavy Weapons incorportated into squad tactics?
« Reply #28 on: March 28, 2009, 03:36:27 am »
Will there be suppression fire effects in the game?

EDIT: Would it possible to have the machine gun (and other comparable weapons) reduce the TU of targeted aliens? instead of doing damage...the MG would reduce the TU of applicable aliens? (and vice versa)


« Last Edit: March 28, 2009, 07:40:33 am by Captain Bipto »

Offline BTAxis

  • Administrator
  • PHALANX Commander
  • *******
  • Posts: 2607
    • View Profile
Re: How are Heavy Weapons incorportated into squad tactics?
« Reply #29 on: March 28, 2009, 10:16:00 am »
I don't think so. Sounds like a needlessly complicated game rule.