Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by RockinHarry

  1. thanks. Pretty much all coincides with my own present and past observations. In fact I did more experimenting with modular buildings and mostly avoided independent ones. For the purpose I´m now giving them some more attention again (mostly houses type and church), also testing a mod that extends the rubbled walls up from 1m above ground more to 2-3m up, which looks way better IMO. Different story. You can as well test modular buildings resilience vs small arms with my sound mod from this posting (dropbox link) here: I found the "beep" sound playing for each bullet pentrating a buildings wall quite revealing. In this regard the modular buildings aren´t that good for protection than might tend to believe. So no wonder our poor pixeltroopers feel a bit uneasy in buildings, particularly in upper stories where they usually draw more fire from multiple enemies. A viable tactic is to move down a level or two to break enemy LOF and works the better if the base level is also protected with other nearby terrain like ditch locked AS´s (I use rubble heaps for the purpose), low walls, or low bocage. In this regard the TacAI does fine usually. But if the buildings basement level becomes untenable (or little protection) again, the true trouble starts. The mentioned 3 story indep building with rubbled upper level turned out an exception from this and I´m now investigating some more. Too bad I can´t post screenshots ATM. My pic hoster just quit out of service and I´ve to find another good one yet. Considering Imgur maybe. Photobucket is a crapload of annoying ads and pretty much unusable to me. Recommendations welcomed.
  2. I as well think that experience and morale levels do not matter much if at all for the evade pathing issues. It looks rather like a complete detaching the units perception from its environment (terrain, friendly units), just having a focus on a particular enemy unit threat that it wants to get away from in most stupid ways. Since my test setup includes lots of buildings I again noticed buildings are death traps to small arms fire below 300m. I got a sound mod in place that replaces the hardly audible "penetrate wall" sound with a "beep" and I can almost always nail a WIA/KIA pixeltrooper by a wall penetrating rifle or SMG bullet. So no wonder that infantrymen leave buidling positions that readily and disregard these as any usefull cover. Taking cover (hide) doesn´t help either from wall penetrating small arms as I figured before, as is paper thin ceilings within buildings. That independent from building type and sizes.
  3. In a current WIP mission I played a bit more with the "evade" instant command and made some partly alarming observations (again). As Macisle said, units in upper stories do oftenly seek cover in basement, but if already at the basement the real trouble starts. When using evade command on such units and no matter if they get incoming fire (+ suppression) or not, I oftenly observed a quick move plotted out to the front and sideways up to 50m into completely coverless terrain. There was plenty of cover to the (friendly) rear (other buildings, terrain folds, craters etc) which got neglected entirely. When it came to the TacAI self applied evade command, the unit concerned then took exactly the same insane move plot than the self made test evade (canceled previously, not executed). Again, setting friendly and enemy map edge was of no influence which is known (by feature). So whatever the TacAI´s logic is, it should put a heavy weight on friendly/enemy map edge and same time shorten move part to just 1 or 2 AS away (currently is almost always 3-4 AS or more). As said we´re still speaking of "evade" moving troopers, not panic stricken rabbits. Another interesting observation I made was a damaged independent building (think No 5 or 6 from houses, 3 story high) providing a mini fortress position. I got that one damaged in 3D editor mode (ALT-SHIFT + Click), so only the basement was left available for unit deployment ingame. It´s that buildings that receive lots of auto generated rubble flavor objects at game start. However, that building made for mentioned mini fortress with units in there no matter what taking losses or suppression, never evaded nor retreated out of it. That with regular troops and normal morale (and +1 leader at best). There´s other terrain between that house and enemy frontline, i.e hedges and some low bocage (enclosing gardens) that might add to the positions defensibility, but got to check on that more. So it seems the rubbled and some damaged (top-down) buildings makes the best cover version of these.
  4. Yeah, at one time or another I did similar things with outsourced maps, particularly in PBEM (CMBB, CMAK times). @GeorgeM knows what I mean. Screenshot of game map, contour lines put on, front lines and individual movement of frindlies, as well as known or suspected enemies and positions. All on seperate layer for each game turn. At last took longer to make the daily (PBEM) situation map, than actual finishing the 1 minute game turn itself. Thus it would come handy if at least a basic version of something like that could be accessed ingame any time. Not a priority for BFC I understand, but how crappy one finds Tigers Unleashed/Point of Attack, these sims have such a screen edit capability which takes a lot from the player´s planning loads. IIRC Steel Panthers WaW has that reinforcement capability, but it put a rather random force on map when it was called by key press in certain circumstances (can´t recall what these are). Could imagine something similar for CM, maybe parts of the player (or AIP) force initially purchased, but left off map for the purpose. Could likely have the additional benefit for increasing game performance for the time the full forces aren´t deployed on map yet. Also not everybody can run full size (4x4km and up) maps so smaller maps can become a bit overcrowded if you´re forced to let in reinforcements by fixed time schedule.
  5. some more little details I noticed in the video. Once the small HE from the AA vehicle hits the team location they go down to cower. For a moment the No2 of the team does some "planning" and then immdeiately starts moving with his rifle AT buddy (No3) toward that wall. Leader and No4 still in cower, likely not quite noticing what´s going on. Since I assume a TacAI initiated "evade" move, the final face command would be of interest. A possibility of the 2 guys bugging out forward might also be gaining an improved position in order to deal with the AA vehicle by means of a rifle AT grenade in somewhat better cover position. The team leader beeing a +1 might support that idea, indicating that move was more offensive and less defensive. Regarding face command I oftenly find it worth rereading the manual since face is a bit more complicated than just "look at": FACE Infantry - issuing a Face command will cause the soldiers of the unit to re-evaluate the cover provided by the surrounding terrain in relation to the facing the player has indicated, and, if better cover is available, to move to that cover. For example, the unit might move around a wall, or house corner, to face the new direction while maximizing cover against fire coming from that direction. You can issue a Face Command to a unit in motion as well. If you do so, then the last waypoint will be automatically highlighted so the Face Command will apply to that last waypoint, not the current position. You are also able to manually select a waypoint (any waypoint, not just the last one) and issue a Face order from there however. Note: the Face command is “absolute” to the point you click on the map, not “relative” to the position of the unit at the time that you click. An example: You issue a Face command to a moving unit by clicking on a house in the distance. When the unit reaches its final waypoint, it will turn to face the house.
  6. agree. The evade command ain´t all bad, both when the TacAI does, or just for player checking perceived threats on individual units (instant command evade, then check waypoint and face, then delete again). Sometimes one can follow the blue face line exactly to an opposing unit (if it has not moved yet), which sometimes turns out beeing bits of a surprise. So what the player thinks is an enemy threat and the TacAI can be two different things. Otherwise would be nice if any possible bugs involved here can be squashed very soon. Beside mentioned move mode and path variables, there might be more things involved worth checking. Like isolation (from friendlies), lack of C2 or just having a doomed minus leader in evading unit.
  7. scouting the FO´s (or HQ) intended target position with another unit would be way to go usually. Also having rearward units observing the vicinity with binocs (the more at hand, the better) helps on this. Otherwise I´d try determining folds/depressions in terrain, as well as good concealment terrain for the move, preferably in short quick/fast move bounds. Final FO´s place best to approach in "slow" move mode from very short short distance (one action spot at max, or up/down a building) and hide command at end. Takes all considerably longer, but stealthiness pays off at last. Same for some heavy support weapons like HMG´s in example. Move in stealthy and pop up with surprise fire on the enemy.
  8. think there´s bits of distinction between actual panicking and the TacAI applying the evade command. When the unit concerned is still on the move one can check assigned waypoint and face, indicating it was an "evade". I remain with seeing the main issue in path finding multiple guys through restricted terrain, like buildings and bottlenecks (doors, gapped bocage etc) generally. Speed before cover, so to say.
  9. SMG´s is among the smallest of mentioned issues. My main point was a unit member already having appropiate ammo at hand and nothing better than a pistol right ATM. Whatever the selection methods for buddy aid are, I remain with serious doubts. But knowing about issues also leads to avoid them to some extend. I.e keep away HQ units from possible buddy aid situations unless it´s inherent unit members concerned. Oftenly hard to apply to in defense situations when one does not want to move units (away) for that purpose. So it´s particularly bothersome in a defense position when you need certain guys staying on the alert. I oftenly find myself shouting "Noooo.... not you, not now! " But instead of working around given issues, I´d prefer BFC putting more brains into that generally.
  10. thanks for clearing up some more. My only guess remains that "cover" values are treated as absolutes, so a "wall/depression" (forward) likely counts more than "depression" (backward). Generally the TacAI search and select cover routines are bits of a mistery. Similar things happen when pixeltroopers leave foxholes to take cover in a tiny shellhole 1m away. At last just one of many issues in current TacAI decision cycles, when it comes to cover and move path finding.
  11. Interesting. Wasn´t aware that buddy aid and my related "mod" (a simple file name change) was discussed a bit here. Thanks to @IanL for confirming effects in H2H play, which confirms both my own and @Heirloom_Tomato latest experiences in PBEM. Though stumbled for another reason on this thread. Got to experiment with buddy aid frequency and likely choice of medics, as well as recipient again and figured a number of issues. Guess these are known generally, but otherwise to add to @MOS:96B2P useful thread here. My test setup (CMBN 4.02) was a simple hotseat US vs german infantry, controling both sides actions. After bits of mutual slaughter I set all units to hide and short range (10m) CA and see what happens, WIA/KIA concerned. Main issues observed: The rate of selecting "specialists" (lMG gunners, german gunner assistants, leaders, radio operators, AT grenade rifles...) for the purpose of applying buddy aid I found way too high. While test setup (both sides do nothing and hide) allowed for such selections, a real battle situation would prevent these specialists from performing their more important main duties, staying at the ready and reacting to threats in timely manner. Some medic/recipient combos observed: Radio operators (from Plt or Coy HQ) taking preference as medic and oftenly looting lMG. Beside over arming a C2 dude having rather non combot responsibilites I also fear for overloading. Soldiers (soldier class) usually grab rifle ammo, rifles with grenade launchers or lMG. Ok. I´ve yet to see a guy having just a pistol (Browning or Luger) to grab a SMG (Thompson or MP40) despite having correct ammo (0.45 or 9mm) at hand. Leaders (or team leaders) oftenly perform buddy aid, even if other less important unit members (simple rifle guys) are available and in same AS as WIA/KIA. I have concerns with the leaders main duties here, also beeing the only candidate observing with the binocs. Binocs looted from non leaders oftenly show the binocs observing animation played, but without the bincos showing up. Also leads to odd animation flickers between rifles on the back when binocs are beeing attempted to be used. In german standard infantry squads usually the no 7 or 8 (unless WIA/KIA) guy is firmly assigned as lMG gunner assistant. That means he usually moves with and positions itself on the free node next to the lMG gunner on its left side. In several occasions I had this gunner assitant looting another lMG from WIA/KIA. That leads to a second lMG in this lMG 2 men combo, but then this one doesn´t get used and is wasted. That in addition to that lMG assistants serious pathfinding issues when attempt moving to or with his assigned lMG gunner (that lMG assitant always got to fight for his place, thus loosing precious time deploying, or in worst case remain outside a building when everybody else is in). These are some the main issues observed and there might be some more. What´s your buddy aid/looting experiences in other games?
  12. To me it looks like a pathing issue from and through buildings. For a reason that retreating (or evading?) unit wants going to a certain place (another building?) likely offering better cover towards the most apparent threat (enemy in building north?). Since the TacAI almost always choose quick or fast move mode it figures path to that building takes less time when moving outside, instead of finding a viable path through inside buildings. Think this is a known (severe) limitation of path finding in/around buildings and as well causes me lots of WTF moments in my own games frequently. Surely something that BFC should think about improving. For movement purposes the TacAI prefers fast moving terrain before slow moving (maybe providing better cover) terrain all the time, unless it´s a final waypoint (into slow move cover terrain). Then there´s "Bottlenecks" (doors) and the TacAI computes paths for pixeltroopers individually. If it figures it takes too long or the bottleneck is blocked during a particular time chunk, it diverts single pixeltroopers another way to the units target AS. This is where most the "single pixeltrooper seperating from unit" issues come from IMO. Also could be the TacAI finds it can´t push the whole unit through that bottleneck fast enough, it chooses an alternative path for all pixeltroopers instead. Buildings in CM aren´t that strong (offering good cover) than one might think. Walls aren´t impenetrable to small arms (another shortcoming), particularly at closest range. Even if the building concerned has no windows at the basement, effective small arms fire still can pour in through windows upper story, then penetrating through the ceiling. Looks like ceilings are considered nothing more than thin wooden planks. Same in reverse. You can effectively hit & kill units in a buildings second story by pouring bullets from outside a building, through windows and up the ceiling. Staircases are fairly large dimensioned (4x4m I think) as well, offering another weak point for in building fights. Another peculiarity of buildings is they appear having a dedicated "front door", or "front wall" (set in map editor). This one appears prefered for entering or exiting a building, even if preset window or door configurations are changed (or removed) in editor 3D view. Also changing door/window configurations oftenly lead to unpredictable effects in game, like invisible doors or odd unit movements, in and out from that building.
  13. judging from the teams situation in the video I´d think the low wall, also beeing somewhat more down in a depression, beeing the best "cover" vs. the incoming enemy smallarms and HE from WNW. Hedge is no cover, while likely the wall and depression breaks direct LOF from that (new) threat. From a SOP´s POV it´s likely the "best" choice to get out of trouble immediately. The teams stats are fairly good actually (+1 leader, regular, +1 morale). A minus leader, green and low morale team even might have done something that looks more stupid at first sight. I.e experienced, good morale infantry under Arty fire would bug out "forward" to get out of the danger area quickly, even when it takes losses. Low experience units likely would remain in the area fully pinned and taking even more serious losses this way. Whether CM TacAI works that way, I just can guess. In my own games and when in doubt about any my units threat appreciation I use "evade" command to check on this. The automated waypoint back and face command gives a good indication where worst trouble is to be expected in that particular game minute. Many the apparent unit "retreats" in fact are self applied "evade" commands which is not the same as true retreats from broken morale. Edit: The bits of info found in the manual "The right button tells the unit to EVADE by abandoning its current Commands, seeking immediate cover and perhaps popping smoke. Although units can Evade on their own initiative, sometimes they try too hard to stick to their Commands and need to be redirected without further delay. Instant Commands work in both Real-Time and We-Go styles of play."
  14. Thanks, that´s what I meant. Required mod package can grow quite large I think. Working on similar stuff for my Siegfried line Campaign series for CMBN/CMFB, though I can´t make use of axtra assets created from Blender exports unfortunately.
  15. personally I just can tell of my running experiences in CMBN and CMFB, with mentioned odd occurrences in particular. Surely deserves some more in depth testing to see how much randomness is actually involved here. Some my guess is that pixeltrooper "class" (leader, gunner, assistant etc) plays a role, but I still find it hard (or impossible) predicting the games choice on medics and what they´ll loot or rather not.
  16. the nice thing on shader files (blur_shader.frag in particular) is that these can be mod tagged and thus assigned to single missions individually. I like tweaking simple things like lightness, contrast and color saturation to adapt maps to certain our non dynamic weather settings. I.e gloomier for rainy day forest fighting or fine tuning dry/sunny weather. Oftenly it´s more effective than actual terrain and object texture modding and that with simple means. Btw, did anybody try mod tagging files for campaigns yet? I mean do the mod tags for the campaigns first mission sets files in use for all follow up missions, or do missions load and set these individually too (after campaign file baking)?
  17. in fact more anticipating for the next engine (or game) version, not current. With just RT I´d be out as well. Just BFC (or any experienced game programmer) could tell if it makes sense, both feature and performance wise. As said you just can make so many computations in a RT game to get it smooth running, but I wouldn´t personally be bothered for WEGO if it takes 1-2 minutes (or even longer) to compute highly improved and advanced simulation features. If some the current major issues in game engine 4 get resolved I´d expect new content to be published faster and maybe more of it. Unless no banging head at brickwall issues remain. I tend to see some issues of this sort going right ATM, but hope I´m wrong. Really no idea on sales. I just see there´s lots of competition in RT segment, but virtually none in WEGO where despite its ageing CM is king!
  18. my main concern is that BFC likely attempts achieving too much with this ageing sim engine. Quite in particular the RT mode to me looks like a major obstacle for getting more out of that classic and undisputed WEGO wargame. More time consuming computations (AI, pathing i.e) can be better buried in WEGO than RT, where good frame rate at high resolutions is of more major importance IMO. So if RT is required for more sells, then better make it two seperate games and let each one exploit modes (RT & WEGO) to their individual capabilities. But at last it´s their game and vision of it and altogether I´m fine with it, however long it takes.
  19. just had another odd case of medic selection in CMBN. Moved a US Inf Plt HQ towards a wounded BAR gunner to possibly grab that gun. It was the radio operator then selected for the medic job and all he grabbed was some ammo. Radio operator? Ammo? BFC should think about that selections in all seriousness again.
  20. Gorgeous! Looks like an entire new game to me! Also bits of reminding on the ARMA series. Is there an air guitar contest in the town btw?
  21. I very rarely use "fast" in my games, maybe that´s why I don´t see overloading effects. Instead I use short bounds of quick quite oftenly, particularly on medium to longer ranges. But otherwise makes sense if fast is disabled due to any sort of heavy or overload.
  22. did you use hotkey (g) or click the command panel button "face" directly?
  23. area targeting behind blockading terrain no farther than 30m does the trick. Works on bocage, tall walls and terrain related like high embankments etc. Don´t expect deadly volleys of hand grenades at first turn though. Most guys then look like attempting to shoot their rifles but can´t (off course). Wished the TacAI automatically recognizes this situation for grenade volleys (BFC hint! ) Beside always beeing a great read, as well quite useful for playing bocage country and related tactical issues in the game: Doubler´s Busting the Bocage
  24. same for pillbox vehicle derivative. There´s crew position data I´d like to mess with in order to improve on vulnerability in pillboxes embrasure area. Alternatively make the pillbox have a realistic size embrasure so just a single guy can shoot from that loophole. Also would be nice to have an armored plate that closes the embrasure, similar to buttoning up an armored vehicle.
  • Create New...