Spotting .... again ...

[A Canadian Cat]

No, good post. There are no perfect pixel troops just like there are no perfect real troops or people. This game shows you what your imperfect troops have registered is there. It is a mind set we need to get into to truly appreciate this game.

[womble]

...Silent Hill, my example, is crap your pants scary; I don't own the game, I don't want to own the game, but if I was playing I can guarantee you I'd miss everything. I'm easily distracted with games like that, and its hard to see when you have your hands covering your eyes... 

 

Heh. Thanks for the chortle, as well as the salient point.

[sburke]

Sorry, did you say something Fry, I was distracted.

[Squatdog]

The spotting system in Combat Mission is blatantly bugged and broken. 

 

 

 

Edited April 24, 2015 by Squatdog

[fry30]

You are kidding me.... Damnit! I swear the first time I typed this I was concise and pleasant.

 

Things I see. Things that are happening. Things you might be missing:

 

1) you're playing the AI. They suck. That's not an insult, that's just a fact. They do not play, anticipate, react like a real player. 

2) The ISU-152 was in the Hetzers field of vision for... what, 4 seconds? What was he looking at? I don't know... there's a smashed house directly in front of him, maybe the crew is on edge, worried that a team of sappers might come out and make a run with demo charges. There's a load of automatic fire coming across his field of vision down a road. Is that suppresive fire? Who's firing? Does he know whats in front of him. I am assuming you are playing the AI, the robotic actions of the Panzershrek team seemed to confirm it for me, I stopped watching shortly thereafter. I'll finish it up after I finish this.

3) The Panzershrek team is facing into the hedgerow. You're using the arrow markers... can't remember the creator but I love them! You can see hes facing towards the hedge, with an inclination towards the field. Sure, by all means he should hear the tank... there's your [indirect] spotting in action. (its hard to notice in real time, but when spotting contacts start popping up out of nowhere a field over from a scout team, its safe to say they'e heard a tank rolling by. The new patch allows you to shut off your engines via the hide button to keep your armored reserves hidden.) By the time the Panzershrek (the AI) reacts to whats going on, the Tac AI is basically saying ok I'm under orders to stare forward, with no LOS, into this hedge. Wait.. is that a tank I hear? Perhaps... but I shall do nothing. Ohhh snap... it is a tank! (Boom... dead Panzershrek... I'm assuming you got him, right?)

4) Use pauses in between moves. Again, I will not even entertain the idea of AI figuring this out. AI sucks. Period. Spotting, seems to be working just fine. Tac-AI works wonders if (aside from obvious things like C&C, Leadership, and Experience being in good shape) you know your pixeltruppen's limitations. Hit your enemy when you can see him, and he can't see you. Sound like an oxymoron? Spot an enemy team in a house with an HQ team, w/C&C to a Machine Gun team. Hit the house with the Machine Gun team. Ever notice how sometimes you can't see where tracers are coming from. almost as if they are appearing suddenly twenty feet away from you. If you don't know where the fire is coming from, you can't trace it back. If your men are pinned down to the floor, they aren't going to spot ANYTHING; THIS IS HOW YOU WIN BATTLES.

5) There was something valid here. It was so valid. You wouldn't even believe it. So much logic.

6) I'll do you a huge favor and teach you first hand the pros and cons of CMRT's spotting system myself. Hit me up at cjburke86@yahoo on dropbox, or PM me if you don't know how to setup a PBEM game.

 

Lastly, and obviously, this has all been predicated on the belief that you are playing against the AI. If you are playing a human, maybe they need to get on the phone with Bill H. and talk tactics.

 

This has been a message from your local Fry.

[fry30]

On second viewing... even if you are playing the AI, I've seen videos like this. I call it working as intended. If you try this against a human opponent, you'll get... humbled.  I'm not trying to call you out, but if this thread goes on much longer, I'll upload a turn where I knock out about 6 tanks (at least) in one turn because I had immobile tanks firing at moving targets. Sure, it took them about 10-20 seconds to spot their targets (seems reasonable to me) from 1000 meters or so away, but once they had their targets, it was the Marinaras Turkey Shoot. My point is, don't ruin your game playing like this. If you can't find an opponent... okay, play only the best missions. QBs against the AI are almost pointless.

 

Spotting is so critical to this game, its important not to clutter threads like this with videos from the AI. It doesn't depict what this game is truly great at. 

 

In summation: Your problem is with the AI, trust me. 

 

 

EDIT: Please tell me you are playing against the AI. Only a Maniac would put an armored arc on a Tank Destroyer and then reverse it across a demolished battlefield in full view of an ISU-152. You are aware this game isn't using borg spotting, right?

Edited April 24, 2015 by fry30

[Squatdog]

Are you insane?

 

The assault gun was directly in the Hetzer's field of vision both times took a uniform 10 seconds for it to actually react to a 45 ton, 3 metre high assault gun directly in front of it at close range. Both times, the Hetzers were undamaged, protected by infantry and were under absolutely no other threat.

 

The Hetzer was completely incapable of spotting the T34 despite it being directly in the Cover Armour arc less than 100m away, while the T34 shot the Hetzer with impunity. 

 

The Panzershrek was completely incapable of identifying  a 45 ton, 3 metre high assault gun despite it being within the field of view, then only noticed it once the assault gun was 5m away and actively turning to shoot the Panzershrek from pointblank range.

 

The last clip involved a T34 LITERALLY running over the tank hunter team's foxhole while remaining completely invisible to them.

 

 

 

6) I'll do you a huge favor and teach you first hand the pros and cons of CMRT's spotting system myself. Hit me up at cjburke86@yahoo on dropbox, or PM me if you don't know how to setup a PBEM game.

 

I'll do you a favour and post the battle report, where I got a total victory on my FIRST ATTEMPT:

 

Edited April 24, 2015 by Squatdog

[sburke]

yeah I played that scenario right after it came out.  Great one actually.  Funny thing is I had none of those issues.  For being totally borked it worked pretty darn good for me.  You do understand there are some limits to the spotting functionality right?  Basically the more cycles in spotting, the more CPU intensive it gets until it is completely unplayable.  Now within that BF did some work to tweak units in close proximity.  As well units that might be freaking out or cowering spot for s**t. 

 

I am honestly tired of looking at people's examples trying to discern what might be going on, especially w/o a save.  Video only tells me so much.  For example the angle you are showing that first Hetzer from- your TC is buttoned.  Is the ISU actually in the field of view of the Hetzer when it first shows up?  I kind of suspect not.  You are counting from when you think it should see it.  I actually do not know the field of view of a buttoned Hetzer, some grog would have to hop on here and say if that was credible or not.

 

Personally I find do find it credible because I expect that my pixeltruppen are aware of very little that I see.  It is battle, it is noisy, you told them to focus on an arc.  There is a building adjacent that blocks some of their field of view. All that adds up to me for plausible.  Not necessarily the only or even an optimal answer, but plausible.

 

If it were "blatantly bugged and broken" you couldn't really play the game and after several years now of playing I can say with some certainty that within the confines of what can be done with current computing power it is a damned good simulation. 

 

And Fry, if you haven't played that scenario, it is quite good.  Even with the limitations the AI has on offense, it is a really tense scenario.

[Squatdog]

Basically the more cycles in spotting, the more CPU intensive it gets until it is completely unplayable.

 

Oh please.

 

This is quite possibly the stupidest thing I have ever heard.

 

 

 Funny thing is I had none of those issues.  For being totally borked it worked pretty darn good for me.

 

Yet I managed to record no less than FOUR separate instances in ONE GAME???

 

Let's face it, the reason it 'works pretty darn good for you' is that you are the milsim equivalent of a role-player and will practically turn cartwheels in an effort to explain away any discrepancies.

 

 

For example the angle you are showing that first Hetzer from- your TC is buttoned.  Is the ISU actually in the field of view of the Hetzer when it first shows up?  I kind of suspect not.  You are counting from when you think it should see it.  I actually do not know the field of view of a buttoned Hetzer, some grog would have to hop on here and say if that was credible or not.

 

The two later clips have the Hetzer being unable to detect enemy armour DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THEM at close range.

 

The first clip shows a 45 ton assault gun slowly lumbering around the corner directly into the field of view of a Hetzer (specifically located to ambush enemy armour) yet manages to remain completely invisible.

 

 

And Fry, if you haven't played that scenario, it is quite good.  Even with the limitations the AI has on offense, it is a really tense scenario.

 

It's interesting to note how 'Fry's' Email address is remarkably similar to your user tag.

 

Things that make you go hmmmmm...

Edited April 24, 2015 by Squatdog

[sburke]

LOL if you really want to go conspiracy mode "fry" and I are both dead heads too....hmmmmmm

 

you recorded 4 separate instances in one game and while I occasionally run into them, they never seem to be that prevalent.  Could be I am a "roleplayer" whatever the hell that means. Or it could be you play tactically too close.  Driving your hetzers into face to face conflicts where they don't belong and stressing the engine in the bargain.

As to your comment about that being the stupidest thing you have ever heard- well that comes direct from Steve in explaining it here on the forum.  It is how the engine works.  Understanding the engine is necessary if you want to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the game. 

 

And thank you for jumping to being directly insulting.

  I never once in my post said anything directly insulting to you.  What I did was point out how the engines works and where it is weak.  I also gave some credible answers for at least one issue that without a save I can't really examine.  Just to point out to folks that the "aggressive fanboi" thing really is BS. 

 

If you really think the game is that borked then lower your stress level and go play something else.  BF has already explained how the spotting engine works and it's limitations.  Fundamentally it is not going to change.  Maybe in CMx3 or 4, but definitely not in CM x2.

Edited April 24, 2015 by sburke

[Squatdog]

you recorded 4 separate instances in one game and while I occasionally run into them, they never seem to be that prevalent.  

 

So at first you claimed that you personally experienced "none of those issues"...and now you actually HAVE experienced these issues.

 

I see.

 

As to your comment about that being the stupidest thing you have ever heard- well that comes direct from Steve in explaining it here on the forum.  It is how the engine works.  Understanding the engine is necessary if you want to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the game.

 

...and it's an absolutely LUDICROUS assertion and a mealie-mouthed excuse for broken mechanics that might require extensive re-coding to fix.

 

The engine can't handle spot-checks more than once every ten seconds? Really? REALLY???

 

Driving your hetzers into face to face conflicts where they don't belong and stressing the engine in the bargain.

 

LOLWUT???

 

The Hetzers were ambushing enemy armour by enfilading them from concealed oblique positions, while protected from close attack by infantry. That's TEXTBOOK use of tank destroyers in an urban environment.

[AttorneyAtWar]

So at first you claimed that you personally experienced "none of those issues"...and now you actually HAVE experienced these issues.

 

I see.

 

 

 

 

...and it's an absolutely LUDICROUS assertion and a mealie-mouthed excuse for broken mechanics that might require extensive re-coding to fix.

 

The engine can't handle spot-checks more than once every ten seconds? Really? REALLY???

 

 

 

Driving your hetzers into face to face conflicts where they don't belong and stressing the engine in the bargain.

 

LOLWUT???

 

The Hetzers were ambushing enemy armour by enfilading them from concealed oblique positions, while protected from close attack by infantry. That's TEXTBOOK use of tank destroyers in an urban environment.

 

I don't see any issues with that Hetzer spotting, its buttoned, its smoky, and vision slits are tough to look through, hell the Hetzer spots the ISU-152 in about 10 seconds, i don't see a problem there.

 

As for the panzerschreck guy, his buddy got blown to bits and he is pretty much sitting in a hedge facing the wrong direction, should he hear the SU-152? yeah probably but, there is a lot of noise going on though so that may contribute to it.

 

Nit picking really gets you no where, the game is not broken, soldiers don't always see everything and neither do tanks, war is hell, its scary, noisy and smoky, if my troops spotted everything I wanted them to I would have stopped playing the game long ago.

 

I will tell you one thing you obviously want to hear though, is the spotting system perfect? nope nothing is.

Edited April 24, 2015 by Raptorx7

[womble]

Instance 1: your camera angle is deeply unconvincing. The building obscures the target for a long time and the Hetzer starts turning pretty much as soon as the assault gun is clear of obstruction.

 

Instance 2: foliage.

 

Instance 3: Smoke. As soon as the smoke cloud dissipates the Hetzer spots its target.

 

Instance 4: There are two trees that are "trunks only" between the T-34 and the Hetzer. The T-34 got lucky and spotted the Hetzer before being spotted in return.

 

Instance 5: Yeah, that's hinky. Looks like the AT team doesn't get a chance to see the JS until its geometric centre is past the corner of the house, which is obviously wrong.

 

I note that 3 of your 5 instances involve Hetzers being blind. The wikipedia entry for the Hetzer says, for what it's worth: "Button-down Jagdpanzer 38 was blind to the right side. Since 20mm side armors (same as late model Panzer II's side armor) were only adequate to protect the crew from fairly small caliber guns, it was important to face the threat forward. Hence, commander's field of view was planned to be improved by installing a rotating periscope in Jagdpanzer 38 Starr, just as Sturmgeschutz III and Elefant had evolved from a single pair of periscopes to all around vision blocks. However, Jagdpanzer 38 Starr came too late to see the action in the field."

 

Also, while you have identified one, maybe 2 places where the holes in the spotting model show up, you are neglecting the tens of millions* of times per game-hour the model works just fine. How many of those situations came out "the wrong way" when it wasn't feasible? 1. Maybe. 3 of them turned out as they should with the unit that was being slippery to spot getting geeked. 1 of them the Hetzer got unlucky with its spotting a target through some trees, or its low posture put LOS blocks in that the T-34 saw over. The overrunning of the foxhole maybe should have gone the other way, but it would take Iron Cross levels of bravery to fire your tube at a JS-2 less than 10m away, and not all our pTruppen have that ice water in their veins.

 

It's not broken. It's just not perfect, and it's working as well as can be expected given the environment (potentially large, complicated, detailed, gimped by single processor limitations) it's in.

 

* take two companies if infantry. Call it 150 eyeballs a side, and 150 targets. That's 150^2 potential spotting checks per cycle. For round numbers, let's say there's an average of 10 cycles per minute, so in an hour, 600 cycles times 22500 = 13.5 million potential checks per hour. And that's just one company a side. Many, many of those checks are handled "in summary" by the LOS table, but it's all part of a system that, generally, works.

[Squatdog]

Instance 1: your camera angle is deeply unconvincing. The building obscures the target for a long time and the Hetzer starts turning pretty much as soon as the assault gun is clear of obstruction.

The SU-152

 

The ISU-152 idled for roughly 10 seconds almost directly in front of the Hetzer, yet somehow remained invisible

 

Instance 2: foliage.

 

The Panzershrek was INSIDE the bush and otherwise had an unobstructed view.

 

Instance 3: Smoke. As soon as the smoke cloud dissipates the Hetzer spots its target.

 

You can clearly see that smoke didn't obstruct the target. Even when the ISU-152 was covered with heavy smoke after being knocked out and pelted with grenades, it was STILL VISIBLE to the Hetzer.

 

Instance 4: There are two trees that are "trunks only" between the T-34 and the Hetzer. The T-34 got lucky and spotted the Hetzer before being spotted in return.

 

What a LOAD OF CRAP.

 

The Hetzer was completely incapable of detecting the T34 from when it slowly lumbered into view, right up to the moment that it was knocked out by the T34s third shot. FORTY-THREE SECONDS LATER.

 

* take two companies if infantry. Call it 150 eyeballs a side, and 150 targets. That's 150^2 potential spotting checks per cycle. For round numbers, let's say there's an average of 10 cycles per minute, so in an hour, 600 cycles times 22500 = 13.5 million potential checks per hour. And that's just one company a side. Many, many of those checks are handled "in summary" by the LOS table, but it's all part of a system that, generally, works.

 

What a LOAD OF CRAP.

 

Out in the real world, it's a simple matter of coding an algorithm that extrapolates a basic vision radius and checks yes/no to whether an enemy is visible.

[sburke]

Thanks squat dog for displaying a massive inability to have a discussion without being ridiculously insulting. Have fun with your issues, I refuse to have a conversation at such a childish tantrum throwing level. Ping me in a few years when you have matured a bit.

You are apparently very enamored with your Gaming combat prowess. Kind of reminds me of this.

http://www.duffelblog.com/2015/01/gamer-isis-syria-iraq/

Not to mention your apparently brilliant coding skills whereby you have singlehandedly told BF how to resolve the game spotting limitations. Kudos to you Mr amazing.

Edited April 24, 2015 by sburke

[womble]

* take two companies if infantry. Call it 150 eyeballs a side, and 150 targets. That's 150^2 potential spotting checks per cycle. For round numbers, let's say there's an average of 10 cycles per minute, so in an hour, 600 cycles times 22500 = 13.5 million potential checks per hour. And that's just one company a side. Many, many of those checks are handled "in summary" by the LOS table, but it's all part of a system that, generally, works.

 

What a LOAD OF CRAP.

 

Out in the real world, it's a simple matter of coding an algorithm that extrapolates a basic vision radius and checks yes/no to whether an enemy is visible.

What's crap? You can't argue with the arithmetic. You note I said "potential" spotting checks. The actual LOS calculation isn't, most of the time, run on all those combinations, because there's a precalculated "first guess" for various combinations of observer eyeball and target. But that's all part of a spotting engine getting it down to manageable computational demand.

 

And their approach recognises one or two orders of magnitude as many things that your asinine, arrogant, idiotic approach wouldn't even begin to think about starting to address. "basic vision radius" just proves you don't know what you're talking about: CM spotting isn't just about distance, it's not even mostly about distance. And still, the game turns out perfectly uncontroversial spotting results in more than 99.9999% of the time when spotting needs to be assessed.

 

But you're not here to learn. And when we stop feeding you you'll go back under you bridge. So consider this your last supper.

[Squatdog]

What's crap? You can't argue with the arithmetic. You note I said "potential" spotting checks. The actual LOS calculation isn't, most of the time, run on all those combinations, because there's a precalculated "first guess" for various combinations of observer eyeball and target. But that's all part of a spotting engine getting it down to manageable computational demand.

 

And their approach recognises one or two orders of magnitude as many things that your asinine, arrogant, idiotic approach wouldn't even begin to think about starting to address. "basic vision radius" just proves you don't know what you're talking about: CM spotting isn't just about distance, it's not even mostly about distance. And still, the game turns out perfectly uncontroversial spotting results in more than 99.9999% of the time when spotting needs to be assessed.

 

 

 

The spotting mechanics determine an aggregate vision radius for a unit and checks yes/no to whether an enemy has entered that vision radius.

 

Very straightforward and not something that will overwhelm the humblest of PCs.

 

 

But you're not here to learn. And when we stop feeding you you'll go back under you bridge. So consider this your last supper.

 

"You disagree with me, therefore troll"

[Vanir Ausf B]

The ISU-152 idled for roughly 10 seconds almost directly in front of the Hetzer, yet somehow remained invisible

 

Units do not spot continuously. They are given spot checks at intervals, which are typically every 7 seconds. There is always at least a small chance of failing a spot check.

[Squatdog]

Clearly an amazing coincidence.

 

 

[A Canadian Cat]

The spotting mechanics determine an aggregate vision radius for a unit and checks yes/no to whether an enemy has entered that vision radius.

Very straightforward and not something that will overwhelm the humblest of PCs.

But this just shows you don't get it. No real person is aware of all things inside their "vision radius". CM tries to simulate that reality. The fact is people miss stuff. You are wrong to think otherwise.

[AttorneyAtWar]

Clearly an amazing coincidence.

 

 

 

 

There in a forest lying down looking through brush and trees...

 

You are going to have to try harder than that, how about you just play the game instead of looking for every single fault, I am afraid no game is without problems.

[Squatdog]

There in a forest lying down looking through brush and trees...

 

You are going to have to try harder than that, how about you just play the game instead of looking for every single fault, I am afraid no game is without problems.

 

The tank is SIXTEEN METRES AWAY and unobscured by foliage.

 

One of the section PULLS OUT BINOCULARS, yet is still incapable of seeing a 35 ton sitting tank directly in front of him.

 

After the magic 10 seconds of 'realism' pass, the sections in both clips can suddenly see the tank sitting directly in front of them, which was previously invisible.

 

But this just shows you don't get it. No real person is aware of all things inside their "vision radius". CM tries to simulate that reality. The fact is people miss stuff. You are wrong to think otherwise.

 

LMFAO!!!

 

The tank was sitting DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THEM in both clips.

[AttorneyAtWar]

 

The tank is SIXTEEN METRES AWAY and unobscured by foliage.

 

One of the section PULLS OUT BINOCULARS, yet is still incapable of seeing a 35 ton sitting tank directly in front of him.

 

After the magic 10 seconds of 'realism' pass, the sections in both clips can suddenly see the tank sitting directly in front of them, which was previously invisible.

 

 

 

 

LMFAO!!!

 

The tank was sitting DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THEM in both clips.

 

 

That forest "tile" is abstracted, the brush and trees aren't necessarily modeled exactly where they are, it just counts as concealment to the game, so laying down in it is going to have penalties to spotting, its not hard to understand.

[Squatdog]

That forest "tile" is abstracted, the brush and trees aren't necessarily modeled exactly where they are, it just counts as concealment to the game, so laying down in it is going to have penalties to spotting, its not hard to understand.

 

They were completely incapable of seeing a 35 ton tank sixteen metres away, directly in front of them, in the open, under bright sunshine, even after one of them pulled out a pair of BINOCULARS.

 

After the obligatory 10 seconds of 'realism', they suddenly COULD see it.

 

If the brushes and trees are abstracted as you claim, why did the grenade and Panzerfaust get detonated by the tree directly in front of the tank?

[LukeFF]

That forest "tile" is abstracted, the brush and trees aren't necessarily modeled exactly where they are, it just counts as concealment to the game, so laying down in it is going to have penalties to spotting, its not hard to understand.

 

Not so - the trees are modeled one a 1:1 basis. Brush might be, but I'm not sure on that one.