CarlWAW Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I just finished Blunting the Spear (ep. III) and I was able to QUICKLY rush with all trucks and kubels cross country over kilometers without noticing the slightest damage. I did not even care where the field paths were or if the ground was cereal or green or a ploughed field. As a rural guy and grown up on a farm I have quite some experience the huge difference cfield paths, roads, cross country makes. I think no truck or jeep/kubel would survive more than a few hundred meters how I can dash them at CM's QUICK speed forward cross country. IMO vehicles being constructed for road use and with light offroad capabilities should be more susceptible to damage because of inadequate speed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holman Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Jeeps were known for being able to go anywhere. Do they not deserve their reputation? And of course as players we don't have to worry about long-term damage or wear-and-tear on our vehicles--they only have to last as long as the scenario. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Piker. Go FAST... Quick gives only the slightest advantage in turning circle for the "multi-purpose vehicles" of CM and is noticeably slower. I've seen some footage of Wilys jeeps going pretty hell-for-leather over some pretty shocking ground... Also worth noting that vehicles will slow down of their own accord for some kinds of bumping: the berm remaining when a bocage hedge is demo'ed, for example, crossing any obstacle they can crush, and rough terrain like Light Woods. So just give them Fast orders and let them sort themselves out... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doodlebug Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I just finished Blunting the Spear (ep. III) and I was able to QUICKLY rush with all trucks and kubels cross country over kilometers without noticing the slightest damage. I did not even care where the field paths were or if the ground was cereal or green or a ploughed field. As a rural guy and grown up on a farm I have quite some experience the huge difference cfield paths, roads, cross country makes. I think no truck or jeep/kubel would survive more than a few hundred meters how I can dash them at CM's QUICK speed forward cross country. IMO vehicles being constructed for road use and with light offroad capabilities should be more susceptible to damage because of inadequate speed. Have you had a chance to check the individual vehicles stats concerned for damage showing up against wheels etc? An accumulation of damage will normally reduce the max. speed possible with an immobilisation also possible which could be considered to represent a mechanical fault or breakdown? Would a crude test to see the effects of quick movement on rough terrain for wheeled vehicles be possible? One vehicle on straight road all the way, the others on varying terrain for the first half of the course and road for the second half. Quick move all to the halfway point pausing everyone upon arrival at the road section. Then a straight drag race along the road. If all other factors are equal and there has been no degradation then every vehicle should still cover the road section at the same pace. If however (as I suspect) the vehicle on the road having accumulated least damage is quickest to finish, that would indicate (wouldn't it ?) that terrain is impacting vehicle performance and reliability. It could provide some useful insights in any subsequent discussion as to whether terrain degradation on wheeled vehicles is set at a realistic level as per your original post. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vergeltungswaffe Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 I constantly keep vehicles on the tab that shows the condition of the weapons, wheels, etc, and I can tell you that wheeled vehicles will absolutely degrade going over rough terrain. Drive through a fence, etc, and you can often see damage. Drive across wire and you'll see yellow sooner rather than later. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holman Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Is vehicle performance also affected by the driver? Will a conscript driver in rough terrain degrade a vehicle faster than a veteran? It's possible that they shouldn't--troop level might be meant to reflect overall soldierly experience, not necessarily their skill behind the wheel. (Maybe that conscript was a truck driver in civilian life six months ago.) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Vehicles -- ALL vehicles, not just wheeled -- take damage from driving through obstacles. Just driving over rough terrain will never damage anything. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOS:96B2P Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 <Snip> Also worth noting that vehicles will slow down of their own accord for some kinds of bumping: the berm remaining when a bocage hedge is demo'ed, for example, crossing any obstacle they can crush, and rough terrain like Light Woods. So just give them Fast orders and let them sort themselves out... I have always had vehicles Slow when crossing an obstacle. I will have to try Fast. Is vehicle performance also affected by the driver? Will a conscript driver in rough terrain degrade a vehicle faster than a veteran? <Snip> I think, to a certain extent, vehicle performance is effected. From page 44 of the 3.01 game manual: To some degree better quality crews lessen the chance of bogging. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holman Posted August 7, 2015 Share Posted August 7, 2015 Vehicles -- ALL vehicles, not just wheeled -- take damage from driving through obstacles. Just driving over rough terrain will never damage anything. Does this include woods, brush, and other terrain? I'm currently playing a long scenario with a full company of tanks, and many of them have significant track damage from (I believe) crossing various kinds of wooded/brush terrain as well as train tracks. None have broken through a fence or other structure (there aren't any). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted August 8, 2015 Share Posted August 8, 2015 (edited) Vehicles of all types can drive through light woods or rocky terrain all day without damage, although there may be an increased chance of bogging. RR tracks can damage both wheeled and tracked vehicles*, but it's not considered a type of ground terrain in the editor. * Which is why you should always try to cross RR tracks at a perpendicular angle. Running vehicles along the length of the track will almost inevitably incur damage. Edited August 8, 2015 by Vanir Ausf B 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted August 8, 2015 Share Posted August 8, 2015 You might change your opinion pretty quickly if the ground conditions get changed from 'dry' to 'damp'. Even with tracked vehicles I tend to aim for the 'hard' and 'rocky' ground in wet conditions for fear of finding myself bogged or worse. In 'muddy' conditions I'm not sure quite what to do. Fields are dangerous, roads are worse! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarlWAW Posted August 19, 2015 Author Share Posted August 19, 2015 Jeeps were known for being able to go anywhere. Do they not deserve their reputation? Not at the speeds in the game. I am wondering if anyone who is defending the cross country capabilities ever drove cross country? In the game halftracks do not show much better cross country capabilities than trucks (although they should). Try to move an empty truck over only one ploughed or rough dry field at any speed faster than "slow". Tracks instead of wheels are there for a reason. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOS:96B2P Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 Vehicles -- ALL vehicles, not just wheeled -- take damage from driving through obstacles. Just driving over rough terrain will never damage anything. Vehicles of all types can drive through light woods or rocky terrain all day without damage, although there may be an increased chance of bogging. RR tracks can damage both wheeled and tracked vehicles <Snip> Which is why you should always try to cross RR tracks at a perpendicular angle. Running vehicles along the length of the track will almost inevitably incur damage. Thanks Vanir. This is more good info. I played the excellent scenario Gates of Warsaw (which I highly recommend). During the scenario some of my tanks sustained track damage. At the time I was not sure what caused the damage. (The tanks had also moved through some light woods) I bet it must have been the railroad tracks they crossed. What is the opinion on the game mechanics of vehicle speed and bogging? IanL was kind enough to provide links to a discussion on the topic however I am not convinced a solid answer was agreed upon. A lot of back and forth in those threads. This also relates to what CarlWAW is talking about. I am trying to run some tests of my own as RL allows. The bogging / immobilized issue will probably be significant with the weather conditions expected in CM Battle of the Bulge release. Vanir, your good at this stuff, what is your opinion on vehicle speed and bogging / immobilization? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 Vanir, your good at this stuff, what is your opinion on vehicle speed and bogging / immobilization? Speed is about right, IMO. Wheeled vehicles receive very significant off-road speed penalties (this seems to be a hidden modifier to the speed rating that is not the same for all wheeled vehicles; vehicles with more axles are nerfed less severely from my observations). Bogging is unfortunately an area that could use some attention. Probably. I have not actually tested wheeled vehicle bogging. All of my bogging tests have been various models of tank. However, my testing has convinced me that the Off-Road Rating in the vehicle UI is a generally accurate measure of a vehicle's propensity to bog. Wheeled vehicles in general have higher Off-Road Ratings than tracked vehicles. I have seen people argue on this forum more than once that this is realistic. I disagree. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinkin Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 (edited) Interesting thread. Yet another angle. Perhaps scenarios are too often set up in dry conditions. Dry it the default setting in the editor like clear skies during the day. The average movement capabilities of forces might be better simulated by setting wet conditions as discussed above. I know in central New Jersey it's drought - dry as a bone. But have a day of rain and all cultivated terrain not in direct sunlight will stay wet for 24 to 48 hours, And its mid summer. As the ground drys, mud beneath the surface is difficult to recognize. So an over zealous group of drivers could head out into a field on a perfectly sunny day and opps. Kevin Edited August 20, 2015 by kevinkin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOS:96B2P Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 Speed is about right, IMO. Wheeled vehicles receive very significant off-road speed penalties (this seems to be a hidden modifier to the speed rating that is not the same for all wheeled vehicles; vehicles with more axles are nerfed less severely from my observations). Thanks for the answer Vanir. All of my bogging tests have been various models of tank. This is interesting stuff. As usual I am curious about the game mechanics and how I should develop my TACSOPs with these mechanics in mind. I think most people on this forum have at least a basic understanding of tactics. However IMO you have to be able to blend your tactical understanding with the game mechanics or your liable to see a bunch of red crosses floating up from your fire teams. The basic question I am curious about is: My platoon of tanks need to cross a snow covered field (think CM Bulge). What would be the best speed to cross the field at with the least chance of bogging / immobilization? Or is a Slow moving tank just as likely to bog as the same tank moving Fast. I am currently playing two PBEM games in CMFI with snow and am doing some testing when time allows. My only conclusion so far is that both on road and off road with wheeled or tracked vehicles is problematic as is illustrated below. This tank was moving Slow in light snow with a veteran track commander and had no damage. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Combatintman Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 I don't test slavishly but I do a bit of it here and there and yes I think X-country movement over snow or in conditions other than dry is a bit of a black art. I'm wondering if crew experience and being buttoned also play a factor in the likelihood of bogging. I certainly am interested in whatever anybody turns up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinkin Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 (edited) Started a test and wanted to report an early finding. The only combination that immobilized panthers was muddy ground conditions with muddy tiles on the map. Either alone had no effect on immobilization over 30 turns in this test of "Fast". Perhaps the settings alone have such a subtle effect that 30 turns did not produce immobilization. I did not know you need both to have big impact. Kevin Edited August 20, 2015 by kevinkin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 (edited) . The basic question I am curious about is: My platoon of tanks need to cross a snow covered field (think CM Bulge). What would be the best speed to cross the field at with the least chance of bogging / immobilization? Or is a Slow moving tank just as likely to bog as the same tank moving Fast.Speed makes either no difference or so little difference that Slow isn't worth it unless you really don't need to get there any time soon. BFC has said crew experience is a factor but I have not tested that. Edited August 20, 2015 by Vanir Ausf B 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOS:96B2P Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 I don't test slavishly but I do a bit of it here and there and yes I think X-country movement over snow or in conditions other than dry is a bit of a black art. I'm wondering if crew experience and being buttoned also play a factor in the likelihood of bogging. I certainly am interested in whatever anybody turns up. CM Engine Manual v3.01 Pg44 – To some degree better quality crews lessen the chance of bogging. Not sure to what degree but my tank commander in the screenshot in post #16 was a veteran. Started a test and wanted to report an early finding. The only combination that immobilized panthers was muddy ground conditions with muddy tiles on the map. Either alone had no effect on immobilization over 30 turns in this test of "Fast". Perhaps the settings alone have such a subtle effect that 30 turns did not produce immobilization. I did not know you need both to have big impact. Kevin Interesting Kevin. Did you have a chance to test muddy conditions, muddy tiles with Slow movement yet? That surprises me that the conditions and tiles both need to be muddy to get the tank bogged. In a PBEM I have a vehicle on a road in light snow that is not only bogged but immobilized. Speed makes either no difference or so little difference that Slow isn't worth it unless you really don't need to get there any time soon. BFC has said crew experience is a factor but I have not tested that. Thanks Vanir. Pedal to the metal! I will update my TACSOPs accordingly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinkin Posted August 20, 2015 Share Posted August 20, 2015 No ... but I will and report later. Any other combos while I'm at it? Kevin (retired R&D) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOS:96B2P Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Well .... with the Bulge release in the pipeline ...... any terrain tile + snow ground conditions. It seems speed does not matter. So I guess it is the terrain tile and/or the weather conditions and/or ground conditions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinkin Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Looks like muddy ground + muddy tiles = about 50% less immobilized slow vs fast. Kevin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) This is a test I did about 18 months ago: A year later and I thought I would update this with some new tests on how speed affects bogging... or doesn't. I chose the Panther A mid and M4A3(76)W Sherman for this run. Except for the change in vehicles and a somewhat larger sample size this test is identical to the ones done in the first post of this thread. Oh, and I changed the weather from raining to overcast, but the ground conditions are the same (muddy).Fast speed Total distance traveled: Sherman: 139316 meters Panther: 138732 meters Average distance traveled before immobilized:Sherman: 1393 metersPanther: 1387 metersSlow speed Total distance traveled: Sherman: 108634 meters Panther: 136935 meters Average distance traveled before immobilized:Sherman: 1086 metersPanther: 1369 meters Conclusion: It has been conventional wisdom since the CMx1 days that reducing speed in mud or snow will decrease bogging chances, but this does not seem to be true now. Edited August 21, 2015 by Vanir Ausf B 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinkin Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Did you use muddy tiles on top of the declared muddy ground conditions? For the Sherman, 1393 vs 1086 l would likely be a small but significant difference via a t-test on the raw data. Kevin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.