Enemy mortars visible in trajectory?

[Bulletpoint]

I noticed that since patch 3.12 I'm starting to spot enemy mortar bombs in flight, just like my own mortars are visible to me. Is this working as designed?

 

(I haven't upgraded to version 4.0, so not sure if this has been changed/solved since)

[Holman]

I feel like I've always been able to see some enemy mortar shells and not others.  Do you mean you're seeing their point of origin even if it is out of LOS?

[Bulletpoint]

I mean that I see some mortar shells from the moment they are fired, through their whole trajectory, until they hit. I haven't even spotted the firing unit. Not all enemy shells are visible though.

I'm pretty sure it used to be that you could only see your own shells.

[A Canadian Cat]

No, you have always been able to see at least some of your enemy's shells.

[Bulletpoint]

1 hour ago, IanL said:

No, you have always been able to see at least some of your enemy's shells.

I suppose you mean tank and AT gun shells?

[MOS:96B2P]

4 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

I noticed that since patch 3.12 I'm starting to spot enemy mortar bombs in flight, just like my own mortars are visible to me. Is this working as designed?

I haven't tested this in 4.0 but I think you could always see some OpFor incoming mortars some of the time.  You could even tell if medium mortars were on map or off map depending on if the mortar round was falling vertical or more horizontal.  (I think you discovered this Bullet)  Heavy mortars I believe are only depicted by a light streak and light mortars are always on map.  However I was never able to follow the incoming mortar bombs back to their on-map point of origin.  (Yes I did try, in the interest of science .......... no gamey intentions)    

[A Canadian Cat]

3 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

I suppose you mean tank and AT gun shells?

Yeah them too. What @MOS:96B2P said

[Michael Emrys]

Do shells from on-map mortars whine? I know off-map mortars, in fact all off-map artillery, seems to but I can't remember about on-map.

Michael

[Xorg_Xalargsky]

I just tested and no, they don't.

[Bulletpoint]

4 hours ago, Xorg_Xalargsky said:

I just tested and no, they don't.

I have a savegame showing some that do .. if you or anyone else is interested.

But it seems people are fine with spotting mortar rounds in flight, so maybe it's just me who thinks it's odd.

After all, we can also spot rifle bullets and incoming AT gun shells, but I always assumed they were not visibly spotted, more that their presence was felt or heard as they whizz by.

[A Canadian Cat]

Well, I think everyone is aware of some of the short comings and the trade off between giving to much away and having some indication of where the fire is coming from.

The main message is in answer to your first question: it has always been that way, there is nothing new in 3.x or 4.x

[Xorg_Xalargsky]

12 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

I have a savegame showing some that do .. if you or anyone else is interested.

But it seems people are fine with spotting mortar rounds in flight, so maybe it's just me who thinks it's odd.

After all, we can also spot rifle bullets and incoming AT gun shells, but I always assumed they were not visibly spotted, more that their presence was felt or heard as they whizz by.

Come to think of it, I only tested them in direct fire. Maybe a fire mission would produce whistling and whining.

[Michael Emrys]

32 minutes ago, Xorg_Xalargsky said:

Maybe a fire mission would produce whistling and whining.

I could be mistaken, but I don't think so. I generally use on-map mortars indirectly and I can't recall ever hearing them whine. That's why I found it remarkable when I noticed that off-map mortar shells do whine. Plus that mortar bombs have a reputation of being relatively quiet. They arrive without warning, which contributes to their deadliness.

Michael

[Bulletpoint]

48 minutes ago, Xorg_Xalargsky said:

Come to think of it, I only tested them in direct fire. Maybe a fire mission would produce whistling and whining.

Not sure why you're talking about the noise they make - my point was about them being visible like fireworks.

[Michael Emrys]

1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

Not sure why you're talking about the noise they make...

Because it is interesting and significant. See my post immediately above yours.

Michael

[Bulletpoint]

9 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:

Because it is interesting and significant. See my post immediately above yours.

 

You mean the reason why they can be visible in the game is because the game is representing that troops are hearing the shell and therefore able to deduce its origin and trajectory? I'm not a military man, so I am not to say if this is possible in real life.

[slysniper]

Bulletpoint, If you are trying to point out the game gives out too much info. when it comes to these things , yes it does.

If you are playing H2h,  A player can pinpoint the ordnance when he really should not be able to at times.

For single play, its easy to ignore and allow it to add to the feel of the game.

 

But if one is playing in a tournament and the enemy is killing your units, it is easy to find that units location by backtracking the rounds and moving to the suspected located area and then replaying and listening to the unit fire. Yes you can hear the location also.Louder when you are on top of it.

 

Needless to say I have lost great placement locations to such tactics and I have done the same to those I have played against.

 

I would love to see it changed, but I doubt  that is likely since it has been there from the first engine build.

[Muzzleflash1990]

I think some of the effects you see in the game would not be noticed in the same manner in real life, but they are added for part immersion, and part overview for the player. For example, grenade fired by a grenade launcher also has a "tracer-like" effect, but that is most likely to give overview. Weapon fire from unspotted enemy units that are shooting at yours make a shooting sound to tell you your units are under fire. Which in itself is fine, however, if you just move the camera around and listen, you can easily locate that darn MG42 to within a tile, and area fire the bleep out of it - I assume people in MP have gentleman rules not to do this. Of course they could remove the audio which would kill immersion, or make not make the sound originate from its shooters position, but rather from "generic" non-3d location, which would also significantly lower immersion - especially when the unit is spotted, since audio does not originates from their position.

EDIT: slysniper beat me to it.

Edited April 25, 2017 by Muzzleflash1990

[Bulletpoint]

3 hours ago, Muzzleflash1990 said:

you can easily locate that darn MG42 to within a tile, and area fire the bleep out of it - I assume people in MP have gentleman rules not to do this. Of course they could remove the audio which would kill immersion, or make not make the sound originate from its shooters position, but rather from "generic" non-3d location, which would also significantly lower immersion - especially when the unit is spotted, since audio does not originates from their position.

Seems the obvious thing would be to follow your suggestion but then once the firing unit is spotted, move the sound source to that location. While playing from the "generic" location, the sound volume could be determined by the distance from the firing unit to the closest friendly unit. This would give you a hint about the distance, just like in real life, but not give away the location.

[JonS]

Except your ears are kind of ok at identifying the direction sound is coming from.  CM allows you to use that facility you  have in the real world. Does the game allow you to do that too well?  Maybe.  But then, the game allows you to do everything much better than in the real world.

[slysniper]

The game will never be that close to the real thing, or should it even try. To make the game playable, many things need to be provided for the aid to the player and to make the game enjoyable.

We need to stop wanting everything to be like its real.

Look you want real. play the game only viewing the map from ground level from your leaders position and that of sub leaders under him that have communication with him. See how that feels and see how long you enjoy playing the game. But it sure would be more realistic.

[A Canadian Cat]

7 minutes ago, slysniper said:

Look you want real. play the game only viewing the map from ground level from your leaders position and that of sub leaders under him that have communication with him. See how that feels and see how long you enjoy playing the game. But it sure would be more realistic.

Indeed - and no icons, no contact '?' icons.

[Michael Emrys]

3 hours ago, slysniper said:

We need to stop wanting everything to be like its real.

Indeed. I recall several years ago making the comment that those demanding absolute fidelity should then hire somebody to stand just outside the room where you play the game and fire live rounds through the window. Extra points if you get hit.

Michael

[Erwin]

BF could make a version that ships with its own oil drum that the player sits in with little food or water or toilet facilities for at least a couple of days with his computer while an employee "reality assistant" uses a baseball bat to beat on the exterior, while spraying fetid water (or sewer water for the more realistic experience) on the player.

The "Totally Wonderful Enhanced Reality Package"?   (TWERP)

[Sgt.Squarehead]

The assistant should chuck the odd firework in there too, get that gunpowder and singed flesh smell going.