Criticism towards CMAK

[pamak1970]

hello everyone,

i am very new and with little experience regarding combat mission games.I want to point something that i was hoping it could be included in the improvements in CMAK.I was hoping that it could be simulated through an algorithm the effect of friendly fire on units,and i am talking specifically about machine gun file.This would restrict players from having machine guns directly behind frindly units and firing supporting fire through them towards enemy positions.What i was thinking was a kind of algorithm which would minimize the fire power of supporting machine guns when the line of fire passes near a friendly unit-simulating the restriction that the operators of the machine gun have to pay attention to the presence of the friendly unit.I would also like to see a morale check algorithm for the friendly infantry forward and even friendly casualties in random.This would force players to use proper tactics for the placement of machine guns.

[ November 30, 2003, 01:53 PM: Message edited by: pamak1970 ]

[PeterX]

I was hoping that it could be simulated through an algorithm the effect of friendly fire on units,and i am talking specifically about machine gun file.

There are two principal grog objections to the CM series:

1- Borg Spotting

2- (Absence of) Realtime LOS

You've brought up #2. If LOS were in realtime we could, in addition to your example, shield advancing infantry with tanks. I believe the only factor retarding its implementation is the extra computer muscle required to simulate the interplay of bullets, shells, troops, and vehicles moving in real time. Perhaps once BFC raises the miminmum system req to the 3 gig level we'll see it. I'm sure it's doable.

#1 is more problematical. For the life of me, I can't see how it can be remedied without removing the player from the game. Alternatively, CM can move up to the modern era where, aided by computers, cellular, and gps devices, Borg Spotting would be a battlefield fact of life. At least for Western armies.

[ November 30, 2003, 06:26 PM: Message edited by: PeterX ]

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by PeterX:

If LOS were in realtime we could, in addition to your example, shield advancing infantry with tanks. I believe the only factor retarding its implementation is the extra computer muscle required to simulate the interplay of bullets, shells, troops, and vehicles moving in real time. Perhaps once BFC raises the miminmum system req to the 3 gig level we'll see it. I'm sure it's doable.

But it will also create a nightmare for the TacAI and the computed opponent and it will require new commands for the player.

An example: imagine you drive a bunch of tanks along a road in cover of houses. At the end of the street they are supposed to stop in LOS of an enemy and shoot him up. Right now you can just arrange the tanks to be in one line and they can shoot through each other.

If you fixed this problem then you would have to give players more control, new commands, to instruct the tanks to move somewhere where they can shoot at the enemy by placing themself so that the others are not in the way - just like a real-world unit would do.

If you don't solve that problem then you will have a battlefield full of tanks not shooting where in reality they would just move a meter and then shoot.

%%

Another thing is that a CM tank is point-shaped in CM right now. You would have to move the engine to give it a full body, both for the tank blocking shots and for the tank behind it. A point-shaped tank is useless as cover but at the same time you cannot hide a point-shaped tank behind a full-body tank because it would be unrealistically easy to hide.

[pamak1970]

since my english is not perfect,What do you mean by borg spotting?

[PeterX]

Another thing is that a CM tank is point-shaped in CM right now. You would have to move the engine to give it a full body, both for the tank blocking shots and for the tank behind it. A point-shaped tank is useless as cover but at the same time you cannot hide a point-shaped tank behind a full-body tank because it would be unrealistically easy to hide.

Interesting. I didn;t realize that. In some some of the cutting edge racing sims, like Nascar 2003, the entire car body is simulated. Necessarily so, as friction and crashing happen in real time.

[pamak1970]

does anybody know here about steel beasts?It is a tank simulator game but it is also a game where you can assume command of up to a task force unit.Although not fancy in graphics and without many elements that combat mission includes,it seems to me that it uses a better ballistics programme.Plus the tools a player has as a commander and which are based on boolean logic(if-then conditions),is the best thing i have ever seen in tactical war games. I am not expert in computers but i was thinking that CMAK could do better regarding ballistics.

[Kwazydog]

Pamak, if you do a Search on 'Borg Spotting' or 'Absolute Spotting' using the search button above you should find a lot of information about this and about how we may improve this in the future.

As for ballistics (presuming you are meaning armour penetration modelling, etc) I can assure you that CM has incredable detail in there area, more so than any game out there that I know of. We use actual mathamatical calculations for every single shot, not penetration tables like most games use. These calculations take into account dozens of factors of each shot and much research has been done to make sure that they are accurate as possible. If you seach for some of the posts by 'Rexford', who is a member on the beta team and actually has a book out on the matter, you should see some of the details we take into consideration in CM's ballistics

Dan

[PeterX]

Borg Spotting:

This term derives from the Star Trek series on television. The Borgs were an android race, relentless and all-knowing which bedeviled Captain Picard and the Enterprise.

In CM, it applies to the instant sharing of LOS data by every unit on the map. That's why, when your pak 75 opens up from the woods every Sherman on the map will swivel and starting chucking HE at it. It's an engine limitation, which, IMO, will be very challenging to mitigate.

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by pamak1970:

does anybody know here about steel beasts?It is a tank simulator game but it is also a game where you can assume command of up to a task force unit.Although not fancy in graphics and without many elements that combat mission includes,it seems to me that it uses a better ballistics programme.Plus the tools a player has as a commander and which are based on boolean logic(if-then conditions),is the best thing i have ever seen in tactical war games. I am not expert in computers but i was thinking that CMAK could do better regarding ballistics.

So what precisely do you mean?

The only thing I can think of is that SB tracks more different kinds of damage and has volume models (not points).

I like the waypoint concept of SB, but I think it is much too complicated to use in a game whith a wide audience when players would have to use it (SB players have plenty of other things to play in the tanks and can get play fun without mastering it). I also miss TacOps-like SOP settings in both games.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by PeterX:

Borg Spotting:

In CM, it applies to the instant sharing of LOS data by every unit on the map. That's why, when your pak 75 opens up from the woods every Sherman on the map will swivel and starting chucking HE at it. It's an engine limitation, which, IMO, will be very challenging to mitigate.

I just witnessed what appeared to be an exception to this. Probably just a one-off, but still gratifying. A german squad had been trading shots with a couple of my own squads. After a few turns of this, I was finally able to get an MMG into position where it had an LOS to it. The interesting thing is, after the MMG got set up, it didn't immediately draw a red line to the Kraut squad. Instead, it waited until the Krauts opened fire again, then the MG spotted them and targetted. I could have hugged them.

Michael

[PeterX]

Michael Emrys:

I just witnessed what appeared to be an exception to this.

BFC appears to have perpetrated some interesting tweaks on the targetting algorythms. Changes will become clearer in the fullness of time, IOW, once the damn disk arrives and we can perform vivisection on it.

[Redwolf]

I also noted that fog-of-war in the CMAK seems to have been extended to include only partial showing of enemy targetting lines, i.e. you don't always see where somebody is firing at. In previous CMs you would also see an area of unit target line.

There might be a connection of the enemy target line showing and so-far uninvited friendly units spotting the enemy explaing what you see. If so, three cheers.

[ December 01, 2003, 08:08 AM: Message edited by: redwolf ]

[Tank Ace]

My complaints

-troops, even veteran ones, duck and sneak when shot at by one enemy 1 time.

-German rifle sounds like a hollow tree being hit with a sledge hammer. It is the worst sound for a rifle, i think.

-M3 can't engage 2 enemy's with the 2 guns.

[ November 30, 2003, 08:32 PM: Message edited by: TANK ACE ]

[PeterX]

I almost forgot:

There are two principal grog objections to the CM series:

1- Borg Spotting

2- (Absence of) Realtime LOS

Actually, pakman1970 (ah, to be 33 again!), in the interest of frankness, I must report that grogs (or 'grognards'- look it up) raise many more objections than these two fundamental ones. Some posters have accused these gimlet-eyed critics of pedantry and humorlessness, even thin-skinned truculence. However, their prodding suggestions and demurrals have made CM an immeasurably better game. In fact, your Grog's dissatisfaction with the status quo and his inner drive toward perfection were fused in the very crucible from which his personal excellence derives.

[Cull]

Hmmm...this is a bit discouraging. When CMAK was announced, I have to admit that I was less-than-enthusiastic, mainly due to the "boring desert" factor.

After playing the demo, however, I found myself more interested in the desert fighting rather than less. I kind of liked the problem of having less cover and concealment, and the unique situation it presented.

Still, I am sure that the non-desert portions of the game will hold more interest for me in the long run. Regardless, I have pre-ordered the game and will gladly add it to my CM library. How could I not?

Now if we can only figure out some way of tricking the guys into suddenly becoming interested in the Pacific theater!

Sorry, couldn't resist.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by redwolf:

I also noted that FOG in the CMAK seems to have been extended to include only partial showing of enemy targetting lines, i.e. you don't always see where somebody is firing at. In previous CMs you would also see an area of unit target line.

There might be a connection of the enemy target line showing and so-far uninvited friendly units spotting the enemy explaing what you see. If so, three cheers.

Yes, I too have noted this and the possible connection. Seems to me that the spotting rules have been firmed up a bit. Seems like a good thing, too.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by PeterX:

...in the interest of frankness, I must report that grogs (or 'grognards'- look it up) raise many more objections than these two fundamental ones. Some posters have accused these gimlet-eyed critics of pedantry and humorlessness, even thin-skinned truculence. However, their prodding suggestions and demurrals have made CM an immeasurably better game. In fact, your Grog's dissatisfaction with the status quo and his inner drive toward perfection were fused in the very crucible from which his personal excellence derives.

Wow! Can I have that engraved on a brass plaque? I'd like to mount that above my monitor so that when I sit down to my computer I once again feel that warm glow of pride your words inspire.

Michael

[PeterX]

Sure! Only, 29.95ea if your order six.

BTW, you are a Grog, right?

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by PeterX:

Sure! Only, 29.95ea if your order six.

Oh good. In that case I will order a dozen and give them out to relatives as Christmas presents. That'll show 'em!

BTW, you are a Grog, right?

Do I need to present an ID to order?

Michael

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by PeterX:

Sure! Only, 29.95ea if your order six.

BTW, you are a Grog, right?

Of course he isn't! He'd have to be, what, 211 years old

[Berlichtingen]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

Do I need to present an ID to order?

Might help if you were French, though I'm not sure that was entirely required

[PeterX]

Do I need to present an ID to order?

No worries, mate. The mere act of posting to this forum at 4:20am constitutes, in itself, a glowing testimonial. BTW, I notified the engravers to replace 'gimlet-eyed critics' with 'unsleeping monitors of historical fidelity'. I feel it scans better.

The plaques should be arriving presently, COD, of course. A word of advice: try not to get them wet.

Cheers.

[demoss]

simply the nature of the situation being modelled: relatively flat terrain

Terrain exists, it's just harder to find. Try taking a CAREFUL (read: at level 1) look at the terrain coming down the djebel in Fruhlingswind. There's one quite concealed path and several moderately concealed ones. Using it to your advantage is left as an exercise for the reader.

Your eye for terrain just has to be much sharper than it did in CMBB.

[Sergei]

Of course, even in CMBB and CMBO seemingly flat maps often had more cover than it first seemed. Even when using grid terrain, I still have to go down to level 1 to notice the small dips and bumps. How to use these to cover the approach of an entire company without the opponent calling in artillery, well now that's the challenge. There is never enough smoke...

[Andreas]

Originally posted by demoss:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> simply the nature of the situation being modelled: relatively flat terrain

Terrain exists, it's just harder to find. </font>