CMX2 FR: vehicles: ammo handling

[Steiner14]

Feature request for vehicles:

A feature i'd like to see in CMx2 and so far haven't read about:

the preloaded ammo-type should be modeled.

But i'm not sure, if the player should have control over it.

I think it would add quite a bit more realism and maybe would give an additional possibility to differentiate between experience levels of crews.

[juan_gigante]

I remember reading a book about Stalingrad talking about how the German tankers had lots of trouble from that. They would want HE loaded to take down buildings and kill infantry, but they would want AP loaded for Russian tanks.

I think this is a feature that should be included, but I would be a little worried about player control balance. Either there would be too much player control and we would have unrealism and irritating micromanagement, but with not enough player control I have this vision in my head of the Tac AI doing some really, really dumb stuff. Not just loading the wrong thing (realistic for tank crews to sometimes select AP when all enemy tanks are dead), but things like all the tanks in the platoon selecting the same thing or other iffy things. I think it would be better to err on the side of less player control, but the potential for irritating things to occur is a bit daunting.

[rune]

Available already in the editors for scenarios. Do you mean for quick battles?

Rune

[Pvt. Ryan]

Originally posted by rune:

Available already in the editors for scenarios. Do you mean for quick battles?

Rune

He's talling about what kind of round is actually loaded into the gun, not the types and quanitities of rounds carried in the tank.

I think the AI should continue to handle this.

[Battlefront.com]

No, this is the sort of thing we are not interested in allowing the player to control. SOP for ammo loaded should always be handled by the game system, no matter how it is simulated. It is fairly easy to do and something that players generally don't want to be bothered by.

Steve

[aka_tom_w]

As a "guess" :confused: I would think a tank should always (as an SOP) have a round of some form of AP loaded, I cannot really think of any time when a tank crew would need a HE round as quickly or spontaneously as they might need an AP round.

I am guessing (but I could be wrong) the the CMxx games have already modeled an AP round in the breach and that has not really ever led to any complaints or widespread bitching or moaning....

(BUT... I could be wrong )

-tom w

[Vergeltungswaffe]

A lot of the accounts of allied tankers that I've read agreed that they usually had HE chambered, because they were more concerned with ATG's and fausts than armor.

Other times and other places in the war, I could certainly see having AP ready to go.

[JonS]

I am guessing (but I could be wrong) the the CMxx games have already modeled an AP round in the breach and that has not really ever led to any complaints or widespread bitching or moaning....

(BUT... I could be wrong )

You are Tanks in CMx1 have 'a round' loaded, and it's nature is only determined at the instant of firing.

Alternately, if it makes you happier, you could think of them as running around with the breeches empty, and the loader poised to load the correct nature while the gunner is laying.

Also IRL, IIRC, V is correct that HE was the more common load, closely followed by smoke. Although, over it all, I suspect it would depend most strongly on the tactical situation.

Regards

JonS

Edit: Oh bugger. I fogot to quote your entire post. Here it is agian so it doesn't feel neglected:

As a "guess" I would think a tank should always (as an SOP) have a round of some form of AP loaded, I cannot really think of any time when a tank crew would need a HE round as quickly or spontaneously as they might need an AP round.

I am guessing (but I could be wrong) the the CMxx games have already modeled an AP round in the breach and that has not really ever led to any complaints or widespread bitching or moaning....

(BUT... I could be wrong )

-tom w

--------------------

"So if a player's idea of fun is to use "gamey" tactics to beat the other guy, I guess we did "remove" some of the "fun" in CMBO. But in doing so we made CMBB more of what CMBO was always, ALWAYS, supposed to be. And the next game will continue that trend of improvement towards the unobtainable goal of perfect simulation of tactical warfare. And in our opinions, perfect means most realistic."

-Steve of BFC Nov 1 2002

posted March 11, 2003 08:35 PM

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wonder at distance that was shot at ?

--------------------

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

Edmund Burke

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by JonS:

Tanks in CMx1 have 'a round' loaded, and it's nature is only determined at the instant of firing.

Alternately, if it makes you happier, you could think of them as running around with the breeches empty, and the loader poised to load the correct nature while the gunner is laying.

OK Thanks

I would suggest that very fact is why there has been no complaining about it. The correct round is ALWAYS loaded in the breach in any given situation.

This sounds like the way the game works for sure:

" you could think of them as running around with the breeches empty, and the loader poised to load the correct nature while the gunner is laying"

thanks

-tom w

[SpitfireXI]

The AI usually does select the correct round but many a tank has been lost when the AI keeps shooting AP rounds while never shooting the Tungsten rounds. I mean three shots of AP and the gunner is still chambering an AP round!

[Michael Emrys]

Of course, as a realism grog, I could demand that CMx2, assuming that there is HE available to be loaded, always have an HE round in the breach, and that it be the first round fired regardless of the target. But, oh well, screw it.

Michael

[Bonxa]

I was thinking about this the other day too. It would be even more advantageous to pounce upon tankers who are already engaged with infantry since they would surely have the wrong type of shell in the barrel! First they need to fire off the HE round and then load the AP.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

Of course, as a realism grog, I could demand that CMx2, assuming that there is HE available to be loaded, always have an HE round in the breach, and that it be the first round fired regardless of the target. But, oh well, screw it.

Michael

Plus crew morale allowing for the use of smoke, WP or HE to force an enemy tank crew to abandon - sometimes setting stowage on fire with such a shell would convince a tank crew their engine was on fire, for example. With the new ability to abandon vehicles and guns and then reman them, this may be possible too, eh.

[Steiner14]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

No, this is the sort of thing we are not interested in allowing the player to control. SOP for ammo loaded should always be handled by the game system, no matter how it is simulated. It is fairly easy to do [snip]

Ah, that is good news!

Just a reminder: don't forget, if a covered-arc for vehicles is set, an AP-round should be loaded!

[ August 02, 2005, 09:43 AM: Message edited by: Steiner14 ]

[MikeyD]

"...the preloaded ammo-type should be modeled."

There doesn't seem to be much of a noticable delay in first shot in the game (once the tank decides to target something) so I've assumed the game's tanks already have got one 'up the spout', generically speaking. Modeling an initial 3-burst 'quick draw' like U.S. tankers were famous for would be nice (AI controlled, of course).

What I'd like to see is for the AI to keep track of the ammo ready rack. Once the first 15-16 rounds are fired I'd say the reload rate should drop like a rock as the virtual loader roots around floor stowage for more rounds. This would only apply if the ready rack just had three AP in the mix or if all rounds are fired in succession, like at a building. Even a small delay between firing would mean that the loader would've been able to pull up new rounds into the ready rack before starting again.

[Vergeltungswaffe]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

"...the preloaded ammo-type should be modeled."

There doesn't seem to be much of a noticable delay in first shot in the game (once the tank decides to target something) so I've assumed the game's tanks already have got one 'up the spout', generically speaking. Modeling an initial 3-burst 'quick draw' like U.S. tankers were famous for would be nice (AI controlled, of course).

What I'd like to see is for the AI to keep track of the ammo ready rack. Once the first 15-16 rounds are fired I'd say the reload rate should drop like a rock as the virtual loader roots around floor stowage for more rounds. This would only apply if the ready rack just had three AP in the mix or if all rounds are fired in succession, like at a building. Even a small delay between firing would mean that the loader would've been able to pull up new rounds into the ready rack before starting again.

Modelling ready racks would be a great improvement.

[Battlefront.com]

SOP was usually to have a HE round loaded. Two reasons:

1. HE works against most things, AP is more selective.

2. AP is usually a minority of the rounds. And when you REALLY need AP, HE is really not a good substitute.

Firing an HE round at another armored vehicle does three things:

1. Prevents a delay in changing rounds form HE to AP.

2. Helps establish/confirm range without wasting an AP shot.

3. If a hit is acheived it can possibly have the same effect as AP (KO, damage, etc.) or at the very least rattle the crew inside.

Simulating ready racks ain't so easy First of all, we'd have to make several flavors of delay since some vehicles had excellent stowage while others had absolutely horrible (and everywhere inbetween). Also the number of round in the ready racks is different from vehicle type to vehicle type. That means a separate variable to keep track of to determine when the ready supply is exhausted. That's the easy part

The more difficult part is that if 16 rounds are at the ready, to do it right we'd have to simulate how many of each ammo type are stowed in that position. So if there are 10 HE and you fire 10, you're going to get a delay. But if there are still 4 AP shots there, well... no delay. Now we have to program the TacAI to make a decision whether to use an incorrect round in the interests of speed, or suffer the delay to haul up a single HE round for the next shot.

Then we get into the whole issue of when, and at what rate, the crew can restock the ready rack. This is a pretty thorny issue because it is generally situationally dependent, and that is usually tough for us to determine for AI programming. Putting in a Human controlled "redistribute ammo" order probably crosses that micromanagement line we don't like to cross, so it will have to be an AI decision.

So I dunno what we'll do for CMx2 yet. It would be nice to simulate this, but I am not really sure we'll want to put the energy into it at the expense of other stuff.

Steve

[juan_gigante]

I think that a ready rack might be a little much, especially considering the effort needed, but it seems to me that having rounds already loaded wouldn't be too tough to do and would be a really cool thing to add.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by juan_gigante:

I think that a ready rack might be a little much, especially considering the effort needed, but it seems to me that having rounds already loaded wouldn't be too tough to do and would be a really cool thing to add.

I'm not sure what you mean. So far as can be determined by AFVs response time, they apparently already have rounds loaded.

Michael

[juan_gigante]

I'm refering to having a specific round type pre-loaded. So that at the beginning of the scenario, the gun or tank would already have an HE in the tube, ready to go, instead of how it is now, where they have a magic shell that can turn into whatever they what in the tube, ready to go.

Because this was an issue that tankers historically faced, I think it would be a fun little tidbit to have. The ready racks sound like more effort than they are worth, however.

[Battlefront.com]

Ready racks, unfortunately, played a pretty serious role in tank to tank shootouts. If you only have 5 AP rounds at the ready, and it generally takes 3-4 rounds to score a hit, it means that you can only engage one tank before having to scurry back under cover to redistribute ammo. And depending on how well designed the vehicle is (Sherman vs. IS-2... BIG difference ) this could give the other side an advantage of some sort.

But yes... ready racks are quite problematic to simulate.

Steve

[aka_tom_w]

Please don't.

"So I dunno what we'll do for CMx2 yet. It would be nice to simulate this, but I am not really sure we'll want to put the energy into it at the expense of other stuff.

Steve"

Please don't put ANY time or energy into ready rack simulation at the expense of ANY other stuff. :eek:

Ready rack simulation should not even be on "the list" NEVER mind at the bottom of it.

(just my personal opinion)

(maybe it could be in a patch or some later version of CMx2....)

or something

-tom w

[Battlefront.com]

Don't worry Tom... it's not going to happen. At least not for the first release. However, from a tactical importance standpoint, it is possibly a significant factor. Really depends on which tanks are fighting each other. Some of the earlier war and Soviet AFVs had terrible ammo layouts. The Sherman 75, on the other hand, had a lot of ammo at the ready. And reloading the racks was probably easier than most, thanks to the roomy turret.

Steve

[jim crowley]

Its funny how giving a tank:

detailed, multi-waypoint directions with appropriate speeds,

instructions to button or unbutton,

choosing to fire main gun, or not, at non- armoured targets,

and selecting to fire smoke shells

is not micro-managing? but being able to choose to fire a tungsten or HE round, rather than normal AP is micro-management :confused:

Even if you could "micro-manage" ammo choice, you would only be able to do it, effectively, for the first round. Once the turn starts, the AI takes over subsequent ammo selection any way.

I'm not sure that would be such a bad idea. In that way you would get at least some chance to select ammo that the AI wouldn't normally use and, since you would be only really choosing the first round, wouldn't add very much to the micro-management that already exists

[Battlefront.com]

Argh... here we go again with the "you can do A, so why can we do the rest of the alphabet too!" argument. There is always a thin line between what is too much and what is too little control. Always. Depending on what an individual wants or doesn't want will often determine which side of the line they think something falls on. Well, guess what... if it we included everything that everybody wanted control over we'd probably still be working on CMBO and the game would suck ass because it would be so horribly complicated and not fun to play. So bearing in mind that we are the best people to make these calls, I'll try again to edumicate the masses...

Why not choose ammo type compared to these things?

detailed, multi-waypoint directions with appropriate speeds,

Until we make an AI that can read your mind, this is a necesary part of the game. Therefore, it is not considered micromangement.

instructions to button or unbutton,

We originally did not allow the player to control this, but it became clear early in Alpha development of CMBO that this was inadequate. The TacAI handles it for the most part, but it is simply not smart enough to be able to do it well enough that player control should be excluded.

choosing to fire main gun, or not, at non- armoured targets,

Again, this is a tactical decision that is context sensitive and beyond the TacAI's ability. If we could program the TacAI to do this we would.

and selecting to fire smoke shells

The alternative is the TacAI being able to read your mind and know when you want a smoke screen. Because that isn't possible, once again Human control is needed for this tactically important task.

Ammo selection, on the other hand, is pretty easy to get the TacAI to do correctly in the vast majority of times. Furthermore, it is extremely DIFFICULT to give a player effective control over the choice of ammo in any event. The reason for that is you are hands off for 60 seconds, so in order to have effective control you'd need a host of commands (SOPs) for the vehicles to follow. And all that to fix something that isn't broken. What a horrible waste of development time.

Steve