Doodlebug
-
Posts
407 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Doodlebug
-
-
-
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.
-
...(Brits did some great tests on this. I think 1m or closer causes most men to seek cover.)
Interesting. Can I ask the source and whether the data is available on line anywhere?
Thanks.
-
Nice work there.
-
Well that's an eye-opener if ever there was.
Thanks for the analysis.
-
Thank you for posting this. A powerful and sobering presentation, and a superbly effective use of the whole medium to visualise what could otherwise be a set of bone-dry statistics. Absolutely puts the numbers into a comprehensible, human and individual scale. That's a clever thing to do given the scope of the subject. Kudos to the original producer and associates and for linking it here.
-
Much appreciated. A brilliant mod and truly amazing what some vision and a bucket of talent can deliver.
Considered changing your moniker to McGumlaut yet?
-
If the AI TC could move the tank autonomously to get LOS - I'm not sure if we would want that. There are many, many situations where this would be a bad idea and the hate posts would come rolling in.
If such a thing happens I usually nudge the tank a bit forward or back and that usually solves the problem. Not perfect but I don't see a viable alternative.
Hmm, just an idea: when you click on an enemy icon your own units that can see it light up. So since CM tracks who can see a target or not in a vehicle the info text of the trooper that can see the target could also light up. That way the player gets the information who can see the target and who not.
100% in agreement with you on the undesirability of AI response movement. It would be a can of worms and no-one would be happy about any outcome where an AI prompted move went wrong.
Your second point is also correct. It falls naturally as a consequence of a blocked gunner LOS which the player endeavours to correct at the earliest opportunity.
Your idea - brilliant! Simple and logical and on face value providing the info the player needs to make a decision. Gunner and TC lit up - your vehicle is good to engage from that position. Only the TC lit up - plot to move and fine tune your position to allow the gunner to get eyes on and engage. I like the notion very much. Thank you. Now if only it could be implemented.
-
An understandably frustrating occurrence having watched through the replay. I think the previous explanations regarding the blocked LOS from the gunner's position in the turret explains the inability to open fire. If nothing else it demonstrates the level of reality built into the game in differentiating between individual crew members abilities to spot. No averaging from the centre of the vehicle going on here.
I suppose for me it raises a couple of minor questions the first being about the efficacy of the LOS tool in the game. The information provided in-game by checking the LOS whether it be clear, blocked or partial is all a player has to go on when plotting moves. It needs to be a accurate representation of what is "likely" to happen. The replay shows a red target line and presumably, although not shown, the LOS showed as unblocked in the preceding plotting phase. From memory grey target lines from vehicles tend to arise when weapons are blocked i.e. hull down with text to clarify. Do vehicles generate grey partial spotting lines in the same way that infantry do where some soldiers cannot see the target? I would hazard a guess not although I stand to be corrected on that. In this example during the plotting phase W.2010 will have taken on face value the information fed to him by the game - target visible and LOS clear - engage. A grey partial spot " gunner LOS blocked" would have triggered a different response for him, perhaps a "hunt" move forwards to acquire a firm targeting line or a reverse backwards to what appears higher up the slope so as to clear the obstacle in front of the Mk. IV. There would have been no need to query the forum to clarify what was going on.
Secondly, the Pz IV seems to make no attempt to rotate the turret to match the targeting line. That raises a question in my mind on how the "in-vehicle" AI routine processes this situation. The historical reality would pan out along these lines: TC - "Target - 1 o'clock - 600 metres" (or the German equivalent). Gunner rotates turret to bearing - "Sights blocked - cannot see target". TC responds with fresh instructions. That doesn't appear to happen in this situation which implies the AI "knew" almost immediately from the calculations that the gunner could not see and therefore did not bother to rotate onto target to no purpose.
From a programming point of view I would imagine it is considerably easier to incorporate a gunner LOS check at the point it is needed i.e. the moment the vehicle is told to engage rather than create an "in-vehicle" AI subroutine sufficiently complex to handle all conceivable situations as they arose. It is a somewhat circular argument in my mind as either approach would deliver a similar result - no shot in that circumstance was possible. The solution, it strikes me (if it does not already exist), would be a more precise LOS tool differentiating whether all relevant crew members of a vehicle can see a target.
I hasten to add that I have not had an opportunity to search to see if this particular point has been discussed elsewhere and whether information and a consensus already posted up. I would be particularly grateful if any kind soul could clarify or add to this subject.
-
Stunning mods nevertheless! I love the worn off paint.
Yep. So do I.
-
Ok might be something with the colors on my screen. But the weathering on edges appears grey to me, perhaps supposed to look like the paint is worn off. However, there would be no grey showing, as at the time the base color was yellow or red.
I "think" we're talking the base camo colour of sand (yellow?) and red might mean red oxide primer underlying that?
I don't think either particularly matters with either a non penetrating hit that gouges downs to exposed metal underneath or a vehicle so hard worked as to abrade the applied finish down to bare steel.
As a matter of interest, how quickly would exposed steel rust and show a discernable discolouration?
-
I use the screen edge a lot...legacy from the original CM games.
Ditto.
-
...CM is like taking a 2 hour movie and just cutting it to the action sequences and ending up with the trailer.
That is a very appropriate analogy.
-
I very much enjoyed reading through your game. Thank you for taking the time the time to post and I look forward to more in the future. It's always beneficial to see how games unfold and got the cogs turning when I thought through the possibilities and "what if's..."
-
I'm more interested in where you get your 1947 black and whites (aerials?)
Here perhaps?
-
Must be an HMG team?
Didn't know you could get a 50 cal. on a ground mount but just looked it up in the manual. Only seen them on vehicles in the games I've played. Looks very strange like that though. Thanks.
-
The Road to Montenburg (Redux).
Never noticed this before. That is a 50 cal. on his back? Bug or graphical anomaly?
-
Gee I go away for a week and someone let the troll in...
They are not Americanisms, they are NATOisms and it is the terminology I used throughout my career. I would use the same terminology to describe the action of a Roman Legion. Semantics...meh
Troll no. Pedant yes.
No offence intended in the original post but I personally prefer the use of historical idioms and phraseology. Adds a little to the immersion factor IMHO.
-
Stop calling for a medic. You'll get no response. The CW have "Stretcher Bearers!". And you're about to cross the Start Line not the Line of Departure. You won't half confuse Tommy Atkins with these Americanisms.
-
All of the above in time but perhaps start with downloading the demo if you have not already done so. Not available in V3.0 with all the current tweaks and improvements but very useful to begin getting into the game. There is a great deal to learn and put into practice and there is no real substitute for some hands on experience.
-
Thanks for the info. I'm off to start checking.
-
Very quick question for the knowledgeable. Are RMRT mods broadly sideways compatible to CMBN? Any reason why not (naming conventions, underlying model etc.)? Looking for a Pak36r mod and noticed one by Kieme for RT that, I think, looks great and wanted to put into use. No point in using bandwidth now or in the future if it won't work.
Thanks in anticipation.
-
Absolutely loving them. Thanks so much for the work. Remind me stylistically somewhat of the CMBB HT's from Gurra which were my old default "go to" mod back in the day.
-
Oh my goodness. Is the crew member dismounting to look at his handiwork or re-mounting after checking out his handiwork? That's one careless bit of parking.
...and the Stuarts
in CM Normandy Maps and Mods
Posted
Check your emails my friend