c3k

Gents, Some screenshots and more information regarding this issue: Please see this thread over on the main forum Is this what you others are seeing? Thanks, Ken

birdstrike, yes it seems similar to that thread. Did you ever get a response? I note that dima chimed in with a request for a savegame. I assume that means BF.C is aware of your issue? This may be a little different. It may be due to the ELOS start spot. I don't know. Thanks, Ken

Yes, I just tried. My new found screenshot skills are failing me. (Photobucket is not showing my latest uploads.) Suffice it to say, using either "Improved" of "Balanced" does not remedy the clipping. Regards, Ken

Birdstrike, I'll try. Of course, every time I move a blue unit I hear "allah akbar" or somesuch, and I'm left looking at a series of red pulsing circles... Look closely.... Straight view across the road... A unit able to shoot across the road at the rooftops... A funny thing, this. He cannot see across the road. BUT, he can shoot at the tree!! Well, he can target it, but it won't take the final click. For a few seconds there I flashed to Crysis. I planned to shoot down the tree, use stealth to grab the coconuts, then use superstrength and use the coconuts to kill the North Koreans. Err, Syrians... Thanks, Ken

Gents, Some pictures of what occurs: Another view: Again, I'm using an 8800gtx card operating under vista64. (169.25 drivers.) Thanks, Ken

No rancor intended to you, drtechno, but please don't put me in the same category as people who never wanted to like this game and therefore pick it apart mercilessly. Your post, three upstream, started with, "I love how people can't handle abstractions at this scale." That is a disparaging start. Credit to you for the edit you added and for taking the time to look harder at the situation. It seems to me that the problem with the craters is that the ELOS is starting the LOS from inside the crater and then ignores the terrain clipping issue. A solution would be to raise the prone ELOS from belly level to a slightly higher point. Or, block LOS completely if partially clipped (that could have a lot of repercussions). Lastly, BF.C could just note it as an unlikely to recur aberration and advise me to press on and ignore it. Thanks, Ken

carlR, Thanks for taking the time to investigate the scenario. I post as much factual and repeatable information as I can for that very reason. FWIW, I think "Al Amarah" presents an interesting situation. I just wish the elevated road weren't such a problem for the game engine. Regards, Ken

drtechno, Thanks. I'm fine with abstractions. But since it doesn't matter what it looks like, that they are prone in a crater therefore LOS is blocked, how do you explain the bottom screenshot? I am aware that this may be an outlier condition. That strange effects may occur at this given set of conditions. My main point being that if something strange is occurring (not sure if that's true or not), is it MEANT to occur this way? If it is, fine. This thread will wither away and die the death of an answered thread. If it's NOT supposed to work the way I'm seeing it, can it be fixed? Does it highlight an algorithm oddity? Can, or should, the code be tweaked? That's all. Thanks, Ken

I'd have to complain that the non-realistic bobble motion snapped my sense of immersion... Ken

Right, time for some screen shots.... Here's the view.... Here's a closup from road level: Here's a comparison how the other friendlies, prone along the road CAN fire: Finally, moving the target line around shows this: These should help show what I'm talking about. Thanks, Ken

Test to see if an image gets posted. If it works, it's thanks to stikkypixie. Regards, Ken

Steve, I'm not sure I understand: Are you saying that prone=no LOS? Or are you saying prone=no LOS to anything at the same level or lower? You're going to force me to register at Image Shack, aren't you? Thanks, Ken

Again, a partial quote (the internal quotes are from one of my posts - Steve's quotes are in response to that. I messed up the format of quotes within quotes.): True. Not possible. Buildings are a predictable entity and are either on the map as a whole element or not at all. This is not possible with terrain because terrain is inherently flexible. However, keep in mind that the TacAI is capable of using terrain within an Action Spot. It does understand concepts like better cover, poorer cover, and even elevation changes. This is one of those tricky concepts to "teach" a computer. The difference between a tactically meaningless elevation change and a meaningful one is pretty easy for a Human to detect, but very difficult to get the computer to understand to the same degree. The TacAI currently does have the ability to recognize ridgelines, gullies, etc. The issue is, I think, that it isn't possible for it to do it in all situations equally well all the time. The problem is players expect it to be right all the time, even if that isn't necessarily realistic (soldiers do some mighty stupid things in real life, as the soldiers here keep reminding you all). So there will probably be some amount of disconnect between player expectation and the TacAI's performance forever. All we can hope for is to reduce this as much as possible as we move along. But to expect it to always get it right is pretty much an expectation that will only lead to disappointment. Steve [/qb]</font>

Again, a partial quote: True. Not possible. Buildings are a predictable entity and are either on the map as a whole element or not at all. This is not possible with terrain because terrain is inherently flexible. However, keep in mind that the TacAI is capable of using terrain within an Action Spot. It does understand concepts like better cover, poorer cover, and even elevation changes. This is one of those tricky concepts to "teach" a computer. The difference between a tactically meaningless elevation change and a meaningful one is pretty easy for a Human to detect, but very difficult to get the computer to understand to the same degree. The TacAI currently does have the ability to recognize ridgelines, gullies, etc. The issue is, I think, that it isn't possible for it to do it in all situations equally well all the time. The problem is players expect it to be right all the time, even if that isn't necessarily realistic (soldiers do some mighty stupid things in real life, as the soldiers here keep reminding you all). So there will probably be some amount of disconnect between player expectation and the TacAI's performance forever. All we can hope for is to reduce this as much as possible as we move along. But to expect it to always get it right is pretty much an expectation that will only lead to disappointment. Steve [/QB]</font>

Forgive my attempts at selectively quoting. Steve, you wrote, in part; At what point does a customer who posts here become a classified as a grog? If you discount grog complaints, and then point to any other complainers as a non-representative minority, the only posters you have left are supporters. I would submit that the supporters are the ones you should ignore. Sure, take the pat on the back. You've worked hard. Accept a bit of thanks and take pride in your accomplishments. But the path to decay surely starts by ignoring criticisms and only valuing accolades. I know you've mentioned the value of constructive criticism, but where is the line? At what point do you take the postings here seriously? Regards, Ken

Webwing, Pulling from your post (and redacted somewhat): First, a comment on your post: thank you. You crafted a thoughtful reply and even took the time to search my recent posts which, by their nature, reflect the areas of this game about which I am most vocal. I quoted the last part of your post to highlight how much you obviously care for and enjoy CMSF. If you've taken the time to search my posts, I'm sure you'll note a similarity in tone to my posts. I WANT this game to be great. Right now, 6 months on, it is close. As I find errors, glitches, problems, bugs, whatever, I post them. My hope, for it is a hope, is that they can and will be resolved. In some cases the posts are not commented on by BF.C. In some cases they are. At one point, I'd posted an idea; years ago. It died the death of an unloved thread. Then, recently, Steve commented on that idea when it was brought forth by someone else; he said he wished he'd heard of it sooner. It was too late to be implemented. That was a failure. (Or it was Steve being politic to someone about an idea which had no chance in hell of ever being implemented.) Since then, I've posted every issue I've found. I try to post solutions where I have the wherewithal to think of one, knowing that I am not a programmer and that I have no idea how much work the proposed solution would entail. When someone else posts an issue which I share, I try to bump their thread. Again, this is an attempt to gain BF.C's attention for areas to be improved. Let's take the list you made: </font>Trees flash when plotting moves True: and the ground gets clipped showing the underlaying terrain. Others have this. BF.C has postulated GPU memory shortage as a possible issue. I, and the OP, have 8800GTX's with 768 Mb of video ram, the highest amount available on a single card. It may be a driver. If it's software, it's a matter of troubleshooting. If the game works on your machine, do you care if it doesn't on someone else's?</font>Immersion and gaming A thread I started when in a moment of gestalt I realized exactly why and when I would quit playing CMSF.</font>LOS errors A thread regarding men in craters unable to shoot at same level targets. Perhaps I've found an outlier condition in the coding. Perhaps I'm a total idiot. The men LOOK like their heads and weapons are up, but they can't get a clear LOF.</font>Arrghh. Gameplay frustrations A squad did not enter a building. It self split. A BMP wiped out 5 of the 6 who split. Thats a pathfinding and TacAI error. I sent a savegame to an individual interested in it.</font>WIA in vehicles are the wrong color A minor tweak to the Interface. I have lots more in this vein, mostly under the guise of standardizing the scheme BF.C has designed.</font>Postgame request Again, a thread for that after action immersive feel.</font>Bradley bugs, v1.07 Yes, "bugs": I felt dirty when I used that word! Yet, it brings up issues of targeting and standardization of the interface.</font>Red Target Lines and Yellow Target Lines need fixing A thread very related to the "Bradley bugs" thread as gibsonm rightly pointed out. I can have two Bradleys, one with "Target" one with "Target Light" and both firing the same weapons for the same effects. An interface standardization theme.</font>Hunt and Covered Arc is broken... Again, highlighting a TacAI item. My men would stop an assault (using hunt and covered arc) on a building when an enemy infantry unit appeared hundreds of meters away. Not the best thing. Immersion, et al.</font>What just happened? A request for a cue when a casualty occurs. BF.C released a radio squawk audible and a written notification of reinforcements as a patch upgrade. I would love to know when I took casualties, even if it's just a flashing red-cross at the end of the turn, up in the corner or down on the interface bar. Then I can find the unit getting hit.</font>Recce Humvee's: Huh? An interface issue. What do these units do? How many units have weapons which need player intervention to use? Which mounted weapons are remote controlled? An interface issue.</font>etc. Yes, there will be more....</font> The areas can be broken into Pathfinding, TacAI, and Interface. I maintain that is the order in which they should be solved. In summation, all the areas I've posted about have received support from others. I'm not hurling feces about. I am posting issues which I have not seen addressed by BF.C. I am hoping, hoping, that they do get addressed. Some are minor. Some ruin the immersion - for me. When CMSF's disparate parts work well, the game is great. Really. But when something goes wrong - and I'm obviously not talking about men acting like robots, or my tactical ineptness causing casualties - but when things go wrong, there's a reason. Finding the reason and seeing if there's a pattern is part of improving the game. I wouldn't be posting here if I did not feel I had a vested interest in BF.C's success in improving this game. I'm glad you're able to keep your eyes above the items which snap the immersion for me. However, based on this thread, there are others who lose the immersion when playing CMSF. This is an attempt to find out why and to get it working 100%. Thanks, Ken

Phillip, excellent questions. I'll post my responses inside your post... Good suggestions in your post, but these quetions are probably best answered by Steve. I am but a cog in the wheel of progress. So, just so I can get a handle on this (subjectively I understand this stuff, I just want to see *how* you think it should be different): 1) How would you expect your troops to react under fire? Is it that the men shouldn't be doing what they're doing, or they should be doing it faster, or what?</font>

Hmmm, right. Okay then.... Ah, yes: immersion. It seems that we've been immersed in some vitriolic exchanges. That is one type of immersion I'd LIKE to snap out of. I recognize the reluctance that BF.C has about comments regarding upcoming patches. Twice bitten, once shy or somesuch. (If they post that the cyclic rate of the AKM is going to be adjusted then the patch does NOT adjust the cyclic rate but instead fixes every other known bug, oddity or glitch, they'll get hoist upon their petard.) However, since 1.08 is being worked upon, are any of the issues raised in this thread - GAME RELATED ISSUES, LADIES - being worked on? Are any of these issues even being thought about back at HQ? The issues I'm speaking of revolve around pathfinding and TacAI. I believe there are examples posted several pages ago... Steve has mentioned that CMSF will continue to be refined. What would you, Steve, LIKE to refine? What do you think CAN be refined? Personally, I think the unit behavior needs to be adjusted regarding cover. I think a system of allowing my pixellated troopers to get up to the LOF without overshooting it would be the single biggest improvement. Right now I can only adjust my ordered waypoints in 8 meter increments. If my guys are 1 meter short, those next 7 are gonna hurt. Ditto with vehicles. If I understand the mechanics, every 8 meters is an action spot. The exception being buildings. It seems the movement grid is broken into 8 meter spots as well. Is that true? If so, how about an adjustment in action spot locations. I mean a parallel to what has been done with buildings. Buildings are tactically useful terrain. You have coded the game to increase the simulation fidelity around these pieces of useful (and often fought over) terrain. Why not do the same for elevation changes? Where there is a fold in the ground, add more action spots. Make the terrain movement grid more finely detailed. Make the TacAI able to be more responsive. Make the spotting algorithms more detailed. Where the ground is uniformly even, within small variations, that would not be necessary. One part of a cornfield is much like another. Where a hill crests is VERY important. Likewise the bottom of a ravine. Is this possible? Is it a valid compromise between performance and gameplay? Thanks, Ken

Steve, Thanks. I'm working on posting screenshots. That should save, oh, 1,000 words per picture. Give or take. My snipers (yeah, MINE; I bought the game, so now I own them... ) are not pinned. Their suppression meter is totally blank. The 2% exposed over the rim of the crater is their head and weapon. Hoolaman, savegame on the way. (Post a screen if you want. I'm being pulled on errands right now. When I get back I'll open an imageshack or photobucket account and try to do so myself.) Thanks, Ken

Thanks!!

stikkypixie, Thanks. I do not have my own webspace. I have heard of imageshack. Is there a significant difference between them and, say, photobucket? I game at 1920x1200. Using Fraps my screenshots are 6.5 MB. I would think that's too big. What's the easiest (obviously newb) way to reduce them? What format is best? Fraps defaults to a bmp. I know that's a lot of questions. Thanks, Ken

Gents, Like the subject says, how do I post screenshots on this forum? I've done a search. Nada. I'll be using Fraps to save the screenies. Any help would be appreciated. That way I won't have to bombard BF.C with cool little pictures made up with keyboard characters. I can show them the real thing. Thanks, Ken

Steve, Thanks. The craters are in an elevated road. Next to the elevated road is a town. All of the buildings are two stories. From the center of the elevated road a LOS/LOF should exist to the roof level of the buildings. __/\__B B B The inverted "v" is the road and the "B"s are buildings. It's not quite to scale. The road surface can be swept with fire from many of the rooftops and quite a few second floor windows. Men ON the road get hit. "Aaaarrrgghhhh, my leg!" Men ON the road can return fire and hit the enemy in and on those buildings. "(Insert Syrian yell of pain)!" Now, the ONLY shelter ON that road is a set of craters. Getting a sniper team in there should allow me (in my view) to fire on the same spots which are shooting at the road. I want the LOS/LOF to be horizontal, if not slightly vertical, from the craters. The sniper team has their heads and weapons up out of the craters. They are looking out. Savegame available. I did not make the terrain juxtapositioning clear in my original post. As for prone equating no LOS, I'm confused. (From Steve's post; "If your guys are prone they are taking cover and therefore can't see anything unless it was somehow above them...") I take that to only apply to prone men IN craters. Is that correct? To emphasize: I am trying to fire at same level or slightly higher targets. The men seem to be looking out of the craters. Thanks, Ken

Cpl Steiner, Your points are well made. I agree with all of them. CMSF needs some coding tweaks. I am totally ignorant as to how much work is involved in tweaking the areas we've all touched upon. Those being pathfinding, TacAI, and the interface. I think BF.C is the team to pull this off. I sincerely hope they do so. Regards, Ken

Running everything at stock settings, whql approved drivers. CMSF menu? With my graphics card I've chosen high or the equivalent settings. Savegame available. At some point, I may download Fraps so I can take a screen shot. Regards, Ken