CK

This would be nice in CMBB too if TacAI is too difficult to program.

This would be nice in CMBB too if TacAI is too difficult to program.

I agree that AI does well when the enemy is seen like in your example. But is does NOTHING when the firing enemy is not seen. That is the problem. The Puma cannot be sure where the shot came from, but it should have an idea where the enemy might be. Units assume that every place is equally potential for enemy to be in? Not very tempting idea. The units are missing a default direction of enemy and it cannot be given? One should be able to give the units the "quess" where the enemy is if the AI is not able to reduce the possibilities from everything that is seen? some other examples: -When you are coming from behind a house and you get shot in your "building side" you should be able to quess where the fire is coming from and maybe back up or drive fast forward to get to the cover of next building. Not continue hunting on open. -Or when you are hit in the front repeatedly you should do something else than keep on driving forward unbuttoned untill you get penetrating hit and you die. Why not smoke and maybe cover if near? -You are hull down and you get repeatedly shot in the side of the turret with AT-rifle, but you don't even bother to turn the turret to where the fire is coming from...and finally you get the bullet inside. Armored units do not react at all on fire if they do not see where it is coming from. AI is definately not easy to program, but it is one of the most important things when it comes to this game.

I agree that AI does well when the enemy is seen like in your example. But is does NOTHING when the firing enemy is not seen. That is the problem. The Puma cannot be sure where the shot came from, but it should have an idea where the enemy might be. Units assume that every place is equally potential for enemy to be in? Not very tempting idea. The units are missing a default direction of enemy and it cannot be given? One should be able to give the units the "quess" where the enemy is if the AI is not able to reduce the possibilities from everything that is seen? some other examples: -When you are coming from behind a house and you get shot in your "building side" you should be able to quess where the fire is coming from and maybe back up or drive fast forward to get to the cover of next building. Not continue hunting on open. -Or when you are hit in the front repeatedly you should do something else than keep on driving forward unbuttoned untill you get penetrating hit and you die. Why not smoke and maybe cover if near? -You are hull down and you get repeatedly shot in the side of the turret with AT-rifle, but you don't even bother to turn the turret to where the fire is coming from...and finally you get the bullet inside. Armored units do not react at all on fire if they do not see where it is coming from. AI is definately not easy to program, but it is one of the most important things when it comes to this game.

Q: Why the Panzers do not stop and reverse/seek cover when they are shot with big unspotted guns? They do it when they see the enemy while moving/hunting/etc., don't they? Example: -Puma is moving with hunt-command, unbuttoned. -No shooting from either side. -A shell explodes within few meters, no reaction. Moving still ahead unbuttoned. -Next shot hits and penetrates armor killing the leader, shocked. Still moving ahead.. -A shot again, this time a missed one..still moving ahead. -Last shot penetrates and kills all the rest but one...Stopped at last. If the Puma had seen the enemy it would have stopped and reversed away from the fire, right? Are the units missing a critical assumption, the general direction of enemy, or why aren't they responding at all when they get shot at with big guns that can destroy them instantly?

Q: Why the Panzers do not stop and reverse/seek cover when they are shot with big unspotted guns? They do it when they see the enemy while moving/hunting/etc., don't they? Example: -Puma is moving with hunt-command, unbuttoned. -No shooting from either side. -A shell explodes within few meters, no reaction. Moving still ahead unbuttoned. -Next shot hits and penetrates armor killing the leader, shocked. Still moving ahead.. -A shot again, this time a missed one..still moving ahead. -Last shot penetrates and kills all the rest but one...Stopped at last. If the Puma had seen the enemy it would have stopped and reversed away from the fire, right? Are the units missing a critical assumption, the general direction of enemy, or why aren't they responding at all when they get shot at with big guns that can destroy them instantly?

So, the current behavior of infantry in CMBB is very close to what we would typically see in a real combat? I still agree that all kinds of things happen in combat, but the issue here is (?) the average behavior of troops. Which is in my opinion very unrealistic especially in case of very poor cover and enemy beeing close. My quess for the infantry's "stupidity" is that the soldiers do not "see" the surroundings. When they get shot at enough they are programmed to search for cover no matter where they are or what is near them? Then we end up with a veteran unit walking in a paved street..it gets shot at from a second floor distance>150..soldiers start looking for cover that does not exist until half of them get slaughtered..they panic..and finally they run five meters to heavy building to get cover. This happens every time.

I meant incoming fire that exceeds the protective value of unit's current cover. Fire against the unit, not just a lonely ricochet. How many shots do you think must be shot before an unit seeks for cover when walking on a paved road? One, two, a clip? I bet for one shot, except for early russian troops which walked head high no matter what

I do agree that weird things happen in extreme situations, but troops freezing constantly under fire to places with no cover is bit frustrating. Soldiers in panic or beyond seem to do more rational decicion than pinned ones in CMBB, they RUN. Units seeking cover from the street, road or pavement when there is a good shelter within few meters is not realistic at all? When you are shot at open place you want to run to cover, because you get killed anyway in the open? When you are in at least somekind of cover you don't want to go to open place to get killed? Would it be a good (or impossible) idea to make infantry to run until they reach cover, exhaust or die if they take considerable fire in areas with poor cover e.g. crossing a street? And soldiers would refuse to move if fired at when in cover? How about something like this. When in poor cover: 1) Run acconding to the given waypoints - Cautious, shaken units 2) Run to the nearest cover that is not in enemy direction. - Pinned, panic units 3) Run straight back to home - Broken, Routed units When in decent cover: 1) Move acconding to the given waypoints with considerable delay especially towards enemy - Cautious, shaken units 2) High propability to refuse movement orders and if unit moves it runs to the nearest cover that is not in enemy direction. - Pinned, panic units 3) Run straight back to home or stay until dead/captured or pressure dimishes considerably. - Broken, Routed units