Georgie

Yes, I was serious also in that the tube guy was helpless confronting a tank with no shreck ammo and was , maybe, trying to get some. Made more sense to me than trying to give aid with a tank 40m away. Seems more real to me.

Yes, and the bearer had fallen on top of his ammo bag and was a big er hefty guy and the tube guy was trying to roll him off the bag, cursing at him all the while, and was so "motivated" that getting the round was all that mattered to him. and the tank going by didn't even faze him. That could happen IRL.

I had a perfect ambush set up with a shreck team. The team took out a Sherman but the ammo bearer of the team got hit. The tube guy crawled over to give buddy aid and while he was giving buddy aid a second tank, a Stuart, that was following the Sherman went by also. The tube guy never looked up as the Stuart drove by at about 30m. I don't think this would happen IRL.

Would the load times be shortened if CMBN were 64 bit for the PC?

Whoops, gotta eat my own words a little bit. The animation works good if the gun crew is on open ground. Its when the gun is em-placed in a fox hole that the crazy animation occurs.

AT gun crew animations. It seems to me that none of the animations with the exception of the loading animation and some times the guy with the binos but some times he doesn't have any binos in his hands so maybe he is shading his eyes so that doesn't spoil the immersion. All of the other movements that they make, and there are plenty, looks to me like they are practicing crawling or pushups or ?. While they are doing this the gun starts to traverse and they get off a shot at the same time that they are flopping around on the ground and the shot some times comes out the side of the barrel. As far as I am concerned they can just stand there in a reasonably attentive posture and I can fill in the rest. For me the flopping around spoils my immersion. Also the AT gun target tracking needs to be fixed. Hopefully BF will spend some time soon getting the gun tracking and animation smoothed out. And that was my rant for the week. OK back to the game.

Hello mjkerner, I tried setting up the gun in a no tinted zone but the movement still happens when a sandbag emplacement is used. Wasn't aware of the other problems that you mentioned.

I have had a problem with positioning AT guns when building a scenario. If I try to "key hole" a gun and use a sandbag fortification the gun changes position from where I placed it in the editor when I "play test" it. It stays on the same action spot but shifts position within the action spot. This sometimes changes the LOS and LOF for the gun to the extent that the "key hole" no longer works. The gun is either blinded at some angles or the LOS dosen't match the LOF. This doesn't happen when I use a foxhole for the fortification of the gun. Problem with the foxhole is it does not look very "real". Any body else have this problem and has any one found a "fix" for it?

I'm not sure either but I think that they were Heat rounds unless the loader made a mistake and loaded HE since that tank had not been in action yet so he had plenty of Heat. This was two years ago so I don't remember whether I checked or not at the time. The rounds what ever they were put the finishing touches on the Panther. That was a near disaster for me as I was playing the US side. What happened was I knew the Panther was there with his flank to the bocage. I decided to get my engineers to blow a hole in the bocage so that my m4 105 could get a flank shot at the Panther. Only problem was the Panther thought that my engineers had blown the hole for him to use and he used it, you can see the engineers scattering as the Panther comes through the hole.

I played a scenario where my Sherman 105 got in a few frontal hits at close range on a Panther. Here is the video.

Yes, I have learned the hard way that you have to be very careful when positioning a gun that a crew member isn't standing on a rock and you are seeing his view instead of the los of the gun.

Ditto to that.

Sounds like a good technique Bil. Thanks for sharing.

Today I was busy setting up a 50mm AT gun to knock out a tank that I figured would come that way. Only problem was the tank keep spotting my gun and my gun could see the tank but would not target the tank even when I tried to do it manually. This happened several times then I got the idea of looking closely at it while "being" the tank. The tank was spotting one of the guns crewman , the guy with the binoculars, who had found a perch next to the gun which raised hip up about 4 or 5 feet. He was the only one the tank spotted and would dispatch him with a machine gun and then look somewhere else. That explained why the gun could not target the tank. If that wasn't enough when I watched the guns crew during the encounter and when the gun crewman with the binoculars got shot off his perch another member of the crew picked up his binoculars and continued to scan with them. Very cool

I am currently building a huge scenario. The map is 4000 by 3000 meters. It is very hilly and parts of it are heavily wooded and it will be wet. The defenders will have quite a few 88mm and 75mm antitank guns but few tanks. My idea is that the Allies have out run their artillery and will have to rely on their on map mortars. The German 88s and some of the 75s are out of range of the US mortars at the set up area so the US will have to advance against ,what I plan on will be, heavy resistance to get their mortars within range of the 88s and 75s that are holding up the advance of their tanks. A large part of the woods is impassable to tanks so the initial phase will be infantry against infantry. The Germans will have on map 81mm mortars and a few heavy mortars off map, just a few, but should not be enough to dominate the battle. The US, as usual, will have plenty of tanks and men to throw into the battle. The casualties will probably be heavy on both sides but especially on the US side, at least thats the plan. Comments welcome.

Sounds good Holien, looking forward to seeing your video. I found that the problem that I'm seeing is happening at close range, 100 to 200 yds with the tank crossing the field of fire of the gun so that there is a big change of angle to traverse the gun. The gun first spots the tank near the edge of its field of fire and the tank continues to cross the guns field of fire at quick speed. Hope my explanations are clear enough, your video will be much better.

LOL, no I meant the "Jackson tank" destroyer.

Welcome back John, looking forward to some more of your descriptive and detailed posts.

Hello Jim, it depends on the angle from the gun that your bren carrier was first spotted and whether or not it made a large change in its angle from the gun since it was first spotted. And the distance between the bren carrier and the gun will have an effect. At least thats what my test show. Be interesting to see what your opponents observations were.

Thanks again also c3k. I hope that this is not too hard to fix or at least make better.

Thanks Holien, your comments on the outcome of your battle and an evaluation on the performance of your AT guns would be helpful. Try zooming in on an AT gun in action and see how it handles targeting.

Hello Phil hope you read this. I have a suggestion on a possible modifier for this problem. Once a gun spots a target and is traversing to engage it the AI could at intervals check for the continued presence of a target for the gun at the same angle. The AI would not have to identify the target just check for a target at the same angle. If the AI checks for a target at the same angle and does not see one then stop traversing and check for any targets at any angle rather than continuing to traverse to a non-target. It appears to me that the AI is waiting until the gun traverses to the original target angle before it checks for the presence of the target.

Further testing shows that when a gun crew spots a tank at a certain angle they start traversing to that angle and keep traversing until they reach that angle no matter whether the tank has moved or not. When the gun is pointed at that angle and the tank is not there then the gun crew "spots" that tank again at its new angle and repeats the process. Maybe the "spot" angle could be refreshed more often. But the "gun" would have to recognize the tank as the same tank. Not a game breaker but if fighting tanks with AT guns at short range then it could be a battle breaker.

Maybe something similar to what you described is happening. Apparently when the gun crew spots the tank way off to their right at a certain angle they start traversing to that angle and keep traversing until they reach that angle no matter what other targets present themselves. When the gun is pointed at that angle and the target is not there then and only then does the gun crew start reacting to other targets? What ever is happening it is causing the gun to perform very poorly in that circumstance. Can the AI be written to correct what is happening? I certainly don't know. I'll do some more testing to see if what I just described is what is happening. And yes, the 50mm gun traverses very slowly and the 75mm even slower.

Thanks c3k, no I don't but I was able to easily repeat what I described using the editor with a small flat map, no road and a gun and a tank. This also occurs with the 75mm AT gun which is even worse because the 75 traverses even slower than the 50mm so it wastes even more time by overshooting in the traverse mode.