Bogging and Immobilized: is it right?

[Mord]

Fourth sentence.

http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1867&Itemid=459

Mord.

[Redwolf]

Fourth sentence.

http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1867&Itemid=459

Mord.

And you are sure that is in effect in the current game code, even though the label in the UI doesn't change?

[Mord]

Don't know, only played one game where it rained. Don't know how long it is supposed to go on before the ground becomes soggy. From what I recall my game was done in less than an hour. Could be it takes longer if it's just rain and is quicker if it's a down pour. Steve, or somebody in the know would have to tell the particulars.

Mord.

[stoex]

Lt. Bull,

Anyways, it would be good to to know the kms/bogging for every terrain type for every vehicle, for each speed, for each ground condition type.

Two things your post from which I quote are noteworthy IMO:

First, (unless I missed it despite reading your post twice) you neglected to report which speed you ordered your Shermans to travel at in your initial test runs on GRASSXT and MUD. Care to enlighten us?

Second, if we leave aside weather conditions for the moment, there appear to be (as you point out in the quote above) four variables which affect the probability of a vehicle to bog/immobilize: terrain, speed, ground conditions, and the actual vehicle in motion.

As far as we know, all of these variables may not have the same effects over their possible ranges in all combinations. For instance, while all vehicles most likely bog more easily in wet conditions than dry, bogging frequency may change more drastically as the conditions become wetter for certain vehicles than others (wheeled vs. tracked?). It is also imaginable that different vehicles bog more easily on certain kinds of terrain than other vehicles, or at different speeds than other vehicles. There might even be 'invisible' soft factors involved, e.g. the effects of "micro-terrain" which also affects cover for infantrymen, or the difference in situational awareness at various speeds affecting not only spotting, but also driving. Who knows what else?

All this means that meaningful trends across the board (of all vehicles or vehicle types) may not even exist, or at least not be very clear-cut. By extension, this means the only valuable information that can be gleaned from such tests (aside from obvious recommendations like avoiding mud as much as possible) MIGHT be on a discreet per-vehicle basis, i.e. going through all the permutations of combinations of terrain types, speeds and ground conditions with each vehicle in the game, to determine how best not to bog THAT particular vehicle under certain conditions.

I don't need to tell you that's a lot of tests to run...

What's my point you will be asking? I think under the circumstances it might be an unachievable objective to find general trends for bogging/immobilization probability, beyond the relatively obvious (dry vs. wet; or mud vs. asphalt roads), with these tests. Such trends might not exist, or might be very hard to pinpoint in the near endless permutations of cross-influencing variable combinations. Exception: there may well be a noticeable difference across the board between wheeled and tracked vehicles, but even that may be hard to find without a whopping load of tests. To my mind what can be done is to maybe answer individual questions regarding a discreet combination of the four variables such as "Why are my M8's bogging so much in this particular scenario?" or "How can I drive my Panther through this patch of soft, damp ground while minimizing chances of it getting stuck?". Unfortunately, for some cases the question only becomes apparent when it's already too late...

[Lt Bull]

First, (unless I missed it despite reading your post twice) you neglected to report which speed you ordered your Shermans to travel at in your initial test runs on GRASSXT and MUD. Care to enlighten us?

Opps, how did I forget that...was FAST speed.

Second, if we leave aside ....[rest of your post]

I am not exactly sure what you are getting at here but I think you might be getting ahead of yourself. I think you are reasoning that because "it's very hard to pinpoint in the near endless permutations of cross-influencing variable combinations" that affect vehicle bogging in game, making sense of the data generated from these types of tests, when put in the context of an actual game, is limited.

To a degree yes that is correct, in the same way that knowing someones weight is not a sure fire way to determine their actual health (well except in extreme cases). But these tests don't claim/intend to give you that information. Who knows just how many other factors can affect bogging probability/frequency. For example the straight line fast speed tests may show that vehicle X might have a lower bogging frequency than vehicle Y on one type of terrain, but if you now made both vehicles travel in a zigzag (ie. change direction every 20m for example), the bogging frequency of vehicle X may be now be higher than than of vehicle Y. FWIW, I certainly would however think that ANYTHING but continuous straight line travel over terrain would result in HIGHER bogging rates in general. It would be easy to test for, but would be a pain of a test to carry out (eg. you would have to manually issue the multi-waypoint orders for each vehicle in each trial...very time consuming).

I would suggest looking at these bogging frequencies that can be determined by these simple straight-line "vanilla" tests as being "best case" scenarios that can be used as a logical fundamental starting point for any further investigation in to how OTHER factors may influence bogging, such as changing direction/speed or as you have suggested whether the crews "situational awareness" affects things.

For the moment, it is probably of much more value and interest now to just see how these "vanilla" bogging frequencies alone map out across all the vehicles in the game. Who knows what controversy would insure if say we found that German vehicle bogging frequency was not affected by speed but US vehicles were. (not suggesting it's so, but its an example of simple stuff that could be revealed).

I will see if I can get a few more tests done. I really would prefer if someone could suggest a particular vehicle (or vehicle pair comparison) they believe may be bogging too frequently/not frequently enough. I may as well do those tests first.

[stoex]

Opps, how did I forget that...was FAST speed.

Thanks, that puts the test into perspective some more.

I am not exactly sure what you are getting at here...

To be honest, I don't know exactly either. I was a little drunk yesterday evening and it seems I was rather into watching myself type just for the heck of it. Sorry .

Anyhow, I think I meant about what you just wrote back, that a set of tests across all or some of the vehicles with other factors identical is a good starting point. Testing all permutations of all factors, and then trying to distill general parameters from all that data would be just a crazy amount of work, but getting some numbers down could give us a good idea of what to look for, what to do and what to avoid, and whether there might be unrealistic issues with bogging in some cases.

Personally I don't think so - I don't have any particular trouble with bogging, but then I am a very cautious player in general and don't try to make my vehicles or men do all kinds of heroic stunts. My gut feeling is that MOVE is the speed at which stuff tends not to go wrong the most (for vehicles), so that is what I use in unfavorable conditions.

Back to the point. My prime interest would be to compare wheeled and tracked vehicles in terms of bogging, so how about you get some numbers for, say, some Stuarts and some M8 Greyhounds next? Or use Pz IVs and Pumas if you like.

Meanwhile, I'll be off to the editor to check out something else nowhere near as worthwhile. I remember a challenge someone uttered last week about bouncing smoke shells off roofs and landing them in vehicles.

[rocketman]

Must admit up front that I haven't read the entire thread, but the title seemed appropriate for what I'm trying to "get off my chest".

Current scenario: I have one panzer asset. The ground condition is dry. I plot my first move: slow along a dirt road. I barely stray after 30 sec, so the minimum of track/treads goes over the border of the road into plain dirt and I immediately get immobilized. That just seems wrong or I'm the unluckiest german in Normandy. I dearly hope that lost asset won't be the back-breaker, since I'm starting to spot enemy tanks. Life/war is a b*tch :mad:

[Mord]

And you are sure that is in effect in the current game code, even though the label in the UI doesn't change?

I am now...did a map with dry ground conditions and weather set to down pour. Around 7 minutes in the ground became damp...at about a half hour, wet. Around an hour and 40 the ground conditions became muddy...that's pretty cool. Only thing that would've made it cooler is if the actual dirt tiles on the map would've switched over to mud tiles...but regardless, that is a pretty nice feature and could really screw a guy's plans up when it comes to armor.

Mord.

[Redwolf]

I am now...did a map with dry ground conditions and weather set to down pour. Around 7 minutes in the ground became damp...at about a half hour, wet. Around an hour and 40 the ground conditions became muddy...that's pretty cool. Only thing that would've made it cooler is if the actual dirt tiles on the map would've switched over to mud tiles...but regardless, that is a pretty nice feature and could really screw a guy's plans up when it comes to armor.

Mord.

How do you know it was now mud if the display doesn't change?

[Mord]

You click the menu tab, choose conditions and it tells you the weather, temperature, ground condition and wind.

Mord.

[Erwin]

Uuungh... So I started the (fun so far) Road to Montebourg campaign, and the 2nd scenario has 4 Shermans and damp ground.

So, am baby-ing them along on SLOW everywhere, and of course one has already bogged and immobilized in the first 20 minutes.

I want my play time to be fun and this high % of immobilizing when one is doing everything possible other than not moving the tanks at all (to keep em un-immobilized), is plain frustrating. I even don't care if this is a realistic % of immobilizations. CM2 is suppposed to be an entertainment game, not an exercise in frustration in which one loses units for reasons which have nothing to do with skill or tactics etc.

And this is just one reason I still play CM1.

[YankeeDog]

Uuungh... So I started the (fun so far) Road to Montebourg campaign, and the 2nd scenario has 4 Shermans and damp ground.

So, am baby-ing them along on SLOW everywhere, and of course one has already bogged and immobilized in the first 20 minutes

Hm. Either I have exceptionally good luck, or you have exceptionally bad luck. Or perhaps a bit of both...

I sent all of my tanks in that scenario in a wide left hook cross-country, and didn't have a single one immobilize. I think one or two may have bogged briefly at one point or another, but they were all still 100% mobile at the end of the battle, despite multiple field and bocage crossings.

I've actually rarely had trouble with immobilizations at all. It's happened to me a few times here and there, but only very rarely. Just lucky I guess...

[Field Marshal Blücher]

Hm. Either I have exceptionally good luck, or you have exceptionally bad luck. Or perhaps a bit of both...

I sent all of my tanks in that scenario in a wide left hook cross-country, and didn't have a single one immobilize. I think one or two may have bogged briefly at one point or another, but they were all still 100% mobile at the end of the battle, despite multiple field and bocage crossings.

I've actually rarely had trouble with immobilizations at all. It's happened to me a few times here and there, but only very rarely. Just lucky I guess...

I have to agree here. Erwin in particular seems to have terrible luck. Even in the exact same scenarios, his tanks seem way more likely to bog and immobilize than mine. Not that that provides any comfort to him, I'm sure.

[Stndrtnfhr]

As you can see, the conditions are dry, the vehicle is on the road and the engine and wheels are both undamaged.

Stndrtnfhr

[YankeeDog]

As you can see, the conditions are dry, the vehicle is on the road and the engine and wheels are both undamaged.

Stndrtnfhr

Hard to tell as the picture is very small, but looks to me like at least one side of the vehicle, and possibly both sides, are actually resting on the open ground next to the road.

Nevertheless, even if the wheels aren't on the road, I do find an open ground, dry conditions immobilization a bit odd...

Now that I think of it, one of the few times I have immobilized a tank in dry conditions, it was on the open ground adjacent to a road. Coincidence?

[Erwin]

I seem to have identified my excessive immobilization problems...

Will the terrorists who keep hacking into my computers and immobilizing my tanks PLEASE STOP!

You have already defeated us in Iraq, Afghanistan, bankrupted the US and brought the western world to the brink of monetary meltdown... Why can't I just play my little game in peace?

Thank you for your consideration.

[quincy]

Now that I think of it, one of the few times I have immobilized a tank in dry conditions, it was on the open ground adjacent to a road. Coincidence?

Thats what happened to me with a greyhound during the "labyrinth"-mission of the Road to Montebourg campaign. It was immobilized while touching the grass next to the road during an imperfectly plotted MOVE-order.

Since I am not the only one to experience it, there seems to be some issue with the transition from road tiles to neighbouring terrain.

Also, it doesn't seem right that a 6x6 vehicule with presumably half its wheels stuck in soft but level ground and the other 3 still on the road wouldn't be able to pull free.

[winkelried]

Thats what happened to me with a greyhound during the "labyrinth"-mission of the Road to Montebourg campaign. It was immobilized while touching the grass next to the road during an imperfectly plotted MOVE-order.

Since I am not the only one to experience it, there seems to be some issue with the transition from road tiles to neighbouring terrain.

Also, it doesn't seem right that a 6x6 vehicule with presumably half its wheels stuck in soft but level ground and the other 3 still on the road wouldn't be able to pull free.

The M8 had an open (non-locked or otherwise traction-aided) differential which was not optimal in cross country behaviour. Such an differential limits total torque applied to both drive wheels to the amount utilized by the lower traction wheel multiplied by a factor of 2, when one wheel is on a slippery surface, the total torque applied to the driving wheels may be lower than the minimum torque required for vehicle propulsion. so this behaviour could be explained.

[Wreck]

when one wheel is on a slippery surface, the total torque applied to the driving wheels may be lower than the minimum torque required for vehicle propulsion. so this behaviour could be explained.

Sure. But the point is not that a vehicle can't bog w/ one set of wheels on a road -- it's that bogging when half on a road should be much less likely than when having both sets of wheels offroad.

[winkelried]

Sure. But the point is not that a vehicle can't bog w/ one set of wheels on a road -- it's that bogging when half on a road should be much less likely than when having both sets of wheels offroad.

can't say anything about probability. maybe you should run a test - seems more like conincidal observations. then large numbers of test runs are missing. I for instance never experienced bogging with half road/half off-road (touch wood ) - technically it is possible and i got stuck more than once like this in RL. you overestimate the hardness of the shoulder and ooops you're stuck.

[TheBlackHand]

Just figured I'd throw this in.

I'm currently playing a battle where I have a platoon of four Panthers. These are vital to this battle without them I will surely lose.

The ground is damp, but not saturated. I have given no "quick" or "fast" orders in open terrain or on turns (I have on the hardball).

So far, THREE, count 'em, THREE Panthers have become immobilized due to bogging. Two of these are bogged on roads. One is on a turn, the other bogged while going from shoulder to pavement. The third one is stuck in a field.

I have one tank left. I expect to lose it to the earth.

This is unsat.

I'm treating these boggings as "mechanical breakdowns". Which makes me wonder, are mechanical breakdowns modeled in the game? I don't think I've ever seen one. If the game designers are determined to strike down the majority of my offensive power to chance, I would prefer it if they at least gave me another option to ponder. As I understand it, German tanks were notoriously unreliable, so perhaps a mechanical breakdown of three good tanks would be easier to rationalize. Particularly with Panthers, which are supposed to have better handling in soft terrain (with those wider tracks).

Anyway, I've had other problems with jeeps bogging on turns. I'd guess that there's something about the road/shoulder that causes this. Hopefully the programmers can fix it because it doesn't seem quite right.

(I also lost a Kubel to bogging in this battle. He had a "quick" order.)

[SlowMotion]

l

Nevertheless, even if the wheels aren't on the road, I do find an open ground, dry conditions immobilization a bit odd...

Now that I think of it, one of the few times I have immobilized a tank in dry conditions, it was on the open ground adjacent to a road. Coincidence?

In a game I'm still playing a tank of mine immobilized exactly this way. Dry conditions, level dirt road and one side of the tank slightly outside the road. I had to watch the movie several times I could understand if there was some slope involved or ground was wet, but totally level dry ground and the tank just stops....

[hoolaman]

What's the terrain on the side of the road?

Careless use of mud because it looks nice could cause this, and if it is under a bocage tile it might not be immediately obvious that is what you are looking at. (I see the screenshot provided doesn't appear that way, but it can happen).

Also I think CM is very forgiving of wheeled vehicles cross country performance. Wheels are fundamentally meant to go on roads.

[SlowMotion]

What's the terrain on the side of the road?

Careless use of mud because it looks nice could cause this, and if it is under a bocage tile it might not be immediately obvious that is what you are looking at. (I see the screenshot provided doesn't appear that way, but it can happen).

Also I think CM is very forgiving of wheeled vehicles cross country performance. Wheels are fundamentally meant to go on roads.

Not sure which user you replied to, but in my case I don't know what kind of terrain there is on the side of the road. I don't want to open the scenario to Scenario Editor while the game is in progress. It looks like dry, totally flat ground where even a bicycle wouldn't get stuck.

And comparing this to your other point: very near the immobilized tank there is a ridge with quite steep slopes and lots of trees. There my wheeled vehicle has been moving back and forth for several minutes without any trouble at all.

[Sgt Schultz]

All non-paved roads have semi-abstracted ditches.

Especially noticeable on diagonal roads.

I agree that the reported boggings seem excessive, but wanted to make sure folks were aware.

Running a tank into a dry ditch should not bog it.

If it were german tanks bogging more than Allied ones, then I would say it was abstracted mechanical breakdowns.