Jump to content

Bogging data


Recommended Posts

Hardly normal as it's a pretty extreme derailing. But it puts some light on a not too uncommon phenomenon when driving armored columns up a road. The first few tanks can pass fine then suddenly the embankment slides down into a ditch taking a vehicle with it. Usually the tank or afv can just drive away but sometimes they get stuck. Roads are sometimes best avoided by armor if there's suitable terrain elsewhere (though that's in part due to the channelizing nature of roads).

A motorized march across several kilometers of dirt or gravel road usually leaves the roads in a complete mess (often the folly of the trailing support which is often wheeled). This of course changes from country to country as some build roads sturdier than others, and on the terrain in general.

There's a reason the Autobahns built in Germandy during the 30's were concrete monsters.

Of course, but what happened to the tank in the pictures above is clearly down to a large amount of water and mud, probably eating away at the foundations of the road. My point is that scenarios like this would either have to be represented by a special "damaged road" tile (say, 10 times more likely to bog, depending on weight?) or a muddy/swampy tile next to the road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 81
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

A motorized march across several kilometers of dirt or gravel road usually leaves the roads in a complete mess...

And not only dirt or gravel roads. A few years ago I was watching a vid of a NATO equipment parade in some European city. The parade was taking place along a bricked in street, and where the tanks were making a turn, they were really ripping the bricks up. They turned that patch of street into one hell of a mess.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some nice but typical pixx I found:

sinking1.JPG

sinking2.JPG

Edit: And in reality there's all kinds of trouble when moving a large armored column. Stuff breaks down, vehicles get stuck and so on. But most of it is handled quickly and efficiently, often within the Battalion or even Coys by other tanks or dedicated towing vehicles. We're talking minutes to get a AFV or MBT unbogged if you have the resources handy.

Yeah, that is what *every* single road in Normandy in summer of 1944 looked like. In the game they do.

That road design with high stacked compacted dirt but nothing to hold the shoulders is also outrageously stupid. I haven't seen that in any of the "core" European countries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And not only dirt or gravel roads. A few years ago I was watching a vid of a NATO equipment parade in some European city. The parade was taking place along a bricked in street, and where the tanks were making a turn, they were really ripping the bricks up. They turned that patch of street into one hell of a mess.

Michael

Even asphalt roads tend to get damaged easily. We were parading with 12 IFVs (weighting a mere ~30 tons) making a single round in the city. The end result was that the road surface was covered in track imprints and torn open at places. (Even though we had spent quite some time installing rubber paddings to cover the tracks) All the pedestrian crossing markings had been destroyed. The single dirt road was utterly demolished, I remember resting while watching the vehicle crews swing shovels as they were ordered to patch it up by some angry lieutenant.

This anecdote doesn't change the fact that roads in CMBN are broken and result in incredibly frustrating gameplay, but the BF boys said they're aware of the issue and I trust it will be resolved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I expect to lose an occasional vehicle to driver error, mechanical breakdown or random chance. I expect there to be a greater chance of experiencing these things when executing tricky maneuvers or rolling over sketchy terrain. I also expect that, while I am the one plotting the moves, there is an actual, computerized "driver" inside the tank who interprets those moves to the best of his ability (experience). If I plot stupid moves, stupid things should have a greater chance of happening. If I plot routine moves on/off a road or around a turn . . . I should not have to run a 100 times greater risk of having bad things happen.

I should not lose 50% - 90% of my motorized power to "random chance".

Neither should you. I think we all agree on this. Right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest I've put in probably hundreds of hours in this game and the number of immobilizations due to bogging in missions and campaigns have been few and far between.

I always avoid rocky terrain and I take care when plotting moves on and off roads but that's basically it.

Movement for me in CMBN is almost always fast or hunt with the crew unbuttoned (don't know if that helps) as much as possible.

I do feel that immobilization in one scenario shouldn't carry over as a missing vehicle in the next most of the time (though on a retreat or with damaged equipment I can understand it). But other than the unclear issue of bogging ratios at "ditches" beside the road I see nothing strange about the percentage as it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, that is what *every* single road in Normandy in summer of 1944 looked like. In the game they do.

That road design with high stacked compacted dirt but nothing to hold the shoulders is also outrageously stupid. I haven't seen that in any of the "core" European countries.

Well as I said it's extreme. But a bit of downpour can turn even good roads into crap.

0fd8385b-cf1d-467e-8447-aaf9c008b567.jpg

Even if most roads don't suffer erosion like this the combination of weight and the heavy vibrations from a tracked vehicle can mess up a road. Also remember that most roads were not built to hold armored fighting vehicles. In Normandy we're talking horses and carts when most of the roads were actually made. Engineers were busy on all sides in the war constantly reinforcing roads and building new ones and still entire divisions got stuck when bad weather turned the roads into ****.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be honest I've put in probably hundreds of hours in this game and the number of immobilizations due to bogging in missions and campaigns have been few and far between.

This has been my experience too. I'm frankly a bit mystified as to how some folk are finding this to be such an issue :confused:

I don't doubt that you /are/ finding it an issue, but I do wonder what we're doing differently to get such different results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's how I move my tanks and most of my vehicles. I only use Quick or Fast over dry terrain or when I'm on a road. I use Move when I'm on wet terrain and I use Move when going around corners. (I use Hunt whenever I'm expecting contact.) I figure a Move order is the best over sloppy terrain because it represents slower, but steady progress. I always assumed that Slow would cause a tank to bog for lack of momentum & that the Quick/Fast orders would have the same effect but for the exact opposite reason.

I have used Quick or Fast with jeeps over wet terrain (and lost a few, which I assume is my fault), but I still use Move when going around corners. I plot all of my turns, both on and off road, using the #7 top down view. Most turns utilize at least three waypoints (tedious, but as I have learned, altogether necessary).

I always assumed that the roads where sturdy and that there would be no problem using Quick/Fast. Perhaps a Move order would be better on all but paved roads.

I wouldn't say that bogging in open terrain has been all that bad. I believe I've lost a few tanks this way over the many battles that I've played over the last six months.

That seems about right. I expect to lose some and I actually WANT to lose some, for authenticity.

The bogging/immobilization on the roads is another story. I have lost a TON of vehicles, from tanks to jeeps while driving along the roads. In the last campaign, I lost well over 50% of my tanks this way (over wet and dry ground). The problems always arise when one wheel/track will leave the road. Turns are the worst. If you don't plot those waypoints DIRECTLY in the center of the road, there's a good chance you're going to bog, no matter what vehicle you're driving. This has been my experience. It also is a huge problem when one vehicle has to go around another, for whatever reason. (I try to space out all of my vehicle columns using the timer, but there ALWAYS seems to be a couple of slow pokes in the bunch.)

I do NOT take great risks when moving my vehicles on roads. I plot all of my moves carefully and use appropriate speeds. I still see much too much bogging going on.

I'm frankly a bit mystified as to how some folk are NOT finding this to be such an issue.

How do you move differently than me?

How can anyone refute the data presented in the tests? 100 times greater chance of bogging in the presence of a road? That sounds like something I might've stated as hyperbole . . . but the tests seem to say that it is indeed true.

I understand that in the real world, it may be quite difficult to make the transition on/off road and that shoulders should be somewhat dangerous for heavy vehicles (but certainly not jeeps). I also believe that this difficulty is something that should be abstracted. As someone said before, this is not tank driver/waypoint plotting school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm frankly a bit mystified as to how some folk are NOT finding this to be such an issue.

.

Hmm the fact that some are having a problem with bogging while others aren't suggests it may not be a game problem.

I might add that if 50% of your vehicles bog then 50% bog.Whether you consider this acceptable in whatever the circumstances may be is another matter altogether.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm the fact that some are having a problem with bogging while others aren't suggests it may not be a game problem.

I might add that if 50% of your vehicles bog then 50% bog.Whether you consider this acceptable in whatever the circumstances may be is another matter altogether.

Condsidering the BFC folks have seen enough in the tests run by the community it would seem there is something nthere. I persoanlly haven't run into it too much but honestly I think I focus a lot more on the infantry.

I have had an interesting reverse event playing Road to Montebourg. I just had a Sherman drive into a building that is wall wrapped, drive along through it and some adjoining structures, exit out the far end and keep on going and nothing was damaged or bogged. I didn't try to do it, just gave it an order to reverse along a road on one side of the building then execute a 90 degree change in direction and move forward along another road. At one point it looks like it just pulled into the auto shop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chek, did you read the entire thread? Most importantly, the first post which shows you that this bogging/immobilization thing is not simply all in my head or in the way I play the game.

It has been demonstrated in a well orchestrated test.

How do you move your tanks on or around roads? I assume you read my most recent post, since you responded to it. I explained my method for movement. Since you claim not to be experiencing these problems, tell me what you do differently than me. I'm not being facetious. If you know something I don't, then let me know.

And, no, 50%+ immobilization is not acceptable. Please tell me how you avoid such things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's how I move my tanks and most of my vehicles. I only use Quick or Fast over dry terrain or when I'm on a road. I use Move when I'm on wet terrain and I use Move when going around corners. (I use Hunt whenever I'm expecting contact.) I figure a Move order is the best over sloppy terrain because it represents slower, but steady progress. I always assumed that Slow would cause a tank to bog for lack of momentum & that the Quick/Fast orders would have the same effect but for the exact opposite reason.

I have used Quick or Fast with jeeps over wet terrain (and lost a few, which I assume is my fault), but I still use Move when going around corners. I plot all of my turns, both on and off road, using the #7 top down view. Most turns utilize at least three waypoints (tedious, but as I have learned, altogether necessary).

I always assumed that the roads where sturdy and that there would be no problem using Quick/Fast. Perhaps a Move order would be better on all but paved roads.

I wouldn't say that bogging in open terrain has been all that bad. I believe I've lost a few tanks this way over the many battles that I've played over the last six months.

That seems about right. I expect to lose some and I actually WANT to lose some, for authenticity.

The bogging/immobilization on the roads is another story. I have lost a TON of vehicles, from tanks to jeeps while driving along the roads. In the last campaign, I lost well over 50% of my tanks this way (over wet and dry ground). The problems always arise when one wheel/track will leave the road. Turns are the worst. If you don't plot those waypoints DIRECTLY in the center of the road, there's a good chance you're going to bog, no matter what vehicle you're driving. This has been my experience. It also is a huge problem when one vehicle has to go around another, for whatever reason. (I try to space out all of my vehicle columns using the timer, but there ALWAYS seems to be a couple of slow pokes in the bunch.)

I do NOT take great risks when moving my vehicles on roads. I plot all of my moves carefully and use appropriate speeds. I still see much too much bogging going on.

I'm frankly a bit mystified as to how some folk are NOT finding this to be such an issue.

How do you move differently than me?

How can anyone refute the data presented in the tests? 100 times greater chance of bogging in the presence of a road? That sounds like something I might've stated as hyperbole . . . but the tests seem to say that it is indeed true.

I understand that in the real world, it may be quite difficult to make the transition on/off road and that shoulders should be somewhat dangerous for heavy vehicles (but certainly not jeeps). I also believe that this difficulty is something that should be abstracted. As someone said before, this is not tank driver/waypoint plotting school.

Well this is wild speculation from my part but do you play RT or WeGo.

Might there be a difference?

I'm reasoning along the lines of calculations for bogging might look different between WeGo and RT due to the turn based nature vs RT?

When I go on or off a road I almost always do it close to 90deg (as I've always assumed there are ditches). I don't use roads much with anything else than Quick or Hunt tbh. I hate when vehicles clog and I usually keep a good distance (air defense long) between them in single column on the road.

I do trust the numbers people have found while testing, it looks like solid data. I'm a bit at confused though as I've not experienced this to be much of an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has been my experience too. I'm frankly a bit mystified as to how some folk are finding this to be such an issue :confused:

I don't doubt that you /are/ finding it an issue, but I do wonder what we're doing differently to get such different results.

People do things very differently. One person may always move vehicles in single file on roads (staying safely in the middle). Another may try abd have two lanes of traffic on some roads, pushing vehicles nearer the edges.

One person might leave 30 second pauses between vehicles in a column. Another might try to get away with 10 second pauses which leads to more incidences of traffic jams and vehicles re-plotting their movements off the road to get around a vehicle that has slowed down in front of them.

One person may keep tanks out of the way at the rear for overwatch and never move them a great deal. Another person might have tanks leading the advance and repositioning frequently at the front of the action.

One person may stick to roads. Another may avoid roads like the plague on the assumption they are going to be defended. A third may move vehicles around completely ignoring where roads may or may not be.

One person may be a perfectionist who makes sure every waypoint is exactly where they want it. Another may just throw waypoints in roughly the right area on the assumption that the precise positioning doesn't make much difference, leading to vehicles going slightly off road on corners.

Plus people play different missions and campaigns. Die Letzte Hoffnung, as frequently noted, has two platoons of tanks and lots of scenarios with wet conditions. If I'd decided to play the Panzer Marsch campaign instead I'd probably not have had any reason to notice bogging frustration. Combinations of crew experience and opposing threats may have a big impact on how often your vehicles are ignoring your orders and making their own movement decisions.

We tend to assume that everyone plays more or less the same way as ourselves, until we see someone doing stuff that we'd have never considered in a thousand years. And it is not hard to think up ways in which habitual playstyle variations (as well as scenario and campaign choice) can have a very big impact on the amount of bogging seen, given that one of the big factors in how much bogging you see is how much time your vehicles spend partly on / partly off roads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well this is wild speculation from my part but do you play RT or WeGo.

Might there be a difference?

Praetori

A very interesting point.

Anyway it is some sadness I come back after many months absence to find that there are still outstanding problems on tank movement. Whilst supporting the company for the last decade or so the latest offering offended me mightily that purporting to be a realistic simulation tanks travelled as fast in reverse as going forwards. For all I know that may be cured but it is obvious bogging has not.

WTF! In my innocence I thought the modern forerunner would have ironed out all the obvious bugs before we got back to WW2. So it looks like I will have to disappear for a few more months until I can believe it is a good game. I cannot bear to be a paid playtester - you know - the one where I have unknowingly paid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I play WEGO exclusively. I can see how it might make a difference in moving. However, I've lost a lot of tanks/vehicles to moves that I would have made in RT as well. For example, I believe I lost five tanks in the last campaign by simply edging them ever so slightly off a (dry) road while either angling for a better shot or simply moving in what I thought was a straight line down the center of the road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please tell me how you avoid such things.

TBH I haven't really thought about it.

When I see rain or mud or wet fields in game I assume they are not so much inaccessible but certainly "unfriendly" in regards to vehicular operations and stick to the roads as much as I can.I move on and off roads regardless of the ground conditions at right angles,although the right angles thing-subconsciously-probably has more to do with rolling vehicles which I guess you could count as an immobilisation.

All this stuff seems to be going through my head when I'm playing.I do tend to put myself in the drivers seat of each vehicle and wonder about these things along with the obvious stuff like where would you place mines and site AT guns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Praetori

A very interesting point.

Anyway it is some sadness I come back after many months absence to find that there are still outstanding problems on tank movement. Whilst supporting the company for the last decade or so the latest offering offended me mightily that purporting to be a realistic simulation tanks travelled as fast in reverse as going forwards. For all I know that may be cured but it is obvious bogging has not.

WTF! In my innocence I thought the modern forerunner would have ironed out all the obvious bugs before we got back to WW2. So it looks like I will have to disappear for a few more months until I can believe it is a good game. I cannot bear to be a paid playtester - you know - the one where I have unknowingly paid.

Today I finally decided that though I don't generally consider myself a "gamer" per se (meaning that I have a fairly focused interest when it comes to games and don't usually buy RPG type games nor first person shooters) I would take a look for investigative purposes at Skyrim's forum to see how delighted the fans over there would be having a game company with dozens of programmers and money to burn. So they are up to I believe the third patch (1.3?) and people are still ranting. Apparently they had dragons that would fly backwards, frame rate issues, crashes etc etc.

Granted they are not an apples to apples comparison being two completely different genres, but in retrospect BFC's much smaller team has I think done a pretty darn good job of producing a game that plays overall very well out of the gate.

Sorry you still feel the game is unplayable, but my opponents and I would disgree. Once more back into the hedgerow breach!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks again for all of the testing and feedback. This thread was extremely handy.

diesel: "Obvious" bugs are only obvious after people find them.

sburke: Yep, Skyrim - with a team and budget at least several dozen times larger than ours - has some nasty bugs. Some very "obvious" bugs if you will (I'll assume no one saw dragons flying backwards and thought that was correct). And a significant portion of those, if experience serves, will *not* get hammered out by the developers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep, Skyrim - with a team and budget at least several dozen times larger than ours - has some nasty bugs. Some very "obvious" bugs if you will (I'll assume no one saw dragons flying backwards and thought that was correct). And a significant portion of those, if experience serves, will *not* get hammered out by the developers.

Yes, but you're BFC and held to higher standards. :) Or haven't you realized that yet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

diesel: "Obvious" bugs are only obvious after people find them

Phil Culliton

Phil, I think perhaps I ought to say then design decisions which I find unfathomable and politely call bugs.

Finding tanks driving as fast in reverse as they can go forwards is deeply disturbing. One might have thought that this hangover design feature from CMx1 would have been removed. I am not going to delve into the acceleration figures for vehicles as that perhaps would be beyond normal expectations for a game.

The invisible walls around a battlefield - which seems to be the default - seems absolutely insane in terms of realism. Gee I must run back into the bombardment .... I will keep my trucks here for the enemy to capture.

And of course in the first iteration there was the laser guided firing on the move problem which was standout wrong.

I am now programming genius but then none of the items I have listed is really a programming "bug". As I say, I politely lump them as bugs.

One that I did consider a bug was that if you drive through a wire fence you destroy it, drive along the length of it and it remains pretty much all in place. This may have been sorted out but I am not bothering to boot the game to find out - that goes with not wishing to be a paying game-tester.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, is it a bug Phil? Have you squashed it? :D

*I* have not. I mostly just gabbed with you guys and collected information. Other people did the hard work. I think you'll be happy with the next patch, though.

Yes, but you're BFC and held to higher standards. :) Or haven't you realized that yet?

No comment! :)

Honestly I think the lesson I take away is that no matter your budget, no matter your standards, there *are* going to be bugs in games. Skyrim is by far the mainstream game of 2011. Bethesda is a large, well-funded company that has even taken significant steps, with Skyrim, to improve quality over Oblivion. I also happen to think their programming team is top-notch. And there are still "obvious" bugs, not to mention significant features that players broadly dislike.

I think one of the great things about BFC is that they stand by their product. You can expect that years down the road we'll still be trying to think of ways to make the game even better. That includes fixing bugs as we find them. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...