crispy Posted December 4, 1999 Share Posted December 4, 1999 New post from a long-time lurker... I downloaded the demo a few months ago and LOVE this game - this is the game I have been looking for; I have also been very impressed with the feedback and fixes gained by the PLAYERS through this forum. BTS, you are doing a great job, keep it up! Now for the issue at hand - I searched for 'intelligence' and 'recon', got a lot of hits, but was unable to find a thread that clearly addresses this - the problem of intel that is too good. What I mean is, I don't just know that that tank is a Tiger, but if it gets close enough, I know it is a Tiger VI E (Late), and if I hit return, I can see the detailed armor data! In 'Last Defense' - hotseat to test this - I saw the Tiger VI E (late) VETERAN (Does the commander stand in the hatch with a certain dash & flair?) whose passengers were a VETERAN Arty Spotter and VETERAN MG42...etc. My nearest unit with LOS was a couple of hundred meters away. Does anyone else think this is too much data to have available? I know that the armor thickness data is out there for gamers to collect, but how do my grunts know that it is a (late) model? Or that the crew is Veteran? What about the Shermans with extra armor? (Or other mods). Should we get detailed info on the number and type of weapons carried by that Waffen SS Rifle 45 squad, or should they just be Krauts? Years ago, I worked on a mod for ASL (Tabletop, yep, I'm a Grognard) that allowed true blind play, and one of the most fun aspects was not knowing which PzKw IV model you were facing, or what support weapons were in an enemy stack. With all of the excellent attention to Fog of War in this game, this seems to be a holdover from the tabletop game days, when all the data was available to both players. Has this topic been broached? Could someone point me to the thread, or is anyone willing to chew this bone with me? Crispy (late) Veteran Tired Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoolColJ Posted December 4, 1999 Share Posted December 4, 1999 I agree with you 100% All you should get even when its pretty close, is its a Tiger, and if the spotting unit is a veteran unit or higher, they may recognise the model varient or even mis-identify it You should never ever feel 100% certain about anything until a game is over ------------------ ------------------ CCJ BLITZ_Force My HomePage -----> http://www.geocities.com/coolcolj/ [This message has been edited by CoolColJ (edited 12-03-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
howardb Posted December 4, 1999 Share Posted December 4, 1999 Must admit I agree on that too. But when it comes to variants some vehicles have pretty distinctive marks to show one version from another so that shouldn't be too hard to recognize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berlichtingen Posted December 4, 1999 Share Posted December 4, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>All you should get even when its pretty close, is its a Tiger, and if the spotting unit is a veteran unit or higher, they may recognise the model varient or even mis-identify it<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> If the unit spotting is American, all German tanks should be identified as tigers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Stone Posted December 4, 1999 Share Posted December 4, 1999 I agree as well. Fog of war is "tuned" pretty well for opposing infantry units; but vehicle IDs seem too detailed. I wouldn't mind seeing complete mis-identification of vehicles and even some confused counting. Of course, this would only hold at great distances... i.e. Americans ID 3 Tigers and about 6 halftracks -- only to discover a couple of French h39s and four trucks later. A little extreme for many players(unfortunately), but a "tuned up" Fog of War would make initial tactical decisions intense. Stone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted December 4, 1999 Share Posted December 4, 1999 There is full misidentification built in. It isn't very common, especially when you have good units spotting, but it does happen. In fact, one of our testers just pointed this out a couple of days ago. Something like a PzIV being labled "Tiger" when in fact it was not. I am pretty sure we have turned down the rate at which you get intelligence about enemy units since the demo, but you still will find out what its experience level is in the end. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lokesa Posted December 4, 1999 Share Posted December 4, 1999 When I played CE for the first time, I only got positive ID on a few units. I was suprised to find out at game end that the bulk of his units were german, I mean smg squads even units that were engaged in the woods at point blank range didn't always give up the info, guess they died to quick but my point is, most of the game all I had to work with was infanty? That's not bad As for not knowing whether units were veteran or conscripts, hmmmm, let me think about that... Somehow I think a veteran unit would have a pretty good idea what kind of forces they were dealing with pretty quickly, at least comprable to the timeline BTS has given for all the other info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cueball Posted December 4, 1999 Share Posted December 4, 1999 It was the custom of some German tank crews to mark the number of kills by painting rings on the barrel. Anyone remember the famous picture of the Tiger I with the 88 kill markings on it's 88? If I spotted a Panther with 25 rings on the gun barrel, I would assume "Veteran" status. Perhaps, the troops were counting the rings Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS_PanzerLeader Posted December 4, 1999 Share Posted December 4, 1999 I'm not sure if all willagree onthis but... shouldn't the frequency of 'total misinformation be conveyed by troops that are conscripts and green tropps be substantially more frequent than vets? Oh Btw are there gonna be ELITE units? Also I noticed that sound contact shows a tank - yet, so far it has seemed to be always representative of one just tank ( which is what i find) - shouldnt it be less discernible with the exception of extremes? ie armored column. SS_Panzereader.....out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
howardb Posted December 4, 1999 Share Posted December 4, 1999 After reading the doc that follow the demo I think I saw that there was Elite and above that again Crack units. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lokesa Posted December 5, 1999 Share Posted December 5, 1999 off track but... The mention of painting rings on the barrel for kills reminds me of the summer I spent gutting salmon for a cannery in Alaska. One of the fork lift drivers on three different occasions clipped peoples legs while turning thus breaking their legs. Me and my tent-mates (tent city dwellers that we were) had this plan to do a stencil of a fork leg breaking scene for the side of his ride. Working 16 hour shifts, we never did get around to it unfotunately... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Oberly Posted December 5, 1999 Share Posted December 5, 1999 LOL Lokesa!A friend and I nearly did that the summer after freshman year in college-we sort of talked ourselves out of it after hear horror stories about things like that happening to kids.And also the thought of working 16 hour shifts cleaning fish wasn't overly appealing,regardless of the monetary reward. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AP HEAD Posted December 5, 1999 Share Posted December 5, 1999 LOKESA , On the fish factory maimer. I would have picked up one of those great frozen fishes hit that forklift driver. Then stenciled a forklift kill my t-shirt and told the rest that they could expect more of the same if they hit anyone else! Also id have asked the boss if you got a day off for each forklift kill? / On the other topic there is a bit to much intell, the shapes seen in the tree should be generic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crispy Posted December 5, 1999 Author Share Posted December 5, 1999 This discussion is very nice, but it has nothing to do with my question. I have no problem with better troops giving better intel data - and vice versa - Green troops may identify everything as a Tiger. Conversely, wouldn't better troops be harder to accurately identify/count, etc? My point is that no matter how good your troops are, I am very doubtful that anyone on the American side could identify the different models of Panzer (aside from the Mark number) with any consistency, and certainly not to tell the armor thickness changes, muzzle velocities, etc. Barrel rings are nice, but I doubt many people took the time to count them on an unfriendly advancing tank. I also doubt that even the best units could spy out a squad at 100m and count the different types of rifle/smg/mg combinations, or do much more than estimate their quality. I appreciate that misidentification is built-in, and ideally, we may not ever realize that a unit was mis-ID'd unless we kill it and inspect it later. What I disagree with is the level of detail of (mis)-information offered. I know also that I can choose to ignore it, and thus have my ideal game made more perfect. I simply want to discuss this seriously in this forum, and hear a good reasoned argument for why it is done the way it is. Crispy (late) Veteran Tired MG42 Ammo 33 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lokesa Posted December 5, 1999 Share Posted December 5, 1999 LOL, I actually took a frozen fish in the face once A big fat frozen salmon, fortunately it was without it's head or I Probably would have lost an eye. Instead it's neck hit that ridge where my eyebrow is (hiding the scar) and the bridge of my nose, almost knocked me out. One of the canners at the factory next door lost his hand to the miniature guillotine that cuts off fish heads (irretreivable as the heads are imediatly ground up for dog food). I think the main problem is the lack of training coupled with long long hours. We'd either have nothing to do or work 16 hour shift's for weeks straight. I remember each morning I would greet the dawn with "what the f**k am I doing here!" as I would plan my return yet 2 cups of coffee later I would "regain my senses" and get ready for work My tent-mate had gotten to know one of the local alaskan's who had subsequently attacked another canner with his fish knife, when I asked him why he had attacked this person with a knife, what he was thinking, he replied "it's ok, I cant get prosecuted unless he stays the winter" ... Oh, then there was the time I got sick after heavy drinking around town (this was Seward, a town with only 6 bars as a local ordinance restricted the number of bars to equal the number of churches) two local's happened by and demanded "You puking on my Alaskan soil!?!" to which I responded with a raised middle finger and was harshly beaten Nevertheless, it was a great adventure and makes for excellent memories Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lokesa Posted December 5, 1999 Share Posted December 5, 1999 Now what were we talking about??? Oh yeah, info... we do get rather extensive details as to the statistics of enemy units dont we How else could this sort of information be given to the player? I assume that fighting units generally have some knowledge of enemy SOP, formations and vehicles. I assume that nco's could recognize what was a "safe distance" and was was a "dangerous distance" from the various hardware facing them. I going as far as to suggest that tankers would know the thickness of the armor on many enemy vehicles or at least a working knowledge of their guns effectiveness vs what they're facing. I was very suprised when I lost my tiger repeatedly to the hellcats. It forced me to look at the information available and get an idea as to what I was facing, knowledge that although not avaliable in the same format to a tiger commander of the day would likely be understood by him nevertheless. We should ask Los. Hey Los I believe you've been directly involed in comprable stuations, correct? through battlefield intel are you able to be aware of what your facing to a comparable extant to CM? I'm going to go off and assume a bunch here so bear with me I bet that a veteran soldier can pick out the various weapon sounds and get a pretty good bead on where the various shots are coming from. He could probably recognize basic unit types, status and capability. I also believe he will have an awareness of what the threat level is of his enemy counterparts. As casual gamers without this detailed knowledge we are hopelessly handicapped when compared to our battlefield counterparts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Los Posted December 5, 1999 Share Posted December 5, 1999 Well in action you will definately be able to distinguish between the various weapons, first and foremost the presence of a machine gun (LMG). Whenever a machinegun fires in a firefight it sort of becomes the focal point for both sides. One dies trie sto portect it, the other side tries to get at it during the tug of war of establishing fire superiority. However you would not know or care how many rifles, pistols of SMGs were in an enemy squad until after you killed them and went souvenier hunting. Same goes for kill rings on tanks. I guess if you wanted to make it totally realistic, when you clicked on a squad (this is at the highest intel level with fog of war on) the weapons readout would only say what types but not how many of each. Also how good an enemy unit is, (veteran/green), is discerned by i's conduct, effectiveness, the way it manuevers and distributes fire against you and when you get up close sometimes uniform (i.e. para's helmet). My point is there are faster and more effective ways of telling generally "how good" you oppposition is than waiting until you can count kill rings on a barrel. In short, Lokesa is right. In fact too much information can be more paralyzing than not enough at times. But that's kind of hard to explain here. Cheers... Los Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lokesa Posted December 5, 1999 Share Posted December 5, 1999 Thanks Los, by the way, I read "go to hell 4" the other day very enjoyable. I like how you had Scipio explaining the battle to the scots. I want more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Los Posted December 6, 1999 Share Posted December 6, 1999 Thanks! Did you follow the link back to my homepage? There's a whole novel on there I just wrote (Rot Hafen), plus more to come. Los http://www.concentric.net/~Los/ft/lossf.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crispy Posted December 6, 1999 Author Share Posted December 6, 1999 I appreciate the return of focus to the discussion. I want to reply to the relevant points one by one. Here goes. Lokesa: "...we do get rather extensive details as to the statistics of enemy units dont we How else could this sort of information be given to the player?" Perhaps in a 'encyclopedia' file, accessible from the game, as in Steel Panthers, or a separate manual. My point is not that the player should not have access to 'game' stats or even 'historical' stats, my point is that individual units in a scenario should not be identified so extensively to the opponent. A Tiger is a Tiger to a Yank, and rare is the scholarly Company Commander who can tell you any more about it. "I assume that fighting units generally have some knowledge of enemy SOP, formations and vehicles. I assume that nco's could recognize what was a "safe distance" and was was a "dangerous distance" from the various hardware facing them." I would agree, in general, if the units are experienced, but how does this translate into detailed stats of the type we receive? " I going as far as to suggest that tankers would know the thickness of the armor on many enemy vehicles or at least a working knowledge of their guns effectiveness vs what they're facing." Possibly; again experience/training-dependent, and a supposition on your part that I would like to see documented. What kind of vehicle-identification training did US armor troops receive? A lot of the armor thickness data was probably gathered after the war from wrecks (how would YOU measure the front upper hull thickness of a Panther?). "I was very suprised when I lost my tiger repeatedly to the hellcats. It forced me to look at the information available and get an idea as to what I was facing, knowledge that although not avaliable in the same format to a tiger commander of the day would likely be understood by him nevertheless." No insult intended, but this is more a reflection of your inexperience than any lack of data. I KNEW Hellcats were deadly to Tigers; I just wonder how far away a Veteran Tiger Commander could positively ID a Hellcat vs. a Sherman. "I'm going to go off and assume a bunch here so bear with me I bet that a veteran soldier can pick out the various weapon sounds and get a pretty good bead on where the various shots are coming from. He could probably recognize basic unit types, status and capability. I also believe he will have an awareness of what the threat level is of his enemy counterparts. As casual gamers without this detailed knowledge we are hopelessly handicapped when compared to our battlefield counterparts" Again an assumption, although one that is probably reasonable. Again, it is not the availability of the DATA, it is the easy and specific identification of the UNIT that I do not agree with. Los posted 12-05-99 09:34 AM ET (US)> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Well in action you will definately be able to distinguish between the various weapons, first and foremost the presence of a machine gun (LMG)... However you would not know or care how many rifles, pistols of SMGs were in an enemy squad until after you killed them and went souvenier hunting. Same goes for kill rings on tanks. I guess if you wanted to make it totally realistic, when you clicked on a squad (this is at the highest intel level with fog of war on) the weapons readout would only say what types but not how many of each." This is exactly what I mean, thanks for stating it so clearly! Now that the question is clear, will someone at BTS please join in here and give us some rationale for the current system and/or why it will/will not be changed? Crispy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lokesa Posted December 6, 1999 Share Posted December 6, 1999 Los, I thought Rot Hafen was great, especially liked the P'Ah'Cad Anyone who likes science fiction should check out http://www.concentric.net/~los/ft/lossf.htm I dont know crispy, I like having data on what my guys think they're seeing. As to adjusting FOW I have no problem with that and I'm sure it's been an area of focus for testing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Posted December 6, 1999 Share Posted December 6, 1999 Crispy, I think it should stay the way it is. There are some things one should keep in mind: 1. The player is not a company commander, nor an NCO on the battlefield; he is, well, just a player in front of the computer. This is about the balance of realism vs. playability. Sure, I have access to 4 or 5 books about the technical specifications of tanks. But do I really want to flip through pages while playing? Definitely not! I have a computer for all the numbers, so I want them there, just one mouseclick away. 2. Non experienced players should have an idea, what "Tiger vs. Sherman" means, without studying books. Once again, this is not a game about "role-playing" an CO. I say, BTS, let the access of data and identification routines as they are, right there in the game, with all stats available, IF a unit is identified (or misidentified). Fred Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Los Posted December 6, 1999 Share Posted December 6, 1999 "I going as far as to suggest that tankers would know the thickness of the armor on many enemy vehicles or at least a working knowledge of their guns effectiveness vs what they're facing." Depends on when in 1944 you are talking. Certainly in teh Normandy Campaign the vast majority of tankers went into battle believing what they were told, that the Sherman was the finest tank in the world, and they were quickly divested of this beleief very rapidly which lead to a degration of their morale. (Note that data to the contrary was available even before June 1944, from the respective war department technical sections and veterans.) Certainly by the breakout all those disillusions were gone. Crispy, regarding calling BTS on the carpet: Things have pretty much reached the stage where little or nothing more in terms of features or changes will be added to CM. It's that far along, though certainly this discussion will be an important one to remember for CM2. Los Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crispy Posted December 8, 1999 Author Share Posted December 8, 1999 Thanks to all for the relevant comments on this question. Los, thanks for the 'inside' scoop on why the answer from BTS was so sketchy. I understand now, I just asked my question too late. I agree it's not worth delaying the release. Let's see the full version! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts