Tank Crew Awareness

[Broadsword56]

Let's not forget to leave some room for the imagination and the fortunes of war. A glint of sunlight on a piece of metal, or a movement at a certain moment, could have caught the tank commander's eye just as he happened to be scanning in that direction. No, CMBN doesn't model such things explicitly, but thegame's level of abstraction allows for these sorts of unusual-but-plausible things to happen. That's the fun and beauty of the game, to me. If the outcome of events were always 2+2=4 or as predictable as a boardgame CRT, it wouldn't feel nearly as much like the real thing.

[sburke]

Let's not forget to leave some room for the imagination and the fortunes of war. A glint of sunlight on a piece of metal, or a movement at a certain moment, could have caught the tank commander's eye just as he happened to be scanning in that direction. No, CMBN doesn't model such things explicitly, but thegame's level of abstraction allows for these sorts of unusual-but-plausible things to happen. That's the fun and beauty of the game, to me. If the outcome of events were always 2+2=4 or as predictable as a boardgame CRT, it wouldn't feel nearly as much like the real thing.

+1 on that or having a couple guys squaring off at a few paces with rifles and pistols blazing away (or blazing as fast as you can with a bolt action rifle) and no one hitting a thing. (yeah Broadsword and I have pics!) If there were no chance for odd luck or room for unexplainable behavior in the heat of combat it would be a lesser game. Now if that one off were to happen on a regular basis, yeah that would be an issue.

[slysniper]

Let's not forget to leave some room for the imagination and the fortunes of war. A glint of sunlight on a piece of metal, or a movement at a certain moment, could have caught the tank commander's eye just as he happened to be scanning in that direction. No, CMBN doesn't model such things explicitly, but thegame's level of abstraction allows for these sorts of unusual-but-plausible things to happen. That's the fun and beauty of the game, to me. If the outcome of events were always 2+2=4 or as predictable as a boardgame CRT, it wouldn't feel nearly as much like the real thing.

I agree 100%

But we have to realize, there are plenty out there that are accustomed to games that work on 2+2 =4 and when this game does not deliver that, they get upset.

Whereas some of us have learned to love the unpredictable nature of the game and enjoy that.

The thing I find interesting to me the most is that even though there is more things out of my control within the newer version of the game, I find that my tactics, when good still provider me with victories, and I truly feel that good solid tactics pay off more now than they did in the earlier version of the games.

I see things, like proper security, protecting my flanks, good unit dispersion. Keeping good chain of command, all these type of things are paying off way more than they use too. The level of play has increased and rewards those that understand how to use it.

[ridethe415]

The following translated German document on infantry close-combat against Russian tanks on the Eastern Front was published in Tactical and Technical Trends, No. 23, April 22, 1943.

That is an awesome article. So is the rest of the site. Thanks.

[WinOrLose]

Let's not forget to leave some room for the imagination and the fortunes of war. A glint of sunlight on a piece of metal, or a movement at a certain moment, could have caught the tank commander's eye just as he happened to be scanning in that direction. No, CMBN doesn't model such things explicitly, but thegame's level of abstraction allows for these sorts of unusual-but-plausible things to happen. That's the fun and beauty of the game, to me. If the outcome of events were always 2+2=4 or as predictable as a boardgame CRT, it wouldn't feel nearly as much like the real thing.

I agree 100%. 2+2 has to be able to equal 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6 otherwise we might as well just play chess. My complaint is that 2+2 shouldn't equal 10,000!

I have looked at the above replay a dozen times and tried all sorts of angles and views at max magnification and you can see bugger all. Factor in that there was a sodding great farm house 100% blocking the way until the tank moved forward, instantly spotted the unit and fired a few seconds later and you have an unrealistic event. The situation favoured me so it isn't an I lost whine and I won the battle. My general experience in this game is that tank awareness is far too good.

Moaning aside I do think its a great game and haven't been back to any other game since I discovered it a couple of months ago.

[slysniper]

I agree 100%. 2+2 has to be able to equal 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6 otherwise we might as well just play chess. My complaint is that 2+2 shouldn't equal 10,000!

I have looked at the above replay a dozen times and tried all sorts of angles and views at max magnification and you can see bugger all. Factor in that there was a sodding great farm house 100% blocking the way until the tank moved forward, instantly spotted the unit and fired a few seconds later and you have an unrealistic event. The situation favoured me so it isn't an I lost whine and I won the battle. My general experience in this game is that tank awareness is far too good.

Moaning aside I do think its a great game and haven't been back to any other game since I discovered it a couple of months ago.

To jump on your side a little, I too have found at times, units, not just tanks. spotting things that to me should not be spottable. Making shots that really do not make sence that they should have spotted or focused on. But it is a game and asking it to have the same amount of logic that you have is asking alot. Play the game enough and you will learn to judge what to expect.

And this is what I expect, tree foilage is not good concealment in the game. It is the one thing that graphics do not match what the game thinks. I have seen time and time again. shots taken through trees that likely in real life would never have happened. Not unless all the leaves are missing on them trees. Now I am in the practice of setting units in such locations knowing I will likely get spotting and shots on the enemy, all I have to do is make sure I have a lane of fire where them invincible trunks are not located. (then I hear the reply from my opponant, I have no clue where you are shooting me from).

But I also have lost units the same way. because by magic he spots me but I cannot see him. so it can work both ways.

But going down to ground level and looking at the view is worthless. I actually turn the trees off at that point to see if anything else is blocking my view if not, given enough time, the unit will likely spot something.

Now the real question. How many trees does it take to not be seen. I have a feel for it, but not a answer.

Bocages, have already been mentioned also. At times spotting through them is funny also in the game. But learn to play the game with what it gives you and move on, pointing out it could improve is fine.

So I will agree with you that they really should adjust how trees give concealment, but til that day happens, learn what to expect from them and work with it.

[Bradley Dick]

Trees, from what I have noticed, have less of an effect on concealment than ground covering. A heavy forest tile, with or without trees, provides more concealment than trees on grass. It's the difference between hiding in the woods and hiding in an orchard.