Sherman performance... again.

[BigDork]

I'm of the opposite opinion at least until we have some confirmation as to whether the MKIV was buttoned or unbuttoned and the condition and experience of the crew.

I'm more concerned at this point that the Sherman was able to spot, fire and score a hit so quickly while on the move. Of course the fates of war are fickle and more formal testing would need to be done to determine if there is an actual problem with the simulations mechanics.

I can't speak for the experience but the MkIV was definitely unbuttoned.

[Lee_Vincent]

without going into a text book explanation. I do recall that the human mind is programmed to hunt or determine danger by certain instincts. Sight being the largest one used for this. It relies on sight in different ways to determine this, like shape, color and movement and some others. But movement is by far the easiest and most instinctive thing for the human eye to be drawn to.

Your eye is always drawn to movement. In combat, movement is by far the best way to get yourselve spotted. The game just does not have it right at the moment.

You can throw all the other factors out. A tank moving has nothing going for it as to staying hidden other than if the line of sight is totally abstructed and its color if by chance it blends in with the backround.

Where as a tank that was stopped, behind a bocage. has no movement, Until it rotates it barrel. Has no outline since the vegetation should be breaking it up and to a large extent there should be no color problen since it is behind concealment making it much easier for the color to just appear as backround tones.

So in just the example I gave in my last post. There is no way a panther moving up on a enemy unit in a open field should be able to get the jump on the sherman behind the bocage facing and watching said field.

It is against nature. At the moment in the game spotting goes to the side that gets lucky. And what I am saying is. If you can spot the enemy first with another unit, like infantry, then the advantage seems to go your way. I find time and time again. if I know where a enemy unit is and I pull my armor up into place to also have a line of sight, I normally get the spot and shot off first.

The program is not correct to the real world, my opinion, but again, I think the best fix would be to correct what moving units can spot and it would resolve plenty of the problems.

+1

+1

+1

[George MC]

Are they atleast going to release FREE patches along with the module for the base game so that we don't have to pay 60$ for a bloody update?

Stand-by...

Poster about to 'POP!'

[Jaksteri]

Stand-by...

Poster about to 'POP!'

Oh man you can understand basic human emotions, I bet you can count with your hands too, so cool.

See? I can be a edgy smartass too

Everytime someone expresses a opinion about the game and the prices here that even suggests a change or two and it's always the same people who are first to arrive on the scene to get their panties in a twist

[sburke]

It might actually be in your interest to read through a few posts on the topic. You aren't commenting into a vacumn. There has been quite a bit of heated commentary on both the difference between CMBO and the way CMx2 modules have worked that goes back quite a few years and the pricing model which had raged all over this forum since May.

I also hear George MC can count using his toes, he is quite talented. Unfortunately he is also cross eyed so he tends to double the figures. Sorry to blow your cover George, but double counting your VL points was making it quite obvious.

[Michael Emrys]

Everytime someone expresses a opinion about the game and the prices here that even suggests a change or two and it's always the same people who are first to arrive on the scene to get their panties in a twist

Well, see, there is a world of difference between asking a question and making a suggestion on the one hand, and whining like a whiny spoiled brat on the other. It's doing the latter which will bring down the heat on you. And in any event, all the replies you've gotten in this thread seem pretty patient and reasonable to me, unlike your demand that you be given everything you want for free last Christmas.

Michael

[George MC]

Oh man you can understand basic human emotions, I bet you can count with your hands too, so cool.

See? I can be a edgy smartass too

Everytime someone expresses a opinion about the game and the prices here that even suggests a change or two and it's always the same people who are first to arrive on the scene to get their panties in a twist

I'm Scottish - can you explain what emotions are?

Oh panties - I get them? In a twist? Hhhmm panties....

See sburke's post. He's way more rational and lucid than I am.

Now why the feck do I have forty fingers and toes...

[Michael Emrys]

Now why the feck do I have forty fingers and toes...

Isn't it tragic when cousins marry? Of course up in the Highlands, I don't suppose they bother about marriage too much since it's all one big happy family anyway, right?

Michael

[Rocky Balboa]

Ah, good then.

They had Canadian forces along with Americans already in the Beyond Overlord along with access to every month of the year. Without any fancy DLC's.

Just wondering, do you get paid the same amount today as you did back in 2000?

Business models change as the industry and costs change. BF is not doing anything that most other publishers have already moved to several years ago and to be honest imo their pricing is very competitive considering the size of their market.

Bottom line, what they charge for their work is their call, What your willing to pay is yours. Any other discussion is a waste of time.

[Sergei]

Oh panties - I get them? In a twist? Hhhmm panties....

Panties are those things that you're supposed to wear under your kilt when you do a cartwheel. They may have other uses.

[George MC]

Isn't it tragic when cousins marry? Of course up in the Highlands, I don't suppose they bother about marriage too much since it's all one big happy family anyway, right?

Michael

Not tragic, expected. Blood ties and all that. It has meant peace in the Highlands (save after midnight when the pubs kick out) for over 267 years.

[Jaksteri]

Just wondering, do you get paid the same amount today as you did back in 2000?

Business models change as the industry and costs change. BF is not doing anything that most other publishers have already moved to several years ago and to be honest imo their pricing is very competitive considering the size of their market.

Bottom line, what they charge for their work is their call, What your willing to pay is yours. Any other discussion is a waste of time.

I was looking for a sensible answer like that. True, times change and developing games is costier than ever. Self-funded companies like Valve and Battlefront are far and between, and more often than not developers have to make compromises in order to match what they can do and what their publishers are aiming for. It's a pity that Battlefront doesn't have similiar software like steam or Greenman gaming's Capsule, or isn't selling in those. It's understandable why thought.

[poesel]

without going into a text book explanation. I do recall that the human mind is programmed to hunt or determine danger by certain instincts. Sight being the largest one used for this. It relies on sight in different ways to determine this, like shape, color and movement and some others. But movement is by far the easiest and most instinctive thing for the human eye to be drawn to.

Your eye is always drawn to movement. In combat, movement is by far the best way to get yourselve spotted. The game just does not have it right at the moment.

You can throw all the other factors out. A tank moving has nothing going for it as to staying hidden other than if the line of sight is totally abstructed and its color if by chance it blends in with the backround.

Where as a tank that was stopped, behind a bocage. has no movement, Until it rotates it barrel. Has no outline since the vegetation should be breaking it up and to a large extent there should be no color problen since it is behind concealment making it much easier for the color to just appear as backround tones.

So in just the example I gave in my last post. There is no way a panther moving up on a enemy unit in a open field should be able to get the jump on the sherman behind the bocage facing and watching said field.

It is against nature. At the moment in the game spotting goes to the side that gets lucky. And what I am saying is. If you can spot the enemy first with another unit, like infantry, then the advantage seems to go your way. I find time and time again. if I know where a enemy unit is and I pull my armor up into place to also have a line of sight, I normally get the spot and shot off first.

The program is not correct to the real world, my opinion, but again, I think the best fix would be to correct what moving units can spot and it would resolve plenty of the problems.

Sorry to quote this fully and +1 to it but it has already slipped to the next page. Should be its own thread IMHO.

AFAIK what BFC does right now is principally ray-tracing: from the eyes of the observer to the AS of the target. This creates sometimes this incredible spotting over half the map through several bushes and whatnot.

To change this to something what slysniper describes is probably not so easy but quite desirable.

[Vanir Ausf B]

I find if I spot the enemy with infantry and then move my armor into place I almost gareentee I will spot and shoot first.

Seems realistic to me. If a friendly tank has been told to expect an enemy unit in a certain spot then it should spot it quickly. But that does not appear to be the case here judging from the posted video.

[Vanir Ausf B]

As for German and US binoculars, here are some opinions from US soldiers:

We deem our general equipment, such as pistols, machine guns, half-tracks, trucks and radios superior to that of the Germans, except in the case of our binoculars.

Our binoculars (all models) are definitely inferior to the Germans' in power and durability.

Our binoculars are no match for the Germans'.

Bincoculars are very important in tank warfare, yet we have seen better, but they weren't ours.

from United States Vs. German Equipment by Isaac D. White

[Tarquelne]

You can throw all the other factors out.

I agree movement is very important. I doubt anyone disputes that. But it's hardly the only determinant. A moving man is far easier to spot than a moving fly, for example. How about a man - or tank - so far away it's about the size of a fly? How about if the revealed portion is that size? How fast is the apparent movement? How much "visual confusion" is there from other things that move, such as foliage given any wind? And then there's tunnel vision, # of eyballs, etc. And the big factor: Time. Sure, the tank will be spotted. But what we're really concerned with "Is it spotted faster than the other guy spots you?" (In the AAR the Sherman spotting and popping the PzIV so quickly strikes me as at least as odd as the Pz not spotting the Sherman.)

So I really don't think you should throw out all the other factors.

I do suspect that the game under-models how much movement influences spotting. And I have no idea if it attempts to directly simulate any of the factors listed above. But I'm pretty sure there should be more to it than "move = spotted"

[slysniper]

I agree movement is very important. I doubt anyone disputes that. But it's hardly the only determinant. A moving man is far easier to spot than a moving fly, for example. How about a man - or tank - so far away it's about the size of a fly? How about if the revealed portion is that size? How fast is the apparent movement? How much "visual confusion" is there from other things that move, such as foliage given any wind? And then there's tunnel vision, # of eyballs, etc. And the big factor: Time. Sure, the tank will be spotted. But what we're really concerned with "Is it spotted faster than the other guy spots you?" (In the AAR the Sherman spotting and popping the PzIV so quickly strikes me as at least as odd as the Pz not spotting the Sherman.)

So I really don't think you should throw out all the other factors.

I do suspect that the game under-models how much movement influences spotting. And I have no idea if it attempts to directly simulate any of the factors listed above. But I'm pretty sure there should be more to it than "move = spotted"

Dont take the comment so literally. What I meant is it far more important of a factor than most of the others. If I had to assign a percentage of how it would impact spotting, movement would likely be 60-70 percent all by itself.

Color is next in most normal situations, but since tanks and troops are not wearing bright yellow or red colors and such, it would be not be as high, so not sure what I would rate next, but I know outline is something that the mind pick ups on very quickly. thus the reason to avoid anything like a crest or ridge where you might reveal part of your outline.

As to some of the comments from others, yes a tank at 1000 meters away could easily be missed as to movement bacause of size and clarity and other terrain that would catch ones attention.

But at 500 meters, it has some decent size and becomes pretty clear as to what you are seeing unless it has something giving it good concealment. At 200 meters, you would have to be blind or dumb to not notice it in real life. even if you only see some of it while in motion.

Just run some test in the game, I have seen tanks pull out in front of tanks on open roads in the game and not get spotted in 10-20 seconds at 200 meter distances.

I like the fact that they have the spotting in the game, I dont think there is a perfect answer for it either, it is a judgement call as to how to represent real life as to what happens. But time and time again. I feel stationary units . which should be the best units as to spotting, seem to not spot things quick enough. And moving units, should be just the opposite of that in that they should hardly be able to spot any new unit unless it is clearly in plain sight and has no concealment, or unless it is moving itself.

Observation was something we had training on constantly as a sniper, so maybe that is why it bothers me so much. But I know my game tactics are totally twisted compared to what I know I would do in real life.

So whenever we get a thread like this one where players start wondering what is wrong with the results. It is my opinion that until they adjust how sighting functions. There is going to continue to be a issue.

I really do not think Shermans have a data problem that is giving them a advantage. I think in general, there is more shermans in play than any other tank in the game, so there is more events with them showing the sighting flaw.

[Paper Tiger]

I really do not think Shermans have a data problem that is giving them a advantage. I think in general, there is more shermans in play than any other tank in the game, so there is more events with them showing the sighting flaw.

True this. I saw Churchills drive into the LoS of a stationary Panther and get off a first shot before the Panther spotted them when testing the 'Going to Church' mission in the Epsom campaign. Apparently, an unbuttoned tank moving in the open has a better chance to spot than an unbuttoned tank parked behind some low bocage because the bocage blocks the LoS of two of that tank's crew. Number of eyeballs spotting is huge in this game. Perhaps that's why we read posts where people complain that their dedicated Tank Hunters can't spot a tank 30m away from time to time. Only four eyes spotting while the tank has ten if it's unbuttoned. What's interesting about the example in the OP is that the two German PzIVs didn't have any bocage, tall or low, in front of them. Yet they came off second, and were killed as a result.

[slysniper]

Also the BigDork game is not a great example of a problem either. from looking at at AAR. It appears to be raining. Rain is one of the best things in the world as to concealing all the things the human eye is in search of. So if a good rain was falling, that tank can be sitting in the open and not be noticed.

There is that factor of, just because you can see it in the game, it does not mean it is designed for the playing pieces to see what you see.

The game would not be too fun if you could only see 100 ft at night when it was a night scenario. Or in the rain , all you could see was falling rain at a 100 meters. The game is designed to play, not to potray every aspect of life real.

We way to often want just that, everything to function just as real life does. Not going to happen. But I can still lobby for the sight programming to improve, cant I

[eltorrente]

I'm currently playing a pbem game as germans and have seen this go both ways.

For the first several turns, I had a Panther getting rounds bounced off it's turret over and over and over, until it FINALLY saw the sherman firing at it from 1200-1300 yards. My Panther was pointed straight at it and it took minutes (luckily I was at such a long range). At the same time, I had another Panther that was pointed in that direction, and he didn't see him firing away for several minutes, also.

In the same game, a Sherman came hunting for me at close range, coming up a hill. I knew he was coming and was backing up to reposition. My Panther was backing up and this time the Sherman simply didn't see him. My Panther saw him, rotated and blew him up and his turret never even moved, though I was basically right in front of him.

[slysniper]

I'm currently playing a pbem game as germans and have seen this go both ways.

For the first several turns, I had a Panther getting rounds bounced off it's turret over and over and over, until it FINALLY saw the sherman firing at it from 1200-1300 yards. My Panther was pointed straight at it and it took minutes (luckily I was at such a long range). At the same time, I had another Panther that was pointed in that direction, and he didn't see him firing away for several minutes, also.

In the same game, a Sherman came hunting for me at close range, coming up a hill. I knew he was coming and was backing up to reposition. My Panther was backing up and this time the Sherman simply didn't see him. My Panther saw him, rotated and blew him up and his turret never even moved, though I was basically right in front of him.

yes, this is very normal in the game as it is presently designed. Very much a luck factor. What I have noticed is two units facing each other even in open terrain have a random time for it to take to spot a enemy unit.

When at extreme distances it normally takes from 30 seconds - to over a minute to get the spot. at 500 meters it might be more like 10 seconds to 30 seconds, once it is 200 meters and closer it can be immediately to about 20 seconds. But there does not appear to be any advantage to either side other than random luck, movement and location of unit does not seem to play enough of a factor, it might be there, but is not realistic enough.

like I have said before, the one factor that does impact it alot seems to be having another unit with eyes on target, then if your unit can communicate with that unit, you have the advantage of getting a quicker spot.

[Baneman]

... Number of eyeballs spotting is huge in this game. Perhaps that's why we read posts where people complain that their dedicated Tank Hunters can't spot a tank 30m away from time to time. Only four eyes spotting while the tank has ten if it's unbuttoned. ...

Maybe there's something in that. I had a Schreck team about 200m away from a Sherman that was blowing hell out of my infantry. Nothing in between, no bushes, trees, etc.

Took them four ( 4 ! ) turns to spot it - by which time it had obliterated 2 or 3 squads and had in fact moved to about 250m away.

It wasn't stationary most of the time, and when it was, it was firing its dirty great big 105.

My whole damn army could see it ( and they were in trees ), the only unit which couldn't was the only one that could have done anything about it

Maybe something could be added to increase spotting chance of units for targets that are moving and/or firing ( generally speaking of vehicles here since they're the ones whose "invisibility" is most crucial ) ie. if a unit is moving/firing, add an extra spotting check/chance for enemy units with LoS.

[slysniper]

The problem is, we are talking about this too late.

Here they are

ready to release the next little generation of programming and it will be back programmed to add to this game and I doubt there is any change to how spotting presently functions.

To get Battlefront to take notice, decide to address and then actually see that feature addressed, seems to take a long time in a world that now sees change so constantly, you just cannot keep up with it in most areas of life anymore. BF could use a little more of that.

But I do have hope that maybe something more has been done to pistols, to tone down their accuracy. (been waiting on that since from shortly after the original release of CMBN. It was many threads of discussions to get them to even take notice. but I know they have at least looked into it.)

[dieseltaylor]

I am waiting on reports of play after V2 to see if they have nailed the most obvious problems before I spend money [$10] or bother with more tests.

[slysniper]

I am waiting on reports of play after V2 to see if they have nailed the most obvious problems before I spend money [$10] or bother with more tests.

Well I am more accepting than that, Even with the flaws, I enjoy the game so much, I have no issues wih paying for their product, even with areas that I love to point out as being flawed.

Now if there was something out there competing with what they are doing, they might lose my bussiness. But really, nothing in recent years has come close to me as for what I want a tactical game to provide.

So i will be more than happy to buy their product as long as it interest me.

They ask a fair price and I get tired of those that try and claim other wise.

Anyone sitting down at a machine has invested the money for the machine and the money to be on line.

I cannot understand where they can complain with the cost for the software of the game if they are using it. lets see. I have spent approx $100.00 dollors for CMBN and its first mod. I probably spend a minimun of 12 hours a week playing this game, so that would be 60 weeks x 12 = 720 hours of entertainment. So at that price it is costing me 14 cents a hour for that entertainment. And no I will not add the machine or internet price since I would need and use them whether I had the game or not.

Now for some , they say they cannot aford it, fixed budget. Easy way to fix that. Get off your chair and go do some work. I think you only have to hold the job for two days before you can get yourself fired and go back to being on fixed income. unless you are in part of the world that abuses you and your labor, for them few souls that might be out there trying to stay in this hobby. I do feel for you, but that is a issue that has nothing to do with this product.