I Hope This Is a Bug and Not a Dumb Design Decision

[Pak40]

But more interesting still I think is a bit about the Sherman gunner having an additional periscope for general vision whereas the Panther gunner only had a narrow view telescopic gun sight.

As a result, it took the Panther gunner about 20 to 30 seconds to engage after instructed by the commander, whereas the Sherman engagement cycle was considerably quicker.

20 to 30 seconds - that's almost half a turn - would seem like an age if you were watching thinking - why doesn't he shoot?

Hmm. It seems the general convention is that the Germans has superior optics. I *think* that I remember reading a post from a long time ago regarding CMx1 giving a slight edge to the Germans because of the optics. I'm not sure if this refers to just spotting in general or gunner accuracy, or both.

Anyway, according to what you're saying is that spotting(or at least the time it takes the gunner to find the target) should be quicker for the Shermans.

I wonder how CMBN handles this? Is spotting handled by actual crew members, relayed to the gunner, and then the gunner has to actually located the target himself before firing? Anyone cares to chime in?

[c3k]

The gyro was NOT meant for in-motion firing.

Without getting into the large difference in sights between Allied and German gunsights (they had significantly different approaches), the Allied gunsights relied on gunner judgment for "holdover". When repositioning, with slightly different ground slopes at the two positions, the holdover would be totally lost. Totally. Lost. The ENTIRE ranging in process would have to be started from scratch. (Basically. Purists will note that the initial guesstimate would still be close.) The gyro would obviate that need. It kept the gun "ranged" to the previous shot, regardless of where the tank moved. It was NOT meant to compensate for in-motion dynamics.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Yeah, it does make one wonder what effect the gyro actually has in-game, if any. In the CMx1 games it was modeled by giving equipped tanks a small in-motion accuracy bonus, hence my test.

[Amizaur]

I'll try to make tomorrow test with tanks actually moving vs stationary and paused. Only about 50 shots to get general idea of that is going on - not precise statistically meaning results.

About the Panther gunner having no 1x periscope and resulting long target aquision times - well, I would think that Germans developed some kind of crew communication / training / tactic to use a tank with such set of observation devices effectively. Such layout was worse than in Sherman, but probably Germans get used to this, trained to get best of it - some kind of good coordination between commander and gunner - because they were using Panthers quite effectively. But only well trained and experienced crews were really effective.

Maybe Germans would be even more effective if the gunner had a periscope - in some cases and situations (like close quarter battles) Panther was at big disadvantage against Shermans, but generally Germans were not doing bad with it .

It's possible that allied tankers testing the Panther tried to use it in a way they used american tanks, they way they trained and were used to. It didn't work too well and it took the gunner 20-30 seconds to acquire the target and take the shot. If there was a trained veteran German crew instead, maybe they would acquire the target and take the shot in 10 seconds. If they trained it for a month or so, and developed a way to use it effectively - they would be quicker.

On the other hand, an inexperienced and poorly trained crew - like Germans had at the end of the war - would be not good, they could be as slow as the "test" crews - 20-30s - or even slower.

Inexperienced and/or poorly trained crews would be much more effective in Sherman, than in Panther.

The conclusion would be, that Panther needed very good crew communication and coordination so the commander could quickly and effectively guide the gunner to the target. Only well trained and experienced crews could fight effectively in Panther. Germans had such crews in 1941-1943 so maybe they didn't notice much problem with observation devices, tanks were effective anyway. But they didn't have much experienced (and trained) crews in 1944-45.... Some improvements were planned for late German tanks (like periscopic sights replacing telescopic sights, and maybe observation periscopes) but they didn't see production lines.

In the Sherman, the gunner could more easily locate and acquire targets on it's own, it didn't need so much help from the commander.

[sfhand]

The results of my testing...

10 firing lanes each with an M4 Sherman shooting at a Tiger from 1000m.

First round, no pause, 18 misses and 17 hits.

Second round, no misses, all hits.

Third round (add indefinite pause) no misses, all hits.

2nd test, same conditions except I start all Shermans with indefinite pause.

First round, 19 misses and 11 hits.

Second round, didn't happen because of the pattern observed.

The pattern observed is that once the Shermans acquired a firing solution they didn't miss regardless of pause. The difference in the number of hits in the first round of each test is the result of the time each tank took to acquire its target and get its first shot off, once they acquired their target they took nearly the same amount of ranging shots to acquire a firing solution (18 vs 19).

My testing does not reveal a problem or a need for me to test further.

[Vanir Ausf B]

The pattern observed is that once the Shermans acquired a firing solution they didn't miss regardless of pause. The difference in the number of hits in the first round of each test is the result of the time each tank took to acquire its target and get its first shot off, once they acquired their target they took nearly the same amount of ranging shots to acquire a firing solution (18 vs 19).

My testing does not reveal a problem or a need for me to test further.

Are you adding a pause PLUS a movement order or just a pause? The pause order by itself does nothing. It's the combination with a movement order that causes the problem.

[sfhand]

Ah... back to it then.

[sfhand]

Okay, same everything except a hunt order was added to the Shermans with an indefinite pause. 22 misses in total before every shot is a hit, the big difference seems to me to be in spotting rather than accuracy. I'm going to try with a fast move order next (since hunt cancels the move order once the enemy is spotted).

[Vanir Ausf B]

(since hunt cancels the move order once the enemy is spotted).

Well, yeah

Sherman 75 vs Panther A 500m. 5 v 5

Turn 1 No orders

Hits: 14

Misses: 5

Turn 2 No orders

Hits: 27

Misses: 0

Turn 3 indefinite Pause + Move added

Hits: 12

Misses: 13

[sfhand]

Everything the same in the setup except a fast move order is added to the pause. This is definitely problematic, in terms of spotting, shot frequency - gunner takes longer to aim, and keeping a firing solution that works (shots miss after hits).

[JasonC]

If this part is already all resolved, pardon the late intrusion in this already long thread...

Reading some posts in the first half dozen pages, I get the impression that some here don't quite get why shots on the move are realistically so impossible. I offer my eyewitness testimony from spending a fair amount of time (in younger days) bucking around in the back of a SP artillery piece changing position.

It is not a matter of changing range estimates. Terrain is not flat, and tracked vehicles cross it with a certain shall we say hearty robustness rather than nimble finesse. Even seated, you are hanging on for dear life to not get thrown around the vehicle interior. Take your 4x4 down the roughest washboard dirt road you can find at 30 mph, and after retrieving your missing kidneys you will have some slight appreciation. For greater realism, stand up in the back of a pickup truck and move about trying to accomplish mundane tasks, shifting bits of the load here and there.

Now for the real fun. Get a pair of binoculars and stare out the left front, off the direction of motion but not at 90 degrees to it. No fair looking at the horizon. Instead, try to say track a rabbit running in brush off to that side. Use 7x power binocs. If you don't get seasick, more power to you, but you won't keep sight of your fluffy little friend. For extra fun, have a buddy occasionally smack the binocs straight back into your eyes with an open hand, to simulate what happens to a gunner with face pressed to his sight when the track hits a nice sized root or rock.

This complete chaos stops instantly when the track does. Granted, the track itself does not stop instantly. Granted, you may sway one last time for half a second. But you get off the crazy carnival ride, the terrain through the glass stops doing an LSD dance, objects stand still... Just little things, you know, like that. Which you get not for being stock still for 20 minutes or having long relationship intentions with that piece of real estate, but simply because the track isn't kicking you all over creation every 2 seconds anymore,

I hope that helps...

[Steiner14]

JasonC,

very good description.

[SlowMotion]

That JasonC's "track a rabbit at left front" is one case which I think should be a pretty difficult target. Now in the game we can get first shot kills from similar situation.

A tank moves downhill at least Quick speed and at left there is a static tank maybe 300m away. The static tank misses with main gun, but the moving tank kills with first shot.

[c3k]

Hell, in the part of country I'm in, all you do is hop in the bed of your buddy's pickup with your favorite scoped rifle and have him cut through fields while you shoot at roadsigns. You miss. Well, you miss the signs. I've got NO idea where those bullets eventually end up. Funny thing is, without the movement, I hit those signs every time.

(All the above in jest. Kind of.)

Ken

[fatehunter]

Now here is a realistic description of what is being simulated.

Soviet tanks fired on the move for the 'scare' factor. If they hit something, great.

My father spent time in Indochina with the 2e REP, (strangely enough, willingly) and he recounted the volume of fired laid down just to keep enemy heads down with little likelihood of actually hitting something. But it keeps their head down while your outfit moves.

Thanks JasonC

[SlowMotion]

Still about that rabbit case: Have you noticed what happens when you have given your tank a rotating order (like move to a waypoint and then face some direction) and while doing that face command the tank spots an enemy target? The tank hull starts turning slowly, then turret tries to turn towards target faster than hull, hull rotates more, turret no longer points to correct direction so it rotates again and so on. This hull turns, turret turns continues until hull is pointing to right direction. Usually only after this the turret manages to turn to correct direction so it can actually shoot and hit target.

IMO this is closer to what I'd think should happen when a tank spots a target while moving.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Yes, I've noticed that. You get a similar effect when the TacAI tries to rotate the hull towards a new target. The turret gets "dragged" off target by the rotating hull and has to repeatedly re-orient onto the target.

But if you stop the hull from rotating with a move+pause order (I wonder if a pause order by itself would work here? I will check) you can run into other strangeness if you give a covered arc. If the tank acquires a target near the center of the arc where its turret is already facing all is fine. But if the target is much off the center of the arc the turret will turn to the target, fire, then turn back to the center of the arc while reloading, then turn back to the target, fire, turn back to the center of the arc, ect.

[agusto]

Still about that rabbit case: Have you noticed what happens when you have given your tank a rotating order (like move to a waypoint and then face some direction) and while doing that face command the tank spots an enemy target? The tank hull starts turning slowly, then turret tries to turn towards target faster than hull, hull rotates more, turret no longer points to correct direction so it rotates again and so on. This hull turns, turret turns continues until hull is pointing to right direction. Usually only after this the turret manages to turn to correct direction so it can actually shoot and hit target.

IMO this is closer to what I'd think should happen when a tank spots a target while moving.

Probably this problem is there because the engine was initially developed for modern era shock force. All tanks there are easily able to track and hit the target during hull rotations, except maybe the T-55 and early T-62 that a player will never use anyways (these two are the only ones who dont have targeting subsystems but only a gyrostabilizer, if i remeber correctly).

[SlowMotion]

Agusto: agree. Even though patches have improved things, in some ways CMBN tanks are still more like modern tanks than WW2 tanks that were operated by human crews manually without computers.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Sorry to bump up an old thread, but does any one know if this will be fixed in the next patch? It was fixed in the last CMFI patch released with Gustov but it is strangely not fixed in CMBN 2.10.

[akd]

Sorry to bump up an old thread, but does any one know if this will be fixed in the next patch? It was fixed in the last CMFI patch released with Gustov but it is strangely not fixed in CMBN 2.10.

It is supposed to be resolved for the patch. If you want to post your CMBN test scenario and procedure, a tester might be able to double-check.

[Vanir Ausf B]

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/eb29rftquo7e84o/JSi0mfsbLR/Paused%20Movement%20Accuracy.btt

"Paused Movement Accuracy" is the scenario file.

I ran this in hotseat mode, iron difficulty.

1) Unbutton the Stuarts for quicker spotting.

2) Give the Tigers short covered arcs so they don't shoot back.

3) Let it run for a turn or two until all of the Stuarts have scored at least one hit. You'll notice that after that, accuracy on following shots is at or near 100%.

4) After letting the accuracy firm up for a turn or two give the Stuarts a move order directly forward, but also give them an indefinite pause so that they never move. I used Fast but it seems to work with any move order.

5) Note how accuracy suddenly drops to below 50% and stays there until the movement orders are deleted, at which point accuracy shoots back up to 100%.

[weapon2010]

Vanir

Does the reverse apply as well?The targeted tank that has a fast move plotted with a 1:15 pause and is not actualy moving, is that tank now extremely hard to hit because the ai thinks it is moving fast?

[Vanir Ausf B]

That is an interesting question, but I have no idea. I have never tested what effect target movement has on accuracy under any circumstance. I'm curious about it, but I think that type of test would be very time consuming.

[womble]

Vanir

Does the reverse apply as well?The targeted tank that has a fast move plotted with a 1:15 pause and is not actualy moving, is that tank now extremely hard to hit because the ai thinks it is moving fast?

That would depend on whether the "aiming AI" leads the moving target deliberately, and if it does, how it determines the degree of aim-off to apply.