City fighting, what are the isssues??

[slysniper]

Last week someone made a comment about not wanting to do any city fighting until Bf did some changes in the game system.

I have been thinking about that ever since, wondering what they ***** is so wrong with the game that they would say that.

Yes, I know there is areas that could improve. But I have played a fair amount of city type maps now and find the game play to be more realistic than any other system I have ever played. The one aspect I really like now is the demo. being able to be used as a breaching tools. Every battle I have had them I have manage to surprise the enemy with my direction of approach and gain a important advantage.

So I was thinking, Ok, I know some of the issues, like men not using corner of buildings as cover to look around. Or tanks that have no gun elevation issues, or the magic door or window issue every once in awhile. But to tell you the truth. I cannot remember that last building door issue that has been really bad for awhile, so maybe they have fixed that to some extent. the tanks being able to fire on any building level, yet to affect me much. First , I find that I can hide men in buildings right next to the tank. so if he can spot and fire on me, he deserves to, second, if tanks are in town I find them easy prey for my infantry if they have the weapons needed and the map is not a terrible design. So bring them tanks down my streets.

The building corner, yes, that would be nice, but come on, what other game that is using multiple units in one formation having that type of control, plus really is that a game breaker.

So what is it I am missing here.

I find the city fights very enjoyable, the tactics very challenging and realistic at the moment. what is it that is needed that will just bring this game to a whole other level of improvement that I should not want to play with without it.

[Apocal]

Being able to fortify buildings and knock out loopholes as needed. Obstacles, roablocks, debris from destroyed buildings, etc.

[Nidan1]

The tac ai needs to control teams and squads better in the urban setting.

Sometimes a team member will stand exposed in a doorway or street waiting the rest of his team to catch up, only to be gunned down. I dont know what neeeds to be done to correct group behavior, but in city settings it can be deadly.

[Lanzfeld]

...and of course be able to shoot schrecks, zooks and fausts from inside.

[Ranger33]

...and of course be able to shoot schrecks, zooks and fausts from inside.

This is the biggest thing. There has to be some kind of compromise made. I know there was a thread where someone posted hard data from the US Army post-WW2 showing that the whole concept of blow-back killing/injuring people indoors was exaggerated. I think everyone would be fine with having something like a chance of troops going to "yellow" if in the same room as a zook being fired. Or even a semi-random "deployment" time representing troops opening doors/windows and finding a suitable firing spot. The balance is very, very far in favor of tanks right now:

1)They spot as well, or better than, infantry in urban terrain IME.

2) To get a shot off the soldier must run out in the middle of the street, spot, aim, fire, stand there reloading like a loon, then make a run for it (assuming you timed your movement order correctly, since there is no shoot-and-scoot type of option).

3) Tanks have no restriction on gun elevation, which has been explained as being borderline impossible to implement, and I'm fine with that, but if we are bending reality lets go ahead and make things more fair.

I've been sour on the whole thing ever since a PBEM game where I was facing a Sherman in wrecked town square. I threw down smoke, concealing the whole area, ran a schrek team out into a crater on the tank's flank, as the smoke cleared they sat there staring, unable to see a tank 30m away for almost a minute. Then, of course, the Sherman calmly swung it's turret around and riddled them with bullets.

[JasonC]

Also men in buildings using them properly as cover, by positioning themselves at the back walls or room interior, not the front windows, then keyhole their view outward. And shifting their position inside the room to change their visible picture.

When instead they all stand at the front windows, they draw fire from every point on the compass and die way too fast - that was not the proper way to use a building for cover.

Then there is pathfinding and route bottlenecks created by doors, and the way the tac AI prefers the physically least challenging route instead of the militarily safest one - because it knows precious little about the latter. Leading to such absurdities as every man in a squad walking one by one through the same door covered by enemy fire even after the previous 11 all bought it, and the like.

[poesel]

Also:

- not throwing grenades out of windows (haven't tested but not have seen also: if I'm wrong then change to: not throwing enough grenades out of windows)

- no conditional order for assaulting a tank. A WEGO problem: you order your men out to the street but the tank drives away a few meters. Leaves your men alone on the street only to be gunned down by the tank

- houses that are between two AS: you can either order the troops to be in front or behind but not beside the house

I don't think MOUT is totally broken but, as mentioned above, it is VERY much in favour of the tanks.

[Rokko]

Also, what worries me is that AT teams don't priorizie movement over reloading. So they reload their weapon in plain sight of their target instead of moving as ordered first and then reload.

[slysniper]

I've been sour on the whole thing ever since a PBEM game where I was facing a Sherman in wrecked town square. I threw down smoke, concealing the whole area, ran a schrek team out into a crater on the tank's flank, as the smoke cleared they sat there staring, unable to see a tank 30m away for almost a minute. Then, of course, the Sherman calmly swung it's turret around and riddled them with bullets.

Ok, I have had that type of thing happen also. Smoked a enemy tank, ran two tank teams into the smoke and laid them down behind the tank to get a ass shot when the smoke cleared. Sure enough, they could never see the tank but the tank could see them and wasted both units before I could do anything. I am not sure they have attempted to fix the tank spotting issue but I think they have made it harder for tanks to spot infantry since then.

What I have discovered is, it is better to stay out of smoke and spot into it then it is to try to spot out of smoke which has started to clear. Since I have used that concept, normally I get the spotting advantage when using smoke. Plus that is a more realistic result. Since trying to see out of smoke is much harder than seeing into it in R.l., I really do not know if the game acts this way, but my results in game play seems to indicate their is some advantage for it.

[slysniper]

Also men in buildings using them properly as cover, by positioning themselves at the back walls or room interior, not the front windows, then keyhole their view outward. And shifting their position inside the room to change their visible picture.

When instead they all stand at the front windows, they draw fire from every point on the compass and die way too fast - that was not the proper way to use a building for cover.

Then there is pathfinding and route bottlenecks created by doors, and the way the tac AI prefers the physically least challenging route instead of the militarily safest one - because it knows precious little about the latter. Leading to such absurdities as every man in a squad walking one by one through the same door covered by enemy fire even after the previous 11 all bought it, and the like.

True, likely not easy fixes.

But they have made adjustments to the protection and I can tell you right now. I have poured hundreds to thousands of rounds into buildings with known enemy units and not been able to kill or hurt them at times now. So I know for a fact that in the present game system, I have found myself multiple times having a hard time overcoming a enemy tactical point in a city and that is with me having a commanding firepower advantage. Now with the improved MG factor, I could see a enemy mg in a strong building becoming even harder to dislodge. So the present level is not all bad.

As for path finding, there is a way to go for sure. But I find this issue has much to do with the player and what they are playing.

I never really play vs the AI. so I do not see that stupid level of play much. Second, as I move units through cities. my squads are broken down. I control moves so that men are not standing in the street unless I want them to, any time I am going through a door where there might be enemy contact, I likeky am only sending a two or three man team with cover units if anything opens up on them.

So most of this junk never happens to me, so I dont see it as much of a issue.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Also men in buildings using them properly as cover, by positioning themselves at the back walls or room interior, not the front windows, then keyhole their view outward.

A means of doing this would be great.

And shifting their position inside the room to change their visible picture.

They actually do this already if they are engaging a target. I paid close attention to a 3 man team in a house during a recent game. When an enemy unit appeared to the rear of the house 2 of them ran to the other side to engage while the 3rd stayed to cover the front. I have also noticed that if LOF to a target is only available from one end of a building, men will crowd over on that side to get a shot. This seems to work better if they do not have a covered arc.

[cool breeze]

do infantry throw grenades out of buildings? That's one of the only things about the city fights that bothers me, I cant seem to get em to throw out, which is a pain when I have some guys with grenades in a building right next to an enemy tank but I gotta figure out some way to get so guys by the tank outside the building. The one other thing that comes to mind is it would be really nice if we could area target building where we can only see wall and windows but not closes enough to the center of it or whatever that we can target it. Our ptruppen still shoot anybody they see in these situations, I'd just like it if generally it was easier to get area fire orders onto areas where we can see the guys but not that action spot. Seems most common in cities where you want to area fire a building on the other side of the street but too far down.

[Georgie]

I remember when I was playing the CMBO demo I fired a bazooka out the window of a small wooden house and the house caught on fire. Seemed reasonable. Maybe BF could allow firing zooks and shrecks out of windows but penalize with an occasional fire if the structure is wooden.

[Wodin]

Most likely me. Listen it's not CM's fault. No game yet has managed to really get City fighting down yet. All the issues people mention above (some more important than others) need looking at. We would also need sewer movement aswell.

I think a 2D turn based game or WEGO has a far better chance of getting City fighting right than a 3D game like CM. The more Hi Fi it becomes the more issues arise..esp with spotting and Tac AI behaviour. In a more traditional wargame these things can be more easily sorted out, yet even there we still haven't had a PC game do City fighting right. Squad Battles for instance has no multi level buildings and also has other issues besides that that annoy. With abit of money and some new features or a couple of changes SB could be the ultimate wargame but it isn't going to happen.

Then we have street rubble, fortified buildings etc..but the biggest issue is Tac AI using buildings properly from LOS and cover.

Now Cx2 is far better than CMx1 for town\city fighting...remember those Stalingrad scenarios..boring. To make them exciting really buildings need rooms aswell...special move\attack orders for house clearing (this can be done at the moment but still a touch abstracted due to buildings having no visible rooms)...and an AI that can carry it out.

Anyway City fighting is more exciting in CMX2 than most games..it still needs away to go though. Even in it's current state I still wnat to see how a Stalingrad secanrio plays out..a true test of how it plays with City fighting (we need alot more new buildings though).

Last week someone made a comment about not wanting to do any city fighting until Bf did some changes in the game system.

I have been thinking about that ever since, wondering what they ***** is so wrong with the game that they would say that.

Yes, I know there is areas that could improve. But I have played a fair amount of city type maps now and find the game play to be more realistic than any other system I have ever played. The one aspect I really like now is the demo. being able to be used as a breaching tools. Every battle I have had them I have manage to surprise the enemy with my direction of approach and gain a important advantage.

So I was thinking, Ok, I know some of the issues, like men not using corner of buildings as cover to look around. Or tanks that have no gun elevation issues, or the magic door or window issue every once in awhile. But to tell you the truth. I cannot remember that last building door issue that has been really bad for awhile, so maybe they have fixed that to some extent. the tanks being able to fire on any building level, yet to affect me much. First , I find that I can hide men in buildings right next to the tank. so if he can spot and fire on me, he deserves to, second, if tanks are in town I find them easy prey for my infantry if they have the weapons needed and the map is not a terrible design. So bring them tanks down my streets.

The building corner, yes, that would be nice, but come on, what other game that is using multiple units in one formation having that type of control, plus really is that a game breaker.

So what is it I am missing here.

I find the city fights very enjoyable, the tactics very challenging and realistic at the moment. what is it that is needed that will just bring this game to a whole other level of improvement that I should not want to play with without it.

[A Canadian Cat]

1)They spot as well, or better than, infantry in urban terrain IME.

2) To get a shot off the soldier must run out in the middle of the street, spot, aim, fire, stand there reloading like a loon, then make a run for it (assuming you timed your movement order correctly, since there is no shoot-and-scoot type of option).

Tanks spotting to easily when alone is an issue as well as the whole problem of infantry having to expose them selves fully to get any kind of shot off. Just walk around your city's down town and see all the paces you could hide - OUTSIDE - and use an AT weapon with easy escape routes and nearby additional cover and concealment. This is partly a map design issue as well. Again look at your down town - how many alley ways are there.

- no conditional order for assaulting a tank. A WEGO problem: you order your men out to the street but the tank drives away a few meters. Leaves your men alone on the street only to be gunned down by the tank

I have been burned by this so many times (OK four or five now) where the enemy tank moves even a small amount and ends up too far away for a close assault and then spots my men and takes them all out.

What I would like to see:

- Some kind of close assault command for attacking vehicles that would automatically abort the whole thing if the vehicle speeds off and leaves no chance for my soldiers to catch it and automatically follows if it just moves a slight amount. I would even be OK with it aborting if the vehicle turns and faces their direction of approach.

- Infantry able to effectively peek around corners both for spotting and attacking.

But that brings us to the biggest issue with urban fighting...

[A Canadian Cat]

The biggest problem the attacker faces is their armour support not being able to effectively engage the enemy in a town.

I cannot properly assault a street with armor support because of the problem of not being able to target building fronts down the street. Try this: have a platoon of infantry try to go building to building down a street. Your tank support will be unable to target building fronts sometimes even one door down. That means that as your men are entering a building the tank cannot fire on the building next door or two doors down even though the face of the building is clearly visible. When the enemy ambushes your guys and guns them down the tank will spot them and then magically it will be able to target those enemy troops - in the windows of the very building you could not target the turn before. Hair starts hitting the floor when the tanks spots enemy soldiers in the middle of the turn, shoots at them, and then looses sight of them by the end of the turn. During the next orders phase you cannot target those very same windows again. Which means your tank is useless to try to save you guys who will likely get gunned down next turn too.

I am convinced this is because of the way actions squares are handled - you cannot area fire on a building that you cannot see the centre of its action square. So, on a city street the two buildings next to you block LOS to the centre of the action square of the building two doors down and it blocks the LOS to the centre of the building next to that etc. This means that even though your tank has a clear field of view down the street and should be able to target any one of those building fronts it cannot.

[agusto]

do infantry throw grenades out of buildings?

I ve seen that happen.

[slysniper]

Anyway City fighting is more exciting in CMX2 than most games..it still needs away to go though. Even in it's current state I still wnat to see how a Stalingrad secanrio plays out..a true test of how it plays with City fighting (we need alot more new buildings though).

Actually I am pretty sure it was not you as to the comment that started me thinking about it.

But I am glad you made this statement, I feel the same, would love additional improvements, but dont mind thinking about playing something in its present state.

[slysniper]

The biggest problem the attacker faces is their armour support not being able to effectively engage the enemy in a town.

I cannot properly assault a street with armor support because of the problem of not being able to target building fronts down the street. Try this: have a platoon of infantry try to go building to building down a street. Your tank support will be unable to target building fronts sometimes even one door down. That means that as your men are entering a building the tank cannot fire on the building next door or two doors down even though the face of the building is clearly visible. When the enemy ambushes your guys and guns them down the tank will spot them and then magically it will be able to target those enemy troops - in the windows of the very building you could not target the turn before. Hair starts hitting the floor when the tanks spots enemy soldiers in the middle of the turn, shoots at them, and then looses sight of them by the end of the turn. During the next orders phase you cannot target those very same windows again. Which means your tank is useless to try to save you guys who will likely get gunned down next turn too.

I am convinced this is because of the way actions squares are handled - you cannot area fire on a building that you cannot see the centre of its action square. So, on a city street the two buildings next to you block LOS to the centre of the action square of the building two doors down and it blocks the LOS to the centre of the building next to that etc. This means that even though your tank has a clear field of view down the street and should be able to target any one of those building fronts it cannot.

Now, here is a good point I have not thought about. Yes, this is a pain in the present state and one of the real weaknesses of the game engine as is. It would be nice to see that changed somehow.

I know for me, i have adapted my tactics to just havng to roll my tank right up to the building i want to area fire on and risk being that close to the enemy to do it. In someways, it takes away some of the armor advantages they have in town at the moment anyway, of course having proper infantry support helps this work. But grenades and immobilization from the enemy is very common. So yes, siting back and being able to area fire would aid the armor being even more powerful in town.

[Lanzfeld]

We need a dedicated "throw grenade" command just like the "throw smoke" command.

[fatehunter]

We need a dedicated "throw grenade" command just like the "throw smoke" command.

It looks to me like a lot of the arguments for commands etc are to create management of the tac AI, because players do not like the tac AI behaviour or consider it less than desireable.

I think the way to go is to make a smarter tac AI, not micro-manage it. With improvement the tac AI can become more intuitive so that it satisfies your requests. The last think I want to do it become more bogged down by individual commands. The best would be if I could simply send a squad in a certain direction and they would always do the right thing. That would perhaps take away some of the fun of a well played action but it would definitely become more of a tactical game, as opposed to a 'did I put the orders in the right order and did I give sufficient pause' game.

[slysniper]

It looks to me like a lot of the arguments for commands etc are to create management of the tac AI, because players do not like the tac AI behaviour or consider it less than desireable.

I think the way to go is to make a smarter tac AI, not micro-manage it. With improvement the tac AI can become more intuitive so that it satisfies your requests. The last think I want to do it become more bogged down by individual commands. The best would be if I could simply send a squad in a certain direction and they would always do the right thing. That would perhaps take away some of the fun of a well played action but it would definitely become more of a tactical game, as opposed to a 'did I put the orders in the right order and did I give sufficient pause' game.

Well, you will be glad to know that BF sees it your way, they do try to get the AI to do the small task and want you the player to focus on the larger picture.

The problem is, as the game becomes more complex, that is much harder to do and get it to react realistically. Thus players, start wanting commands that can control or override the AI. Thus in a sence why we keep seeing request for better AI or for more commands. It is likely a area that will never cease to have issues and getting the right balence to keep the game playable is also a issue. There is no questions, Playing CMX2 was less enjoyable at first because of all the added micro managing one must do. But developing the game where it is not needed is even a bigger request which will not likely be adcheived with such limited resources.

[DasMorbo]

Hmmm.

I do not see the issue. Honestly, I have not fought that many house-to-house engagements jet, but never felt it needed an overhaul.

Maybe some players forget that house-to-house fighting has always been awful bloody business. As long as I get only a third of my attacking party greased in taking a certain objective (i.e. the next block) I feel, I did a pretty good job.

About the 'throw-grenade' issue:

My experience is that infantry throws grenades pretty seldom in general. A fail-safe way to get them fragging the places is giving an area target command less than 20 meters away. Always worked for me.

Best regards

Olf

[A Canadian Cat]

Well, you will be glad to know that BF sees it your way, they do try to get the AI to do the small task and want you the player to focus on the larger picture.

Which I think is the right thing.

The problem is, as the game becomes more complex, that is much harder to do and get it to react realistically. Thus players, start wanting commands that can control or override the AI. Thus in a sence why we keep seeing request for better AI or for more commands.

Most of the time when things go off the rails for a squad it is easy to chalk it up to "well bad things happen" after all your opponent is trying to kill your guys. I only get bothered when things go off the rails and I think "damn a real squad leader would never have done that". Yes, I know that leaders make dumb mistakes too. Clearly a crack +2 squad leader will make less than a conscript -2 leader. Frankly I do not feel this happens often - IMHO (clearly from the discussions on this forum many people have a different definition).

I think the disconnect usually comes from an inability to give orders that make human sense. For example, and this has happened to me several times, my enemy has a tank in the street (or a bocage lane) and I have unspotted infantry in the next lane (or in the bocage). The order I would like to give is "sneak up behind that tank and close assault it" or " sneak up behind that tank and use your AT weapon to blow it up". Instead what I have to do is give the squad a series of movement orders along the street to get behind the tank and then through a house and into the street so they are behind the tank where they will blast it. This has worked well. The trouble is that when the turn unfolds if the tank moves even 20m down the road the squad just follows the movement orders and ends up standing alone in the street in full view of the tank. In real life **** can happen and it is true an inexperienced leader might burst out into the street and have an oh **** moment - could happen. The thing is most humans would notice that the tank is not where they expected it to be and skip the part where they run into the street and get killed.

It is likely a area that will never cease to have issues and getting the right balence to keep the game playable is also a issue.

Very True.

[A Canadian Cat]

Maybe some players forget that house-to-house fighting has always been awful bloody business. As long as I get only a third of my attacking party greased in taking a certain objective (i.e. the next block) I feel, I did a pretty good job.

I am not saying that there is something wrong with it being bloody I just think there are a few things that could stand improvement in this area.

Fighting in the woods is really bloody too but I have no concrete complaints specific to fighting in the woods. In fact I quite enjoy those moments where two opposing forces meet and a furious fire fight ensues. Grenades fly all over the place. Enemy units get mixed up in your lines. And both units end up running away from each other. To me it feels real and exciting and frustrating. Just like I want it to.

Frankly it usually feels pretty good everywhere in this game. An amazing accomplishment!