Jump to content

City fighting, what are the isssues??


Recommended Posts

Not 24 hours later I have the opportunity to show screen shots to illustrate my problem of targeting buildings in an urban environment. These are from an ongoing QB I am fighting. This is the second time I have fought on this map - it is a good one.

This is not quite the urban fighting I have been talking about. This is more of a village but it shows the problem.

What I will show is that a tank in the street is unable to target a building whose face is fully in view. There are no obstructions between the tank and the building. To successfully target the building it must move down the street to increase the amount of the building that it can see. Once it can enough of the adjoining side it can magically target the building. You will see that the tank should be able to target the building from all three of the positions I try, not just the last one.

Further I should point out that moving down the street in this context is not a big problem. I own this half of the village! So even the new position is quite safe for the tank. So, while this shows the problem the workaround is easy and safe this time it is not effecting play.

I want to further point out that if this were a more built up area this would be a bigger problem. Because there is space between the target building and its neighbors the tank only has to move a short distance down the street and it is still quite far away. However in a more built up environment there would likely be another building close by and moving that short distance would not allow the tank to see the magic portion of the adjoining wall. This is where the problem would start to effect play. In a fully urban environment tanks have to move too far up to get the shot and then they are no longer safe.

A bit of speculation on my part: I believe the problem is Action Square related. To me it appears that the tank cannot target the building until it can see the centre of the action square. So it is not really an amout of adjoining wall that needs to be seen but the centre of the AS the building is sitting on.

So without further blabbing the screen shots.

First I try to move the tank up from behind the building where I have it hiding. From here I has a clear LOS to the building (trees are turned on). You can see that there is no reason the tank should not be able to target that building.

01BuildingTargetIssuePositionOneNLOS.jpg

Full Size Version

The building next door is can be targeted no problem:

02BuildingTargetIssuePositionOneOtherBuilding.jpg

Full Size Version

I try moving the way point down the street a small amount (camera has not moved). Still no joy.

03BuildingTargetIssuePositionTwoNLOS.jpg

Full Size Version

I try again further down the street, ah sweet satisfaction I can target the building (bug again no camera change for the screen shot).

04BuildingTargetIssuePositionThreeLOS.jpg

Full Size Version

Same third position but camera moved to the new way point.

05BuildingTargetIssueFromPositionThreeLOS.jpg

Full Size Version

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the above screen shots are shrunk for viewing, here are 100% crops from the first way point where the tank should be able to target the building and from the third way point where if finally can. Notice the difference is the amount of adjoining wall that can be seen.

I think all would agree the tank should be able to target that building from either position. Further if the tank does spot the MG team that is in that building it will be able to target the enemy soldiers. And when they duck and can no longer be seen the tank will suddenly no longer be able to target the building.

I my opinion this is something that should be fixed - at some point. If I were a tester I would have logged this as a bug. I realize that this is probably an issue that comes from under lying design decisions so it will not be an easy fix. This is my number one game play issue - I guess I should change my sig now that I have articulated the problem:)

First way point - should be able to target but cannot:

06PositionOneCloseUp.jpg

Third way point - finally can target:

07PositionThreeCloseUp.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vehicles pathfinding in building need to be improved. It's a nightmare in PBEM games.

It's my 1st issue with "city fighting" in CMx2.

Actually that is a really good point. I am not sure specifically what issues he has seen but I have seen problems of vehicles not fitting down streets that the look like they should fit. And even if the game knows that it cannot fit it should tell me. Yeah I realize it does not know instantly but some part of the code figures it out because my vehicles don't go down those streets they go another way.

IMHO this problem is not unique to urban fighting. This is a variation of the problem of no feedback when asking a vehicle to go through an opening in the bocage that is too narrow. Or across a wall it cannot knock down.

BFC I would love to have a way of knowing when this is happening. Ideally feedback at the point of placing way points.

A couple of ideas for the "how" are a broken way point line or ghost buster symbol (like what is used now for showing the vehicle cannot land on that AS). Or alternatively away to ask - for the selected vehicle - please show the route this vehicle will take given the way points I currently have set for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the above screen shots are shrunk for viewing, here are 100% crops from the first way point where the tank should be able to target the building and from the third way point where if finally can. Notice the difference is the amount of adjoining wall that can be seen.

I think all would agree the tank should be able to target that building from either position. Further if the tank does spot the MG team that is in that building it will be able to target the enemy soldiers. And when they duck and can no longer be seen the tank will suddenly no longer be able to target the building.

I my opinion this is something that should be fixed - at some point. If I were a tester I would have logged this as a bug. I realize that this is probably an issue that comes from under lying design decisions so it will not be an easy fix. This is my number one game play issue - I guess I should change my sig now that I have articulated the problem:)

First way point - should be able to target but cannot:

Third way point - finally can target:

This looks to me to be a well known limitation of the AS system, which has been well discussed in the CMSF forum. As I understand it, the tank isn't able to target the building because it doesn't have LOS to the center of the AS from the more oblique angle due to the other buildings. So, I don't think it is a bug as much as an engine limitation. As I recall this is an area fire limitation, if there were units visible in the building the tank would engage them. Of course, I could have this all wrong too...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This looks to me to be a well known limitation of the AS system, which has been well discussed in the CMSF forum. As I understand it, the tank isn't able to target the building because it doesn't have LOS to the center of the AS from the more oblique angle due to the other buildings. So, I don't think it is a bug as much as an engine limitation. As I recall this is an area fire limitation, if there were units visible in the building the tank would engage them. Of course, I could have this all wrong too...

I am not sure I would say it is well known - here at least. You have it right. The tank cannot area fire but can target any enemy that shows itself. I realize it is a design issue. I just think it should be given a high priority to be fixed. More fighting in urban environments means players will run into the issue more often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, SS ! (hmm...) Must...regress...to...childhood.

Buddy

Its One of them motto's I live by "never grow up" you know it - from Peter Pan,

well it works. I was out playing Basketball just the other night, keep in mind, everyone else on the court is 25 or younger, I am now in my 50's and there still a fire in me to not grow up.:cool:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I would like to see added to the TacAI is fear of tanks - especially when the turret starts to turn towards you.

A unit without AT (wrt to the tank) and without pending movement orders and not in a fortification/cover (foxhole, trench, house etc...) that has LOS to a tank and the tank turns toward it (or is already turned) should simply run away. Not always (experience, distance) but more often than now (which is AFAIK never).

Tanks are big and scary and most probably have the attention of any enemies nearby. Seeing the turret turn towards you and you have nothing in your hands to do anything about it - you run away (and/or sh*t in your pants).

Adding this behaviour would IMHO be beneficial in many situations.

What can go wrong?

The tank could turn in your direction but it's actually aiming at someone else -> units run away because they are afraid. That would be terrific! (pun intended)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to see that AAR!!!

OK the video is uploaded. @slysniper made the ideal move. To the left of this position an HGM is covering the main road. The men in this building are covering the right of this building and there is no access to the alley on the left or this building itself from the other street. So he conducted some renovations:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the things I noticed in Ian's pics, and this has always been something that really bothers me, is the way the targeting tool always originates from the units position.

If I want to see if a unit can target something from a way-point then the target line should originate from the way-point, not the position of the unit.

The way targeting works now is just very confusing ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Been reading through this one again and felt there was one area that kind of bothered me. While there have been some very good points and ideas floated in this thread, there is one particular bent in parts of the discussion that I do disagree with. That is the view that some things just can't be explained away as bad luck or just one of those crazy a** things that happen in combat.

What I think sits behind this is not recognizing that battle is friction and friction creates conditions where people do stupid unexpected things as well as amazingly heroic crazy things. What they want is their pixeltruppen to do exactly what they want and to do it correctly every time and do so while also handling unexpected issues that pop up that the player never anticipated. It is exactly the opposite of what a commander in RL would face. I personally do not want that. I want mistakes to happen, I want the unanticipated, I want the variable behavior that some times a guy steps out the doorway and gets drilled when he should have been taking cover. Or maybe the AT guy will sit there in the roadway stupidly reloading when he should be dodging for cover cause maybe he thinks he can do so before he gets gunned down or maybe he is just freaking out and that is all he can think to do. I do not want micro-managed soldiers to do exactly what I want them to do all the time. That isn't a simulation, that is a game. Yes I realize that some of these events are actually due to issues in the game, AS positioning, oddities about buildings and movement etc etc The cause isn't as important as much as knowing I can't control everything.

I know that is not an opinion everyone shares, hell maybe nobody else shares it. I like the ambiguity though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want mistakes to happen, I want the unanticipated, I want the variable behavior that some times a guy steps out the doorway and gets drilled when he should have been taking cover.

As long as he doesn't get drilled EVERY time I'm with you. But there are some situations where it is just that. And that is frustrating.

Please note I said 'some'. City fighting is not perfect, nothing is. It ain't broken either. But it has more room for improvement than other parts of the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is the view that some things just can't be explained away as bad luck or just one of those crazy a** things that happen in combat.

Actually , this is likely the main reason I hardly ever get upset as to what happens in the game. I go along with your thinking. You really should as a player accept the fact that your troops do not always follow orders correctly and that bad things happen. Saw plenty of crazy stuff in RL as to not doing what they were ordered to do and wondering how they came up with the actions they did.

I think in the game, its just looks un-natural as to poor actions troops do at times, so once they get them programmed out of the game, maybe then we can ask them to program in stupid troop actions that should be there and then let the players whine about that. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure I would say it is well known - here at least. You have it right. The tank cannot area fire but can target any enemy that shows itself. I realize it is a design issue. I just think it should be given a high priority to be fixed. More fighting in urban environments means players will run into the issue more often.

When I say well known I guess I mean well discussed... but then I've been on the board for a long time. Anyway, here's something Steve said about it a while back:

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?p=1122492&highlight=action+spot#post1122492

There's some interesting discussion if you are interested.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the things I noticed in Ian's pics, and this has always been something that really bothers me, is the way the targeting tool always originates from the units position.

If I want to see if a unit can target something from a way-point then the target line should originate from the way-point, not the position of the unit.

The way targeting works now is just very confusing ...

One way you can partially work around this is to give the unit you're interested in a "dummy" waypoint where it can target a point of interest, set an area target there, then move the waypoint around. The established target line from the waypoint remains and you can see where it intersects intervening terrain, though there's no "automatic" notification of "LOS/noLOS".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I say well known I guess I mean well discussed... but then I've been on the board for a long time. Anyway, here's something Steve said about it a while back:

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?p=1122492&highlight=action+spot#post1122492

There's some interesting discussion if you are interested.

Thank you very much for that link. I understood that it was an Action Square visibility issue - and due to the design. Steve's post was very informative about what is going on and the issues with making changes to resolve it.

He even called out the reason players do not run into it often (and why I think players might hit it more once market garden comes out)

So while this problem exists for all terrain, it generally isn't noticeable outside of fairly dense urban areas.

I am glad to see that BFC understands the issue and have been working towards making things better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

one particular bent in parts of the discussion that I do disagree with. That is the view that some things just can't be explained away as bad luck or just one of those crazy a** things that happen in combat.

...

I want mistakes to happen, I want the unanticipated, I want the variable behavior that some times a guy steps out the doorway and gets drilled when he should have been taking cover.

...

I know that is not an opinion everyone shares, hell maybe nobody else shares it. I like the ambiguity though.

I am with you on this for sure. That chaos is makes this game so much fun to watch. I would not want to change any of that. Those moments where the last few guys in a squad surrender, except one who ends up saving the day. Those are great moments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
On ‎3‎/‎11‎/‎2013 at 0:51 AM, JasonC said:

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.

People dying one after another as they line up to go through a door.... that is a game breaker for me in regards to city fights.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FYI, download the Stalingrad MOD Instructions and Design notes at CMMODs III. Those issues are not resolved but discussed. Net Net. You will not get FPS fidelity in tactics. Split your squads during urban combat, remember buildings draw fire,  and if possible "best played H2H". 

Kevin

http://cmmodsiii.greenasjade.net/?p=4282&

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The total and utter inability of the AI to properly retreat. It's an issue in fighting outside cities as well, but since you tend to have longer ranges and more lines of fire, it's not that big of an issue. But in city fighting, the way the AI retreats, to the first best square not under fire, makes damn near every contested building into something akin to flushing out fanatical suicidal Japanese from a cave on Iwo Jima. They never actually retreat, all they do is move right outside the building, facing into it, launching a vicious ambush when you go after them, but at the almost immediate expense of their own lives. If that's how actual city fighting had been done, Zhukov would not need have bothered encircling the German armies at Stalingrad, they'd all already have been killed down to a man, or have failed to take the city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, kevinkin said:

FYI, download the Stalingrad MOD Instructions and Design notes at CMMODs III. Those issues are not resolved but discussed. Net Net. You will not get FPS fidelity in tactics. Split your squads during urban combat, remember buildings draw fire,  and if possible "best played H2H". 

Kevin

http://cmmodsiii.greenasjade.net/?p=4282&

Thanks for the link @kevinkin.  I found the section on Urban Tactics 101 interesting.  In the interest of sparking further tactical discussion I Copied and pasted Urban Tactics 101 below.  Hope you don't mind.

Urban Tactics 101 (very brief tips)

SETUP AND MOVEMENT

·        Attacking buildings is costly in men and ammo. Check your starting squad’s headcount and ammo load – it might not be 100% to reflect the "on-going attrition and supply situation" per the scenario design.

·        Select building sections and levels carefully. You will need to capture sections of buildings that are objectives and suppress or capture building sections that might stop your progress. Wandering around the map will be inefficient. Before setting-up and plotting your first move, check the key buildings for “open” windows i.e. fire ports / apertures.  Check to determine if the adjacent levels will allow internal movement via internal doors. Remember in urban combat your troops may be vulnerable from 360 degrees so plan your movements carefully and try and keep troops in mutually supporting movements or an urban version of over watch. Read the briefings AND design notes. They may contain information specific to the MOD and scenario e.g. descriptions of the “floor plans” for key buildings and perhaps best approach routes.

·        Urban combat may require a bit more up front planning than fighting on more open terrain. Those checks may seem tedious but they are key to completing the mission successfully. Some scenarios may give you time to feel your way into the battle. Others may have tight mission requirements. You might use a simple hand drawn map to remind yourself of the city layout and building floor plans. Try to use a phase line approach to cover the battlefield in the allotted mission time. Be careful not to set-up in areas that are “dead ends” e.g. back alleys with tall walls and building sections with no doors! Lack of windows and doors reflect the original construction, battle damage and enemy “sand bagging” the structure for defense. As scenarios proceed from September through the winter, expect more defensive works, fewer available troops and ammo.

·        Scouting is important.  One well executed ambush can wipe out a lot of troops in an urban environment.  You may want to split large squads to provide more fire and maneuver units and scouting forces.  Better to lose 3-4 guys to a hidden MG than a whole squad.

·        Here is a very simple attack sequence that would strike part of a phase line.

 

SUPRESSSION

·        Suppression is KEY to successful movement and taking urban objectives.  Try to pinned down any sources of fire that will interdict your movement in the open toward the objective building. Use MGs and SMGs to their maximum effect.

·        Use "TARGET LIGHT" during suppression to save ammo if needed. If you do not have an identified target, consider using AREA fire. It may take several one minute turns to be able to safely move out toward the objective building.

·        If you have units providing covering fire, you do not need the assault squad to provide its own covering fire. So, you may want to avoid the ASSAULT command for that squad whereby it divides into two sections. Try to estimate the minimum force needed to finally eliminate the suppressed enemy. You may need just a split squad.

·        Weapons

Use direct fire HE (75mm or better) and ATGs if available. AFVs will be in short supply in many scenarios. You don't have to knock down the objective building. Get the enemy into a poor morale state as soon as possible. Mortars do not count as effective HE. These high-trajectory weapons are better suited against light wooden structures, trenches or wooded areas When using smoke, make sure the timing is planned and accounts for wind drift. Off map artillery can be effective against building objectives. Just realize that it is less accurate than direct fire and needs time to call in and adjust. Breach teams and flame throwers can be deadly. But they are slow to position so plan their deployment carefully. Note: the game does not directly model gun elevation. BFC has adjusted tank guns so that if the target is outside of the gun's normal elevation limits firing times are increased simulating finding a position to fire on a difficult target. 

GETTING TO THE OBJECTIVE

·        While suppression fire is ongoing: quick or fast move to the base of the objective near a door. If the distance is short and you have time, slow move instead of running. In large buildings, if you have breaching capabilities available, you might be able to use satchel charges to either move within the building or blast your opponent on the opposite wall.  Always remember you are vulnerable from 360 degrees while out in the open. Use rubble, folds in the ground, as well as buildings to provide cover and concealment on the otherwise barren landscape.

 

·        Minefields and Wire on the battlefield. For active, non-marked mine fields, this is a red sign with a skull and crossbones, saying "Danger Mines".  A marked minefield has its sign changed to off-white.  A known neutralized mine field (all mines detonated) has a green sign with a white X on it. Marking a minefield substantially reduces the chance of triggering a mine for infantry traversing the minefield. Although antitank minefields can be marked, marking them appears to have no effect, since infantry can traverse them without risk in any case and vehicles don't benefit from marking. Minefields can be neutralized by heavy artillery (150mm+), if it scores a direct hit. Minefields can be neutralized by a blast from a demo charge, although due to the game's limitations, a blast can only be performed if there is some “blastable” obstacle (such as wire) in the action spot. Anti-personnel mine explosions damage a vehicle's tracks or wheels.  No other system on any vehicle is affected. Vehicles have varying levels of damage that their tracks/wheels can withstand before they are immobilized.

 

·        As missions move from September into the colder months, mines and wire will become more common. Wire can be removed with the blast command. A tricky enemy may allow you to clear a path but withhold fire until your men try to move through the breach. Achtung!

 

ASSAULTING BUILDINGS

While moving the suppression fire up or down level by level, assault the objective.  Use the ASSAULT command instead of the MOVE or QUICK command.  It might also be worthwhile to break squads into teams using the SPLIT SQUAD command to make smaller groups that could assault a building from multiple directions while providing suppressing fire. This offers the player the most control. Target the adjacent rooms once you get a foothold in the building. Some players like to assault from upper levels down when possible. Try to estimate the minimum force needed to finally eliminate the suppressed enemy. You may need just a split squad. The supersession-assault cycle takes time! Once you captured the objective spread out. Avoid having an entire squad a small level “room” which can be subjected to ambush type fire. That will ruin your day.

 

Edited by MOS:96B2P
Changed the font
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No problem at all. I hope folks with CMRT will give the Stalingrad MOD a kick in the tires. There is a thread over in RT just for that discussion. Since no one knows when CM will officially arrive at the hallowed battlefield, it's the next best thing. And the more feedback the better.

Kevin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...