Vehicles on Hide = questionable

[Childress]

I've posted on this subject in other threads but decided, despite the lack of groggy credentials, to start a topic. What's the purpose of the Hide command, particularly for tanks? What's going on? The driver presumably cuts off the engine. But there's no penalty for restarting; a lengthy procedure in most WW2 tanks. And turret traverse? T-34s had an electrical traverse but the German hydraulic systems were directly dependent on engine speed. But there's appears to be no target acquisition penalty for turreted AFVs on Hide. Or Tank destroyers or assault guns for that matter; they must be at least at idle. So what does one infer from the Hide command?

Why, therefore, shouldn't the player issue a Hide command to every vehicle at the end of every turn? In the same way you'd issue a Deploy command to a Weapons team at the last way point when the Deploy bug was in force? You have nothing to lose.

One questions whether the Hide for vehicles command should even exist if it implies the absence of engine power. That's a very limiting and perilous state for an armored vehicle when action is imminent. Perhaps if AFVs simply enjoyed a camo bonus similar to AT guns if they haven't moved since turn 1?

[womble]

The only way I think it works is if tank drivers, by default, sit there revving their engines like boy racers at the lights, and the Hide command represents the TC squelching the juvenile "vroom vroom"ing... But I don't think they did, and in general have to agree: the Hide command makes little sense for AFVs as-is.

[Childress]

...the Hide command makes little sense for AFVs as-is.

Right. Unless a BF rep chimes in with an plausible explanation. We could be missing something.

In the meantime, I think I'm the first poster to request the simple 'abolition' of a feature. :cool:

[Vanir Ausf B]

IIRC correctly the manual states that vehicles under a Hide command have a spotting penalty. If that is true the command is worse than useless.

[Sublime]

Though vehicles on hide I believe do not present a sound signature to enemy troops.

[John Kettler]

Childress,

Here's what the CMBN manual says about Spotting. Note that acoustic signature is included in the Spotting calculations.

"Spotting is computed for each unit individually, and is not only based on actual lines of sight, but includes many other factors such as: what the spotter and target are doing (facing does matter!), the equipment they have available (scopes, binoculars etc.), skill levels, visibility based on climatic effects and the time of day, even sounds (units can “hear” nearby enemies!) and so forth."

Under Hide, it says vehicles will try to keep a low noise profile.

"Vehicles - vehicles will hold fire and not move, trying to keep a low noise profile."

There's a lot of difference, both acoustically and visually, between an AFV at idle and one with its engine revving. Here's a StuG IV. I believe you'll find the difference considerable.

But for a more extreme case, look and listen at the same drill for a (so help me) Flammpanzer III! I feel safe to assert the Spotting difference would be even more marked.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ks6NNRX_B0w

Panther signature differentials (visually and acoustically) are enormous.

The same holds true of this Sherman, though it seems to have the cleanest exhaust in tankdom. I suspect a recent engine rebuild.

Also, AFV crews HATE turning off the engine! Why? The engine may not restart, a disaster in combat. Even if it does, the resulting snorting and gouts of smoke are quite likely to betray the AFV's position. Engine startup is distinctive, smoky and loud.

Hope this helps.

Regards,

John Kettler

[sburke]

Instructor from US Army Armor school demonstrating correct behavior for "hiding" in an Armored vehicle.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ao9CEYsSIa0/TVJ9-0KwDZI/AAAAAAAAAPk/SxeWSyABX-k/s1600/bag-on-head.jpg

[MikeyD]

Its been a very long time indeed since I've tested this but I believe 'hide' command for vehicles has a certain small benefit when there is airpower circling overhead.

[Childress]

Its been a very long time indeed since I've tested this but I believe 'hide' command for vehicles has a certain small benefit when there is airpower circling overhead.

In the middle of an open field? No cover?

[Childress]

Under Hide, it says vehicles will try to keep a low noise profile.

"Vehicles - vehicles will hold fire and not move, trying to keep a low noise profile."

There's a lot of difference, both acoustically and visually, between an AFV at idle and one with its engine revving. Here's a StuG IV. I believe you'll find the difference considerable.

I'm guessing every single AFV in CM sized battle is moving or idling. All the time. You cannot reduce 'idling' to a lower noise profile.

[John Kettler]

Childress,

Idling is the lower noise profile. A unit in position could have significant revs going, but not have the clutch engaged. This would allow for very quick movement if needed, but it would be far from the relative quiet of idle. As noted, too, it's not merely sound volume, but the nature of the sounds produced and the considerable visual telltales from the associated engine smoke.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Childress]

Why on earth would a tank- a defending tank- be revving its engine? It's preparing to leave a covered position? Boys just being boys? You're clutching at straws.

There's no apparent trade-off for not Hiding a tank. It's in the interest of the player to Hide every AFV on the map at turn's end. Whether attacking or defending. On the other hand there exists abundant photographic evidence that show tanks- on both sides- resorted to camouflage. A splash screen in CMBN depicts an Allied tank buried in foliage.

BF could eliminate the Vehicle Hide command (minimal coding) or refine it to plausibility (lots of coding). Either way I believe the game enhances its simulation credentials.

[Holman]

It's worth remembering that your "hiding" tank, even if it's still as loud as rumbling truck, is still less noisy than the other tanks, vehicles, machine guns, and artillery going off elsewhere on the battlefield. Remember too that enemy soldiers might have their ears ringing from the sound of their own weapons, near misses, etc.

It's not hard to see how a tank "keeping a low sound profile" might actually be hard to notice amid the general din. Active battlefields are noisy.

I don't think CM models the effects of background noise like this (so that sound contacts would be more common before the heavy shooting has started), but it's something to remember.

[John Kettler]

Childress,

A defending tank isn't necessarily a static tank. It might indeed be preparing to move to an alternate position, creeping forward from turret defilade, backing out and so forth. All of those actions require that power be applied in order to do so, greatly increasing both the acoustic and visual signatures. It's very easy for a busy player to forget to Hide AFVs, so I think this thread is useful in developing a valuable new habit. This will hold until such time as BFC includes code which limits the conditions under which an AFV may Hide, rather like rules in miniatures covering how long for a warship to turn and how tightly, fighter plane maneuvering and similar. For now, Hide early and often!

Regards,

John Kettler

[Michael Emrys]

For now, Hide early and often!

But why? Has it been demonstrated that Hiding a vehicle has any effect within the game?

Michael

[John Kettler]

Michael Emrys,

Because, as I noted earlier, citing from the CMBN Manual, Spotting is affected by, inter alia, visibility issues and sound, both of which are reduced when a vehicle is using Hide. It therefore seems logical to use Hide to lower the Spotting chance. If it had no effect, why would BFC bother to write text describing what Hide means to vehicles?

Regards,

John Kettler

[Michael Emrys]

...why would BFC bother to write text describing what Hide means to vehicles?

Well I don't know, but there are more than a couple of disjunctions between what the manual says and what actually happens in the game. It appears that the manual was written before the code was finalized and sometimes describes things that were thought at the time to be included, but either never made it into the game or made it in but in a seriously altered form. So my question is, do we have independent confirmation that Hide actually does anything important for vehicles?

Michael

[Childress]

But why? Has it been demonstrated that Hiding a vehicle has any effect within the game?

Michael

The effects are murky. The issue, for me, is that there is no noticeable 'downside' for routinely commanding every single AFV to Hide at the end of every single turn. Unlike, say, ordering a Weapons team to Deploy at the conclusion of a turn: you're sacrificing mobility, and rifle fire for 20 odd seconds. Every quality game should confront the player with well calculated trade-offs, something the CM series normally do exceedingly well. Except, apparently, here.

[Holman]

The effects are murky. The issue, for me, is that there is no noticeable 'downside' for routinely commanding every single AFV to Hide at the end of every single turn. Unlike, say, ordering a Weapons team to Deploy at the conclusion of a turn: you're sacrificing mobility, and rifle fire for 20 odd seconds. Every quality game should confront the player with well calculated trade-offs, something the CM series normally do exceedingly well. Except, apparently, here.

Hide also means "hold fire." If you order a hide, your tanks will politely refuse to shoot at anything they see after they've finished moving.

[Childress]

True, but Cover Arcs will accomplish the same result. And what good is a Hiding tank on defense? I say ditch the HV command and substitute a camouflage bonus* for AFVs that remain stationary from Setup. And it's historical.

*- provided the vehicle is sitting in some kind of cover.

[Vanir Ausf B]

I've often wondered why BFC brought forward that camouflage bonus from CMx1 for AT guns but not for vehicles.

[Childress]

My thoughts as well. Maybe they haven't had time to wrap their massive collective brains around this holdover feature from the nineties. On the other hand it be could be that this command is primarily there for AI use, it in a similar manner to the Assault command (assuming most players split squads). Can a scenario designer even assign Cover Arcs to units? I have no idea.

[womble]

Can a scenario designer even assign Cover Arcs to units? I have no idea.

No. The scenario designer's input does not extend to that level of detail. I'm pretty sure the TacAI has no means of assigning CAs of any description, in the same way as it can't use area fire: it has no predictive ability for what the player will do.

[akd]

Can a scenario designer even assign Cover Arcs to units? I have no idea.

Yes, but not directional.