Annoying, unbelievable tank spotting

[sypox]

If we knew more about how situational awareness is modelled in the game, we could probably better understand what happend.

As seen on the pictures we have a tank platoon facing away from the camera (and the at team). If infantry supported their flanks and rear, the platoon leader would probably not spend time to scan other directions and not passing targets to his gunner. I wouldnt say what happend is unrealistic, I dont have the whole picture and I certainly dont know how the game handle situational awareness.

[invernomuto]

If we knew more about how situational awareness is modelled in the game, we could probably better understand what happend.

As seen on the pictures we have a tank platoon facing away from the camera (and the at team). If infantry supported their flanks and rear, the platoon leader would probably not spend time to scan other directions and not passing targets to his gunner. I wouldnt say what happend is unrealistic, I dont have the whole picture and I certainly dont know how the game handle situational awareness.

I totally agree. We can spend hours talking about spotting problem or similar, but the truth is that we DO NOT KNOW how the Combat Mission engine models spotting and situational awareness.

It could be a bug or working as designed by the programmers (maybe a nearby friendly unit warned the TC or in CM tanks have a small chance to spot the enemy 360° even if buttoned, who knows?).

As a player I would like to have more detailed information from the game: spotting (which unit is spotting the enemy ones), mm of armour penetrated, etc. If this goes agains FOW, give us a "verbose" mode or a log file...

The more information, the better, IMVHO.

Bye.

[sypox]

As a player I would like to have more detailed information from the game: spotting (which unit is spotting the enemy ones), mm of armour penetrated, etc. If this goes agains FOW, give us a "verbose" mode or a log file...

The more information, the better, IMVHO.

Information is for sure a tool to better understand the big picture, but somewhere the game will transform into milsim Im afraid, which probably actract a minor audience.

Im more into getting info on how the game reacts to situations like in this thread. Sure you can preform tests to build an understanding of how the game can be played, but will not end the discussion of "feature or flaw??".

[Erwin]

"As a player I would like to have more detailed information from the game..." Unlikely since there is a possibility that items have been abstracted and fudged and that would mitigate against CM2 being an "accurate" simulation.

[JasonC]

invernomoto - um, if the behavior of Sherman tanks spotting infantry 150 yards behind them while actively firing to their front is "as designed", then the design is broken. It certainly isn't a feature, even if someone intended it, because it fails to reflect *reality*. Nobody is saying the incident was the result of a memory mistake in the execution, that is not what we mean by a "bug" in this context. We mean "it shouldn't do that, however you programmed it, because it is unbelievable and nonsense and would never actually happen".

[akd]

would never actually happen".

Please prove this.

[Lanzfeld]

At some point logic has to step in.

The event would most likely happen maybe 1% of the time IRL. <----a guess but come on...buttoned tank fighting forward during combat sees a 2 man team 150 meters at their 7 o'clock?

The problem is that too many people have had this happen to them in the game so maybe it is 50% of the time. Maybe 30%. Maybe 70%

The point is it happens way more often in the game than IRL.

[JasonC]

akd - I know what the specific tasks of the men inside the tank are in that situation, and what their field of view is. The gunner is looking through his periscope sight, which has a very narrow field of view right around what he is firing at - which is to his front. The driver has a narrow field of view to his front, as does the MG gunner / radio operator next to him. The loader has no external field of view at all.

That leaves the tank commander as the only one with any chance of looking in that direction. And his job in that situation is to scan the forward field of view, without a magnified optic, to spot the next target for his gunner.

If he is unbuttoned his view is much less obstructed and wider, but still to the front 180 degrees of his head and concentrated in the front 30 degrees or so around where he swivels it. He is unlikely to expose himself farther than he needs to to scan the potential targets to his front.

If buttoned, he has separate and relatively narrow vision ports, but the same job - to find the next target for his gunner. He is not going to do that by looking to the 7 o clock position every 2 seconds. Nor will he want to crank the turret around just to have a look. Doing so would expose the side and rear armor of the turret to the known enemy ahead - last thing he wants to do.

Tanks spot too well in present CM. Everyone with a pulse knows it. Stop making excuses and help the designers improve the game.

[JasonC]

For those who don't know, look at this video and specifically the shot at 2:27-28 on the tape, and again at 3:17.

It shows the vision ports around the commander's station, from below and inside the tank.

Next watch this one, from 10-15 second mark, to see the forward view out of one such vision port.

Now tell me again that 2 men 150 yards away at the seven clock position are going to be picked up in seconds, while the tank is fully engaged and firing in the other direction.

[Chops]

I have also been observing this uncanny ability of AFV's to spot since the CMx2 engine was rolled out, starting with CM: Shock Force. This has been present in every iteration of the game up to the latest game CM: Gustav Line.

This problem affects gameplay negatively and needs to be fixed. However, I imagine that it is a very difficult thing to fix, hence the reason it has not been corrected so far.

[akd]

akd - I know what the specific tasks of the men inside the tank are in that situation, and what their field of view is. The gunner is looking through his periscope sight, which has a very narrow field of view right around what he is firing at - which is to his front. The driver has a narrow field of view to his front, as does the MG gunner / radio operator next to him. The loader has no external field of view at all.

That leaves the tank commander as the only one with any chance of looking in that direction. And his job in that situation is to scan the forward field of view, without a magnified optic, to spot the next target for his gunner.

If he is unbuttoned his view is much less obstructed and wider, but still to the front 180 degrees of his head and concentrated in the front 30 degrees or so around where he swivels it. He is unlikely to expose himself farther than he needs to to scan the potential targets to his front.

If buttoned, he has separate and relatively narrow vision ports, but the same job - to find the next target for his gunner. He is not going to do that by looking to the 7 o clock position every 2 seconds. Nor will he want to crank the turret around just to have a look. Doing so would expose the side and rear armor of the turret to the known enemy ahead - last thing he wants to do.

Tanks spot too well in present CM. Everyone with a pulse knows it. Stop making excuses and help the designers improve the game.

The task of the TC is to maintain situational awareness. Your claim that the commander would always and only search for targets within a narrow field of view in relation to the gunner's current or recent target is without any support other than your own opinion. Feel free to support your opinion, otherwise it is just that.

Note I am not commenting on the actual probability in game because it is unknown (to us), but I agree it is probably far too high. However, your comments are an excellent example of unconstructive contributions that are useless to improving the game. The probability for something that is possible will not be set to zero just because some players want certainty in outcomes.

[John Kettler]

JasonC,

"Fly" eye? Bravo! full marks! Describing the utterly unrealistic spotting situation which generated the thread as "not a feature" was spot on, but I'd take the metaphor further by observing, "But it is a benefit--to the player owning the Sherman!" If you've read my stuff in the Operation Bagration thread on actual tank FOV and attendant interactions with weapon depression (not requiring psychotropics, save for the close assaulting PBI!), you'd know that I've pushed hard to get this whole ugly, ridiculous and blatantly ahistorical and impossible situation ironed out, only to get nowhere fast, despite my best efforts.

Of course, it probably didn't help that I'd annoyed BFC earlier with my crusade on sorting out the M10 "under the hood" antitank round issues in CMGL!

Regards,

John Kettler

[BletchleyGeek]

If buttoned, he has separate and relatively narrow vision ports, but the same job - to find the next target for his gunner. He is not going to do that by looking to the 7 o clock position every 2 seconds. Nor will he want to crank the turret around just to have a look. Doing so would expose the side and rear armor of the turret to the known enemy ahead - last thing he wants to do.

Tanks spot too well in present CM. Everyone with a pulse knows it. Stop making excuses and help the designers improve the game.

And anyone looking close enough on the screenshot will easily appreciate that the tanks are all buttoned, and engaged to their front.

@OP: I'd please urge you to open up a ticket under the General Support category here

http://www.battlefront.com/helpdesk/index.php

providing a more circumspect explanation with links to the images and the movie replay, indicating the timing of the event.

I think that's SO much more effective than bringing these issues to the forums. Really.

[JasonC]

"an excellent example of unconstructive contributions"

Have you ever done anything to improve this game, or anything else? Certainly not here.

That aside, we do not require your permission to see and know the truth. Get off your high horse.

[ridethe415]

@OP: I'd please urge you to open up a ticket under the General Support category...providing a more circumspect explanation with links to the images and the movie replay, indicating the timing of the event.

Too much work. And if it were an issue to BFC, they'd fix it.

I think that's SO much more effective than bringing these issues to the forums. Really.

I merely presented something I thought unrealistic. Effectiveness is relative. Really.

[76mm]

The task of the TC is to maintain situational awareness. Your claim that the commander would always and only search for targets within a narrow field of view in relation to the gunner's current or recent target is without any support other than your own opinion. Feel free to support your opinion, otherwise it is just that.

First, you are misrepresenting JasonC's position, he is NOT saying that TC's always and only look to the front--their attention is focused on the front, even if they glance to the rear every now and then.

I am a former TC (M1A1, Desert Storm), and I can tell you that if you are engaging tanks to the front, that's where your attention will be focused. Sure, the TC's job is to maintain situational awareness, but that doesn't mean that he is going to do a 360 survey with binos every several seconds while engaging enemy tanks to the front.

[Oddball_E8]

First, you are misrepresenting JasonC's position, he is NOT saying that TC's always and only look to the front--their attention is focused on the front, even if they glance to the rear every now and then.

I am a former TC (M1A1, Desert Storm), and I can tell you that if you are engaging tanks to the front, that's where your attention will be focused. Sure, the TC's job is to maintain situational awareness, but that doesn't mean that he is going to do a 360 survey with binos every several seconds while engaging enemy tanks to the front.

They were engaging infantry to the front. Not tanks.

[akd]

First, you are misrepresenting JasonC's position, he is NOT saying that TC's always and only look to the front--their attention is focused on the front, even if they glance to the rear every now and then.

No, he in fact stated that spotting infantry to rear/side while engaging infantry to the front would never happen. An occasional glance to the rear suggests an occasional chance to spot. My point is that it is a question of probability and highly subjective.

I am a former TC (M1A1, Desert Storm), and I can tell you that if you are engaging tanks to the front, that's where your attention will be focused. Sure, the TC's job is to maintain situational awareness, but that doesn't mean that he is going to do a 360 survey with binos every several seconds while engaging enemy tanks to the front.

First, thanks for your service. Second, that is how the game works. Spotting probability is weighted heavily to the current facing.

[womble]

The problem is that too many people have had this happen to them in the game so maybe it is 50% of the time. Maybe 30%. Maybe 70%

Actually, the problem is that no one knows how often this happens, relative to the opportunity for it to happen. It seems like it happens too often, but that may just be down to the fact that when it happens it gets noticed. The problem might just be that infantry gets behind tanks so often that the "1%" (which is almost certainly more than that in game, I have no idea how much more than that it would be IRL) seems to occur 9 times out of 10.

One of the problems, beyond not knowing what's going on "under the hood", with commenting on a specific situation is that we don't even know all the factors which we could see. What's the experience level of the crew in question? What's the exact situation out front and in the tank (has the TC just finished a thorough scan of the threat environment in the forward arc and left his guns to deal with some pesky infantry while he refreshes his peripheral situational awareness?)

It's a pretty target-rich environment and lethal gunner that has the TC required to chain spot for the next target without a break for ungluing his target fixation.

I'm not saying anything is perfect, but pointing out that deciding whether to fix something is a more complicated process than simply leaping to our every whim. BFC still exist to make money, they're a small outfit (still) and there seems to be great demand for "noo stuff", especially Ostfront stuff, even with the engine at its current state of development. That demand for the new is even getting in the way of the CMFI patch to make GL and non-GL upgraded versions work together. Spending the testing and development time on improving the edge cases of tank spotting isn't going to be high on the priority list until people stop buying (and clamouring for) the new stuff. At some point, it may be that the weight of "not good enoughs" becomes sufficient drag on sales that a remedial patch will become the most important dev project, but we're a lonnnng way from that, I reckon.

Yes, it affects gameplay. But it should only really be an advantage for the AI or the outclassed human player, and a minor one, at that.

[poesel]

Spotting probability is weighted heavily to the current facing.

It is weighted but heavily? Not IMO. I tested this a while back. It was not very thorough and there are a lot of parameters which are not taken into account in the setup.

Take a look here:

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1385985&postcount=28

Number of tanks/infantry spotted to the side/rear are less than to the front. But IMHO the effect should be much stronger.

This is for a tank which is not attacked.

[stikkypixie]

First, thanks for your service. Second, that is how the game works. Spotting probability is weighted heavily to the current facing.

That may be true, but I think the point is that the probability should change during shooting to reflect that the crew is focused on something. Much like being suppressed. Unless of course this what you meant

[Childress]

I tested this a while back. It was not very thorough and there are a lot of parameters which are not taken into account in the setup.

Number of tanks/infantry spotted to the side/rear are less than to the front. But IMHO the effect should be much stronger.

This is for a tank which is not attacked.

There appears to be zero cover for the inf units in your test.

[agusto]

invernomoto - um, if the behavior of Sherman tanks spotting infantry 150 yards behind them while actively firing to their front is "as designed", then the design is broken. It certainly isn't a feature, even if someone intended it, because it fails to reflect *reality*. Nobody is saying the incident was the result of a memory mistake in the execution, that is not what we mean by a "bug" in this context. We mean "it shouldn't do that, however you programmed it, because it is unbelievable and nonsense and would never actually happen".

I believe (well, or lets say i guess) that in CM that there is a certain propability expressed in % for each direction that defines how likely it is that a TC spots something coming from that direction (things like distance and camouflagte are factored in too, of course, but are irrelevant for this discussion). That makes it possible that sometimes a TC spots a target that is in a position relative to the tank where it would be unlikely that the tank would spot it IRL. There are no virtual "eyes" looking through the persicopes.

IIRC someone somtime even tested how tank spotting works. I dont have the link right now, but IIRC the result was that there is always a certain probabilty a tank spots something behind him, independent of what the tank is doing - although it is much more likely that targets to the front are spotted, of course.

[poesel]

There appears to be zero cover for the inf units in your test.

Yes, correct. The test was not about the quality of spotting but about the quantity wrt direction. Giving (the same) cover to all infantry units would yield less spots/minute but the result would be the same.

IIRC someone somtime even tested how tank spotting works. I dont have the link right now, but IIRC the result was that there is always a certain probabilty a tank spots something behind him, independent of what the tank is doing - although it is much more likely that targets to the front are spotted, of course.

I think that was me. See link above.

One thing I find especially interesting. I reduced (ahem) the 5 men crew of the tank to 4 which gave nearly the same spotting results - a bit slower but same pattern. Reducing them to 3 made the tank suddenly blind to the back. Unfortunately with 3 men they refuse to open up...

So I guess CM puts one pair of eyes on each side as long as it can which means it can spot in all directions if you have >=4 men. I have never sat in a tank so I don't know if that makes sense or not.

[Redwolf]

One day this CMx2 problem will just pop disappear just like the MG one.