how to load soldiers onto vehicles?

[ChappyCanuck]

Obviously I am doing something wrong, or the display of soldiers on vehicles is different? I have tried to load soldiers onto tanks, etc, and they just lie on the ground beside the vehicle. Help?

[Michael Emrys]

At this stage of the evolution of the game code troops cannot mount or ride tanks. Hopefully by the release of Bagration sometime next year, this will be included.

Michael

[ChappyCanuck]

that is a surprise, since it was so common in WW2...no wonder it wasn't working for me. Thanks Michael

[YankeeDog]

that is a surprise, since it was so common in WW2...no wonder it wasn't working for me. Thanks Michael

The reasons AIUI are twofold:

(1) Creating code that to realistically and properly model when and how soldiers ride on tanks is really f'n hard. Embarking on a tank is not like hopping onto the back of a flatbed truck. It's not necessarily to embark on a tank, especially with a full combat load (the deck of a tank is about 6' in the air). And a soldier could easily break an ankle on the jump down as well if not done with care and preparation. Nor is it necessarily an easy thing to stay on the tank if, say, the tank comes under fire and has to maneuver sharply, rotate the turret, and/or fire the main gun. And the animations for all this would be a b*tch, too.

(2) While riding on tanks was something done throughout the war by infantry on all sides, it probably wasn't all that common when in close contact with the enemy. Up high on the back of a a tank is a really exposed place to be under any level of incoming fire. Even the Soviet specialist tankodesantniki were trained to jump off the tank at the first sign of incoming fire (hence the name, which means "Tank diver" in Russian).

So BFC decided to hold off on modeling tank riding for now. But I think it is on "the list" somewhere.

All this said, I am looking forward to having tank riding in the game someday. Once it's in, I think players will discover they actually don't use it all that often, but especially for larger scenarios, the ability to shift e.g., a reserve infantry platoon on the backs of tanks would useful sometimes.

[ChappyCanuck]

Unless BFC is trying to be graphically stunning, I am not sure why they would omit this - it worked fine by me in the first edition games. Having infantry ride tanks is extremely useful for tactical mobility around the battlefield. Obviously they wouldn't ride into a set piece defensive zone, but getting there and/or exploiting a breakthrough was something I used quite often. In real life, I remember my own infantry company/platoons riding Canadian Leopards...what a smooth ride compared to our APC's at the time. We used rope netting to tie our gear onto the rear deck of the tanks and to hang on for the ride. Sweet memories.

[YankeeDog]

I suspect it's more the technical model issues that are slowing BFC down on this than the graphical representation issues.

For example, what happens if a tank on the move with infantry on board spots an AT threat, like an AT gun? If the crew immediately rotates the turret to engage, they may sweep some of the friendly infantry off the tank, potentially injuring or even killing them. Or, does the tank crew stop the tank, shout at the infantry to get off, and wait to engage until the infantry are clear? If so, how long does this process take?

How does having infantry on board affect a tank's spotting ability? Assuming the tank is unbuttoned, you could argue that the infantry on-board effectively gives the tank extra sets of eyes for spotting. But on the negative side, for a buttoned tank, the infantry might actually block some of the tank's viewports.

And what about speed? How fast can a tank safely go without risking pitching off infantry passengers on a severe bump or sharp turn? On a flat road, there would probably be no substantial effect on speed. But what about across rough ground?

Which weapons of the tank can fire with infantry riding?

Should infantry on the back of a tank be able to fire their personal weapons? If so, under what conditions and restrictions? All weapons or just lighter weapons like rifles and SMGs?

How many men can ride on a tank? Is this affected at all by their weapons loadout (i.e., does a larger weapon like a mortar or HMG take up a "passenger slot")? This probably needs to be determined on a case-by-case basis for each AFV.

Things have come a long way since CMx1, and many things that could be handled by a generic abstraction in CMx1 are now fairly complex in CMx2. CMx1's Larry, Moe and Curly kneeling on the engine deck of a tank and then magically teleporting to adjacent to the tank when they disembark ain't gonna cut it for CMx2.

As I said, I am looking forward to having tank riding back in the game as well, but it's easy to see why it's not a simple thing, and they can't just toss together a few tank riding animations and leave it at that. Better to wait and get it right.

[ChappyCanuck]

I personally think that many of the questions you pose go far beyond what a CM game brings to the fold. I want my infantry to be able to ride tanks to a battle and I don't care if Private Jones twists an ankle while jumping off or the turret traverse is impeded. Just make it a non issue. I really don't care if the troops missed their "bully beef" issue either. There is detail, and then there is detail. But I don't think that just omitting a battlefield function that was fairly common practice was the way to go and I hope this gets "fixed". Riding trucks or riding tanks...it isn't that difficult to simulate.

[Vanir Ausf B]

BFC has already said tank riding will be in the East front game. Whether or not it will subsequently be put into previously released games I don't know. Tank riding while in contact with the enemy was not as common in western Europe as it was in the east.

[Holman]

BFC has already said tank riding will be in the East front game. Whether or not it will subsequently be put into previously released games I don't know. Tank riding while in contact with the enemy was not as common in western Europe as it was in the east.

I've read a lot about the Western Front over the decades, and I can only recall one or two instances where American troops were described riding tanks within range of enemy fire. Infantry would ride tanks on roads when they had the chance (who wants to march?), but that's outside the scale of a CM battle.

[Childress]

I personally think that many of the questions you pose go far beyond what a CM game brings to the fold... Riding trucks or riding tanks...it isn't that difficult to simulate.

Doing things half-*ssed isn't the way of CM2. There are many details to sort out and BF is just as perfectionist as you. YankeeDog, who'd no doubt love to have tank riders, made some telling points. We're more likely to see refinements in, say, ATG crew animations. Which could use some improvement.

[YankeeDog]

Riding trucks or riding tanks...it isn't that difficult to simulate.

I don't know. I'm not a programmer or a game developer by trade, so I'm just going by what Steve has said on the boards previously regarding this issue.

But I am pretty sure that if BFC got a dollar every time someone stated on these boards that their pet missing game feature "isn't that difficult to simulate" and should be added to the game stat, BFC would have enough money to hire away EA Games' entire programming staff.

And then BFC probably would have the resources to add all of our pet desired missing features to the game.

[ChappyCanuck]

Vanir - great to hear they are bringing it back...hopefully they put into the previous games too.

[ChappyCanuck]

hardly a pet game feature...and if they can figure out how many seconds it takes to deploy a 60mm mortar I am sure they can handle this

[YankeeDog]

...and if they can figure out how many seconds it takes to deploy a 60mm mortar I am sure they can handle this

Wait... what? You think grabbing the relevant TM off the shelf and looking up the training standard for how long it's supposed to take a 60mm mortar to set up their weapon is an equivalent task to building the code and animations that will model a group of men embarking on a Sherman deck, riding around the battlefield, and getting off elsewhere, under any and all possible conditions?

Sure. And if I can build a simple radio from one of those kits they sell at Radio Shack, I am sure I can also handle designing and building my own smartphone from scratch...

[ChappyCanuck]

you are really blowing this out of proportion...it's soldiers on tanks....and it should be a feature...and it will be soon...over and out

[ZPB II]

He is not blowing it out of proportion. This has been discussed countless times and the answer has always been along the lines of it being a lot harder to code than many people believe and not being that important in the West.

It has everything to do with opportunity costs, as everything in development, business and life in general. No opinion will change this fact of life.

CMx2 is a high-fidelity simulation so as such as "it's soldiers on tanks" isn't all that helpful. Soldiers in trucks need only a sitting animation and the disembark/embark animation and the truck doesn't have any weapons system nor does it fill the same battlefield function as an AFV. The TacAI involved is different. A truck under fire will start evading instead of fighting back. Synchronizing the TacAI of the infantry and tank is, I believe, the crucial part. How many players will complain when a Sherman loaded with infantry crossing an open field takes fire from a Tiger and instead of completing it's dash across to safety it stops to let the infantry disembark and gets taken out? How many players will complain when that Sherman keeps moving into an artillery barrage that wipes out the entire squad without stopping to let them disembark to avoid imminent danger? How many players will complain when a Sherman stops to shoot at the Tiger and the infantry doesn't disembark but instead wait for the tank duel to go on? The only thing I know is that I have intense respect for da man coding the TacAI. He has to come up with so much problem solving logic that it blows my brain. Charles rocks.

Do I want to see infantry riding tanks? Yes.

Do I want to see other features suffer so a feature that really isn't that important gets done first? Not really. (important as in didn't really happen in the West, AFAIK tank riding was something that happened on long marches, not in actual combat that the game simulates)

I hope it gets implemented some day, just like fire and Space Lobsters. I rode on Leopard 2A4s back in those mandatory military service days and all I can comment is that I hope infantry riding on tanks suffer some degree of fatigue while doing it, especially if the tank is moving fast. They should not be resting when they are holding on for dear life.

[ChappyCanuck]

My thanks to the developers for bringing this ability back to the game

[Holman]

Perhaps the most realistic modeling would allow units to *start* embarked on tanks but not to get back on them during the battle. After all, even Russian tank infantry dove off and then fought dismounted after the initial assault.

I can't imagine circumstances under which Americans would climb onto a tank when incoming fire was likely. In fact, American infantry generally understood tanks to be big targets that drew too much enemy attention. Climbing up onto the exposed deck of one during battle would have seemed like the height of folly.

Audie Murphy excepted, of course.

[YankeeDog]

Audie Murphy excepted, of course.

This brings up an interesting side issue which is how and when infantry should be allowed to actually use weapons from the back of a tank; not just their personal weapons, but also in some cases the tank's weapons.

Some U.S. AFVs especially had a flex mount .50 or .30 BMG that could only be effectively used against ground targets by someone standing on the rear deck -- the Audie Murphy incident is an example of this with the M10 TD, but other AFVs, including some models of Shermans, also had this feature. This actually wasn't that bad a fighting position as long as the incoming fire was only coming from the front, as the body of the turret provided good cover (from direct fire, at least).

Sometimes the Tank Commander or another crew member would get out of the turret and man this MG, but I have also read of infantrymen "riding shotgun" on a tank to man the flex-mount MG, while the actual tank crew stayed in the turret.

In the PTO, it was apparently fairly common practice to put 2 infantrymen on the rear deck of a tank when advancing through dense terrain -- one to man the flex mount MG, and another with a BAR or other automatic weapon. The idea was that the tank gunner would cover the forward sector, the one infantryman would cover a flank with the flex mount, and the other would cover the the other flank with the BAR. This was to guard against suicide rushes against the tank where Japs carrying explosives would try to dive under the tank and blow themselves up.

Sometimes, the PTO fighting makes the ETO seem like a pleasant game of chess...

Be interesting to see if CMx2 ever gets refined enough to model this kind of stuff. I'm certainly not expecting it anytime soon, but it would be fun to have someday...

[db_zero]

I'm waiting for the day when infantry can use the little phone thingy that was mounted in the rear of the tank that allowed them to communicate with the tank crew.

[YankeeDog]

I'm waiting for the day when infantry can use the little phone thingy that was mounted in the rear of the tank that allowed them to communicate with the tank crew.

Overall, this type of device doesn't seem to have been very common in the ETO. If BFC ever gets around to modeling Okinawa and Iwo Jima, though, this type of device would be much more common.

It's a little hard to tell exactly how common such devices were because some tanks definitely jury-rigged them. I have also read of tankers wiring up an SCR-536 radio inside the tank so that they could talk to nearby infantry wirelessly.

But overall, even late-war, I think externally mounted intercoms on tanks would be rare at best in the ETO.

[Erwin]

I hope to see animation of the Brit tankers stopping to brew tea in the middle of battle. ():