Armour - Last Known Location Fire

[WynnterGreen]

Currently infantry units will continue to fire for a short period of time on the last known enemy location when direct line of sight is lost.

This is good and logical.

I'd like to see something similar instituted for Armour.

On quite a few occasions I've witnessed a gunner make a good hit on a enemy tank, the loader does his job, the gunner is aiming the next round when smoke popped by the still stationary opposing vehicle briefly obscures the silhouette.

Half a second from firing at an obvious and dialed in target, the gunner immediately stands down and waits to get positive line of site again, giving the panicked crew opposite time to recover and reverse away.

I'd like to see tanks fire a speculative round through the last known location of enemy vehicles in this kind of situation.

The same is true of tanks engaging infantry in buildings.

As soon as contact is lost, quite often due to dust and smoke being thrown up by impacting rounds, tankers will disengage and give the enemy a chance to get away when another round of HE on the last known location followed by several bursts of MG is probably more appropriate.

[A co]

Seems a good idea. It might make the AI a bit more effective opponent as well, since it never deliberately does area fire after losing a contact. "Out of sight, out of mind."

[Holman]

I think historical SOP was to pop smoke and then displace, so firing into the last known location would be a bad bet.

[WynnterGreen]

SOP for the tank making the hit, or SOP for the tank being hit?

You do realize what I'm talking about is an AI bracket of something probably less than five seconds???

Why would you pop smoke and displace when you're the tank that's made the hit and just about to squeeze off another round into a target you've got dialed in?

The issue here is the gunner standing down and not firing at a known target in a known position seconds after smoke, or some other miscellaneous factor intervenes, rather than firing where the tank was 2 seconds ago.

[Michael Emrys]

I can see a case being made that would go either way. For instance, in the case of low main gun ammo and still a lot of time left in the battle, a gunner might not want to waste a round on speculative fire. But in other situations and with lots of ammo, the gunner might feel that the shot was worth taking. The problem is, how do you program the AI to make that kind of judgement call? It might not be as straightforward as it at first appears.

Michael

[WynnterGreen]

Again we're talking about very short, but crucial brackets of time, with relatively low volumes of fire.

It's about an AI routine for Amour that currently makes a snap decision not to fire the moment obscuration happens, rather than firing where the enemy obviously is.

[Erwin]

WG has a point. Many times smoke obscuring a target causes immediate loss of targeting whether it's infantry or vehicles and the target is a few meters away. A randomized (say) 1-5 second extension of fire at the obscured target would make sense.

[Hister]

I support this idea and shouldn't be too hard for devs to implement. Any betas here who could relay the message to them?

[Holman]

SOP for the tank making the hit, or SOP for the tank being hit?

You do realize what I'm talking about is an AI bracket of something probably less than five seconds???

Why would you pop smoke and displace when you're the tank that's made the hit and just about to squeeze off another round into a target you've got dialed in?

The issue here is the gunner standing down and not firing at a known target in a known position seconds after smoke, or some other miscellaneous factor intervenes, rather than firing where the tank was 2 seconds ago.

I'm talking about the tank that has been hit (or almost hit) and pops smoke.

SOP would be for the tank to pop the smoke and move (usually backing up) immediately, vacating the spot where the enemy knows him to be. Otherwise there's no point to using smoke at all, as it obviously provides zero cover. A good enemy gunner might be able to fire off another round in five or ten seconds, but an average tank driver can pull out in less time than that.

The AI not firing at the now-obscured last-known location reflects the gunner's assumption that, since the target popped smoke, he has displaced and is no longer in that location.

[bobo]

I'm talking about the tank that has been hit (or almost hit) and pops smoke.

SOP would be for the tank to pop the smoke and move (usually backing up) immediately, vacating the spot where the enemy knows him to be. Otherwise there's no point to using smoke at all, as it obviously provides zero cover. A good enemy gunner might be able to fire off another round in five or ten seconds, but an average tank driver can pull out in less time than that.

The AI not firing at the now-obscured last-known location reflects the gunner's assumption that, since the target popped smoke, he has displaced and is no longer in that location.

I agree with this explanation.

Not sure that I see a problem with current approach. WG, do you have a test case and can you repeat it? It would be helpful for the discussion and might point out an area of improvement or it might not.

I would be concerned about wasting precious tank rounds when the gunner isn't sure of his target. Especially on the eastern front.

Bobo

[Warts 'n' all]

I think that we all get annoyed if our troops stop firing the split second their target becomes obscured. We just happen to forget those occasions when the enemy do the same thing.

[DavidFields]

I think the OP suggestion is excellent.

Think of the Fog of War situation now with tanks continuing to fire at AFVs, not knowing that they are already Knocked Out. The OP suggestion would not be much different, and also would be, I think, realistic.

As a gunner, why would you stop firing when an enemy tank pops smoke?--for a few seconds you know almost exactly where the enemy tank is--the tank is where the smoke is. You also know the enemy tank is in trouble, and may be somewhat panicked. Thus an excellent target. And with WW2 tanks being less nimble than there modern counterparts, getting those gears engaged and grinding into reverse was no small matter. A 1-5 second delay in losing spotting would make smoke seem less like a magical shield.

My guess, though, is that this is more difficult to code than we might suspect, or it would otherwise already be done. This goes to the idea of the AI, and Tac-AI being programmed to sort-of-knowing where the enemy is when it loses spotting, and acting on that. It is probably somewhat balancing that the AI and the Tac-AI have the same weakness in that area, with the human player being having the advantage of being able to override the Tac-AI and at least order area fire (though we are not allowed to specifically target the smoke, or a specific forest area, for example--probably it would give the human player too much of an advantage over the AI?).

[WynnterGreen]

A 1-5 second delay in losing spotting would make smoke seem less like a magical shield.

Yes.... this is the nub of the problem.

I'm sorry I entertained the discussion re SOP.

It's not the issue, and has nothing to do with the AI behaviour I'm trying to address at all.

Nor does whether it's 'happening to them or me' have anything to do with it.

It's a matter of realistic AI behaviour.

The issue is tanks, specifically gunners, ceasing their AI routine and not taking a shot [unrealistically] due to the fact that they stop a progression from aiming to firing the instant the 'magic shield' of smoke or dust obscures the target.

There should be a window, albeit brief, where the gunner can safely assume the target is still in the area where the smoke is and engage through it.

At the moment this isn't the case.

The same is true of targets in buildings. The gunner should have a short window where engagement continues rather than stop firing due to smoke and, or, the target unit cowering.

What I'd like to see is, like infantry, the gunner given the ability as part of the AI routine to target the last known position of the enemy prior to obscuration or loss of contact.

I'll set up a test range and trying to recreate the situation I'm describing.

[A Canadian Cat]

+1 for that