Jump to content

Return of the bocage gap bug in 3.00?


Recommended Posts

I am playing a hard fought H2H of 'The Sheriff of Oosterbeek' and I am continually encountering the problem of units refusing to use gaps in bocage.

In the most recent example, a unit was positioned behind a section of bocage, right by a gap. There were also gaps to their left and right, in the same section of bocage.

I gave an order to move quickly, directly forward, to the next piece of bocage.

Rather than move forward, through the gap directly in front of them and in the direction that they were facing, they went in the opposite direction, moved off to the right, exited the field and proceeded to move around a house, in the open, to try and get to their destination.

Needless to say, they never made it.

This is happening pretty much all of the time and, especially in a game with a high unit count, having to continually micro-manage movement through gaps is a thankless chore. Not to mention the delay incurred in having to create multiple way points.

I have also encountered units failing to use the back/front doors of houses to go through them, instead going around the house on the outside.

I have had a lot of unnecessary casualties as a result of this bug which, it appears, has returned with Ver. 3.00, having been eliminated previously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have also encountered units failing to use the back/front doors of houses to go through them, instead going around the house on the outside.

I witnessed the same behaviour too on various occasions. Chalked it up to some pb with the underlying map ("closed back door") but it may well be an old bug showing its ugly head again...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just curious, did you plot a waypoint on the other side of the bocage gap they were directly in front of?

Have never experienced this problem as I pretty much always put a waypoint right in front of a gap and immediately on the other side.

Also, there are gaps in the hedge that look like they are traversable, but are actually not. Good map designers put a mud tile or somesuch on a real gap so one can more easily tell which ones are traversable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen vehicles go to drive around a bocage instead of through the gap when I didn't plot their movement specifically to, and through the gap. In other words if I just click to the opposite side of the gap from where the vehicle currently is - and don't take some care giving it a route to follow - the 'crew' chooses to go around sometimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These are the positions prior to given orders.

The squad was ordered to move directly forward, on quick, to where the HQ is and the HQ was ordered to move directly forward to the next bocage.

Bocage%20gap%202%2050%25.jpg

Bocage%20gap%203%2050%25.jpg

Both the squad and the HQ ignore the gaps and take routes to the right and around the bocage the long way.

Bocage%20gap%205%2050%25.jpg

Bocage%20gap%204%2050%25.jpg

I have save game files, if required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IIRC the old bocage gap bug was different. It involved vehicles not going through large gaps blasted by demo charges.

I'm looking into this but am having trouble finding that spot on the map. However, just from eyeballing it I think you've been fooled by the false gaps that have always been in CMBN. The rule of thumb I have used is that if the gap is only on the lower half of the bocage it is impassible. It needs to be open all the way from top to bottom. Some mapmakers have resorted to placing dirt tiles in passable gaps so you can them apart without getting down to level 1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

James Crowley, I have the same problem on the same map (modified the scenario OB's a bit), and in the same gap you showed, plus quite a few other places. But the problematic gaps are are located mostly on small, truncated lots.

Yeah hedges and walls when you have those angled sections can actually make a very difficult pathing move for the AI. You sometimes have to get very very specific about movement and that section of that map is really tight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, just from eyeballing it I think you've been fooled by the false gaps that have always been in CMBN. The rule of thumb I have used is that if the gap is only on the lower half of the bocage it is impassible.

To be 100% sure where the "true" gaps are, use Yankeedog's Sure-Fire Gap-Finder Method (Patent Pending):

- Hit ALT + [ a few times to lower detail level to the lowest level.

- Hit "5" to zoom out to view level 5.

- At this detail level and distance, bocage is rendered as a 2-D wall, and gaps are blatantly obvious. "False" gaps do not appear at all. Note them.

- Revert your view and details level to whatever you prefer for gameplay.

I do this at the start of all battles on maps with bocage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Scratch that. It's a bug.

Those gaps are passable. I had no problem with the western one (the one closest in the screenshots). Units will go through the eastern one as long as you plot a waypoint directly on the other side, but if you plot the first waypoint at the next row of bocage and let the TacAI find it's own way it will ignore the gap and take the long way around.

This did not happen in 2.12. I just did the same test on that same spot on the map in my 2.12 install and the team uses the gap without having to be baby sat, so this is a new issue in v2.20/3.0.

I'm sending it to Charles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I have 3.0 and having the same issue as the OP and couple others, but with the 'Task Force Raff' Scenario/Campaign ( only played this one since the upgrade )...I'm playing the U.S and lined my troops on back-side of St' Martins Hedge, placed order to go directly forward to direction of stone bridge that's about 100 yrds or so away, my troops didn't go through the small opening in Hedge, but instead went to the river embarkment opening before moving forward...I didn't have this problem with v2.12

Joe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WHAT !...81mm Mortars can't fire from Foxholes in 3.0...This is getting more & more disconcerting :-(

I have tested this in 3.0 and mortars in foxholes fire normally. If there are some 81mm mortars in foxholes refusing to fire in someone's 3.0 game it's not because they are in foxholes, at least not entirely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not want to hijack this thread but this mortar bug is real! just try it by yourself: Take a flat map some foxholes and 81mm mortars. Then give them an area target outside the minimum range and you will notice that the crew will get stuck in "moving" and not fire!

Edit: Did some more tests and got different results - sometimes the 81mm had no problems to fire sometimes the crew refused to fire. The first time I noticed this "bug" when my brother was complaining that his 81mm mortar in a foxhole ignores his area-target. He then moved the crew outside the foxhole and it started to fire.

I did a quick test afterwards and got the same results. Now with my second test the mortar fires in some directions but in some it still refuses to fire.

So after some more tests it seems that once the mortar fires once it can fire in all directions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not want to hijack this thread but this mortar bug is real! just try it by yourself: Take a flat map some foxholes and 81mm mortars. Then give them an area target outside the minimum range and you will notice that the crew will get stuck in "moving" and not fire!

That is exactly what I have done, with US and German mortars, direct and indirect fire.

If you have a saved game that shows this, post a Dropbox link to it and I'll try it.

P.S. Are you and your brother on PC or Mac?

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...