Russian Optics and Spotting in general

[nuzrak]

Before I get into it I’ just want to say this is not a criticism of the game. I’ve been playing this title to the exclusion of all my other CM games since it was released and I am having a blast with the campaigns, the editor and the stock battles against the AI.

There is little doubt that this game series gets better and better with every new build released.

 

But… after playing a number of H2H QB games at the Elite setting as both the US and Russians one thing has begun to stick out very consistently, which is that Russian troops and AFV’s even with the best optics that they can have are performing at a level nothing short of appalling when compared to their US counterparts ability to spot enemy units.

In fact I would say that every game played so far as the Russian’s has gone along the lines of forward AFV’s and Infantry eliminated with little or no idea where the fire was coming from. Gradually sound contacts are established and Russian units are systemically eliminated by the scattered wall of ‘?’'s creeping toward them.

Having Drones up just illuminated how bad the Russian spotting was, showing clearly M1’s and Bradley’s, often blazing away with their cannons, sitting in action squares that unsuppressed Russian units (That included T90AM’s in a couple of instances) had clear LOS to but didn’t even have as much as a sound contact themselves.

 

Now I’ve played CM in every version since CMBO and I’m very aware that even over a number of battles we can sometimes see and convince ourselves of things that are not actually supported when tests are run so…

To make sure I wasn’t just imagining this due to circumstantial bias I went into the editor and set up a small map with a small ridgeline along its center with a scattering of trees and ran a series of very simple manoeuvre tests having Russian troops and AFV’s MOVE and HUNT up onto the ridge in a mix of open and hull down positions and into LOS of US infantry and assorted AFV’s and observed the results.

I then reversed the process and had the US vehicles and infantry do the same thing.

I then ran this test both ways under all of the different weather conditions and light conditions.

In all I run this test both ways about 50 times (the carnage was great, it didn’t take long J).

Now at this stage I would normally provide stats… but frankly there is no need to because what was observed was the following,

In every instance except 9 (that’s correct, just 9 in 100 runs) the US units spotted the Russian’s first and then almost as often simply eliminated the Russian units before the Russian’s could even establish a sound contact. Only twice did the US lose an AFV, surprisingly M1’s both times, to returning fire and never (that’s again correct, never) did the Russian’s ever fire first!

 

Even more interesting was that the US AFV’s and Infantry usually spotted the static Russian’s even faster after moving!

This makes me wonder how the spotting cycle is actually triggered; does it trigger when a unit enters a new action square and if so how often does that coincide with the base cycle for non-moving units? Either way, and I may be way off base as to how the underlying code functions here, but it just seems a little off in CMBS.

 

Anyway, this is becoming a very long post, when all I really want to know is,

 

1)  Is what I’m seeing just an accurate depiction of the technological differences between these nations optics and comms systems as we believe they will function in 2017?

 

Or

 

2) Is there actually an underlying issue in the way spotting is functioning for the different types of tech and does something need to be dialed up or down?

[AttorneyAtWar]

What kinds of Russian vehicles were used in those tests on that custom map?

 

BMP-3 and BMP-3M have drastic differences in optics packages, while BMP-3m has thermals, BMP-3 doesn't. Things like that are extremely important to know before saying anything concrete on this test at least. I learned that BMP thing the hard way...

 

However, over all yes, American forces have the better optics packages across the board, infantry, armor you name it.

Edited March 3, 2015 by Raptorx7

[nuzrak]

There were both BMP-3 and BMP-3M's as well as T90AM's and they all died pretty much the same way having spotted pretty much nothing!

[Stagler]

There were both BMP-3 and BMP-3M's as well as T90AM's and they all died pretty much the same way having spotted pretty much nothing!

 

The BMP-2M is also pretty blind. Abrams drove up to a firing position 200m to the front of my vehicle (granted it was light rain), paused for two seconds then proceeded to destroy it with a frontal sabot shot. BMP-2M didn't spot it at all sadly.

 

Seems to me personally that spotting hasn't changed from CMSF. I wonder if there are any modifiers that we cant see at work.

Edited March 3, 2015 by Stagler

[antaress73]

Use a commander by leaving an infantry leader inside. If only two men in BMP its pretty blind. The commander will use the panoramic sight

[GAZ NZ]

I agree that russian spotting is not working properly.

Ive been playing both sides in PBM and russian spotting is appaling unless you have a drone. Im dominating as a US player as a result.

One map i had 5-7 russian seperate units with binocs not able to see AT jav launchers shooting multiple times.

The javs were coming thru tree canopy to hit my tanks. 20-30 feet in woods i might add.

My russian scout vehicles cannot see much.

I thought my C3 just wasnt working but its setup pretty good for russian units.

My russian guys are spotting units further away in some instances than closer enemy units.

I have considered the opinion of this post and my opponents comments and my own experiences.

Something is wrong.

I appreciate Russian units have less scoped weapons but there recon armor is rubbish for spotting and hqs are not seeing much.

Please fix or somefink?

[c3k]

Look at my AAR vs DMS. Not a test, but I rarely spotted him till he fired.

[Thewood1]

How about putting a video up about it.  Show us what you are seeing.  As far back as CMSF, if you have equal ratings, M1s moving, T90s stationary in woods, the T90s get off first shots almost every time.  But a video or save game can let us all see what the various settings are.

[GAZ NZ]

My game had an M1 , Bradley and a sniper team, jav team

run around corner onto grass section by rd

xxxx us units are here Rt Rt

this is a long road -700 yards to Rts

400 yards

Rt Russian sniper team

RT

My opponent cannot see my Units with RT russian tanks sniper and observer

he is stationary and i have a drone watching his units

i hit his units straight away shooting after moving around the side

His units cannot see me for up to 5 seconds after ive shot with my tank

Its hard to put vids up as i dont have much time to muck around with this and im playing multiple pbms on a ladder.

Ive also sent in bugs for RT for example and been told for example the HE shot going thru panther tanks without exploding on the tank but miles behind it may go into a future patch. still to be patched

This is after mucking around and sending files and write ups.

Just dont have time.

The whole spotting issue , Steve and the developers need to really explain in more detail how this works.

Im playing with hqs outside tanks directing or in command vehicles with massive c3 setups.

Still inconsistant at times

[GAZ NZ]

my post ill edit as im doing on my cell and its not going up properly my example

*sigh*

[womble]

My opponent cannot see my Units with RT russian tanks sniper and observer

he is stationary and i have a drone watching his units

i hit his units straight away shooting after moving around the side

His units cannot see me for up to 5 seconds after ive shot with my tank

This is to be expected. You have a drone watching his units, so your superior US C3 net will have primed your Abrams etc to be ready to fire as soon as tubes bear on targets. The only reason you don't get a "spotted" icon before they turn the corner is because "spotted" means it's been acquired well enough to shoot at. The Russians on the other hand don't, from your account, have any idea the US are there until they come into LOS, so they're running on the default spotting cycle which is calculated every 7 seconds. 2 seconds for the pre-warned Americans to make their final gun lay, plus the 5 second delay after firing gives the "up to 7 seconds". This is a case of the correct result of superior battlefield coordination being delivered, not some sort of magic or mystery.

As is usual with spotting queries.

[Stagler]

Ask Doug Williams as well, he is smashing the crap out of me . Cant even see whats destroying my vehicles most of the time and its definitely not air.

 

All my chaps have green C3 in their status bars. Just don't seem to be able to see things.

 

I hear what you say about the BMP-2M Antaress, but the gunner has the same optics as the commander, but with better fidelity and zoom. The offending M1 was infront of the BMP-2M, forward facing of the gunner and his optics at 300m. It drove up, stopped, and fired without even an unknown or unknown vehicle marker.

Sometimes the gunners are placed sideways in turrets in CM. I know that was an issue in Normandy, may have arisen again. I also would like to know more how this works, because I think there might be some under the code modifiers somewhere.

Edited March 4, 2015 by Stagler

[c3k]

Without seeing what's happening, it's impossible to judge whether you've found something which is wrong.

 

If it's wrong, the next question would be if it's "accidentally" wrong or "intentionally" wrong.

 

For "intentional", remember HOW spotting work: each unit gets polled at intermittent intervals to find out what it can see. In between these polling times, it sees nothing. (The code only checks LOS at those moments.) The polling frequency and start times are different for different units. There are a LOT of good reasons for this, rather than having every unit continuously check every LOS. Something about computers and cpu cycles.

 

Also, soft factors are critical, as is posture.

 

The LOS table has a large role to play.

 

Terrain obscurations are frequently found to be the cause of mysterious LOS issues. Trees are left off, smoke is left off, etc., by accident.

 

 

The game is not perfect. So, you've either hit a seam which highlights some of these design issues, you've had a particularly odd run of luck (which happens), or you've found something that could be fixed.

 

Pix, savegames, or footage are required for any further analysis.

[Stagler]

Smoke and trees were not off. The BMP was parked in forest light, with scrub, with tall overhead trees. Nothing in the way of the gunner optics at ground view.

 

Doug Williams might still have the pbem save for that episode. I dont because I cleared my cache.

 

If the Abrams can rock up, stop, pause, then engage taking about 40 seconds. Then the rolling "spot check" is either too fast on that platform or too slow on the BMP-2M.

As I said in other threads. OPFOR "spot check" roll is probably kept the same as a carryover from CMSF or is not as fast under the hood. In CMSF it was noticable that OPFOR were at a disadvantage in spotting even at peer levels against either peer equipment or infantry on infantry spotting.

[Thewood1]

I don't understand how anyone can expect any help or response without putting a save game up.  Are we supposed to assume you can list every parameter and someone can reproduce it?  I mean look at the questions coming up.  Why not save everyone the aggravation and just post some saves, or at a minimum, a picture.

[womble]

I don't understand how anyone can expect any help or response without putting a save game up.  Are we supposed to assume you can list every parameter and someone can reproduce it?  I mean look at the questions coming up.  Why not save everyone the aggravation and just post some saves, or at a minimum, a picture.

Hear! Hear!

[Thewood1]

Wasn't it list somewhere that US Thermal and Night Vision equipment one or two generations newer that Russian and allows faster positive IDs at longer ranges?  For example, the integrated Thermal/low light displays on helmet worn units.

[Frankster65]

I don't understand how anyone can expect any help or response without putting a save game up.  Are we supposed to assume you can list every parameter and someone can reproduce it?  I mean look at the questions coming up.  Why not save everyone the aggravation and just post some saves, or at a minimum, a picture.

 

+1

[antaress73]

The commander has a panoramic sight in the BMP-2M ..Which means its field of view is much larger than the gunner's normal "looking through a straw" sight. Especially at close range, sights have a very narrow field of view. Easier to spot at long range than at short range with a non-panoramic sight (if you don't know already where to look). A panoramic sight will GREATLY help in spotting new contacts , especially at close to medium range.

[Stagler]

BMP-2M gunner sight is not "looking through a straw" sight, if thats the attitude programmers took when placing it ingame then no wonder it cant see anything. Berezhok turret module has Catherine-FC derived variable zoom thermal sight, like most other armoured vehicles in this day and age. Granted it cant turn independently of the turret. But when looking right at something it would be fairly obvious what its looking at.

[c3k]

BMP-2M gunner sight is not "looking through a straw" sight, if thats the attitude programmers took when placing it ingame then no wonder it cant see anything. Berezhok turret module has Catherine-FC derived variable zoom thermal sight, like most other armoured vehicles in this day and age. Granted it cant turn independently of the turret. But when looking right at something it would be fairly obvious what its looking at.

 

I have absolutely no idea why you'd postulate that bold part. Implying falsehoods creates a false impression. Do you really think that field of view, magnification, ancillary duties, and other factors are not baked in with as much accurate information as possible?

[Stagler]

That's the excuse you gave for why its unable to spot, others might have also surmised this?

 

I also mentioned, and ill mention it again, a lot of models are carryover from CMSF. I sometimes doubt they have been updated properly with capability having witnessed similar behaviours in this new game.

[AttorneyAtWar]

That's the excuse you gave for why its unable to spot, others might have also surmised this?

 

I also mentioned, and ill mention it again, a lot of models are carryover from CMSF. I sometimes doubt they have been updated properly with capability having witnessed similar behaviours in this new game.

 

Ok, Ill bite, what vehicle models are carried over from CMSF and were not changed, and where did you hear this from?

[Thewood1]

I have seen no evidence about any unit performance.  If its important enough for someone...show the freakin video for it.  If its so blatant, you should be able to get a save pretty quickly.

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

Only the ones he doesn't like.