Auto smoke dispenser, should players have more control

[slysniper]

I have a love hate relationship with the way the game presently does Auto Smoke with the units.

 

Yes I know this Topic has been there from since the games first release.

 

I have created my own tactics to work around the games way of using Smoke. Since it drives me crazy to have units pop smoke at times when I do not want it, I basically make sure to run a few units out of smoke early before major contact and keep others in the formation with it so at least I have the option of which one I will lead with and if I want it popping smoke or not.

 

So if I have a enemy unit I want to make sure I am going to fire on just on the other side of a vision block, I am running the unit that does not have any smoke. If I am going somewhere blind as to what the enemy has, I lead with a unit with smoke.

 

But then it crossed my mind again on how stupid the present system is.

 

So here again is a some thoughts of how it might be able to change.

 

Why not have a option as to if you want the unit to auto place smoke or not, then at least the player has control of that much of the feature, at least I would not need to waste smoke to make the not happen as a feature.

 

Then it crossed my mind, that no matter which option is chosen, there is times I would want auto smoke  no matter what. So when the button is in the off mode, the tank would still deploy smoke if

 

It is being lazed and it presently cannot see any enemy unit.

it presently sees a enemy unit that can destroy it, but it cannot really destroy the enemy unit

it has been hit by a round from something that could of killed it but has survived.

 

Now if the button for auto smoke is on, then it would pop smoke as it presently does.

 

 

I see this as a possible easy way to really improve the present auto smoke options.

 

 

please give input as to what you think or if you at least agree that something should be done as to how auto smoke presently functions

 

 

[Abdolmartin]

I completely agree. When they have no eyes on the enemy it's a great feature, but when you do, or when you want to move to a particular position to shoot without using fast move, it's very irritating.

[agusto]

Well it' s a problem only if you regard your men as expendable or if the enemy vehicle is not a threat to your vehicle that got lased. Keep in mind that a vehicle getting lased is only 1 or 2 seconds away from beeing fired upon, potentially with a devastating effect. I think that the auto-smoke dispension should depend on whether or not the enemy vehicle can be seen or not and if it can be seen, only vehicles that actually pose a threat should trigger a smoke dispension. There is no point in, for example, an M1A2 deploying smoke after beeing lased by a BTR with a 14,5mm main gun, i would rather have the M1A2 kill the BTR than waste his precious smoke grenades.

Edited July 19, 2015 by agusto

[Kieme(ITA)]

Hmm, it's truly an interesting problem. I also found more than once my units using auto-smoke when I didn't want them to.
I understand that a tank that gets a warning can't immediately know what is lasing it, even if it's just a low level threat...

Sly, your "tactics" about how to manage smokes are smart, but you shouldn't be forced to do something like that as you know already. I found myself forced to order a dash move using FAST command to an M1 when I wanted it to attack a BMP-3 that I knew would have lased it, and it did, if my M1 reacted as the game forces it wouldn't kill the BMP, but hide two turns behind a smoke screen, instead, thanks to the FAST command it pushed behind its own smoke screen and destroyed the target.

 

All in all I belive that if we could control such detail within our units it would be perfect.

 

Example, consider what if we had this:

[agusto]

Excellent idea Kieme, although i would label it "Auto-Smoke On/Off" because that would be more accurate.

 

And yeah i have had the same problems with M1A2 vs. BMP3s as well. It' s not only that the M1A2 deploying smoke after beeing lased by the BMP3 prevents it from killing the BMP, it' also a waste of the precious smoke. Imagine the following: a BMP-3 lases an M1A2 2 times, the M1A2 deploys all of its smoke and the next turn 2 T-90s pop up and kill the M1A2. Had the M1A2 not wasted its smoke vs. the BMP-3, it might have survived the surprise attack of the T-90s.

Edited July 19, 2015 by agusto

[sburke]

I'm on the fence on this one as it goes back to what does the player know versus what does the vehicle know.  When a vehicle is lased, it has no idea what lased it or the threat level.  To have it's reaction be based on the player's knowledge gets into a chancy area for me while I can also understand the frustration.  On the one hand I can see the argument that if I get lased and I KNOW there is a BMP facing me, my best option might actually be to kill it.  Popping smoke is more a defense for the BMP than my M1.  But if that lase had come from something else that now has a sweet shot at me and I delay to kill the BMP..... 

 

What would a real life crew do?  Time for some input from our folks who have actual knowledge....  what would be standard practice?  Survival first by employing defensive assets, or kill the known enemy in the hopes they are the source?

[agusto]

What would a real life crew do?  Time for some input from our folks who have actual knowledge....  what would be standard practice?  Survival first by employing defensive assets, or kill the known enemy in the hopes they are the source?

 

I hope Panzerleader or Panzersauerkrautwerfer see this thread, they certainly could help us with the question of what a crew would do IRL.

 

EDIT:

During basic infantry training i was told that "the effectiveness of my fire is more important than my protection from the enemys fire." - in german "Wirkung geht vor Deckung!". I cant say for sure, but i think it' s reasonable to assume a tank crew would handle the issue in a similar way.

Edited July 19, 2015 by agusto

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

 

 

I hope Panzerleader or Panzersauerkrautwerfer see this thread, they certainly could help us with the question of what a crew would do IRL.

 

Sorry dudes, my wife got me an xbox one, I've been mostly doing the less thinking kind of video games for a bit.

 

Short answer: It depends!

 

Long answer:

Generally if there's a target lined up and ready to hit, shooting before/instead of popping smoke is optimal.  If I don't see what's lasing me I'm going to pop smoke and back up/seek a protected position.

 

Most tank on tank combat comes down to who fires first over any other factor.  I will not likely do anything to prevent myself from taking that first shot and claiming the advantage of initiating contact, conversely I will do whatever I can do to deny the enemy a good clean first shot.  

 

The way it's done in CMBS is good, it's just a limitation of what can be done now.  The sort of short decision cycle actions just happen too fast for most players to be there to make the choice to smoke/shoot/whatever.  

[A Canadian Cat]

I imagine it happens pretty fast for crews in real life too. The game is already set up to pop smoke and pull back when a threat is detected except if

1) the crew is already in the process of aiming and firing, or

2) the crew has fast move orders, which the game AI assumes means you the player decided that moving forward is the safer choice.

There was plenty of discussion during testing and real life tankers said just what @panzersaurkrautwerfer just said. So, the tac ai is attempting to simulate that now. I can say without reservation that this tac ai behaviour is so much better than the initial draft. I have been happy with the behaviour. Sure I have had some instances where I wish a crew did differently but I see that as what would happen - the company CO wanted X and half his crew got if right and the other half got close.

Right now the tac ai will hold steady and fire of the aiming process has started. Although having said that I bet crew experience factors in. Are you saying you want that hold and complete the firing process decision should be moved back to just spotting the enemy?

I suppose we could debate where in the decision cycle the call to stay and fire is made. I have to say, for myself I am currently happy with it as it is. But hey I might be happy with a different settled too) ;

[slysniper]

Well it' s a problem only if you regard your men as expendable or if the enemy vehicle is not a threat to your vehicle that got lased. Keep in mind that a vehicle getting lased is only 1 or 2 seconds away from beeing fired upon, potentially with a devastating effect. I think that the auto-smoke dispension should depend on whether or not the enemy vehicle can be seen or not and if it can be seen, only vehicles that actually pose a threat should trigger a smoke dispension. There is no point in, for example, an M1A2 deploying smoke after beeing lased by a BTR with a 14,5mm main gun, i would rather have the M1A2 kill the BTR than waste his precious smoke grenades.

 

 

Oh , I agree with you.

But would it not be nice to have a choice.

 

If that BTR is 900 meters away, what is the chances that is the only thing spotting my unit. So as a player I don't mind the smoke feature as is, if I pick it to be on and to act that way.

 

But with what I am suggesting, turn the system off and I can go get and nail any btr I know of without my M1 firing smoke. Because I have made a decision that the m1 likely will not run into any other threat.

 

Plus if it does, my auto smoke options with the off selected can still help.

Edited July 19, 2015 by slysniper

[slysniper]

you all do understand, I am not saying that the present system needs to change. The present AI settings are fine.

 

I just think that we as players should have another AI set up that we can choose also if we want it to respond differently

 

Thus I suggested something like this for the second selection

 

the tank would still deploy smoke if

 

It is being lazed and it presently cannot see any enemy unit.

it presently sees a enemy unit that can destroy it, but it cannot really destroy the enemy unit

it has been hit by a round from something that could of killed it but has survived. the tank would deploy smoke.

 

 

Personally, the present system is fine until I know what is expected when I confront the enemy again.

 

If my units are telling me there is 3 bmp's on a ridge and no other threat. I want my tank to move into sight and engage, that should be a option in choices. I do it now by making sure I have a tank without smoke. that is stupid, but heck it works.

If a unknown threat emerges and gets the jump on me, I should expect it to get a shot off, it would in real life.

Thus coming up with some logical AI rules for the second option should be present, like suggested above.

 

So far no one is saying they really disagree, but any suggestions on what we should or could have as  some basic options is welcomed.

[womble]

It could be a toggle like "Open Up". There's one spot left in the Special Orders menu to accommodate it.

[Stagler]

If they didnt want to use it then it could be incorporated into the vehicle hide button, if hide is on it will autodeploy smoke, if not it wont.

[Thewood1]

Can a unit move under hide command?

[slysniper]

Can a unit move under hide command?

I really do not think that is the place to allow for some smoke options if they were available

[Lethaface]

the tank would still deploy smoke if

 

It is being lazed and it presently cannot see any enemy unit.

it presently sees a enemy unit that can destroy it, but it cannot really destroy the enemy unit

it has been hit by a round from something that could of killed it but has survived. the tank would deploy smoke.

 

I agree that sometimes the current behavior leads to 'meh, that's not what I had envisioned :D'. I recall some encounters in which I had a platoon of tanks lined up in ambush to meet an enemy IFV platoon moving towards a covered position, upon which one of my tanks got lazed first blinding my tank platoon while the enemy moves into the covered position and deploy their infantry. Or something similar

 

That being said, not sure if your suggestion would bring improvement across the board. How does the AI know who or what is doing the lazing and whether they can be destroyed by it? As far as I know there is no automatic threat detection built in a laser warning system. The fact that you only see a BTR doesn't mean there isn't a T-90AM lazing you as well. Also my example of unwanted behavior could still happen because one of my tanks for some reason didn't spot the IFV lazing it (if it even knows what lazed it).

 

Besides, for RED vehicles i'm not sure which encounter would lead to other results in your example: A T-90AM being lazed should always smoke since all potential enemy weapons connected to the lazing device are potentially lethal (although not sure whether .50 or MK-19 stryker laze targets?) If any option would be made available I would opt in for a 'auto smoke on/off' option that really does what it says: auto smoke on or off, no in betweens.

Edited July 20, 2015 by Lethaface

[slysniper]

I agree that sometimes the current behavior leads to 'meh, that's not what I had envisioned :D'. I recall some encounters in which I had a platoon of tanks lined up in ambush to meet an enemy IFV platoon moving towards a covered position, upon which one of my tanks got lazed first blinding my tank platoon while the enemy moves into the covered position and deploy their infantry. Or something similar

 

That being said, not sure if your suggestion would bring improvement across the board. How does the AI know who or what is doing the lazing and whether they can be destroyed by it? As far as I know there is no automatic threat detection built in a laser warning system. The fact that you only see a BTR doesn't mean there isn't a T-90AM lazing you as well. Also my example of unwanted behavior could still happen because one of my tanks for some reason didn't spot the IFV lazing it (if it even knows what lazed it).

 

Besides, for RED vehicles i'm not sure which encounter would lead to other results in your example: A T-90AM being lazed should always smoke since all potential enemy weapons connected to the lazing device are potentially lethal (although not sure whether .50 or MK-19 stryker laze targets?) If any option would be made available I would opt in for a 'auto smoke on/off' option that really does what it says: auto smoke on or off, no in betweens.

 

Or we add that as a third option, no smoke fired , no matter what. 

 

yes, what I suggest still has potential issues, but the player knows what they are and its his choice as to using it or not.

[slysniper]

That being said, not sure if your suggestion would bring improvement across the board. How does the AI know who or what is doing the lazing and whether they can be destroyed by it? As far as I know there is no automatic threat detection built in a laser warning system. The fact that you only see a BTR doesn't mean there isn't a T-90AM lazing you as well. Also my example of unwanted behavior could still happen because one of my tanks for some reason didn't spot the IFV lazing it (if it even knows what lazed it).

 

Besides, for RED vehicles i'm not sure which encounter would lead to other results in your example: A T-90AM being lazed should always smoke since all potential enemy weapons connected to the lazing device are potentially lethal (although not sure whether .50 or MK-19 stryker laze targets?) If any option would be made available I would opt in for a 'auto smoke on/off' option that really does what it says: auto smoke on or off, no in betweens.

 

 

The more I think about it the more I do not think a no smoke no matter what option should NOT be allowed. Realistically, if you have smoke available, there should be some basic crew actions that would dictate using it, even if the player says "do not use your smoke". I feel the three rules I suggested fit that. I just do not see any crew not deploying smoke in the situations I suggested.

 

As for the suggested rule about activating smoke for a enemy unit that can destroy it. ( that needs some clarification).

 

The logic would need to be which unit has the better odds of winning as being the factor. Yes a Bradley can kill a T90, but in a straight duel the odds favor the T90, so no,  the T90 would not deploy smoke, but the Bradley would.  If the odds are close to equal, neither would, Like a BMP2 vs a BMP3.

 

So yes, it would have to be programmed to react on only situations where the unit is outclassed.

[Lethaface]

The more I think about it the more I do not think a no smoke no matter what option should NOT be allowed. Realistically, if you have smoke available, there should be some basic crew actions that would dictate using it, even if the player says "do not use your smoke". I feel the three rules I suggested fit that. I just do not see any crew not deploying smoke in the situations I suggested.

 

As for the suggested rule about activating smoke for a enemy unit that can destroy it. ( that needs some clarification).

 

The logic would need to be which unit has the better odds of winning as being the factor. Yes a Bradley can kill a T90, but in a straight duel the odds favor the T90, so no,  the T90 would not deploy smoke, but the Bradley would.  If the odds are close to equal, neither would, Like a BMP2 vs a BMP3.

 

So yes, it would have to be programmed to react on only situations where the unit is outclassed.

 

There is a case to be made to force smoke always when one is hit by a penetrating round from undisclosed source and survives, I'll give you that

However, I still don't see how one should know what thing exactly is lazing oneself. While you only see a BTR with a 14,5mm, you might be receiving a laser warning from one of the BTR's dismounted troops aiming an ATGM or heck directing a krasnopol 152mm pgm on target (not sure if pgm painting causes laser warning ingame). When you see a T-90AM it might be a BTR lazing your M1A2.

 

If I understand you correctly, the difference in your proposal from how things work right now is that vehicles won't auto smoke if they are lazed while they have spotted an inferior enemy unit. I don't see the merit of that behavior, while I do see merit in a 'auto smoke off' option.

Edited July 21, 2015 by Lethaface

[slysniper]

If I understand you correctly, the difference in your proposal from how things work right now is that vehicles won't auto smoke if they are lazed while they have spotted an inferior enemy unit. I don't see the merit of that behavior, while I do see merit in a 'auto smoke off' option.

That pretty much sums it up. In that I want the present option and a suggested second option as to how a crew should react.

As a crew, you are correct in that you never know who is lazing you. But if all known threats that you know of are inferior targets, then Yes I am saying the basic doctrine in most armies is to eliminate the targets instead of popping smoke.

This is combat, you don't pop smoke unless you are in likely danger or you don't know where the enemy is.

Well, if what you see is a inferior enemy and you are being lazed. You should engage, not smoke and hide, just because there is a chance you don't see the real threat.

But that is my view of it, plus this really still does not cover all situations. But it would be a improvement.

[A Canadian Cat]

This is combat, you don't pop smoke unless you are in likely danger or you don't know where the enemy is.

Well, if what you see is a inferior enemy and you are being lazed. You should engage, not smoke and hide, just because there is a chance you don't see the real threat.

 

Actually some systems *do* know who is lazing you  - OK the don't know who but the know which direction it came from.  The M1s in game will spin their turrets towards the threat - this is because the lazer detection system actually *does* know what direction the enemy is in.

 

So, that means that if you see one more more inferior enemy and you get lazed M1 crews would actually know if it was one of those visible contacts or some other threat they have not yet seen.  Which means they can decide which of the inferior enemy to target first or decide there is an unknown threat out there and they should back off and find it first.