BTS: The Hull Down Move

[:USERNAME:]

BTS

I really admire the games handling of armor. If the propensity of armor to avoid the crews and other non threatening inf targets can be adjusted, then I am near satisfied.

One thing, I think would be revolutionary is the "hull down move". It would consist of a move type order on the menu that would extend a line like a fire move. The player would then "stick" the line to a point in the frontal arc of the vehicle that is obviously out of the LOS of the vehicle. The vehicle would then get into hunt mode and advance till it gets an LOS to the designated point.

This command would allow the player the needed steath that TDs/stugs/etc exploited in real combat.

What say you BTS?

Lewis

[von shrad]

Lewis I think that is a great way to deal with finding hull down if they decided to add that function but, I'm not sure if they should put in such a feature. One of the good aspects of not having a 'seek hull down' command is the realistic aspect of commanders not really knowing if they are hull down to a target or not. You assume you are well placed but you cant be sure. A sneeking infantry unit 'thinks' its being quiet and unseen but it never knows if it really is

On the other hand it does not necessarily need to be used just for hull down purposses. It could be used for creeping around a building etc.

But again it uses unreal steps to ascertain the desired effect. If your tank shouldnt be able to see a point, you shouldnt be able to command it to seek it out specifically.

Hmmmm....I am just not sure. How do others feel?

PS. a good idea none the less

[This message has been edited by von shrad (edited 07-09-2000).]

[MERC]

I see several Problems with a hull-down command becase it is all a matter of reference. Your tank can be hull down for tank A but not tank B. Also I could see a problem where you have a "hull-down dance". This would be where your tank is constantly moving to keep LOS and its hull down position versus a selected target. Therefore the TAC AI is moving to maintain the hull-down position to your target, but ultimately revealling it or not allowing you to get a shot off in time.

Ultimately, I think a hull-down command would be rewarding the lazy or less skilled people. Whats the use of playing the game if everything is automated. This is where in CM as the overall commander you really have the chance to make your mark.

[This message has been edited by MERC (edited 07-09-2000).]

[:USERNAME:]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by von shrad:

PS. a good idea none the less<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks

To tell you the truth I only want the best that BTS can put out there.

I of course would use it in the game realistically, ie slowly get over a rise in steps. Perhaps its also modeling the aspect of a commander of a vehicle dismounting/getting up on his legs on deck position/infantry relaying info/etc.

The best a game can give you is realism or great abstractions. BTS gives that and more.

Lewis

[:USERNAME:]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MERC:

Your tank can be hull down for tank A but not tank B. Also I could see a problem where you have a "hull-down dance". This would be where your tank is constantly moving to keep LOS and its hull down position versus a selected target.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am not sure if I exactly understand you but I assure you that armor fighting is a dance.

I have dug improved positions with an M9 ACE and the whole "dance" is about letting them see little and you seeing as much as you can. The engine/tranny/driver is as much a force multiplier as you might imagine. Everyone fights to live and gears-be-damned you will survive at machines expense.

The lay of the land is a good tankers best friend. In WWII it was more so because nowadays AP rounds just will blow threw dirt.

Its simple, show little and see as much as you can. A tankers life is a deaf world save the intercom. He is a slave to his vision and the intercom. It was the same in WWII. The shoot and scoot and sneaky peak was the way of life. "The Quick and the dead" and I would bet anything it wont ever change dude.

Lewis

[Guest Michael emrys]

I think something somewhat like what you are asking for already exists in the game. If you target your tank, assault gun, what-have-you at an unspotted unit and give it a Hunt command, it will tend to halt and bring the targetted unit under fire as soon as that unit is spotted. Whether your vehicle stops in a hull-down position is a matter of the lay of the land, how you plotted its movement and how alert its crew is, among other things.

BTW, I agree with you that mobility is an often underrated weapon in the tanker's inventory. I know the great tendency in my own play is to just plop them down somewhere within range of enemy units and leave them there to pop off shots. But I notice that if I start moving my armor around the enemy's flanks and into his rear, his troops start to get very nervous. And repositioning on defense can be even more important, especially in a very fluid situation.

Michael

[thomasj]

I have only a small thing to add.

United States

Army 1st Armored Division "Old Ironsides"

Americas Tank Division

You want to see a dance? Watch modern tanks while they are in the box during an OPFOR/NTSC exercise, FOs spot for more than just ARTY, and movement to contact begins way before they (the tanks) even see one another.

[:USERNAME:]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael emrys:

I think something somewhat like what you are asking for already exists in the game. If you target your tank, assault gun, what-have-you at an unspotted unit and give it a Hunt command, it will tend to halt and bring the targetted unit under fire as soon as that unit is spotted. Whether your vehicle stops in a hull-down position is a matter of the lay of the land, how you plotted its movement and how alert its crew is, among other things.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Totally agreed

But what if a target is not there to be targeted? I am seeking to employ my firepower selectively. I want to insure a piece of ground is covered by my firepower (gaining superiority) yet seek to wait for victems who crawl unawares into my new web. And I want sir to be hull down proper and waiting in style..

Lewis

[Dave]

I like Lewis's idea. Maybe I'm misunderstanding it, but I think some of you have it slightly wrong.

"The player would then "stick" the line to a point in the frontal arc of the vehicle that is obviously out of the LOS of the vehicle. The vehicle would then get into hunt mode and advance till it gets an LOS to the designated point."

Furthering this idea, think of the "hull down line" as the eyes of the tank commander. If the TC and his tank are in a deep gully and the "line" extends to a road that can't be seen by the TC, then the "hull down move" would imitate the TC ordering his tank up the side of the gully until he has a LOS to the road.

You would get your "hull down" position the same way it's done in real life, relative to a fixed point on the ground and not to any particular enemy unit. If the enemy is at that fixed point, you're "hull down". If he's somewhere else, you may or may not be.

[MERC]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> I have dug improved positions with an M9 ACE and the whole "dance" is about letting them see little and you seeing as much as you can. The engine/tranny/driver is as much a force multiplier as you might imagine. Everyone fights to live and gears-be-damned you will survive at machines expense. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

We are talking different things. Your talking fighting from improved positions that I assume have a hull defilade, turret defilade and a hide locations - which is really beyond the scope of CM. Your are right, Combat Engineers (and their works) are a excellent combat multiplier in real life - ESSAYONS.

What I was talking about is the possibility of "AI Confusion" due coding where if when you give the command "HULL DOWN" against Tank A - especially if it the target starts moving, the AI would be trying to compensate and would create a possible "dance" that is not "real life" and could be very frustrating when your tank is "showing" itself or not is able to fire because its constantly moving.

If you do the command versus a fixed spot on the ground, the problem I see here is that it is in reference to that spot. A tank at that same location will have a higher offset and thus greater LOS, thus you may or may not be hull-down.

This is just a couple issues that I think would have to be worked through if this command was attempted to be implimented.

Bottomline I don't think its necessary for 2 reasons.

1) Presently, you have the ability in the game to get hull down positions using the HUNT command.

2) Those who are skilled in finding hull down positions will be rewarded, those who aren't will have a bunch of burning wrecks. I have not had many problems finding opponents that can't get their vehicles in a hull down position.

Most here in this forum most likely know the tactics (overwatch, bounding overwatch, interlocking fields of fire, hull-down, SOSR, etc). The diferrence on the battlefield (PBEM) will be those who are actually able to apply those tactics successfully.

[This message has been edited by MERC (edited 07-09-2000).]

[:USERNAME:]

Exactly Dave

MERC I am a bit confused by what you are saying. Perhaps I can pontificate my thoughts.

There is no such thing as a hull down position, you are really hull down in reference to an enemy position. It is concievable to be hull down to one enemy position and not hull down to another.

That being the case, the only logical thing is to order your vehicle to try to move itself so that it attains a hull down position in reference to a distant point.

I never said that the point has to have a enemy vehicle occupting it, mind you, and as your vehicle "hunts" towards the assigned point and it sees an enemy target, it will naturally stop and behave just like any vehicle that is hunting. I dont get your speculation about dancing though.

I think that a slow subjective process that is being used presently can be streamlined so that PBEM games dont take forever. Perhaps it can help the AI also.

Lewis

[Cueball]

If I understand this correctly, it's essentially a "Move until target point visible".

I can see many uses for that other than achieving hull down status. Sneaking around a building, or moving infantry inside a large building until they can see another building comes to mind.

[MERC]

Lewis,

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I never said that the point has to have a enemy vehicle occupting it, mind you, and as your vehicle "hunts" towards the assigned point and it sees an enemy target, it will naturally stop and behave just like any vehicle that is hunting.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How is what your proposing any different than the HUNT command presently in the game?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I think that a slow subjective process that is being used presently can be streamlined so that PBEM games dont take forever. Perhaps it can help the AI also.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, I don't find PBEM games taking forever. I also wouldn't consider the current process slow - though it is subjective.

You might expand on why you believe it will help the AI.

[TargetDrone]

I thinks Lewis' basic idea was a commando that allowed a vehicle to advance until the TC has a line of sight to the designated target spot and then stops... no matter if you target the ground or an enemy... I want the tank to stop as soon as he has LOS and then he can start shooting or scanning for new enemies....

i dont see why my tanks always go over the ridge instead of staying a bit behind it, just with the gun having a clear shot... i guess TCs have done that in reality too...

well.. just my opinion anyways...

------------------

TargetDrone

who has a heart for smilies

and will defend their rights ....

even if the cost is bloody....

[aj_nielson]

MERC,

The difference between the proposed command and the hunt command is the presence of an enemy unit. When using hunt to find a hull down position your tank rolls forward & then stops when it has LOS on an enemy. Great. But what if you want to be in a hull-down position before an enemy arrives, (to set up an ambush or something?), THEN a seperate command would be quite useful. The command would be exactly like hunt except your tank would roll forward until it has LOS on a given point instead of an enemy.

Also, I think such a command would be quite realistic. Having a tank roll up a hill until the commander has LOS over it isn't gamey or unnatural. It irritates me to have to fiddle with my tanks turn after turn, playing with all sorts of camera angles as I micromanage my armor trying to get them properly hull-down when the crew should be able to do it on it's own. I'm not a veteran or anything, so this is all just speculation, but it seems reasonable to assume that a tank commander knows how to find a hull down position.

The idea seems fairly realistic and would cut-down on the micro-managment of armor to increase the "fun" factor of the game.

Just my $.02

-Adam-

Either way, CM is still an amazing game!

[:USERNAME:]

Targetdrone: I think you see what I am saying.

MERC: What I am proposing is very different than the hunt. The hunt is a specified distance. The vehicle will move that distance. If you dont eyeball it right, the vehicle will go over the protective terrain and the vehicle will hang its balls in the breeze. My hull down move is really a variable distance move.

I dont think the game gives you the perspectives you need to issue commands that simulate realistic manuvers. The game shouldnt "reward" people for getting around this, its a wargame not a sim.

The AI might be taught how to slowly gain better firing positions for its armor.

Cueball: Good take on that.

[Midnight Warrior]

The mechanics of a "target point" could be very similarly to the current "ambush point". Select Target Point comamd and then click on any fixed point somewhere on the map and the target point sysmbol could appear. The target point could then be used by the Hunt command just as if it real a bonafide target.

------------------

March To The Sound Of The Guns

[MERC]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

The game shouldnt "reward" people for getting around this, its a wargame not a sim.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Around what? The game should reward you for applying real world tactics in a realistic manner. It should reward those who are capable of reading the terrain and find hull-down positions over those who cant.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

The AI might be taught how to slowly gain better firing positions for its armor.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How? You were talking about a "command" for people to use, are you now suggesting a TAC AI change?

[This message has been edited by MERC (edited 07-09-2000).]

[This message has been edited by MERC (edited 07-09-2000).]

[Richard]

Okay time for a SHAMELESS plug....

Steel Beasts has this very feature but it is a modern sim, not something along the lines of CM.

Check it out:

www.shrapnelgames.com/esim

------------------

[Mark IV]

The problem is that if you want hull-down from a ridge to a road, you can't see what a real TC could see in order to get that.

If your AFV isn't on the ridge yet, you have to zoom forward at level 1. As soon as you leave the AFV, your perspective changes- your eyeballs roll down the tube and drop to the ground. You are no longer seeing from the center-mass of the AFV, or the TC's hatch. Your lookers are lower. So hull-down for them is different than for a multiple-tonned vehicle.

Now if I want to set up a hull-down position relative to a road, I drive to the general area and look. I yell "Gunner, can you JUST see that there road in yer optics?" or better yet, let him tell the driver when to stop.

There's really no difference at present between Hunt and Move for setting up hull-down against an empty area. You just go there, pan around at 1, and creep back and forth and hope you got it. A real crew would know and just do it.

[:USERNAME:]

MERC: Around what? Around the "kludgey" interface.

I agree, the game should reward you for applying real world tactics. But being a savant at moving about in CMs 3D world aint real world. Whats realistic about ordering a tank to advance too far? I and others just want to get the vehicle to be hull down not to be mouse jockeys.

I think we wont agree and I am sensing you feel your "advantage" is being compromised. If the game would allow me to get the tanks perspective from a hunt commands commanded TO position, ie I could see what I am getting into, then all would be about the same. I just want a quick way to get a tank hull down to a position (which is realistic) without some flying camera-clickfest. I want the units in the game to behave realistically, thats all.

Thanks for contributing. I hope BTS does also.

Lewis

[:USERNAME:]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV:

A real crew would know and just do it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly. The TC will always see the area/target that he is trying to be hull down to first. The gunner will get it in his vision next and if the driver sees it then its too much. Normally the gunner can yell halt. It should have nothing to do with being a mapreader or anything else. You perform the move in low gear and a good driver will be ready to reverse at a moments notice.

Lewis

[MERC]

I do agree, things would be alot easier if when locked on to unit at view 1, it would not drop down when you moved or panned around.

[TargetDrone]

Hmm... I wonder what BTS is thinking about that matter... having no response from them for some time could be positive... maybe they are already implementing a solution into the next patch?

at their support reaction speed that could be possible

Merc:

well, i think it is realisctic like Lewis and many others (including me) described it.. the TC marks a spot for the gunner, which tells the driver to halt, if that spot becomes visible in his targeting vision....

that is something i can't do on my own with just the camera angles (and i don't want to do, because i guess that is something the units should be able to do alone.... )

another question that comes to my mind...

if we get that feature... what happens to Tanks with dead TC? i guess the gunner still could tell the driver when to stop, or how far to reverse....

------------------

TargetDrone

who has a heart for smilies

and will defend their rights ....

even if the cost is bloody....

[MERC]

I fully understand what everybody is saying. I just don't think getting hull-down is a precise black/white issue. Its a relative issue and will be constantly changing throughout the turn and game. What is hull-down at this second may not be 10 seconds from now.

I also believe that some of the difficulties that some are experiencing in getting hull-down in the game is the similiar to the difficulty you would face in real life.