Jump to content

Vehicle Immobilization


Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, JoMc67 said:

I think the 'Bogging'/'Immobilzed' trend started happening more often with release of CMRT & CMFB...

I do not believe the bogging / Immobilization has changed since some early bug fixes in v2 or maybe v3

 

40 minutes ago, StieliAlpha said:
2 hours ago, Sublime said:

The absolute WORST anti tank obstacle in game in my experience is those friggin vineyards in CMFI. I literally had a battalion assault stopped dead because all the tanks had to cross this vineyard area (only safe area to move towards the objective) and everything got immobilized.

That reinforces my point: In difficult terrain, move sloooow.

Slow is a good idea but not for vineyards. For CMFI vineyards just don't do it. It is a virtual guarantee of getting immobilized if you get your tanks into that wire mess.

There is no save speed to go through vineyards. Go around them.

 

4 hours ago, StieliAlpha said:

They can be pretty effective in close combat, too. I remember one FI game where a 5 men crew with Mauser‘s mowed down a whole US squad. Unfortunately only once, thereafter the bullets were spent. Again, very effective in the situation, but quite „gamey”.

Each upgrade and some patches this gets toned down. There is one remaining issue that might produce goofy results - the one way bullet mirror that is the crew's tank. When you are close assaulting a tank if you add a covering team that is not in line with the assault team (i.e. multiple angles) then the crew is not going to be wiping out a whole squad any more. Well at least not regularly - luck can still happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, IanL said:

Slow is a good idea but not for vineyards. For CMFI vineyards just don't do it. It is a virtual guarantee of getting immobilized if you get your tanks into that wire mess.

There is no save speed to go through vineyards. Go around them.

 

Each upgrade and some patches this gets toned down. 

I did not say “ Go through vineyards”. I meant to say, if there is need to go through obvious obstacles „Move slowly.“

And, in my example the Crew bailed out, moved into a building and then killed the US squad (moving in a little too fast...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, StieliAlpha said:

I did not say “ Go through vineyards”. I meant to say, if there is need to go through obvious obstacles „Move slowly.“

Indeed. I was more afraid that people would connect @Sublime's observation that vineyards are very bad for vehicles and your observations about speed to conclude that going slow through a vineyard would be wise.

1 hour ago, StieliAlpha said:

And, in my example the Crew bailed out, moved into a building and then killed the US squad (moving in a little too fast...)

Ah, so one of those unlikely occurences that can still happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recall reading about Marines LAV-25s in Afghanistan at the start of the war. During their first significant operation (involving cross country travelling to cut a distant highway) it was reported that EVERY vehicle in the task force needed to be unditched at least once, several multiple times. Humvees in particular suffered from multiple broken suspensions and needed to be airlifted By CH-53s back to base. The operation was a 'success' in that they finally reached the highway and shot up anything attempting to drive down the road. But it was a costly operation getting there.

Vineyards in CMFI are not to be fooled with. A combination of stout vine bases and long lengths of wire that wrap around the suspension as you move through it.

 

wine vineyard.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh I want to clarify - the vineyards I just mentioned as STAY AWAY FROM.  

The 'SLOW' issue for tanks actually I think WAS A BUG.  Yes, going SLOW drastically reduces bogging chances, but I dont think a Sherman rolling over a German AT mine at ~5 miles per hour and setting it off directly under the track or hull should only do moderate damage ( i.e. still drives ) but at normal speed or above KOs the tank usually or at least immobilizes it.  Again though, I dont know if it was corrected and not mentioned/I missed it in patch notes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

It's one of the undying myths of Combat Mission. @IanL tested it and busted that myth long ago :)

This.  There are many forum threads on bogging / immobilization.  The below are some of the lessons learned.    

Movement speed has no demonstrated effect on bogging/immobilization rates.

Also vehicles will slow down of their own accord for some kinds of bumping: the berm remaining when a bocage hedge is demo'ed, for example, crossing any obstacle they can crush, and rough terrain like light woods. So just give them Fast orders and let them sort themselves out... 

Even without movement orders bogged vehicles will continue to try to get free (you can see the tracks of tanks moving). So once it's bogged, it will eventually either transition to immobilized or free, regardless of your actions. No correlation between type of movement orders and success/failure of un-sticking a bogged vehicle.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you got a thread link? Id like to see Ians results.

Because if its not true, without testing but anecdotally I can say over literally thousands of games moving vehicles FAST will cause bogging etc quicker.

I dont know man perhaps the speed going slow doesnt matter for bogging, it most certainly did for AT mines, and I also most definitely noticed that when you get bogged if you cancel all move orders it seems 2 or 3x more likely you.ll become unstuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks.

Follow up question though - my experiences with at mines and my BMP2Ms NEVER firing their kornets ever in hundreds of engagements were on 3.0 (didnt upgrade) and so may be dated. I still think there should be a use atgm only toggle on Brads, BMPs, etc. At the time someone claimed they tested it and their 2Ms shot Kornets. There wasnt much evidence howeber. And yes I would have someone in the commander spot.

My sorry for the tangent - my point is I was worried my info and complaints abt AT mines were dated, and that speed test is from 2011. BN was released in 2011. Given that the manual and things said by BFC claim that ground conditions and speed of vehicles directly affects chances of bogging - perhaps the tests in 2011 were done to prove there was an issue (ianl usually does tests expressly for this) and given its 8 years old Id be shocked if this hadnt been adressed.

 Simply bexause it flies in the face of reality. Abstraction included you cannot convince me that a MBT going SLOW would have better chances navigating treachorous terrain and not getting bogged or stuck, verdus a tank that recklessly just floored it terrain be damned?  It makes total sense to me that a tank driving slow would be less likely to bog - if anything if it startex looking like itd bog the crew has time to react, can navigate little obstacles better etc.remember even x2 is abstracted somewhat.

The idea also seems silly because whilst a good amt of tanks tears up any terrain really badly im pretty sure say a battalion of m1s advancing through a muddy field at walking speed would probably be a lot less rough on the ground, create less deep track grooves, and probably toss arnd the least amout of vegetation and mud. Versus a battalion ordered to drive full speed across said field where i can picture "rooster tails" of mud behind tanks etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, MOS:96B2P said:

Nooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!! Bogged!!!  Apparently talking about it in the forums does increase the chances of a bogged vehicle :lol:.   

qNvPs5Xh.jpg

 

 

Having commanded a Bradley on plenty of streets and alleys exactly like that, I’m not sure that would be likely. Those alleys were hard packed dirt that was actually perfect for tracks. 

Edited by Swervin11b
Link to comment
Share on other sites

u know Im gonna get off my ass and ad the first new thing to my sig line in 18 years - Im gonna copy your Fulda Gap 1985 and add (45 Op Unthinkable if not) as an alternative. I reaallly wanna saee that game. Like if BFC said fine, we'll do it, if we get enough ppl to agree to 200 a pop, for a game that has 1978, 1983 able archer, and 1985. All Cold War scenarios. All of NATO. All of Warpac. 200 dollars though to get in.  And youd get all content, battle packs campaigns etc as sellable DLC later, along with more special or unique units.  But initially - Brits - Germans - East Germans - Soviets - US - Czechs and some other Warpac as well ( Poles )

Later smaller war pac countries could come in. We could add French units, it was iffy but generally assumed theyd join in if the balloon went up.

But I would find the money for that - my dream game of all time.

Next best thing, or maybe better I dont know depends what day you ask me - is a 1945/46 war between east and west.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, MOS:96B2P said:

Nooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!! Bogged!!!  Apparently talking about it in the forums does increase the chances of a bogged vehicle :lol:.  

Oh that's in **** too. Your crew are going to be annoyed with the commander...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Swervin11b said:

Those alleys were hard packed dirt that was actually perfect for tracks. 

Humm this highlights a problem. The mod uses streams to represent the gross water in the streets. But the game thinks it is a stream and streams have soft banks and you can get stuck in them...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Swervin11b said:

Having commanded a Bradley on plenty of streets and alleys exactly like that, I’m not sure that would be likely. Those alleys were hard packed dirt that was actually perfect for tracks. 

Thank you for your service.  I bet you have a lot of interesting stories from back in the day.  The good news is, the Brad never went to immobilized.  It un-bogged and drove off to complete its mission.  I think the small stream of feces running down the center is what made it bog. :o 

 

19 minutes ago, Sublime said:

u know Im gonna get off my ass and ad the first new thing to my sig line in 18 years - Im gonna copy your Fulda Gap 1985 and add (45 Op Unthinkable if not) as an alternative. I reaallly wanna saee that game.

Fulda Gap would be cool.  

My hope is that the last release for CMFB will be an equipment pack introducing Soviet forces/equipment into CMFB.  Call it meeting on the Elbe River or something.  Then the US, Commonwealth and Soviets would all be in the same Combat Mission game.   No BFC created scenarios would be needed.  Just an equipment pack of already designed equipment ported over from CMRT.  Scenario designers and mod creators could do all kinds of cold war, neo-colonialism stuff.  Patton goes east 1945, Fulda Gap 1948, Korea, Suez Crisis, etc.    

I hope the effort to profit ratio would be favorable enough for BFC to make this happen.

Edited by MOS:96B2P
Link to comment
Share on other sites

U know what? I think your solution is the best one

Make a mini campaign where you end up commanding Russian forces East of Torgau and Amis West and you link up. Maybe thats the culmination of a single player campaign.  Swithces back n forth between ami and russian. losses or forks in story could lead to more combat for one side.

All weed need is the late war Soviet Forces and the Late war Allies (then decide how many divisions realistically could the Germans if we rearmed them could muster? Second would they use German equipment or would they get American equipment like the French? I lean towards German equipment except maybe armor and planes  - especially to avoid friendly fire. Perhaps also a uniform change, though I doubt it. Feldgrau was distinctive.  In fact maybe it;d see the Allies adopt camo universally?  The modders could make endless scenarios and campaigns around this though and it.d be glorious. I mean you just have sooo many options that way. And also the way CM works you can fight allies on allies - so you could have pre GDR Commie sympathetic Germans fighting for Russians.  You could have say a Soviet unit defect.  Or say a French unit mutinies, gets promised cushy stuff in the SU and fights to break out to Soviet lines. 

Id be most interested in all in PBEMs and campaigns of

a regular GI armor or infantry commander

his counterpart in the red army

and for me specially Id love to be given command of a battalion of Germanys best left troops - part of a corps that took men out of PoW camps, from all over the Wehrmacht and mustered them up into a few Jagd. fighter squadrons, maybe 1 jet bomber/recon squad, some advanced uboat crews, but mostly a Corps (-) of German troops. I envision some Good german armor, but considering different round sizes and breakdown problems I almost envision the allies using those in emergencies and trying to get the germans to use shermans as well.  I could see German small arms being adopted by some allies - like the fausts. the other stuff not so much cept maybe the STG 44.  I could see the Germans keeping their own equipment except food trucks, maybe tanks, and if they wanted more than a few squadrons allied airplanes.  But yeah Id love to roleplay as a German officer from say Konigsberg desperately fighting this war hes been in since 42, and desperately trying to find out what happened to his family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, MOS:96B2P said:

Thank you for your service.  I bet you have a lot of interesting stories from back in the day.  The good news is, the Brad never went to immobilized.  It un-bogged and drove off to complete its mission.  I think the small stream of feces running down the center is what made it bog. :o 

Thanks. Yes, quite a few stories. You could say it was an interesting time. Had to watch out for power lines in those alleys and streets, a real hazard at night too. 

That’s the infamous and ubiquitous grey sludge of the alleyways. Even the dust in those smelled funky. 

Kudos to the designer, though. That’s an exact resemblance of Anystreet, Iraq Town. 

Edited by Swervin11b
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sublime said:

Simply bexause it flies in the face of reality. Abstraction included you cannot convince me that a MBT going SLOW would have better chances navigating treachorous terrain and not getting bogged or stuck, verdus a tank that recklessly just floored it terrain be damned?  It makes total sense to me that a tank driving slow would be less likely to bog - if anything if it startex looking like itd bog the crew has time to react, can navigate little obstacles better etc.

I agree with you.

And I think it would also be nice from a gameplay perspective, so that you had to balance speed with the risk of bogging. Also, it would make bogging less frustrating for the player, because he now has some kind of say in it, compared to just having to hope it doesn't happen.

Now, whether or not it was actually a bug back then, and it was fixed after IanL's testing, I don't know.

All I know is that I always move vehicles FAST, and I don't see much bogging (and hardly any immobilisations) on damp ground conditions. I do avoid problem areas such as mud and forest tiles though.

Edited by Bulletpoint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’d be cool to have recovery assets, or even allow for self-recovery. Even if it was imperfect and difficult, it’d be an accurate interpretation. 

For every problem, a potential solution. Wire/mine obstacles can be breached with engineers, for example. 

Some may say that such a feauture may not be an accurate reflection of front line operations, but reading through AARs one sees that they absolutely had to do it under fire sometimes, even if their efforts were greatly frustrated. (Ex: The recovery vehicle in a cav squadron had an 81mm mortar to shoot its own smoke screen). 

I can easily see why it’s not in the game, though. It falls into the same category of something like medics. The developers have to ask themselves how many players would find it entertaining to run ammo around the map, dispatch litter bearers, or tow vehicles. 

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
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...