Bogging vs experience, test results and questions

[Jarmo]

I performed a little test to see if the crew experience makes a

difference to bogging and immobilization.

I took 30 shermans for a 1 kilometer sprint.

15 of 'em elite, 15 greens.

I sent 5 elites and 5 greens going fast, next group hunting and the

last one moving.

End results, how many made it (from the goup of 5):

Fast goers

Elite 1

Green 1

Hunters

Elite 1

Green 2

Movers

Elite 2

Green 1

Total elite success, 4

Total green success, 4

Now, from this light, it seems it doesn't make much difference if

the driver knows his profession or not.

I feel it should. Even more, I'd think elite driver would

almost never immobilize his vehicle, he might get bogged, sure.

But seeing the situation is hopeless. he'd likely stop trying

before the engine overheats.

Oops, forgot to mention the ground was muddy.

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

Now, would this brilliant plan involve us climbing out of

our trenches and walking slowly towards the enemy sir?

[This message has been edited by Jarmo (edited 09-19-2000).]

[Daveman]

Once, I had placed a veteran Churchill on a pretty steep uphill slope without noticing it was wet weather. First move, he bogs down. 20 seconds later he was on the move. I assumed it was his experience that got him out.

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

“Out in front every one is holding out. Every one. My grenadiers and my engineers and my tank crews – they’re all holding their ground. Not a single man is leaving his post. They are lying silent in their foxholes for they are dead.” – Gen. Fritz Bayerlein on an order to hold his position

[Mark IV]

You don't mention the conditions- I assume the ground was Damp? What about Snow/Deep Snow?

"I'd think elite driver would almost never immobilize his vehicle, he might get bogged, sure. But seeing the situation is hopeless. he'd likely stop trying before the engine overheats."

Ground pressure is ground pressure. If crew experience makes a difference, it probably should be in the likelihood of un-Bogging before the vehicle becomes Immobilized.

If they stop trying to free the vehicle, isn't that about the same as Immobilized?

It sounds as though you're assuming that Immobilized means engine trouble, but I think it means you've either thrown a track, or simply buried it to the extent that it can't be dug out in the time-frame of a CM scenario.

[109 Gustav]

I think driver experience should make a difference whether vehicles get bogged at all. A good driver should be able to chart a relatively dry path through wet terrain, which in real life is never completley wet. In addition, a skilled driver should be able to unbog his vehicle better, because he would know to rock the vehicle out of a bog, turn into skids, etc. (I learned to drive on a twisting, muddy dirt road, so I have considerable experience here)

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

There is nothing certain about war except that one side won't win.

-Ian Hamilton

[Jarmo]

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

You don't mention the conditions- I assume the ground was Damp? What about Snow/Deep Snow?

If they stop trying to free the vehicle, isn't that about the same as Immobilized?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ouh, forgot that, it was muddy.

Staying bogged and being immobilized would have the difference,

that bogged vehicles continue in an operation, but immobilized are gone.

And the driver makes a difference in real life. A skilled

driver knows if you can get through a certain spot, or if you

need to go around.

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

Now, would this brilliant plan involve us climbing out of

our trenches and walking slowly towards the enemy sir?

[JoePrivate]

Yeah I think experience would have a factor of some sort in bogging/immobilization. To draw any conclusions about what CM does though you would have to run more than one test. If you are interested/have the time, try running your test a hundred times. I would be interested in the results.

[Jarmo]

Yeah, well.

I'd rather hear from "someone" if there is any difference modeled

than run the test a hundred times.

BTS, U there?

[JoePrivate]

Lol, yeah isn't that the truth

[Jarmo]

Poit! Up she goes!

[Mark IV]

Beg to differ, respectfully of course. I've "Bogged" lots of vehicles of all sizes in real life.

Europe is famous for the muddy conditions which prevailed in both wars. There often aren't ANY dry areas; rain and snow are theater-wide in CM terms.

You can't tell much about the depth of mud or snow by looking at it. I've seen (and driven in) 2m+ deep ditches that looked like level terrain. You can plow along in knee-deep mud and suddenly plunge up to your neck, especially if it's been chewed up by arty and other units. And then you can throw a track trying to get out.

I don't know how any level of crew could be expected to tell what is under the surface of mud and snow, especially when the human player has told them the general path they must follow.

Driving a tank requires the least experience and training of the crew positions, and while skills improve with time, AFVs bogged all the time in Germany, Holland, Belgium, and France, and they still do. I've seen lots of AFVs bogged and immobilized in Hoehenfels and Grafenwoehr. The sharp driver has a much better idea of what to do once he's stuck, but sometimes there's nothing you can do.

[Bullethead]

109G said:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>A good driver should be able to chart a relatively dry path through wet terrain<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Don't forget that bogging isn't the only thing a good driver worries about in combat. "Picking a path" means deviating from the straight line course the player orders. Such deviation means the vehicle's facing must change. Changes of facing alter which way the armor is oriented. This in turn affects the odds of the vehicle dying, as opposed to merely becoming stuck in the mud.

Imagine the howls of protest if BTS were to implement such a feature:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I told my elite King Tiger to go from Point A to Point B. But the stupid thing weaved around like a drunk, exposing flank and rear to enemy fire, until it died. Another elite KT hit a mine on a road I had told it to avoid--this wouldn't have happened had it stayed on the ordered path. WTF is up with this???? My green tanks do as I say and thus perform better in combat. They get stuck sometimes but I can plan for this. I can depend on them. The CM vehicle AI is AFU'd!!! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And then try to explain to this guy that the above results were because of a tweak to keep more experienced vehicles from bogging as often as green vehicles

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

-Bullethead

Visit the brand new Raider Operations message board at www.delphi.com/raiderops

Main site www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

[This message has been edited by Bullethead (edited 09-19-2000).]

[Jarmo]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I told my elite King Tiger to go from Point A to Point B. But the stupid thing weaved around like a drunk, exposing flank and rear to enemy fire<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

since there's no differences between open terrain (abstraction),

there'd be no need to make curves. Isn't this already modeled to

some extent by making offroad speed slower. Going straight in

sparse woods doesn't really mean plonking down every tree that gets

into the way, does it.

Anyway, I see the point. Anyone can get boggedd or immobilized.

But I still feel a good driver should have a better chance

to unbog than a bad one. A bad driver would be likely to just

step onto the pedal until the vehicle is sunk.

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

Now, would this brilliant plan involve us climbing out of

our trenches and walking slowly towards the enemy sir?

[Slapdragon]

Hey Jarmo,

Your test is a good idea, but you cannot generalize based on 6 groups of five necause you used 2 variables. With the test you did, it could be luck that you noticed any bogging difference.

IIf you want to perform this test, you need at leasr 40 cases for each cross of your variable matrix, and you need to measure how far the vehicles got before they bogged. With 2 variable (crew experience and speed) you would need to do 160 single tank trails (or fewer with more tanks) AND measure the distance went before bogging.

Imagine you wanted to test coin flipping. You could flip head five times in a row, and would not be surprised, but would be shocked if you did it 40 times. That is the reason you need so many tests.

A better way is to isolate your variable and test 40 tanks with regualr crews going at each speed range. Then you know about speed, or take 40 crews of each experience level and try that.

[Jarmo]

I refer to my earlier post.

BTS fellas know if the experience makes a difference.

So I'd rather not find out by testing.

Anyway, it seems the issue at this point is more whether

the experience should make a difference or not.

[Herr Oberst]

Stop it Slappy!!!

You're bringing back way too many memories of a past life (Lead Sadistician on a National Institutes of Health grant).

Now I manage developers and write code for a living.

[This message has been edited by Herr Oberst (edited 09-20-2000).]

[Slapdragon]

Heck Oberst, I am teaching a research course right now -- what I wrote Jarmo is right from my lecture notes!!!

Actually, I used Quake Arena to teach some of my students experimental research and observational research -- you would be surprised what they can find out once they learn research techniques.

Sadly, I use to be a director.

[Bullethead]

Jarmo said:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>since there's no differences between open terrain (abstraction), there'd be no need to make curves.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It seems to me that there are 3 types of terrain: that which any tyro can negotiate, that which can bog (maybe permanently) a given model of vehicle based on its ground pressure, power, etc., and maybe a zone of moderate severity where perhaps a better driver can get through due to better control over and better knowledge of the capabilities of his vehicle. The issue of driver experience thus applies only to this middle zone, so the question is: is this zone "wide" enough to warrant special treatment?

Personally, I don't think it is. Bogging, IMHO, is more a function of physical laws based on the design of the vehicle and the severity of the mud, than it is of driver skill. Driver skill, IMHO, is most important for spotting and avoiding areas that the vehicle isn't likely to negotiate. That is, better drivers don't get stuck as often because they go around bad hazards that novices plow right into. But if the expert goes into this same mudhole, he'll get stuck right beside the rookie.

Now consider a 20m tile of muddy grass. In an area that small, any safer areas big enough for a vehicle to cross would be obvious to all, it would seem to me. Or there's no such area, and everybody has to hope for the best. Thus, you'd expect no difference in results due to driver experience. So I think CM's apparent method of treating a muddy tile as uniformly muddy throughout is justified--it's an equal hazard to all drivers.

So, it seems to me that the only way a better driver would avoid getting bogged in such a tile is to drive through a different tile. This entails a major change of course, probably more than once, adding greatly both to the distance traveled and the risk of taking a flank or rear shot.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Isn't this already modeled to some extent by making offroad speed slower? Going straight in sparse woods doesn't really mean plonking down every tree that gets into the way, does it?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think the above are analogous to weaving around mudholes. In orchards (scattered trees) you can drive tractors in almost any direction without hitting trees, so you don't have to go around the whole tile like for mud. Also, vehicles go slower offroad even in dry conditions for many reasons.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>But I still feel a good driver should have a better chance to unbog than a bad one. A bad driver would be likely to just

step onto the pedal until the vehicle is sunk.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I dunno. I'm sure a large part of tank driver training is about dealing with mud. You'd think that would be as basic a skill to a tank driver as how to load a rifle is to a grunt. So even green drivers, which have received "basic training" per the manual, would be expected to have a working knowledge of unbogging procedures.

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

-Bullethead

Visit the brand new Raider Operations message board at www.delphi.com/raiderops

Main site www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

[Jarmo]

A green driver, for all his basic knowledge of avoiding mudholes,

would be likely to be very nervous in his first actual firefigt.

Maybe even in a mild state of panic. Leading to hasty, not properly

thought of decisions. A terrain he could negotiate while

practising, would not be so easily negotiated now.

As for freeing the vehicle, it's a very different thing

to be lectured about what to do when bogged, than to actually

do it. Now I don't know if tank driver practice used to

include driving a tank into a mudhole and try to get out until

you've blown a track. And then do it a dozen times again,

but I doubt it.

A veteran would probably have done it before, a distinct advantage.

[Slapdragon]

In a test of 40 Elite King Tigers and 40 Regular, the Elite bogged on flat ground in rain and mud an average of 345 meters, while the Regulars bogged in 330 meters. This is statistically insignificant. In other word I would bet morale is not a major factor in the CM bogging formula.

Two interesting things came out. Elites pivot twice as fast as regulars which can be tactically ver important, and bogging tended to come in clusters, possibly because of the formula that is used to figure them.

[Bullethead]

Jarmo said:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>A green driver, for all his basic knowledge of avoiding mudholes, would be likely to be very nervous in his first actual firefigt. Maybe even in a mild state of panic. Leading to hasty, not properly

thought of decisions. A terrain he could negotiate while practising, would not be so easily negotiated now.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There are 2 types of people in firefights: those at least mildly panicked and those already dead. As some old sweat once said, "Anyone who is not terrified doesn't understand the situation." I've been shot at many times over the last 20 years, by accident and on purpose, and I fight fires that aren't using intelligence to kill me. But I still suck a "20-minute" air tank down in about 10 minutes .

Seriously, I think we are talking past each other. My position is that the CM system considers a "muddy" tile equally muddy throughout, and if a tile is "muddy", then all vehicles are at risk regardless of who is driving them. So, an experienced driver would like to avoid the whole tile and stick to the roads. But if you order him through the mud, he's going to obey your commands and maybe get stuck like anybody else.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>As for freeing the vehicle, it's a very different thing to be lectured about what to do when bogged, than to actually

do it. Now I don't know if tank driver practice used to include driving a tank into a mudhole and try to get out until you've blown a track. And then do it a dozen times again, but I doubt it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know the World War One Brit tank school did exactly this. Of course, given the muddy moonscapes that were the norm in the Brit sector of the front, no other form of training would remotely suit requirements.

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

-Bullethead

Visit the brand new Raider Operations message board at www.delphi.com/raiderops

Main site www.historicalgames.bizland.com/index.html

[This message has been edited by Bullethead (edited 09-20-2000).]

[Mikeydz]

Ok, I ran some tests... I'm no expert, but have loads of free time so this is what I did.

Total Number of Test Runs: 1000

Test Ground Condition: Mud

Test Vehicle: Basic US M4

Test Vehicle Speed: Fast Move

I ran 20 tanks of each experiance level (Green, Reg, Vet, Crack, and Elite). I had them race at fast move over open terrain over a course 1000 meters long. The totals I'm giving is the percentage of tanks that completed the course. I repeated the test 10 times, for a total of 200 runs for each experiance group, or 1000 tests total.

Green: 37%

Regular: 39%

Veteran: 36%

Crack: 35%

Elite: 34%

I guess if you factor in margin of error, then more than likely this can be considered close to a dead heat.

It does not look like experiance helps at all as far as preventing a tank from becoming immobilized due to ground conditions.

BTW, for you statistical types out there, how do you figure out what your margin of error is? I know the large the sample, the less the margin of error, but how do you figure it?

Mikey

[Slapdragon]

The 66th and 67th Armored, later the core of CCA and CCB of the 2nd AD, trained extensively in rough field driving, and practiced it in manuevers. They also gained a lot of practical experience when the switched from M3 Light to M3 Meduim tanks in the core battalions -- in the Louisiana manuevers the managed to get a large number of their new heavier tanks, not really because they were inexperienced, but because they were new to the tank (Blaker: Iron Knights, 1999).

761 Tank Battalion, according to oral histories of Company B recounted in "The 761st Black Panther Battalion in World War Two" (Wilson, 1999) practiced crossing antitank ditches in Texas which Antitank units were practicing setting up. This included purposeful tests, if a ditch did not get them stuck then it was rebuilt until it did. Th eunit claimed this was great practice for driving tanks.

Steve Jackson

(an amplification is in order: The "Louisiana Manuevers" happened in 1940 and no tanks bogged down because none left the road. To make the manuevers fair their were resticted to paved surfaces. The Louisiana training were many tanks bogged occured in 1942. By that time, tank divisions were allowed to leave the road.)

[This message has been edited by Slapdragon (edited 09-20-2000).]

[Pacestick]

My two bobs worth

Drivers rarely have the opportunity to pick and choose a route, their life is to jockey of the the hill and drive at best speed to the new overwatch/fire position as directed by the crew commander.

A bogged vehicle is hardly ever unbogged due to the efforts of the crew. The usual procedure is another vehicle in the platoon tows it out if possible, if not, it is left until a specialised recovery vehicle brought up from the second echelon can tow it out.

Experienced drivers drop tracks, get bogged and break down less frequently than green drivers but as someone else pointed out, sometimes it cannot be helped due to the ground/ weather conditions and poop happens

Yes, platoons do deliberately bog vehicles and practice recovering them in training.