Hunt/Move Command and Taking Fire

[ZPB II]

13 hours ago, Artkin said:

This is one the most boggling things in CM. Its essentially impossible to advance without taking casualties unless you sprint to a piece of cover before your enemy can see/shoot you

There are definitely a ton of weird stuff that happens in CM, it's a computer program after all. But in long term the way CM emulates trends of reality quite well, it's not supposed to be easy to advance without taking casualties. It's frustrating when a plan and orders that one meticulously plotted doesn't go well, but atleast personally the biggest charm is that it never goes as planned, playing CM is all about controlling chaos. It's a punishing game, cruel mistress, femme fatale kinda thing like Dark Souls or Escape From Tarkov.

What gamemode and tempo do you maintain? I play WEGO so waiting 5 ingame minutes to allow troops to observe and listen to their surroundings can be done in 20 real-life seconds. Advancing without taking casualties is a painstaking process, but if you methodically move from cover to cover, always maintaining excellent command & communication, always have overwatch covering a manouver element and always Target Brief the most potential threatening vectors while having a constant recon screen and support on call one can improve the odds. I can play maybe one "methodical" game in one day before it gets mentally tiring and but I can play a dozen scenarios in a quicker fashion where I take more casualties. I only recently got back to playing CM after a long break and at first I was frustrated at how I felt my troops were doing stupid stuff, but then I adjusted the way I play and I'm seeing less casualties.

[ZPB II]

Also, from personal experiences I feel SLOW might be an under-appreciated command when moving into contact or I'm just experiencing statistical outliers. I've actively started using it more and I'm seeing great success. High-experience units moving into contact with SLOW will often spot enemies really well and will immediately return fire if engaged and don't seem to suffer from suppression as badly.

It's really tricky to use since it will exhaust your troops really fast, but doing those final move into contacts manouvers with slow has proven useful. 

I usually used Slow when moving ATGMs, MGs, FOs and such into positions but now I've been using it to enter buildings and crest terrain into contact.

Be careful when using it in the open though. 

 

Edited September 17, 2021 by ZPB II

[domfluff]

Slow is the best command to crest hills, certainly, and for a number of reasons - not least is that it exposes the minimum amount of you before you get into a firing position.

[Simcoe]

Great posts from everyone. 
 

I’ve accepted that the movement commands are compromises between real life and computer game reality.

for the original point in the OP. When clearing out a forest, I’ve found sending multiple small teams spaced out using the hunt command is the way to go. If one team is shot at and doesn’t drop. Another team close by should get the spot. 
 

I think slow is mainly useful for sneaking into a spot for observation like the crest of a hill or edge of a forest

[benpark]

The coding of that needs to specify a lot of variables - cover, morale, etc. - so the happiest medium for the most situations, while depicting "human" behavior is the goal. I suspect that some of the adjustment from the "hit the deck" behavior when faced with enemy fire may towards with a game-wide view of behaviors. If your pixelmen ducks under enemy fire, that impacts a coded AI player's behavior as well (both strat and tac). A trained squad should be able to maintain attack some degree of attack momentum in the face of light fire.

For the majority of cases, the general movement behavior seems better than ever to me right now - there was a massive batch of testing prior to RT:FR on that -  for all titles, but given the dense nature of some of the combat, and the issues people were seeing with bocage a few years ago, this received a lot of BFC attention. Getting an AI attack going was also something that I spent years on for FR (imperfect still that it is), and these fixes helped keep the AI from completely bogging down (along with lots of experimentation and testing).

Could it be better - sure - I'd like an animation/separate state depicting something between Normal and Pinned. "Alert", maybe. They could swap their current Movement order to "Assault", following the same path as prior. Animation could have their heads ducked a bit, etc. 

The other thing about this balancing act is that the AI plays by the same Tac AI rules as the player does - no peeking, etc. It struggles with the same challenges of keeping their forces moving, without nearly as many powers of reaction. So having them stick to the plan as much as possible helps.

 

[Simcoe]

Benpark,

 

i completely agree. At first it frustrated me that my troops clearing a forest wouldn’t drop down in cover when fired at but would that also affect different situations. Let’s say u want to move to contact with hunt and a stray bullet goes near the troops. They would drop down and you would have to wait another minute to give them the same order. 
 

it’s nice to hear from a more technical standpoint why this compromise was made.

[Artkin]

10 hours ago, ZPB II said:

What gamemode and tempo do you maintain?

First I would like to say, great post. I agree.

This game sure is all about balancing chaos.

I play WEGO and Realtime on Iron. I have human opponents. My tempo is 1-4 ferocious turns per day

[MikeyD]

Judging by past poster comments, players seem to prefer playing veteran or higher, and extreme motivation levels. There are pluses to that but one downside is it becomes difficult to spook your troops. They're less likely to go to ground or second-guess their orders. A fanatic will die where he stands without hesitation. 

Lets remember the definition of 'hunt'. Proceed forward until you get eyeballs on the enemy. It isn't proceed forward until an unseen enemy sends bullets whizzing overhead. A crack squad will take their orders seriously.

[Artkin]

5 minutes ago, MikeyD said:

Judging by past poster comments, players seem to prefer playing veteran or higher, and extreme motivation levels. There are pluses to that but one downside is it becomes difficult to spook your troops. They're less likely to go to ground or second-guess their orders. A fanatic will die where he stands without hesitation. 

Lets remember the definition of 'hunt'. Proceed forward until you get eyeballs on the enemy. It isn't proceed forward until an unseen enemy sends bullets whizzing overhead. A crack squad will take their orders seriously.

But the AI should react to the gunfire, as it does with other commands. Like, if I use the move command to walk across a field and my guys start taking fire, theyre going to start sprinting whether they see the enemy or not. Hunt can be wonky in contrast.

[chuckdyke]

16 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

troops will continue to hunt for over a minute while a sniper takes potshots at them.

Did the unit on hunt had a full contact? Who spotted the sniper?

[chuckdyke]

4 hours ago, MikeyD said:

Lets remember the definition of 'hunt'.

Read any dictionary the definition is the pursuit and killing of animals. I think it is a poor choice of words and leaves it open to interpretation. My interpretation is moving to contact. Sometimes the contact fires at you more accurately and with more fire superiority. The 'hunt command' becomes very limited. Entering woods or building.

[womble]

3 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

Read any dictionary the definition is the pursuit and killing of animals. I think it is a poor choice of words and leaves it open to interpretation.

Is English your first language? Hunt has a much wider definition and usage. Outside of the pursuit of game, it basically means to look for until you find (unless you give up). I can hunt for my keys. I can go bargain hunting. In the field of mechanics, to give a specific example, a poorly-governed engine that runs faster and slower and repeats that cycle without external input is described as "hunting" (it's an anthropomorphisation of the engine, for sure, but we humans do that all the time). Dictionaries that omit this/these aspects of the usage of the word are lacking.

And it's exactly what Hunt does.

[chuckdyke]

1 minute ago, womble said:

Is English your first language?

Interesting question, I am 71 years and talked English for 56 years. Technically it is not my first language. Here in CM hunting in the command panel tends to confuse people. The closest unit in which  we can apply hunting is the sniper. After all the snipe is a gamebird and very elusive. Like my father told me: "Je moet dus 'n fiets hebben voordat je kan fietsen." (You must have a bicycle before you can go cycling.) Same with hunt it is related to Hund (German) Hond (Dutch) meaning dog or hound.  

[Artkin]

1 hour ago, womble said:

Is English your first language? Hunt has a much wider definition and usage. Outside of the pursuit of game, it basically means to look for until you find (unless you give up). I can hunt for my keys. I can go bargain hunting. In the field of mechanics, to give a specific example, a poorly-governed engine that runs faster and slower and repeats that cycle without external input is described as "hunting" (it's an anthropomorphisation of the engine, for sure, but we humans do that all the time). Dictionaries that omit this/these aspects of the usage of the word are lacking.

And it's exactly what Hunt does.

You sure are a helpful guy. 

[Sgt Joch]

Problem with threads like these is that people make assumptions about how infantry behave with a HUNT command without bothering to check how they actually do behave in the game. When this topic came out last year, I ran a series of tests to see if there was an issue. As far as I can tell, infantry on HUNT behaves in a realistic manner. This are the results I had posted:

Quote

I just did a quick test in CMSF2 and do not see any bug. Infantry units on HUNT will stop and go prone in 1-2 seconds when under fire from an unspotted enemy.

Quote

Just tried again in CMBN, 1st mission of the Scottish corridor, split all the squads and gave each team a HUNT order towards the German lines. They will stop and go prone as soon as they are fired upon, 1 or 2 bursts, even when the enemy is unspotted. Not one took any casualties before going prone.

Quote

I ran some more quick tests in CMBN, U.S. regular infantry HUNT towards single shooters. Ignoring situations where there was a hit, it seems to take an average of 2-4 shots before they stop and go prone from an unseen enemy. There may be some tweaking required with single shooters since they do not generate much suppression, unlike MGs or automatic weapons

so, basically, infantry on HUNT will cancel the order and go prone in the following circumstances:

1. they spot an enemy unit;

2. they take a casualty;

3. their suppression meter goes up to the second bar, which can take as little 1-2 MG bursts coming close or 2-4  shots from a single shooter coming close.

Tweaking the sensitivity to fire is always a balance, you don't want your troops to keep advancing when they are fired on, OTOH you don't want all your troops going prone because of some enemy fire in the general area.

Again if anyone has a save game where you feel infantry is not behaving in a realistic manner, post it so we can take a look at it.

[Artkin]

On 9/18/2021 at 8:13 AM, Sgt Joch said:

3. their suppression meter goes up to the second bar

Considering this was said twice by two reputable sources, I believe this is what the thread was looking for. 

[domfluff]

The frustration, naturally, is going to be on where you set that suppression bar. From the player's point of view, they can see the unit coming under fire and their men not reacting - either because they're not getting suppressed at all (the rounds aren't hitting anywhere close), or because they're not being suppressed enough.

Anywhere you draw that arbitrary line is going to be wrong in some manner. I think where it is, is probably okay. I do think you could make an argument for having this set to be a little more sensitive, but that will also inevitably be wrong, just in a different direction.

[Bulletpoint]

I'd be happy if the hunt command just did what it says in the manual: stop when fired upon.

[chuckdyke]

On 9/28/2021 at 12:52 AM, Bulletpoint said:

I'd be happy if the hunt command just did what it says in the manual: stop when fired upon.

That's when we select troops for certain jobs. -2 vs +2. The -2 experience stress levels faster than the +2 unit and seek cover when under fire. The +2 on the other hand keep going and get shot to bits. I don't regard -2 as inferior at all. They are more suited to move to contact. Even when no harm is done they show increased stress levels and respond to the evade command on the end of a turn. That is my experience in the game. 

[dbsapp]

On 9/18/2021 at 6:41 PM, chuckdyke said:

Interesting question, I am 71 years and talked English for 56 years. Technically it is not my first language. Here in CM hunting in the command panel tends to confuse people. The closest unit in which  we can apply hunting is the sniper. After all the snipe is a gamebird and very elusive. Like my father told me: "Je moet dus 'n fiets hebben voordat je kan fietsen." (You must have a bicycle before you can go cycling.) Same with hunt it is related to Hund (German) Hond (Dutch) meaning dog or hound.  

May I ask what's the first? Just curious.

[chuckdyke]

7 minutes ago, dbsapp said:

May I ask what's the first? Just curious.

Dutch I gave you the clue with the sentence. 

[dbsapp]

3 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

Dutch I gave you the clue with the sentence. 

Yup, sorry, I had to pay more attention.

[chuckdyke]

No worries. 

 

[chuckdyke]

Spotting from vehicles 'Usually Hapless' came up with this gem on YouTube. 

 

[Freyberg]

On 9/18/2021 at 10:41 PM, chuckdyke said:

Here in CM hunting in the command panel tends to confuse people.

In CM1 it was called 'move to contact.'