Steel Beasts vs Combat Mission t-72 visibility test

[chuckdyke]

The topic was T72 visibility test @Drifter Man showed us how to do a proper test. Topic should finish here. A claim that the game is biased should be backed up by evidence. We need a test protocol in other words. 

[SergeantSqook]

11 minutes ago, dbsapp said:

But I was rewarded after I found in you faithul and passionate follower. 

I am a big fan of your work

[dbsapp]

12 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

Topic should finish here.

[chuckdyke]

The good old days of the worlds worst spotters.

 

[chuckdyke]

Spotters? why the heck do we need spotters for?

 

[dbsapp]

8 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

The good old days of the worlds worst spotters.

 

I think now we need our version of Hitler in the bunker meme (looks like it's from the same movie). 

[chuckdyke]

10 minutes ago, dbsapp said:

I think now we need our version of Hitler in the bunker meme

You mean this one? The Brits beat them at soccer too.

 

[Redwolf]

Stop messing up this thread.

[The_Capt]

6 hours ago, dbsapp said:

Don't worry, they will never "nerf US" and you'll be able to play your fantasy toys and magic Abrams in the rainbows and unicorns world as long as you wish. 

Ah, there it is.  So this is not really about making the game better, this is about pushing an anti-US, pro-Russian agenda.  I had heard about people like you and am flattered that you guys think we merit any attention, even from what is clearly the lower tier of the talent pool.

Hey, an idea to send back to HQ, why don't you buy another 10k copies in order to really show us the error of our ways?

[Bulletpoint]

On 10/27/2021 at 5:29 AM, dbsapp said:

But I must admit that this bug is not unique to CMCW, it happenes in all CM games due to uncunny ability of AI vision to see the "holes" in the forest that is not available to the human eye.

It's not really that the AI finds small holes in the vegetation, but that the graphics of the game don't quite show the real conditions.

Vegetation seems much denser visually than how the game engine calculates it, which means we as players think our units are safe in the forest even though there's a real risk they will get spotted through the leaves.

Conversely, darkness and fog seems a lot less dense graphically than the game engine atually calculates visibility levels. Which means in many scenarios, we will not be able to spot units at distances where it looks graphically like it's not that dark or foggy.

Both issues are not so much a case of the simulation getting things wrong as not showing the conditions clearly to the player. I've seen so many players post questions about these things, and I've posted several, myself, but eventually I just learnt to work my way around the issues.

[dbsapp]

32 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Hey, an idea to send back to HQ, why don't you buy another 10k copies in order to really show us the error of our ways?

Wow, great tip! I'll notify Moscow immediately.

You will be handosmly rewarded for this recommendation, tovarich. 

[chuckdyke]

46 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

the graphics of the game don't quite show the real conditions.

It depends on the tiles. How many times we see we have a no LOS when we see the target on the screen. 

[The_Capt]

20 minutes ago, dbsapp said:

Wow, great tip! I'll notify Moscow immediately.

You will be handosmly rewarded for this recommendation, tovarich. 

Aw, you know I just can't stay mad at you.  You are a troll but you are our troll and we would be lost with you.  

[dbsapp]

2 minutes ago, The_Capt said:

Aw, you know I just can't stay mad at you.  You are a troll but you are our troll and we would be lost with you.  

 

[holoween]

15 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

It's not really that the AI finds small holes in the vegetation, but that the graphics of the game don't quite show the real conditions.

Vegetation seems much denser visually than how the game engine calculates it, which means we as players think our units are safe in the forest even though there's a real risk they will get spotted through the leaves.

Conversely, darkness and fog seems a lot less dense graphically than the game engine atually calculates visibility levels. Which means in many scenarios, we will not be able to spot units at distances where it looks graphically like it's not that dark or foggy.

Both issues are not so much a case of the simulation getting things wrong as not showing the conditions clearly to the player. I've seen so many players post questions about these things, and I've posted several, myself, but eventually I just learnt to work my way around the issues.

Id argue that that in itself is quite a significant failing though probably not easy to fix( if its even possible).

 

[Bulletpoint]

6 hours ago, holoween said:

Id argue that that in itself is quite a significant failing though probably not easy to fix( if its even possible).

 

It would just mean adjusting the values that govern how much graphical fog/darkness effect to apply to different conditions, and to change the graphics of the trees to make them look less dense. This last part can be somewhat achieved with mods.

[ASL Veteran]

9 hours ago, holoween said:

Id argue that that in itself is quite a significant failing though probably not easy to fix( if its even possible).

 

If visibility is only - say about 10 feet in foggy conditions and the game only let the player see 10 feet in game terms on the map the game would be unplayable because the player can't see anything when trying to play.  If the player can't see what he's doing then the player can't physically play the game. 

[A Canadian Cat]

1 hour ago, ASL Veteran said:

If visibility is only - say about 10 feet in foggy conditions and the game only let the player see 10 feet in game terms on the map the game would be unplayable because the player can't see anything when trying to play.  If the player can't see what he's doing then the player can't physically play the game. 

Yep. I personally would like a true WYSYG mode for fog, darkness, blizzards etc. but that would have to be toggle-able so you could actually play - as @ASL Veteran correctly points out. I think it would be pretty cool to follow a unit through the fog seeing what they can really see. Like smoke now.

Not to mention it would put to rest some of the "why can't my guys see that <insert big scary thing here> right in front of them". OK it wouldn't really stop those posts but we could turn them all into:

OP: "Why can't my guys see that <insert big scary thing here> right in front of them. The game is broken"

The rest of us: "Have you toggled on True Visibility (tm) mode?

OP: "Oh"

[BeondTheGrave]

4 hours ago, IanL said:

Yep. I personally would like a true WYSYG mode for fog, darkness, blizzards etc. but that would have to be toggle-able so you could actually play - as @ASL Veteran correctly points out. I think it would be pretty cool to follow a unit through the fog seeing what they can really see. Like smoke now.

Not to mention it would put to rest some of the "why can't my guys see that <insert big scary thing here> right in front of them". OK it wouldn't really stop those posts but we could turn them all into:

OP: "Why can't my guys see that <insert big scary thing here> right in front of them. The game is broken"

The rest of us: "Have you toggled on True Visibility (tm) mode?

OP: "Oh"

A 'soldier's perspective' toggle would be a pretty good solution IMO, and could work sort of like the trees toggle where its just bound to a key. Maybe do some highlighting on 'Things this dude can see.' 

Another solution that IMO would solve a lot of this would be to add something like Steel Division or Graviteam has. In SD you hit a key and around your mouse piper the visible arcs are shaded drawn in, so you can check visibility from any point on the map. That may itself be too much for CM, but I think in concept something similar would be very useful. Let me click a guy and hit a key to see what his fields of view & fire are. We already have a similar function with the targeting line, and thats a decent stopgap, but IMO in terms of quality of life I would rather just get a full display of what the pixeltruppen can or cant see. I dont even think it would be that unrealistic either, as it seems totally plausible that a commander would call up a tank or a squad leader and say "Hey Sgt. Jimmy, tell me what you can see from here." Plus commanders can walk the terrain and see for themselves, something its much harder to do in CM. Beyond that I think it would simplify some of the more annoying parts of CM and just make the game play a little smoother. IMO from a gameplay perspective, more information for the player is always preferable to less. 

[ASL Veteran]

4 hours ago, IanL said:

Yep. I personally would like a true WYSYG mode for fog, darkness, blizzards etc. but that would have to be toggle-able so you could actually play - as @ASL Veteran correctly points out. I think it would be pretty cool to follow a unit through the fog seeing what they can really see. Like smoke now.

Not to mention it would put to rest some of the "why can't my guys see that <insert big scary thing here> right in front of them". OK it wouldn't really stop those posts but we could turn them all into:

OP: "Why can't my guys see that <insert big scary thing here> right in front of them. The game is broken"

The rest of us: "Have you toggled on True Visibility (tm) mode?

OP: "Oh"

I also seem to recall that when CMSF was first released the trees were actually represented on the map as physical objects - at least the trunks were (not sure about the branches and leaves).  It was miserable because vehicles would have to pick their way through the tree trunks and the trees themselves offered very little cover or concealment because the bullets had to actually intersect the trunks or something.  Just going from distant memories though.

[Erwin]

From a gameplay perspective that makes sense re making things easier.  However, we already have too much info from the "God's eye" capability we have which is better than the most modern electronic battlefield tech.  It makes sens that the player should not have 100% accurate info re what can or cannot be seen from any location.  In addition, the height of the unit makes a difference.  A tank will have a different LOS view than an inf guy at exactly the same location.  

[Redwolf]

59 minutes ago, BeondTheGrave said:

Another solution that IMO would solve a lot of this would be to add something like Steel Division or Graviteam has. In SD you hit a key and around your mouse piper the visible arcs are shaded drawn in, so you can check visibility from any point on the map. That may itself be too much for CM, but I think in concept something similar would be very useful. Let me click a guy and hit a key to see what his fields of view & fire are.

BFC has directly commented on this several times, saying that this kind of LOS checking tool is never gonna make it into a CM game.

I also think it would be quite messy to fire that up in a forest given how trees and LOS work right now.

[Artkin]

8 hours ago, ASL Veteran said:

If visibility is only - say about 10 feet in foggy conditions and the game only let the player see 10 feet in game terms on the map the game would be unplayable because the player can't see anything when trying to play.  If the player can't see what he's doing then the player can't physically play the game. 

When you get down low to eye level as the troops, this is when the fog should kick in. I believe this is how it works already but not 100% sure. 

[Codreanu]

As useful as a visibility arc would be I feel it would take away a bit of the magic of the game. What I'd kill for more than anything is just camera heights that correlate to a prone/crouching/standing soldier or the view out of a commander's cupola, or just make height adjustments a smooth graduation so the player can dial it in exactly how they want.

[chuckdyke]

I honestly don't know why people keep comparing it to other games? Battle front is relative spotting. Before you start a game you can open the map in the editor. There you can see the tiles where you can look through and the tiles where you can't. You can go to elevations where you can see the exact heights of every single tile. They call this map recon and in real life you would examine a detailed topographic map. Now when you play the game an LOS is determined by the game engine when you get contacts a tentative contact for area fire and a full contact for LOS. The editor can be so kind to paint trees on heavy forest tiles for example but he doesn't have to. You can test this for yourself make a simple map and see or you can have an LOS through a heavy forest tile with no trees painted on it. A simple test plot a movement or movements with an AFV through a forest. If you can drive through you can shoot through it.