Frustration with CMCW - Russian side

[Andrew Kulin]

I want to start off by sharing text from a couple of recent e-mails I sent to a regular opponent while playing CMCW with PBEM++, with me as the Russian player in both of these separate scenarios.  I think it will be clear from the text what I am driving at, and I wonder if this is something others are experiencing, and if this is something the development team needs to address.

Scenario:  Unhoook the Leash

BTW, in our current CM match, it is frustrating playing Ivan. Hidden in trees with LOS to open ground, but cannot spot large moving vehicles in the open. I can spot a deer 500 m off to my side at tree line in dusk conditions with peripheral vision while driving on highway at 80-100 kmh but my guys sitting still looking right at tanks cannot see them. And they are equipped additionally with sensors??? And your guys, while on the move, can see my non-moving stuff and take them out with one shot.

 

Case in point, your second M1 to be immobilized. By HE. Why, you might ask? Because my T72 was firing at the infantry "behind" the tank. The tank, which, could not at all be seen by my tank. But the infantry "behind" the tank? Totally visible.

Scenario:  A Beautiful Morning (from Scenario Depot)

Meanwhile in our other game, you are not going to believe this.  I took out a tank with an ATGM.

 

Which one might naturally assume is the unbelievable aspect based on my experience with Russian sensor systems.  And in a way, those systems did not disappoint.

 

But here is what happened.

 

I was checking LOS last turn and my IFV could see your four beautifully lined up tanks.  By see, I mean the light blue line was present all in that area as I was using the target command to check LOS.  But actually see the four tanks.  No.  Of course not.

 

In doing this I must have accidentally issued a target command, at a point beyond all your tanks.  Think of an area fire command.

 

So the bugger launches an ATGM as area fire.  Has not spotted a single tank.  The ATGM just happens to hit and blow up your tank, because it happened to be in the way.  My IFV still cannot see the flaming, smoking, mass of twisted steel by the way.  Which of course, is par for the course.

 

I think I may have discovered a way to actually get Russian BMPs to fire ATGMs at high value targets.  Can't be any worse than what happens normally.

 

It seems to me that the game (CMCW at least) has a flaw in how Russian IFVs and Tanks locate (see) enemy IFVs and Tanks.  In both these games, what is not mentioned in my e-mails to my opponent, is that while my armored vehicles cannot see enemy vehicles, infantry units can spot the enemy vehicles pretty reasonably.  And in some cases my infantry are sitting next to one of my tanks or BMPs, and the infantry squad or HQ, can see tanks rolling across open fields, but the tank or BMP positioned next to the infantry cannot, even though using targeting command for both units (infantry,  BMP/tank) shows a blue line over a large swath of area all around the enemy vehicles.  And consider that my infantry, depending on stance, are much lower to the ground (say 1 to 6 feet above ground for eyeballs/binocs) compared to the sensor equipped vehicle, which must be sitting say 8-12 feet or more above ground.  I now try to open up all my fighting vehicles in the hope that the commander/gunner sitting at the top of the vehicle.

 

I fully appreciate that US sensor systems might be better quality than Soviet sensors (though I am not sure if that is how it was during CMCW's time frame), which to me would provide advantages such as being able to pick out targets further distances than Soviet forces at night or under darker conditions, or being able to see through smoke better than Soviet forces etc.  But is seems the way CMCW is currently being modeled, the Soviet vehicles are essentially blind to US vehicles much of the time.  It is like the sensors/optics on these vehicles are painted over/closed and hinder rather than enhance siting of enemy vehicles, but not of infantry.  And even unbuttoning vehicles does not appear to improve chances of siting enemy armor, on the move, in the open no less.  So a commander in a cupola, presumably with binocs cannot see the enemy armor, but infantry/HQs on the ground with or without binocs can.

 

So wondering if anyone else is noticing this and if this is something the development team should look into.

[Halmbarte]

From my notes on fighting like the Soviets:

1) Time spent on recon is never wasted.

2) Time and resources spent killing enemy recon is never wasted. 

3) Have a plan and execute it. 

4) The artillery fire plan dictates the maneuver plan. The maneuver plan dictates the fire plan. These must be mutually supportive. 

5) A company of Sov tanks spots better than any single German/American tank. 

6) Take away the better spotting offered by the NATO habit of fighting unbuttoned. Get them heads down to decrease their situational awareness. 

7) When you attack, attack! Don't poke him with one finger at a time. Make a fist and crush the enemy with overwhelming force. 

10) Use a platoon to crush a squad > use a company to crush a platoon >> use a battalion to crush a squad. Fair fights are for suckers.

9) Keep pressing attacks until they aren't feasible anymore, but don't reinforce failure. The Germans/Americans never have enough troops/tanks. 

10) Just because you have mass doesn't mean the only way forwards is a frontal assault. There are other ways to win that don't involve sticking your dick into the meat grinder until it jams. Recon routes that bypass the enemy, the Germans/Americans never have enough troops/tanks to cover every avenue of approach. Infantry infiltration is a thing.

11) Take you time, don't be in a rush to die. You'll probably run out of people, tanks, and/or ammo before you run out of time. 

H

Edited April 8, 2023 by Halmbarte

[Bufo]

2 hours ago, Andrew Kulin said:

So wondering if anyone else is noticing this and if this is something the development team should look into.

The game has always been like this. Devs / community think this is fine.

Edited April 8, 2023 by Bufo

[Lethaface]

Git gud

Abrams, Bradley, M60 TTS all have thermal optic. Try a game without those (although TOW and Dragon also have thermals) and feel the difference. I don't have issues with my USSR forces. The vehicles are usually worse on spotting/optics, but not short on firepower. 

Sharing C2 contacts helps, that's another thing which is easier as US forces. 
And yes sometimes I also wonder if the exact spotting values modeled are 'correct'. All I know is that thermals do make all the difference because it makes stuff standout from the scenery.

[Brille]

Well my experience is totally pro soviet in that regard. I had instances where american forces are as blind as them. In one a team of bmp smoked almost an entire platoon of M60 in a forest without those ever seeing them. In another an T80 platoon ambushed my M60 TTS platoon and almost wiped them out completely. Only my M901 and some close infantry attacks could stop them.

So I cannot confirm those frustrations, only that I have them on both sides equally. The big game changer here however is the introduction of thermal imagers. So if the americans have those (and I suppose they did in your games, as you were talking about M1´s) you will have a hard time because they give them a huge leap in spotting ability.

If you try a head on attack with a 1on1 you will often loose. The M60 TTS might not be able to penetrate (if you have an T64 or higher) but he will certainly damage your tank till he is an immobile steelbox, while the soviet tank only sees dust and smoke.

So I say that soviet tanks are at least on par with their US counterparts in spotting ability BEFORE they get their thermal upgrades.

 

Maybe try to adapt your tactics: Try to flank american tanks more, because their thermals are only looking forward or keep their commanders in the tanks and your commanders out and looking. Though that last one might be against soviet doctrine.

And don´t go in for 1on1 engagements. Overwhelm the enemy and get local superiority.

You see it now in Ukraine how the russians struggle because (at least partially) the lack of thermal imagers, while ukraine gets more and more of them.

The exact same "problem" is there in CMSF2 and CMBS.

[The_Capt]

We have had a lot of debates on the spotting models in CM.  No game is perfect but CM’s is pretty solid.  A lot of times players get frustrated but this is entirely realistic.  Perfect no, and we always get weird instances but having playing both sides a lot the game is not that far off.

As to Unhook The Leash - this is the last scenario of the US campaign.  You have M1s and Bradley’s versus 2nd ech Soviet troops, that are also kinda beat up.  Not sure of player CW experience levels but this scenario is pretty asymmetric for the US player…up to a point (and it has the MGB!).

Soviet tanks are not fantastic for spotting but they were not really designed for duelling, they were designed for getting in close and crushing.  If you start duelling T72s with M1s you are going to lose badly.  Maybe the T80 and T64 but even they have to be careful.

[Andrew Kulin]

I fully recognize that M1s and Bradleys have the spotting advantage.  But what I am having a hard time with is my Soviet vehicles parked just inside tree lines looking over open fields in mid daylight with great visibility (evidenced by blue target lines over a large area), on a defensive mission, unable to even see the unsuspecting M1s, M2s as they are advancing in a large group.   I pulled out CMRT (Gog/Magog) scenario and I have buttoned T34s able to spot stationary Tiger tanks from at least 1500 m in open fields.  July 1944 technology - optics/observation slits, Binocs, eyeballs doing what I would reasonably expect in being able to eventually spot big hunks of metal in a field during daylight (as in a minute or two) vs. 1981ish Soviet tanks not being able to replicate that on a large group of moving targets.  At all.  Just does not seem reasonable to me.  But they seem to have no issue spotting infantry soldiers in a reasonable time frame under the same conditions (even when blocked from view by an invisible M1 tank). 

Not asking that Soviet AFVs be able to spot other AFVs instantly, but certainly they should be able to so after some period of time, especially when said enemy tanks are moving over open ground, and even firing their main weapons.  But 5 - 10 minutes or more with no sightings?  That's a tough one to swallow.

Thanks for replies.  I won't belabor the point as it seems to have been settled long ago in other discussions.

[Halmbarte]

One thing I have done with Sov armor is to get the crews out. Get the crews out, let them get spots, then get them remounted. The crews are much harder to spot than their vehicles are and once they have radios again they can share spots with the rest of the formation. 

H

[Andrew Kulin]

Thanks - I will try that.

[Lethaface]

16 hours ago, Andrew Kulin said:

I fully recognize that M1s and Bradleys have the spotting advantage.  But what I am having a hard time with is my Soviet vehicles parked just inside tree lines looking over open fields in mid daylight with great visibility (evidenced by blue target lines over a large area), on a defensive mission, unable to even see the unsuspecting M1s, M2s as they are advancing in a large group.   I pulled out CMRT (Gog/Magog) scenario and I have buttoned T34s able to spot stationary Tiger tanks from at least 1500 m in open fields.  July 1944 technology - optics/observation slits, Binocs, eyeballs doing what I would reasonably expect in being able to eventually spot big hunks of metal in a field during daylight (as in a minute or two) vs. 1981ish Soviet tanks not being able to replicate that on a large group of moving targets.  At all.  Just does not seem reasonable to me.  But they seem to have no issue spotting infantry soldiers in a reasonable time frame under the same conditions (even when blocked from view by an invisible M1 tank)

Not asking that Soviet AFVs be able to spot other AFVs instantly, but certainly they should be able to so after some period of time, especially when said enemy tanks are moving over open ground, and even firing their main weapons.  But 5 - 10 minutes or more with no sightings?  That's a tough one to swallow.

Thanks for replies.  I won't belabor the point as it seems to have been settled long ago in other discussions.

The comparison with ww2 is interesting. I had some similar experience in that T-62 have issues hitting targets at 1000-1500m (and preferring HEAT over APFSDS) while German ww2 tanks performing better at such ranges. Even got a kill with the Jagdtiger at 2200m.

 

[Lethaface]

17 hours ago, Halmbarte said:

One thing I have done with Sov armor is to get the crews out. Get the crews out, let them get spots, then get them remounted. The crews are much harder to spot than their vehicles are and once they have radios again they can share spots with the rest of the formation. 

H

Or use recon/infantry and make sure they share the through c2. If no link exists you can move units next to each other and they will share info.

[Andrew Kulin]

33 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

The comparison with ww2 is interesting. I had some similar experience in that T-62 have issues hitting targets at 1000-1500m (and preferring HEAT over APFSDS) while German ww2 tanks performing better at such ranges. Even got a kill with the Jagdtiger at 2200m.

 

Can we get a vehicle pack with T34s so that the Russian player can at least take shots at, and presumably kill, NATO IFVs?

[Simcoe]

On 4/8/2023 at 8:18 AM, Andrew Kulin said:

I want to start off by sharing text from a couple of recent e-mails I sent to a regular opponent while playing CMCW with PBEM++, with me as the Russian player in both of these separate scenarios.  I think it will be clear from the text what I am driving at, and I wonder if this is something others are experiencing, and if this is something the development team needs to address.

Scenario:  Unhoook the Leash

BTW, in our current CM match, it is frustrating playing Ivan. Hidden in trees with LOS to open ground, but cannot spot large moving vehicles in the open. I can spot a deer 500 m off to my side at tree line in dusk conditions with peripheral vision while driving on highway at 80-100 kmh but my guys sitting still looking right at tanks cannot see them. And they are equipped additionally with sensors??? And your guys, while on the move, can see my non-moving stuff and take them out with one shot.

 

Case in point, your second M1 to be immobilized. By HE. Why, you might ask? Because my T72 was firing at the infantry "behind" the tank. The tank, which, could not at all be seen by my tank. But the infantry "behind" the tank? Totally visible.

Scenario:  A Beautiful Morning (from Scenario Depot)

Meanwhile in our other game, you are not going to believe this.  I took out a tank with an ATGM.

 

Which one might naturally assume is the unbelievable aspect based on my experience with Russian sensor systems.  And in a way, those systems did not disappoint.

 

But here is what happened.

 

I was checking LOS last turn and my IFV could see your four beautifully lined up tanks.  By see, I mean the light blue line was present all in that area as I was using the target command to check LOS.  But actually see the four tanks.  No.  Of course not.

 

In doing this I must have accidentally issued a target command, at a point beyond all your tanks.  Think of an area fire command.

 

So the bugger launches an ATGM as area fire.  Has not spotted a single tank.  The ATGM just happens to hit and blow up your tank, because it happened to be in the way.  My IFV still cannot see the flaming, smoking, mass of twisted steel by the way.  Which of course, is par for the course.

 

I think I may have discovered a way to actually get Russian BMPs to fire ATGMs at high value targets.  Can't be any worse than what happens normally.

 

It seems to me that the game (CMCW at least) has a flaw in how Russian IFVs and Tanks locate (see) enemy IFVs and Tanks.  In both these games, what is not mentioned in my e-mails to my opponent, is that while my armored vehicles cannot see enemy vehicles, infantry units can spot the enemy vehicles pretty reasonably.  And in some cases my infantry are sitting next to one of my tanks or BMPs, and the infantry squad or HQ, can see tanks rolling across open fields, but the tank or BMP positioned next to the infantry cannot, even though using targeting command for both units (infantry,  BMP/tank) shows a blue line over a large swath of area all around the enemy vehicles.  And consider that my infantry, depending on stance, are much lower to the ground (say 1 to 6 feet above ground for eyeballs/binocs) compared to the sensor equipped vehicle, which must be sitting say 8-12 feet or more above ground.  I now try to open up all my fighting vehicles in the hope that the commander/gunner sitting at the top of the vehicle.

 

I fully appreciate that US sensor systems might be better quality than Soviet sensors (though I am not sure if that is how it was during CMCW's time frame), which to me would provide advantages such as being able to pick out targets further distances than Soviet forces at night or under darker conditions, or being able to see through smoke better than Soviet forces etc.  But is seems the way CMCW is currently being modeled, the Soviet vehicles are essentially blind to US vehicles much of the time.  It is like the sensors/optics on these vehicles are painted over/closed and hinder rather than enhance siting of enemy vehicles, but not of infantry.  And even unbuttoning vehicles does not appear to improve chances of siting enemy armor, on the move, in the open no less.  So a commander in a cupola, presumably with binocs cannot see the enemy armor, but infantry/HQs on the ground with or without binocs can.

 

So wondering if anyone else is noticing this and if this is something the development team should look into.

All the advice in this thread has been good. You need as many AFV's pointing at the enemy as possible. 

There are some problem children on the Soviet side, T-62's especially. I have them unbuttoned as much as possible and sometimes they can't see enemy tanks 300 meters away. It's like the tank commander is crewed by Ray Charles. BMP-2's have this issue two but they get a pass since they only have gunner and driver most of the time.

I would stick to the year 1980 when playing CMCW. 

[Lethaface]

12 minutes ago, Simcoe said:

All the advice in this thread has been good. You need as many AFV's pointing at the enemy as possible. 

There are some problem children on the Soviet side, T-62's especially. I have them unbuttoned as much as possible and sometimes they can't see enemy tanks 300 meters away. It's like the tank commander is crewed by Ray Charles. BMP-2's have this issue two but they get a pass since they only have gunner and driver most of the time.

I would stick to the year 1980 when playing CMCW. 

It all depends though, at closer ranges (0-600m orso) I have had T-62(1975) outperforming M60 TTS. Also Abrams in CMCW are far from invincible, I managed to actually destroy all of the Abramses fielded against me in the CMCW tournament (using T-80s).
But overall I agree that 1979 is more balanced and fun for both sides when playing CMCW PBEM compared to 1982.

[Halmbarte]

‘79 is a horror show as you bounce Dragons and tank main gun rounds off T64s and T72s. Meantime everything AT will punch right though the front armor of a M60. RPGs, SPG9s, and everything else with more penetrating power than a pointy stick. 
H

[Pelican Pal]

On 4/8/2023 at 10:18 AM, Andrew Kulin said:

big snip

So over a large number of games I'd say that CM's spotting model works out okay. But on any individual game you're going to run into edge cases that are intensely frustrating and part of that is the game systems are fundamentally more than 15 years old at this point. So imagine that its not 2023 but instead 2011 and the whole thing seems much more impressive.

Anyway turning out your tanks and having C2 info sharing will help quite a bit to ameloriate some of the issues you are having.

[Halmbarte]

2 hours ago, Pelican Pal said:

So over a large number of games I'd say that CM's spotting model works out okay. But on any individual game you're going to run into edge cases that are intensely frustrating and part of that is the game systems are fundamentally more than 15 years old at this point. So imagine that its not 2023 but instead 2011 and the whole thing seems much more impressive.

Anyway turning out your tanks and having C2 info sharing will help quite a bit to ameloriate some of the issues you are having.

Here's an example of the spotting game going the other way: 

H

[Simcoe]

10 hours ago, Lethaface said:

It all depends though, at closer ranges (0-600m orso) I have had T-62(1975) outperforming M60 TTS. Also Abrams in CMCW are far from invincible, I managed to actually destroy all of the Abramses fielded against me in the CMCW tournament (using T-80s).
But overall I agree that 1979 is more balanced and fun for both sides when playing CMCW PBEM compared to 1982.

T-62's are the ultimate wildcards for sure.

[chuckdyke]

5 minutes ago, Simcoe said:

T-62's are the ultimate wildcards for sure.

The Chieftain pointed out. A T-62 with thermals is more effective than a T-72 without it.

[Halmbarte]

36 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

The Chieftain pointed out. A T-62 with thermals is more effective than a T-72 without it.

Yep. Sometimes a little tech buys a lot of effect. The earlier Sov tanks retrofitted with laser range finders are damn scary in '79. They can get the range faster than you can with your M48s and M60A1s and their HEAT will take out the American tanks pretty reliably. 

H

[chuckdyke]

11 minutes ago, Halmbarte said:

Yep. Sometimes a little tech buys a lot of effect.

Example is the Sherman in 1967 it was a different beast than the one in 1942.

 

[Andrew Kulin]

7 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

Example is the Sherman in 1967 it was a different beast than the one in 1942.

 

Not sure what you mean by this, I presume adding 20 year newer spotting tech to a 1940s era tank improved its ability to spot.  Which would come back to something I brought up in an earlier reply of mine.  1944 buttoned T34 tanks spotting King Tigers out in the open daylight in a couple of minutes at 1500 m ranges.  1982 buttoned/unbuttoned T72s unable to spot similar sized tanks out in the open at ranges <= 1500 m.  That seems broken to me. 

Both examples from CM2 series games, with same game engine.

[chuckdyke]

4 minutes ago, Andrew Kulin said:

That seems broken to me. 

I played Gog Magog and watched how many T34 attacked. Soviet tanks have all radios in the game, nearby are AT positions. I know the weather conditions were optimal in that game. The T34's all shared C2 by radio so if one tank spots inside the minute tentative contacts are shared. Also, the size of a King Tiger tank makes it easy to spot. Numbers in the game make a huge difference. In another Red Thunder scenario we spot Tigers in a hull down weather hazy distance over a kilometer. The German armor was spotted by infantry and the tentative contacts relayed by runners to the IS2's. The IS2's independently didn't spot anything it was combined infantry with the armor which make them spot first. 

[Simcoe]

22 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

The Chieftain pointed out. A T-62 with thermals is more effective than a T-72 without it.

For sure. Spotting is king. If the T-62 could spot like an Abrams it would beat every other vehicle in the game.

[FinStabilized]

The fact is that depsite how good this game is, and that its spotting system does many things better than other games, it is the weakest link in these games and quite frankly needs a serious look over. 

I posted a while back about some issues I had in the NTC Missions where M60s without thermals could not see several plattoons of soviet tanks in a open featurless desert. I replayed the mission dozens of times trying to find out some workaround. Unbuttoning, target arcs etc. No matter what, those M60s could not see anything. One thing I discovered from that discussion is that CMCW units cannot remember what they have spotted, so once the find something, they can lose it again and then have to start the entire spotting process all over. That is a HUGE problem. 

The other big issue is the way thermals have been modeled. Make no mistake, thermal optics are a huge advantage in the real world. But the way they work in CMCW I think needs quite a bit of adjustment. I could be wrong, but I suspect that thermals have some kind of blanket spotting buff because it seems to boost aquisition even when it shouldnt. Tanks with thermals seem to alway get the first shot even at close range, etc. One extermely frustrating example is having a bunch of soviet tanks that are lying in wait with faceing or arc commands and the thermal armed tanks get the first shots off almost every time even in that situation when ranges are less than 1500. Often even at much closer ranges. 

And stuff like this is not an uncommon thing. Units routinely fail to see things that are right in front of their face. 

One last thing. This issue has been the subject of complaint pretty much since CMX2 came into existence. What I find rather depressing is that many in this community just assume the people complaining are bad at the game or go on lengthy explanations of how sophisticated this games spotting system is compared to other games. In the latter example, it simply doesnt matter. The fact that this game is trying to do things that other games dont do doesnt mean its problems should be a free pass. This aspect of this game needs a serious adjustment. 

The problem is sufficiently frustrating that if the only thing CM 3.0 or patch 5.0 did was fix this, I would be totally happy with it. 

Edited April 21, 2023 by FinStabilized