FIX THE BOGGING ALREADY!

[Artkin]

@MarkEzra CMRT, I already said the scenario in the picture was CMPE. But a similar issue happens in cmrt, surprisingly to a lesser degree. 

No matter the scenario, this is obvious when you play open maps. Green and conscript troops immobilize at relentless rates even at normal speeds and the simplest of.manuevers (I understand the game can't distinguish bogging due to manuevers). 

[MarkEzra]

Thanks. I will check into the map. 

[WimO]

16 hours ago, Centurian52 said:

So I think this isn't so much a case of Combat Mission incorrectly modeling reality, as yet another case of people having incorrect expectations of reality. Just like all the spotting complaints.

I would like to agree with Centurian52's comment regarding player expectations.

I remind myself that the CM series are simulation 'games' and a lot of fun to play. Although there are numerous quirks that I personally don't like, I can live with it, comforting myself with the knowledge that my opponent (real or AI) is experiencing the same issues.

Graphically the series is dated and constructing maps and scenarios is like working with Lego blocks but ... what other game gives me an editor to create new maps and scenarios? Maybe not ideal but still wonderful! Very wonderful.

Although the orthogonal and diagonal constraints of the map building blocks frustrate me daily, it still remains my 'go to' game and editor.

If there is something in a scenario that you don't like, just load the scenario into the editor and change it (then save as a revised version). You can do that with campaigns too but that is a heck of a lot more work.

[Centurian52]

5 minutes ago, WimO said:

If there is something in a scenario that you don't like, just load the scenario into the editor and change it (then save as a revised version). You can do that with campaigns too but that is a heck of a lot more work.

Yeah, I actually did that myself a while back with 'The Fleeting Moment' campaign in CMFI. I felt that it was too easy, and it just didn't make sense for the Americans I was facing to have such low experience. So I bumped up their experience to normal and renamed the campaign to 'The Fleeting Moment(edited)' so that I could preserve a copy of the original. I ended up creating a campaign that was impossible for me to win. But I was ok with that. IIRC the Italians got absolutely pasted during the Axis counterattack in Sicily, so I ended up getting a more or less historical result (I still ended up performing better than the historical Italians). It was a PITA though, and I haven't attempted to edit another campaign since then.

[Artkin]

No, it's not about expectations vs reality. 

The fact is if you set the crew to a higher veterancy they wont bog much at all. 

Somehow magically green or conscript troops will bog doing the same thing. That  can be driving through mud - more understandable - or driving on a dry surface at a slow speed in a straight line - less understandable. 

I am doubtful there is much to be skilled at when driving in a straight line. Considering that terrain deviations are done in 1m intervals that means at most the random abstracted terrain devations must be less than 1m. 

 Dirt underneath that is pretty much going to be squished flat unless it's totally bone dry, and even still, it shouldnt be causing total track failure at slower speeds. 

[Jackal2100]

If you are talking about green and conscript troops, then wouldn't it make sense that it could also be because of their lack of maintenance with their vehicles. If you throw a bunch of men inside of a tank, and tell them to drive in a straight line, they can do that, but they might not have realized that one of the gears was already breaking down.

[Artkin]

Could be, but thats some serious grasping at straws, and probably shouldnt be in the game. What differentiates regulars from elites in that regard? Elites cleaning their tracks with toothpicks? Doesnt make enough sense honestly. 

[Thewood1]

In RL, in Steel Beasts, and in CM, inexperienced drivers should bog at higher rates that veteran drivers.  I used to drive skidders, tractors, and bulldozers in the woods of Maine.  I guy driving a skidder a few years compared to me with a month of experience is a world of difference in speed and knowledge of where not to drive a skidder.

[Artkin]

10 minutes ago, Thewood1 said:

In RL, in Steel Beasts, and in CM, inexperienced drivers should bog at higher rates that veteran drivers.  I used to drive skidders, tractors, and bulldozers in the woods of Maine.  I guy driving a skidder a few years compared to me with a month of experience is a world of difference in speed and knowledge of where not to drive a skidder.

Notice how I didnt post a screenshot of a forested area. 

You wouldnt even be able to distinguish divets or holes in a wheatfield/tall grass like this. 

[Thewood1]

Well you say that, but my talent allowed me get out main skidder stuck in a hayfield just driving to the woods.  The other driver immediately came over and said the ground in the center is always softer after a rain storm so have to skirt the woodline to avoid getting stuck.  You would not know that without some experience.

I'm not saying there's no problem, but I frequent the Steel Beast forums as a player.  There are dozens of former and active tanks commanders and drivers.  They all talk about getting stuck and throwing tracks.

[Brille]

1 hour ago, Artkin said:

No, it's not about expectations vs reality. 

The fact is if you set the crew to a higher veterancy they wont bog much at all. 

Somehow magically green or conscript troops will bog doing the same thing. That  can be driving through mud - more understandable - or driving on a dry surface at a slow speed in a straight line - less understandable. 

I am doubtful there is much to be skilled at when driving in a straight line. Considering that terrain deviations are done in 1m intervals that means at most the random abstracted terrain devations must be less than 1m. 

 Dirt underneath that is pretty much going to be squished flat unless it's totally bone dry, and even still, it shouldnt be causing total track failure at slower speeds. 

Well the way I understand it is that Combat Mission is abstract in a lot of situations. So a simple line from A to B might be not just that simple or the terrain is not as flat as it is depicted ingame.

So fields or even roads may have bumps and rocks in them, sometimes a slope or a pitch here and there. On a driven out dirt road you can have 2 tracks on the sides with a high middle strip. An inexperienced driver may dig the belly of their vehicle on that strip, while an experienced driver would know how to position his vehicle to not get it immobilized. Those little adjustments of the vehicle/tanks position you don´t have in CM. It is just an abstraction.

A little anecdote of mine: I once parked my car (me a junior driver, fresh from driving school) on a improvised parking spot, mostly just dirt ground. Later it started to rain and it transformed the place into a muddy affair.

I dug the tires of my car to the point that the belly of it hit the ground until I gave up and called my dad. He, a vastly more experienced driver, got the car out again with no additional equipment. So while I dug myself in hopelessly with no means to recover, overheating the gearbox to almost breaking point, my dad just knew what to do. And I didn´t even drove 2 meters...

So it tells us that I was a really dumb/inexperienced driver back then and that experience matters.

 

On another note I think that battlefront once stated that immobilisation (by mere movement) is not a cause of a component failure in itself. So engine failures due to overheating, run down gears, a defective final drive or thrown tracks are out of the picture. However I sometimes want to believe it would be just that or maybe it is.

 

 

[Artkin]

22 minutes ago, Thewood1 said:

Well you say that, but my talent allowed me get out main skidder stuck in a hayfield just driving to the woods.  The other driver immediately came over and said the ground in the center is always softer after a rain storm so have to skirt the woodline to avoid getting stuck.  You would not know that without some experience.

I'm not saying there's no problem, but I frequent the Steel Beast forums as a player.  There are dozens of former and active tanks commanders and drivers.  They all talk about getting stuck and throwing tracks.

The steel beasts players are probably using vehicles that have completely different tracks too. An abrams/leopard 2 tracks are flat padded and are better for road surfaces. These tanks have more aggressive treads which are better for offroading - including t-90a's tracks. Also the ground conditions were set to very dry. The center of CM fields are not going to be more wet than the exterior.

[Artkin]

19 minutes ago, Brille said:

Well the way I understand it is that Combat Mission is abstract in a lot of situations. So a simple line from A to B might be not just that simple or the terrain is not as flat as it is depicted ingame.

So fields or even roads may have bumps and rocks in them, sometimes a slope or a pitch here and there. On a driven out dirt road you can have 2 tracks on the sides with a high middle strip. An inexperienced driver may dig the belly of their vehicle on that strip, while an experienced driver would know how to position his vehicle to not get it immobilized. Those little adjustments of the vehicle/tanks position you don´t have in CM. It is just an abstraction.

I understand and have already mentioned the deviations in tiles that arent visibly represented. In a wheat field this should be almost impossible to distinguish. In a grass field this should be exceedingly obvious. 

Even experienced tank crew have found themselves surprised in combat conditions... i.e. excerpts from Cairus' Tigers In The Mud. 

This is why I set my crews to lower veterancies, so they perform closer to what I've read. Tanks are definitely hard to see out of, and I dont think being highly experienced makes that big of a difference insided an armored box with little windows. 

[Thewood1]

Just ran the CMRT scenario twice.  Ran the Germans and Russians all the way across the maps at normal speed.  There are about 50 vehicles on each side.  Mostly I got them to avoid each other.

Summary: Across two runs, One M3 scout car immobilized, two halftracks immobilized.  Had two halftracks bog entering a wood line, but they quickly cleared.

Not very statistically significant, but somewhat directional. That's less than 2% and all three immobilized were wheeled or halftrack offroad.

[MarkEzra]

Cannot duplicate the results you seem to have had.

[A Canadian Cat]

On 3/21/2024 at 10:30 PM, Artkin said:

Dude you think this is my first game? The ground conditions are set to very dry. 

Dude you think missing super important information means I can read your mind

Ah I see your fuller explanation. So delete this:

I still don't see the kinds of issues you are experiencing. So my mind reading is stumped

Edited March 23 by A Canadian Cat - was IanL
Delete incorrect comment

[Centurian52]

AR has been on a roll with helpful Combat Mission tips videos. His latest one is one bogging, so I think a link to it belongs in this thread.

 

[Erwin]

Thanks for doing those tests.  It would have been interesting to know if SPEED made a difference, and also GROUND PRESSURE - ie: lbs/sq ft.  Wider tracks on (say) the T-34 should enable it to function much better than a similar weight tank with thinner tracks.

 

[MOS:96B2P]

3 hours ago, Centurian52 said:

AR has been on a roll with helpful Combat Mission tips videos. His latest one is one bogging, so I think a link to it belongs in this thread.

 

+ 1 Interesting stuff.  If I understood correctly speed had no impact on bogging.  I think this is what he meant when he said, orders had no impact?  I wish he had spent more time on the speed issue since the forum often debates speed vs bogging / immobilization.  IMO speed, in the game, does not effect bogging /immobilization but I'm not sure he went into enough detail to conclusively end that debate. 

In game bogging / immobilization probably means more than just getting stuck.  It may also mean mechanical issues, running out of fuel, etc.  Instead of the UI reading Bogged and Immobilized it might be better if it read something like Broke / Stuck and then sometimes transitioning to Out of Action instead of Immobilized.   This change in wording might be more accurate and make more sense more often. 

So when the player's tank becomes broke / stuck on grass terrain in clear weather with very dry conditions it could be assumed it threw a track or something mechanical.  If BFC ever made an animation for the track coming off this would be even better ............. 

[Centurian52]

27 minutes ago, Erwin said:

Thanks for doing those tests.  It would have been interesting to know if SPEED made a difference, and also GROUND PRESSURE - ie: lbs/sq ft.  Wider tracks on (say) the T-34 should enable it to function much better than a similar weight tank with thinner tracks.

 

The game UI doesn't tell us what a vehicle's ground pressure is. Perhaps this is part of what is indicated by the "Off-Road" meter? He did say that weight made no difference (given the same "Off-Road" rating and means of movement), which struck me as odd. But it might make sense if the ground pressure is already accounted for in the "Off-Road" meter.

25 minutes ago, MOS:96B2P said:

If I understood correctly speed had no impact on bogging.  I think this is what he meant when he said, orders had no impact?

That was my interpretation as well. I assume when he said that the "order given" made no impact he meant whether you gave it a slow, move, quick, or fast order.