SDG Posted June 22 Share Posted June 22 There are many many posts on this forum on the subject of how flawed the spotting system of CM2 is, so heres another one pointing out the ridiculousness of this part of the game engine. Tiger 2, veteran crew, +2 commander, opened up moving forward with the hunt command. As you can see a T34 at around 20 m-s from the tiger has just blasted a kubelwagen into pieces. At the end of the turn, the 2 tanks are literary breathing down each others neck. But honey budger doesnt care. They are oblivious of each other's present. I know, I know, now we come up with the magic words of "randomness", "abstraction", "dice rolls", "bad luck" etc. to describe that all this is WAD and super duper realistic. (I love this game to bits but these moments make me want to just flip the table) ((save attached because I was criticised in the past of not providing the save file therefore what I was saying "couldnt be put into context")) https://fastupload.io/1e941f59532dd2c1 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted June 22 Share Posted June 22 No luck involved here. The target tool explicitly says "No Line of Sight" to the action spot the still-living T-34 is in. The tool says "Reverse Slope - No Aim Point" to the dead T-34, which means it can't see the ground but does have LOS to some space above the ground. Why the difference? There are fewer trees between the Tiger 2 and the dead T-34. Line of sight through trees is always hard to predict in CM. It looks like the tanks should be able to see each other below the tree canopy but unfortunately the visual graphic of tree leaves and branches is not what the game engine uses to calculate LOS and can be quite misleading. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted June 22 Share Posted June 22 (edited) Another phenomenon re LOS issues, is that a vehicle can abruptly change orientation (or its turret will) to point towards an enemy that is completely unseen by the player (ie: no sound marker or anything). Edited June 22 by Erwin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckdyke Posted June 23 Share Posted June 23 (edited) 6 hours ago, SDG said: I know, I know, now we come up with the magic words of "randomness", "abstraction", Lack of understanding is what I call it. You need to look at the tiles and it becomes clear. If it is a heavy forest tile your view will be obstructed. I have been caught myself Blast by the engineers in that case was ineffective the tank still couldn't get through it. Units directly behind a Normandy bocage can spot the enemy but the enemy won't spot them unless you fire. You cloud blame the scenario designer possibly as winter conditions is cosmetic, and you need to read weather conditions. Edited June 23 by chuckdyke 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtHatred Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 (edited) My favourite is still when something fires at target tank A, but hits an unseen tank that is totally obstructing the shooter's view of target tank A takes the round instead. Also, any vehicle driving on a road that creates dust is completely invisible from all sides. Edited June 25 by SgtHatred 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckdyke Posted June 25 Share Posted June 25 48 minutes ago, SgtHatred said: Also, any vehicle driving on a road that creates dust is completely invisible from all sides. Correct and Jeeps, Scout Cars are relatively safe as long as they move at speed. If you put them on Hunt and they stop to fire they are usually history. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artkin Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 (edited) On 6/25/2024 at 4:05 AM, SgtHatred said: My favourite is still when something fires at target tank A, but hits an unseen tank that is totally obstructing the shooter's view of target tank A takes the round instead. Also, any vehicle driving on a road that creates dust is completely invisible from all sides. People, like myself can live with abstracting the density of trees... But this is exactly the type of spotting problems that bother me. Edited June 26 by Artkin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 I don't like the tree model in CMx2 much. I did like the fog-like woods in CMx1. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckdyke Posted June 26 Share Posted June 26 1 hour ago, Redwolf said: I don't like the tree model in CMx2 much. I did like the fog-like woods in CMx1. Switch them off and go by the tiles. Trees are supposed to be on Forest Tiles or Orchard Tiles but sometimes they are not. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PEB14 Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 11 hours ago, chuckdyke said: Switch them off and go by the tiles. Trees are supposed to be on Forest Tiles or Orchard Tiles but sometimes they are not. AFAIK there are no orchard tiles (I mean, you can't see orchard if you switch trres off): it's only a way to align the trees, not a tile per se. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckdyke Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 13 minutes ago, PEB14 said: AFAIK there are no orchard tiles (I mean, you can't see orchard if you switch trres off): it's only a way to align the trees, not a tile per se. Correct I thought you had to use light forest tiles with single trees. I just checked it out. you can put trees anywhere. So, I think an orchard on grass tiles don't give much concealment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JM Stuff Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 (edited) On 6/25/2024 at 10:05 AM, SgtHatred said: a good way to save some smoke shells... Edited June 27 by JM Stuff 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PEB14 Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 4 hours ago, chuckdyke said: Correct I thought you had to use light forest tiles with single trees. I just checked it out. you can put trees anywhere. So, I think an orchard on grass tiles don't give much concealment. Well, I'm really not sure... I may be wrong, but I think that the tiles (dense forest, light forest) have an impact on movement but not on LOS. I think that only foliage (1 tree, 2 trees, 3 trees, orchard-like aligned trees, brushes, etc.) has impact on LOS (but not on movement: you can move on dense, 3-trees forest tiles but not on treeless, dense forest tiles... ). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckdyke Posted June 27 Share Posted June 27 6 hours ago, PEB14 said: I may be wrong, I think you maybe right, I was just wondering about this. I plot my moves from Cameraview 5-9 with the trees switched off and plot my pauses next to tiles that I assume give cover and concealment. But it is not always the case. Once I blasted a gap in bocage but armored vehicles still couldn't move through it. So I assume it must have been a heavy forest tile. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meltpile Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 AND____ the correct answer- is, Target the forest tile in-Line with T34, some shots go high! taking out- enemy tank. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
semmes Posted July 7 Share Posted July 7 Not exactly. The point, my question: Why the HMG is not using the code for the LOO of the FO? Can you answer why we never had a patch for that? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.