Joeri Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 Hi, Recently I did some test about bogging chances for different movement orders and terrain types (thread: statistics on bogging). In my tests it seemed that while reversing the chance of bogging is 0%. In v1.1b I started to play some with the (reduced cost) mines and noticed several times when they did not detonate. Therefore I did some tests trying to determine the detonation chance of a mine. I haven't finished those test yet but I did find that while reversing the chance of detonating a mine is again 0%. Both in v1.05 and v1.1b This seems a little more than a coincidence so my conclusion is that there is something wrong with the reverse movement code. I would appreciate it if someone from BTS could comments on this. Joeri [This message has been edited by Joeri (edited 12-03-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chupacabra Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 I've had precisely the opposite experience. It seems to me that bogging is more common when vehicles are reversing. So I'd say it's probably just sheer luck on both sides. ------------------ Grand Poobah of the fresh fire of Heh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pritzl Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 Nope, this is definately a bug! I don't know about bogging, but I just ran a test with five M3A1 halftracks repeatedly reversing through five antitank minefields. In EVERY instance they failed to set of any mines. I had them move through the mine fields about 10 times each. On the 11th, they advanced forward and 3 were destroyed by mines. That's more than just coincidence. Nice find Joeri. Did you report it to BTS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Clark Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 Damn! This is a pretty large bug! Making minefields ineffective is a HUGE glitch, open to all sorts of exploitation in PBeM and TCP/IP games. Please report this to BTS, and good find! (The bogging bug also sux, but is not as worrysome as the minefield problem.) ------------------ "The truth was that the Germans were losing faster than the Allies could win." - A Bridge Too Far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dNorwood Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pritzl: Nope, this is definately a bug! I don't know about bogging,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, I just did the same for the bogging - not as extensive as Joeri's original, just a YES/NO test. 10 Jumbo's in deep mud, open ground, fast move. All bogged (most several times) and were ultimately immobilized by the end of 19 minutes . The shortest distance to immobilization was 65 m from start, the longest, 660 m. (OK, just to prove I'm a scientist - MeanDistanceToImmobilization = 286+-208 m) Same test in REVERSE - no bogging for 20 minutes. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Nice find Joeri. Did you report it to BTS?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ditto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subvet Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 I'd like to point out that wheeled vehicles (well, at least jeeps) will bog in reverse. In a recent game against the AI a MG Jeep was giving me headaches zipping around too fast to target. It shifted into reverse and soon after bogged down. Poor, poor, jeep crew Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 Funny. After about a year of debate of what's gamey and what's not, the first really, really gamey tactic is found. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joeri Posted December 3, 2000 Author Share Posted December 3, 2000 It seems that my initial observation that bogging in reverse is not 100% correct. As I did the test with the minefield, on dry ground to be exact, there were two instances of tanks in reverse getting bogged in the mine field. There was no explosion so it was not an immobilization caused by a mine. One got unbogged, the other got immob. after some time. At first I thought the reverse bogging issue was resolved in v1.1b but I did a test in deep mud again and I saw no bogging for vehicles in reverse. Very strange. Joeri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joeri Posted December 3, 2000 Author Share Posted December 3, 2000 I did report the bogging issue to madmatt some time ago. Did not additionally report the mine issue. I thought the subject of this thread would catch there attention Joeri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 I'm on it! Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CATguy Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 From my experience with tracked machinery (dozers, crawlers... etc). Reverse gear is hard on a undercarriage. Most tracked vehicles have 95% or more of their life spent going forward. When you reverse a tracked vehicle especially with high hours on the undercarriage, track tension changes and the; traction, the driveablity, and chance of throwing a track greatly increase. You ask any person with knowledge of tracks and undercarriage and you ask the number one killer of a track is reverse gear ( especially high gear). I serioulsy doubt this is modeled in CM but I could be wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Clark Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 Yay! Charles the exterminator is on the case. ------------------ "The truth was that the Germans were losing faster than the Allies could win." - A Bridge Too Far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dNorwood Posted December 3, 2000 Share Posted December 3, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Joeri: Did not additionally report the mine issue. Joeri<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> For what it's worth, I can confirm the minefield thing as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joeri Posted December 4, 2000 Author Share Posted December 4, 2000 Thanks Charles, That was exactly the response I was hoping for Joeri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olle Petersson Posted December 4, 2000 Share Posted December 4, 2000 Hey! Why don't you guys come reversing your Jumbos over the minefields in front of my ATGs? The only vehicle that really benefits from this bug is the Archer, that has reverse as the normal movement in an offence. Cheers Olle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fangorn Posted December 4, 2000 Share Posted December 4, 2000 So it is true... a friend of mine was playing a pbem and his opponent was moving his panther in reverse to avoid being bogged by snow... and a Stuart destroyed it Now, perhaps I'll buy some archers.. Hope that get fixed soon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted December 4, 2000 Share Posted December 4, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fangorn: So it is true... a friend of mine was playing a pbem and his opponent was moving his panther in reverse to avoid being bogged by snow... and a Stuart destroyed it Now, perhaps I'll buy some archers.. Hope that get fixed soon<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> OK laugh while you CAN! I'm the idiot commander that "adavanced" a panther in reverse. I did not know the Stuart at that range (about 700 meters IIRC) could A) hit the Panther, penetrate the rear area. Yes I advanced a Panther in reverse and Yes a Stuart Immbolized it on the first shot and k-killed it on the second shot. But it was my last good tank and I did not want to risk it being bogged in the snow. It was on a road and I have since been told the Panthers are VERY unlikely to bog in snow on roads. It was the first time I had ever fought in Snow and I thought everything would bog down. oh well it was a FUN TCP/IP game vs. Epee and he LAUGHED at me when I lost my Panther, had it taken out his Stuart, which it "should" have, I would most surely have won the scenario, BUT, I lost. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-04-2000).] [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 12-04-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted December 4, 2000 Share Posted December 4, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by aka_tom_w: Yes I advanced a Panther in reverse and Yes a Stuart Immbolized it on the first shot and k-killed it on the second shot. But it was my last good tank and I did not want to risk it being bogged in the snow. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Good to see that CM defeats 'gamey' tactics by realism, eh? I can see the German CO giving the order now: - Men! In order to awoid bogging, ze tanks vill adwance in rewerse. Marsch! - But Hauptmann - zere may be ze enemy tanks. - Bah - zey haf only ze puny gun! 37mm can not harm ze Panther, out Uebertank! Harharhar! ------------------ Andreas <a href="http://www.geocities.com/greg_mudry/sturm.html">Der Kessel</a > Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission. [This message has been edited by Germanboy (edited 12-04-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Private Pike Posted December 4, 2000 Share Posted December 4, 2000 So the Archer has now become the prime minefield assault weapon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olle Petersson Posted December 4, 2000 Share Posted December 4, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Private Pike: So the Archer has now become the prime minefield assault weapon<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>For the Allies, yes. For the Germans I'd suggest the AA halftracks. Cheers Olle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Epée Posted December 4, 2000 Share Posted December 4, 2000 Aka_Tom, I told Fangorn about my heroic Stuart, but didn't tell him any names...but now that you confessed, it was a funny situation. When the Panther showed itself in the battlefield, I nearly panicked! One Stuart vs. a Panther!! But then it started moving itself towards me in reverse, and I was bewildered thinking why the hell that was happening. The rest is history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fangorn Posted December 4, 2000 Share Posted December 4, 2000 Aka_Tom, Well, it was a very funny story and I was wondering where da hell Epée's opponent (he didn't game me your name) heard about that unusual "tatic" ... I thought that was b******t, but it was really a bug! P.S. Snow isn't that bad... just be careful with scattered trees and fast move! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted December 4, 2000 Share Posted December 4, 2000 Being the old hard head I am, I still maintain tests or no, that stopping, reversing, stopping, then reversing, is the best method of unbogging. I've seen it happen over and over again. I just finished the Blitz Tourney, where Don decided to toss in bogging along with the bocage (thanks Don), and I had three tanks bog on two separate turns. All three were unbogged by reversing. Two of the three took two turns each. On the turns where they failed to unbogg, I stopped them, then told them to reverse again (to avoid engine burnout), and it continues to work (for me anyway). To date, though I've suffered bogging in many a game, in each one I've yet to have a vehicle I could not un-bog. And in each, I've used this same method. Coincedentally, again against the tide of logic from the tests, I keep finding that heavier vehicles bog more often, and that vehicles bog less on higher ground or higher slopping ground. That cannot be just a random thing. I keep seeing it over and over again. Am I a pain in butt or what? ------------------ "Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth." -Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916) [This message has been edited by Bruno Weiss (edited 12-04-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joeri Posted December 5, 2000 Author Share Posted December 5, 2000 Bruno, I never did any tests looking either at unbogging techniques or at verhicle weight. So unless I'm missing some other tests, these are not in contradiction to your experience. Actually I thought it was clear to everyone that heavier (read more ground pressure) vehicles have a higher bogging chance. About the unbogging techniques. Someone from BTS posted somewhere that you best do nothing while bogged and let the crew sort it out. By the way, unbogging chance is approx 75% (according to my test) so seeing all your vehicles unbog is not so unlikely. Unless you have had a very high number of occurences. I used to do the same trick (stopping and reversing) and it worked often(in approx. 75% of the time ). About the higher lower ground. My test did not show any chance in bogging chance for elevation levels. I didn't test inclination. By the way it's not that difficult to test yourself. Just put up a bunch of tanks in the scenario editor and make high and low ground and run them around. Joeri [This message has been edited by Joeri (edited 12-04-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts