Clarification needed on Abandoned Vehicles.

[Apoc]

In a recent scenario, something dawned on me, which had me thinking about the reality of the situation. A LOT (30+ German) tanks were advancing on my position. After 5 minutes worth of artillery, anti-tank guns, and Piat action over 1/2 of the German tanks were knocked out or abandoned. Later in the scenario, I received some armor reinforcements that proceeded to mop up the remaining German tanks.

My question is pretty simple. Why didn't my armor fire on the Abandoned German tanks? At distances over 500 meters, it's hard to determine if your target is abandoned, especially with burning vehicles and ground bursts occurring throughout the area. Was removing the 'threat' from abandoned vehicles a design decision?

[Guest Scott Clinton]

Abandoned vehicles generally don't move.

They show other signs like no humans on board and barrels drooping...

Not to mention an occasional blown track, bent gun, etc.

Abandoned is not equal to undamaged&unmanned IMO.

I see your point, but this goes back to the larger wish for relative spotting, IMHO. Do a search on this if you want to join into that one.

------------------

Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own.

[aka_tom_w]

Thats a good question

oops I meant..

Is it possible with Binoculars for

TC 's to see that far and determine there is no threat from those vehicles?

maybe

maybe not

-tom w

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 06-27-2000).]

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

Thats a good question

IT is possible with Binoculars for

TC 's to see that far and determine there is no thread from those vehicles?

-tom w<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Remember it is not just the TC, but also the gunner through the optics, you see the crew bailing, you see bits of metal flying, I would imagine the gunner gets a good idea of whether it was a hit. Maybe one of the real-life tankers could enlighten us?

------------------

Andreas

[Apoc]

I see your point, Scott. Yet most of the spotting is too crisp. Immobilized tanks are still threats and it'd be pretty hard to tell the difference between an immobilized tank sitting idle and an abandoned one, especially if the targetting unit is Buttoned. The computer distinguishes between the two without any problems. Needless to say, spotting all this across a 500+ meter front with LOTS of distractions (Artillery, small arms, burning wrecks) would be extremely tricky. If threat was so easy to avoid in real warfare, tank commanders would play possum no-stop. I've read many accounts of Tankers putting shells into already 'dead' tanks, just to make sure.

I did do a seach on Abandoned vehicles, but came up with no old threads that deal with this subject. I'll do a search on spotting, but already have a feeling it's going to take me days of time to read all the spotting posts.

The scenario for which my question is based on ended up being a graveyard of armor. There were no less than 70 wrecks when the carnage with through. Thus my question mostly applies to the Ultra-Chaotic battlefield instead of less-chaotic one.

[This message has been edited by Apoc (edited 06-27-2000).]

[ntg84]

The Allied tanks didn't have optics that zoomed (Shermans didn't) so a gunner wouldn't be able to tell.

[Guest Scott Clinton]

Relative spotting guys...

------------------

Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own.

[Apoc]

Relative Spotting is far too broad. After doing a search and reading through most of the threads it appears the term Relative Spotting (more or less) is directed at Terrain Features with consideration to individual units and FOW.

Now my point isn't directed as such, but is aimed towards Threat Indications and accurate assumptions. To capitalize on my idea the game would require a hightened spotting-to-threat indicator. As I click on units throughout the battlefield, I can quickly find out which tanks are KO'ed, Immobilized or Abandoned. Whereas the difference between an immoblized tank and an abandoned one is pretty minimal (at range). Tack on a chaotic atmosphere and mayhem setting, then the environment gets extremly unpredictable.

Perhaps a new command, POSSUM, would add in the uncertainty factor I'm so trying to point out. A tank, armored car, recon (etc...) could attempt to POSSUM thus giving the appearance of being Abandoned. Whenever the enemy rolls on by, one could un-possum or ambush. This would leave it up to the player/computer to target Abandoned Tanks 'just to make sure.'

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Apoc:

Perhaps a new command, POSSUM, would add in the uncertainty factor I'm so trying to point out. A tank, armored car, recon (etc...) could attempt to POSSUM thus giving the appearance of being Abandoned. Whenever the enemy rolls on by, one could un-possum or ambush. This would leave it up to the player/computer to target Abandoned Tanks 'just to make sure.'<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm sorry, but that sounds incredibly gamey to me. Have you any evidence that that occured on the battle-field, and not just once but regularly? B/c I have never read of it. And you should target abandoned enemy tanks anyway, if there is no live threat left, just to make them unrecoverable.

------------------

AndreasI

[This message has been edited by Germanboy (edited 06-27-2000).]

[Doug Beman]

I've read accounts, don't know how common they were, of crews who would crawl back to abandoned vehicles whose guns still worked and fire a couple shots when the enemy least expected it. That's part of the cause for the "shoot it til it burns" maxim, IMHO.

DjB

[Goanna]

Sgt. Morgue, where are you when we need you? Care to add your real world experience here? How does (and how well) a tank crew ID a dead from a non dead tank?

------------------

desert rat wannabe

[Sgt.Morgue]

With the magnification of the gun sights , it is fairly easy to tell a dead vehicle from a live one , but of course mistakes can be made. i don't know the M4 but would guess it had two gunner sights , one a magnified gradurated (mark in meters) for firing the main gun and another unmagnified window. One fairly sure sign of a abandoned tank is the crew usely leaves the hatches open as they flee.

[Apoc]

I know of specific accounts of Tankers hiding under their Tanks during mortar/artillery shelling. After the shelling stops they would mount back up and start firing at a closing enemy. Doug is right about the Maxim. You assume a tank is alive unless it's 'obviously' dead or if it's burning.

I'm adding a pair of pictures from the battle I fought last night. My original intent was to figure out how I knew these vehicles had been abandoned. The rest of the battlefield is completely covered in smoldering wrecks and other vehicles. As you'll see these vehicles have not been id'ed, yet I already know they pose no threat.

[This message has been edited by Apoc (edited 06-27-2000).]

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Apoc:

Doug is right about the Maxim. You assume a tank is alive unless it's 'obviously' dead or if it's burning.

[This message has been edited by Apoc (edited 06-27-2000).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So if I am in a chaotic battle environment with lots of definitely life enemy tanks around, I would take the time to make sure that the one tank I already hit and I assume but am not yet quite sure is dead is definitely dead, by e.g. putting another round or two into it? I find that hard to credit, I must say. And what constitutes 'obviously'? Now if the crew bails during a stonk, that is a very different matter IMO. Were enemy tanks around during the bombardment?

Not trying to be a pain, but I simply can not see that as a realistic tactic, and I would think that the POSSUM command would be abused a lot in games, so I am just trying to understand the basis for the request.

------------------

Andreas

[pathfinder1]

hmmmm....I have had my crews (and me) get faked out...a dead tank was there so I ignored it but fire still came out...until I went over there and saw another tank using his dead bud as instant hull defilade...seen this in two DYO battles I set up...

------------------

this is pathfinder's evil twin

[This message has been edited by pathfinder1 (edited 06-27-2000).]

[Apoc]

Pathfinder1, that's a good representation of what this game can do! I've had a single, similar encounter with fire from what appeared to be a dead vehicle. Further investigation revield a hidden AT gun section just 20 meters behind the carcass of the tank.

Germanboy, the game has shock effect. You hit and succeed with a partial penetration. The target tank goes under shock and tends to root in place, not moving and not firing. How do you know if your hit was successful or not? By all indications (in game) you scored a good hit. But the AI knows and keeps your tank firing at the target. However, if the hit was a FULL KO, then the AI would switch to another threat. This is but one example of why Possum would not be a gamey tactic. The game already supplies you with a lot of information such that you instantly know whether a target is out of action or not.

[Guest Scott Clinton]

I was under the understanding that for a vehicle to be ID'ed as "Abandoned" some friendly unit at sometime had to have had a good LOS/spotting on the unit and had at least some form of LOS to it as it was 'hit'.

If this IS the case then it is a 'relative spotting' issue where one unit knows its 'dead' the others should not (in real life). But this is currently on the 'Long-term wish list'.

If this is NOT the case, then perhaps the FOW can be adjusted. But exactly how many times are vehicles going to be rendered "Abandoned" and NOT be in LOS/spotting of a unit? Not many (relativity) I would suspect.

------------------

Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own.

[This message has been edited by Scott Clinton (edited 06-27-2000).]

[aka_tom_w]

Thats a good question

oops I meant..

Is it possible with Binoculars for TC 's to see that far and determine there is no threat from those vehicles?

maybe

maybe not

it was originally meant as a question

It sounds like a fog or war question, in the same catagory as how is it we can know if that is an elite SMG unit or a Green SMG unit, this "extra" info shows up when a unit gets good LOS to the enemy SMG unit. I would say the ability to KNOW that it is an abandonned vehicle is also TOO much info unless MAYBE the hatchs are open and MAYBE one of your friendly units actually watched them abandon the AFV, but I think it EVEN this little aspect of WW II tank combat is modeled realitically because it seems the crews bail out of the bottom of their vehicles.

Didn't MOST if not ALL WW II vintage tanks have escape hatches in the floor?

So then the upper hatches would not be left open and the tank would not actually look like it was in fact abandoned.

I think this is a very good question as to how it can actually be determined that this or that AFV is in fact abandoned?

-tom w

-tom w

------------------

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> "Have you thanked BTS by buying your SECOND copy of CM yet?" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Lorak]

Just a quick .02 cents.

I can see how you would know an unidentifed vehicle is abandoned.

I often targeted "tank?"s before. If you hit them and the crew bails. You know the tank is abandoned even if your still not sure what model it is.

Lorak

------------------

http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/combatmissionclub

Lorak's FTX for CM <--Proud member of the Combat Mission Webring

[Lorak]

sorry double post.

------------------

http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/combatmissionclub

Lorak's FTX for CM <--Proud member of the Combat Mission Webring

[This message has been edited by Lorak (edited 06-27-2000).]

[Sgt.Morgue]

tom w

Access to the bottom hatch is not always available to the men in the turret.