Maximus Posted July 8, 2000 Share Posted July 8, 2000 OK, to avoid a spoiler, I won't mention the scenario name, so here goes it... Alright, in a particular scenario where there is a quite a bit of armor, I had a Panther up at the front lines trying to deliver some know-out blows to the last few remaining enemy armor. Well, this just so happened to be near alot of enemy infantry. What happened was this. A M5 Stuart was just down a slope out of immediate LOS and actually behind my Panther after the Stuart did a mad "fast" move. So here's where the tac-AI made a bad decision. During the planning phase I had the Panther do a "Hunt" toward the Stuart along with targeting the Stuart, however, from the previous action phase, the tac-AI was blasting away at the infantry with HE. Now as my Panther started to "Hunt" toward the Stuart, it never turned it's turret around to face the Stuart. It kept blasting away at the infantry. So what happened? Well the Stuart kept taking pop-shots at the Panther with its 57mm gun. The first two ricocheted or broke-up. The third got a rear-turret penetration hit, knocking out my Panther. Talk about a humiliating bad tac-AI decision. ------------------ "I for one, am pretty damn close to Genius"--Ol' Blood & Maximus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeAcH Posted July 8, 2000 Share Posted July 8, 2000 Yeah. There seems to have been an inordinate amount of situations like this. Perhaps the AI just can't do any better. So heres a suggestion as a workaround for BTS to consider. What about adding a command for ROTATE TURRET? As we all know, we can do this for the hull, but perhaps a command to face the turret will not only prevent most instances like the one maximus describe from occurring, but it could also override the TAC AI for that action phase. Im all for keeping the commands to a minimum, but it seems like we may need to add one or two. Perhaps the same command would change to LOCK TARGET when used by infantry. Just a thought. TeAcH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanzfeld Posted July 8, 2000 Share Posted July 8, 2000 That sounds like too much micromanagment to me. JMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Weaver Posted July 8, 2000 Share Posted July 8, 2000 CM already allows you an insane amount of micromanagement ability you don't have in real life. Being able to specify turret orientation for individual tanks is just ridiculous. I suggest that you make better tactical choices so as not to have infantry behind your Panther and tanks in front of it. That's stupidity on your part, not the computer's. Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximus Posted July 8, 2000 Author Share Posted July 8, 2000 Oh Dan Weaver, you mis-read my situation. There was nothing behind my Panther until the Stuart made a mad dash past my left flank. So in order to fix that, I did a "hunt" and "target" towards and on the Stuart and the tac-AI decided to continue firing at the infantry. ------------------ "I for one, am pretty damn close to Genius"--Ol' Blood & Maximus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cybeq Posted July 8, 2000 Share Posted July 8, 2000 I think what happened was pretty realistic. You have to realize that in real life you can't make decisions for the tank commander. He gets his orders and then executes them his way. By the way, doesn't the Stuart have a 37mm gun? ------------------ "To subdue the enemy without fighting is the supreme excellence." -Sun Tzu, The Art Of War Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximus Posted July 8, 2000 Author Share Posted July 8, 2000 Yeah, you're right. A 37mm gun. Thought it was, but wasn't sure, especially after it knocked out my Panther. ------------------ "I for one, am pretty damn close to Genius"--Ol' Blood & Maximus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastables Posted July 8, 2000 Share Posted July 8, 2000 Don't suppose you had the Panther unbuttoned? It's always high on my list of "if only". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scott Clinton Posted July 8, 2000 Share Posted July 8, 2000 I think it just boils down to what is the largest threat to the Panther (in this case). Was the infantry a greater threat than the Stuart? I don't think so, especially if the Stuart was on the Panther's flank/rear. Infantry should be secondary targets for tanks at all times. The only exceptions I can think of are infantry with AT weapons or very close infantry (often the same thing). ------------------ Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OberGrupenStompinFeuhrer! Posted July 8, 2000 Share Posted July 8, 2000 Didn't maximus say the Stuart was just out of LOS? In which case the Panther would be doing what you told it too. It started hunting in the direction of the Stuart, but when it began it could only see the infantry. Once it had engaged the infantry, the "hunt" command will keep it engaged until the infantry was eliminated. So the Stuart was getting free shots at the Panther while the infantry was still kicking. At the start of the move, *you* could see a higher threat, but the Panther couldn't. Perhaps a "fast move" on the Panthers part, towards the Stuart, with targeting on the Stuart, would have worked better. Not guaranteed, but it might have seeen the Stuart before it got bored and looked for something else to target. The "hunt" command gave it no choice in that situation. I hope that makes sense? OGSF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochen2 Posted July 8, 2000 Share Posted July 8, 2000 The same with a panther happend to me in a quickbattle against 5 Stuarts and Infantry. The Panther liked to shell the Infantry more than the Stuarts. They flanked him and knocked him out. Hmmm, perhaps the Tanks should more concentrate on other tanks, if they have seen any. They should be more careful to other tanks. Jochen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peterk Posted July 8, 2000 Share Posted July 8, 2000 I agree with Stompin on this one. Just because you were able to see the enemy in back of your Panther (probably because someone else had LOS), it doesn't mean that the Panther knew he was there - especially if your tank was buttoned up. Looks like you got burned by a nice move by the AI to get around your Panther. p. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scott Clinton Posted July 9, 2000 Share Posted July 9, 2000 OberGrupenStompinFeuhrer!: Yep, good catch. I missed that part and it makes all the difference in the world IMHO. With the Panther never having LOS to the Stuart it should NOT have started turning its turret just because of 'orders'. This would represent TOO much control (again IMHO). Thanks for setting me straight. ------------------ Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rother Posted July 9, 2000 Share Posted July 9, 2000 Here's my Panther story. I'm trading shots with a Sherman at real close range. Next turn he charges me and I miss my last shot at 3 meters when a broken crew from a dead Sherman ran in front of me 50 meters away. Instantly my Panther targets the crew and ignores the Sherman which is now about 15 meters to my rear. This was an elite Panther and yet they ignored a known close range threat that could have easily killed them for a non threat. Needless to say my Panther died. I see this constantly where tanks will ignore another tank bouncing rounds off them to shoot at a closer infantry target that is no threat. There's no reason for a buttoned tank to fire at infantry more than 300 meters away when there are known spotted armor threats anywhere on the battlefield. If they don't spot it that's fine and realistic, but these tanks do need their targeting priorities straightened out a little. They seem to have no attention span. I'd rather have them keep watching that target that just popped smoke and not firing at anything more than a few degrees off that for the rest of the turn than slewing 90 degrees to take pot shots at long range infantry. More realistic tank AI behavior yes. Micromanagment no. Rother Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts