zeke Posted June 13, 2000 Share Posted June 13, 2000 This is a very basic question and has probably been answered already somewhere(sorry!), but here goes: let's say an enemy tank is hiding behind a building (though spotted by other friendly units), and you'd like to fire at it with one of your tanks as soon as it moves out from behind the building. What typically happens is your tank ends up finding a new target somewhere else, and while your tank is firing at the secondary target, the enemy tank emerges from behind the building and destroys your tank. Is it possible to "track" an enemy target, even if it is currently out of LOS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pfalz XII Posted June 13, 2000 Share Posted June 13, 2000 At this point, I don't believe you can "track" an ememy armor unit for more than a few seconds. Eventually, I would like to see an additional targeting order for AFV's and other units with large bore guns which would "lock" the main gun on the armor unit you want to kill for up to 20-30 seconds. In effect, this would be telling your armor unit not to target enemy infantry units with its main gun. This may or may not be needed, depending on how this works in the full version. We will find out soon enough! ------------------ Formerly known as not THE Charles from BTS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott C Posted June 13, 2000 Share Posted June 13, 2000 IIRC, targeting "stickiness" has been increased since the GD. So, if you order a unit to target something out of LOS, it will stay with that target longer than it currently does - a good compromise, I think, since a "lock" command would inevitably lead to a slew of complaints along the lines of "My *#%@ tank didn't shoot at that exposed FO!!! What an idiot!!!" ------------------ Questions, comments, arguments, refutations, criticisms, and/or sea stories? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Itchy Posted June 13, 2000 Share Posted June 13, 2000 Why don't you try selecting the area where you think the enemy tank will exspose itself as an ambush area? As long as you target the area your gunner should stay locked to that sight...just a suggestion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly's Heros Posted June 13, 2000 Share Posted June 13, 2000 One complaint about target stickiness. Let's face it, if a tank commander knew there was a tank behind a building in his LOS, he would never target another entity unless it had a higher fear factor. What I mean by this is that a tank commander is going to keep the tank in his boresight for fear of being destroyed by the enemy tank. The fear of being destroyed when the tank came clear of the obstacle will keep him preoccupied. Only another tank or an infantry with an AT weapon will change his mind. I think targets should be prioritized based on the fear factor they impose. For example, infantry probably would change targets to another infantry unit because other infantry pose a similar threat as a tank, especially MG fire. This simple scheme should help targeting issues. Now the real question is can you overide the fear factor. Here I think the AI should evaluate the situation and the strengths of the commander and make an informed decision. If the tank commander agrees with your new target then fine. Otherwise, he stays with the fear factor. Leadership ratings should come into play when this order is challenged. I believe very few tank commanders would have targeted infantry if they knew a tank was ready to pounce. It just isn't good business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomasj Posted June 13, 2000 Share Posted June 13, 2000 Just to throw in my $0.02 worth. I have to agree, Unless the target is of a higher risk factor the tank should not break target lock on the other tank. This is of course taking into account that someone near the tank has LOS. I had a tank targeted behind a building also, and my tank broke target to fire at a infantry squad that was over 300 meters away, and of course while my tank turned and fired the sherman came out turret ready and fired, minus one stugIII for me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrD Posted June 13, 2000 Share Posted June 13, 2000 On the other hand, we're all assuming that the tank knows there's a tank behind that building. Just about the only thing unrealistic about CM is that if one unit can see an enemy then all units can see it. In today's army this is true since just about every individual soldier has a radio but this was not true in WW2. So the tank not targeting the out of LOS enemy is somewhat rational. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted June 13, 2000 Share Posted June 13, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by zeke: Is it possible to "track" an enemy target, even if it is currently out of LOS?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That is what the 'ambush' command is for, isn't it? Or am I not getting it? I do that all the time. In CE, my opponent has his Stugs behind the ridge, so I just select various ambush points with my Shermans on the ridge, close to where he must emerge at some point if he wants to wrest the place from me. Bingo, if he shows he gets nailed. Unrealistic it isn't, because I know the Stugs are there, they have been pounding my infantry for a while now. ------------------ Andreas The powers of accurate perception are often called cynicism by those who do not possess them. (forgot who said it) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikester Posted June 13, 2000 Share Posted June 13, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DrD: On the other hand, we're all assuming that the tank knows there's a tank behind that building. Just about the only thing unrealistic about CM is that if one unit can see an enemy then all units can see it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> DrD, Actually, I believe you are incorrect. Just because one of your units spots an enemy unit, and it appears on the map, doesn't mean all of your other units on the map can actually "see" it. You see all spotted units, because you are in the omniscient position of the computer player. Your boys on the ground though, can only actually "see" what they can trace a valid LOS line to. I could be wrong, but I think that's the way the game works. Mikester out. [This message has been edited by Mikester (edited 06-13-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Galanti Posted June 13, 2000 Share Posted June 13, 2000 Have you been using the tanks (and anti-tank units) own ambush markers? This has helped me greatly in getting tanks to focus in the right area, instead of getting distracted... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrD Posted June 13, 2000 Share Posted June 13, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Actually, I believe you are incorrect. Just because one of your units spots an enemy unit, and it appears on the map, doesn't mean all of your other units on the map can actually "see" it. You see all spotted units, because you are in the omniscient position of the computer player. Your boys on the ground though, can only actually "see" what they can trace a valid LOS line to. I could be wrong, but I think that's the way the game works. Mikester out.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This has been discussed recently but I lost the thread and I don't think we ever reached a conclusion. Several posts have suggested that units do have awareness of all spotted units. For example, several people have asked "why did a BU tank turn its turret and engage my 'shreck team that was behind it? How could they see them?" and the answer given is usually "one of your OTHER units must have spotted them resulting in the tank becoming aware of them." Also, I seem to recall that Steve said in an interview that he would like ONE DAY to include true individual LOS in future titles. However, due to the preference of units to target enemies they have LOS to over ones they don't and a preference to target units more toward the front (less rotation required) they often ACT like they're unaware of units out of LOS. Any clarification would be appreciated, BTS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikester Posted June 14, 2000 Share Posted June 14, 2000 Ahhh, Herr gut Doctor. Now I "see" better where you are coming from. Mikester out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cannon Fodder Posted June 14, 2000 Share Posted June 14, 2000 Just another 2¢ opinon. How about targeting the building. If the tank moves from behind it your tank should switch its target to the enemy tank as it is a higher priority. If the enemy tank stays put, evenutally you will destroy his covering building, and problem solved. Either way it will keep him pinned down for some time until you can get up additonal support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murx Posted June 14, 2000 Share Posted June 14, 2000 On the other hand there should be a command to HOLD FIRE for the main gun. Let the tank spray his MGs and turn the turret to a logical degree (that is from 10 O'Clock to 2 O'Clock in real Panzertactics) but don't waste a round. Especially reloading the gun (HE for infantry, AP for tanks) takes lot of time and most of the time my tanks end up facing the enemies tank but still reloading couse they found it nice to see some grunts splattering. As a tanker I learned that in combat you don't unload and reload the gun, you just shoot the type of ammo you loaded and hope your loader gots the right round with the next shot... Just my experience with tanks & ammo (nowadays we tankers aren't allowed to shoot our big gun on grunties, boo murx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted June 14, 2000 Share Posted June 14, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DrD: Also, I seem to recall that Steve said in an interview that he would like ONE DAY to include true individual LOS in future titles. However, due to the preference of units to target enemies they have LOS to over ones they don't and a preference to target units more toward the front (less rotation required) they often ACT like they're unaware of units out of LOS. Any clarification would be appreciated, BTS?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yes good point Dr.D I too still do not really understand exactly how this works. I have been asumming that every unit on the battle fields "knows" via the "magical" radio about the location and type of every enemy that ANY one friendly unit knows about (has spotted). To have it any other way would imply "relative spotting" which is not available at this time, if I undertand that correctly. This does not mean that every friendly unit can "see" every other enemy unit, as LOS and LOF are still a large factor. But the concept is that my friendly units that are out of LOS to an enemy unit which has been spotted by another friendly unit, will know where to "look" for them and where to expect them, via info shared by ALL friendly units over the "magical" radio. I''m the one that stated earlier I played the game assuming EVERY one of my units was in clear and open, state of the art, (by tomorrow's standards), radio communication with every other friendly unit because they could all know about and have the SAME info about the type and location of all other enemy units that have been spotted by any friendly the SAME way I as the commander have the info. This is not exactly realistic but it seems to work quite well as the concept of relative spotting has been discuseed by Steve and he has determined it to be a REAL nightmare to code up. That makes sense to me. -tom w ------------------ <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> "Have you thanked BTS by buying your SECOND copy of CM yet?" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted June 14, 2000 Share Posted June 14, 2000 Has this targeting issue been covered elsewhere or is it reasonable to hope that we might get some insight into what our friendly units can "know" about enemy units they can't see (no LOS to it) but have been spotted by other friendly units? -tom w ------------------ <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> "Have you thanked BTS by buying your SECOND copy of CM yet?" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted June 14, 2000 Share Posted June 14, 2000 Still curious about the targeting question the "magical" radio and who knows what amongst friendly units? -tom w P.S. for the record I think I have now become known as one of the whiners around here ------------------ <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> "Have you thanked BTS by buying your SECOND copy of CM yet?" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 06-14-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrD Posted June 14, 2000 Share Posted June 14, 2000 Hoping the manual addresses these issues. It's 180 pages and no stats so I'm sure it does. God I can't wait!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts