AT Targeting Problem

[IntelWeenie]

Note: any resemblance to the "crew targeting" issue is purely accidental.

I have been playing a few games lately purchasing more AT guns than usual since I would like to learn to use them more effectively. In doing so, I have noticed an annoying tendency for them to 'spin' more than shoot.

A small AAR to put forth my point:

When engaging a PzKfw IV with several other PzKfw IVs nearby(within 100m radius of the original target), a Tank Destroyer? target appears much farther to one side (about 45^ from current line of fire). After dispatching the first PzKfw IV, instead of firing on the other nearby targets, the AT gun rotates to engage the Tank Destroyer?. In the course of rotating (which takes several seconds during which no fire is possible) the AT gun has several shots taken at it by the remaining PzKfw IVs, knocking it out. In the time it took to swing the gun around to engage a target that really posed no more threat than the others, the gun could have most likely gotten at least one more kill. Note: this is only one example, I have seen it happen *many* times.

I searched the archives for an answer, but all I found was this re. Tank Threat Calculation:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:The TacAI looks at a whole bunch of factors. They can be grouped into two generalized concerns:

Likely to do damange (based on the target type, its facing, range, etc)

Likely to be caused damage (enemy unit can cause death, is actively targeting, etc.)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/001310.html

Target 'stickiness' is not the issue, but rather that guns (and tanks with slower turrets, too, I suppose) can end up spending more time rotating the gun than engaging perfectly legitimate targets that they are already pointing near. Could this be fixed by a narrower targeting focus for guns/slow turrets? Better AT targeting assessment for non-armored units? Is it not an issue for others?

I welcome all comments....

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

Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses.

-Dudley Do-right

[Guest Michael emrys]

I guess your AT must have decided that the TD was either a higher value target or more vulnerable.

Again, this gets into how targets are prioritized. This seems to be an area where trying to correct one bit of odd behavior is likely to introduce yet other odd behavior. While it is always good to search for ways of improving the performance of our digital soldiers, we may just have to learn to live with a certain amount of irrational behavior. If it's any consolation, so did our real-life counterparts.

Michael

[Joeri]

I noticed the same behaviour. It can be very frustrating watching your gun rotate away from a whole field of juicy targets just to engage a (maybe more valuable but you're never gone get it anyway) target far away.

When your in an ambush with your gun it's average lifespan is probably less then 90 sec. from the point that you start shooting. Often 40+ sec. of that time is needlessly spend rotating.

I also agree with you Michael that it's probably hard to get this behaviour sorted out without introducing other strange behaviour.

Frustrating it is.

Joeri

[Guest tero]

I had one AT gun track and fire an infantry squad while a HT came up behind the squad and snuffed the AT gun with 50cal fire. The infuriating thing was the AT gun spotted the HT but kept on tracking the infantry unit until it lost LOS to the infantry unit and only then started to rotate back to engage the HT.... and got killed.

Likewise, in a PBEM my opponent lost his last operational Sherman to a AT team smack in front of it. The Sherman was firing area fire at a spot slightly to the (his) left of the real location of the team. The tank spotted the team after the first shot but remained on target with the area target for 4 more shots, the last of which killed it. No backing away, no smoke.

Are the crews preferring those targets that give them better odds than the targets that tactically would be better (or correct) targets ?

[This message has been edited by tero (edited 09-14-2000).]

[Noba]

I too have had this occur ( more spin than shoot ). I also agree that a potential fix could be a problem to program. I can see no real answer other than being aware. I have had the situation where my atg has ignored a Panther to take out 2 Ac's, (whilst under fire from the Panther ). Some times I wonder if an order to try and immobilise an otherwise unkillable target could be available for those heroic crews who would otherwise die in a spin.