Jarmo Posted July 19, 2000 Share Posted July 19, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RMC: Can there be a way to say "fire at this area until something better pops up in that area" and also when needed "shoot at that spot and DO NOT stop?" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> There would be awful many extra orders that would be useful. This is one of them. Area fire orders are abandoned, BTW, if a "threat" appears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Posted July 19, 2000 Share Posted July 19, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hunter: Guys, he threat value should diminish with time, say by 1 per second (again, or whatever). So for 40 seconds in this example, the 'hidden' threat from the firefly would constitute the greater threat and the Tiger would react to it as it's main target. This is plenty of time for the target to reemerge on the other side of the house, and for the Tiger to be still tracking it (although leading might beproblematic). If it hasn't re-emerged in 40s, then go ahead and target the distant Stuart.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Nice idea, but it would alow a gamey tactic: a player wold have a Sherman stick its nose out from behind a building every minute or two, when the Tiger is looking the other way, then back up out of sight; thus the Tiger would never get a shot off. Actually I have seen something like this happen with the present version; with the Tiger's slow traverse, if enemy tanks are appearing for only brief periods crossing roads, running between buildings etc, the slow turret traverse of the Tiger is such that it just keeps moving its turret around and never shoots. A possibly good solution proposed on the Usenet forum is to allow the Tiger to "see" the enemy tank for some time after it disappears from sight, so that it "knows" that there is a hidden threat. Henri [This message has been edited by Henri (edited 07-19-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeAcH Posted July 19, 2000 Author Share Posted July 19, 2000 I'll add one more instance that occurred in a game I am playing now. A Panzer IV was on one side of a line of thin trees. He was facing along the run of trees, hence the side of his hull was exposed to the tree line. An enemy Cromwell on the other side of the trees raced forward hoping for a shot at the PIV. As the Cromwell moved, the PIV's LOS to it was broken and regained at about 1 second intervals. Each time the PIV wanted to traverse back to the direction of the hull. When the Cromwell eventually came into LOS, the PIV's turret had returned to face forward and thus out of position. I have a good feeling this is being addressed in 1.03 but I wanted to point it out nonetheless. TeAcH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sitting Duck Posted July 19, 2000 Share Posted July 19, 2000 In terms of the game logic/programming, wouldn't a Defensive Arc have nearly the same effect as an ambush? So, one way to achieve the intended affect of a Defensive Arc is to allow vehicles to create a Defensive Target (rather than an ambush target). I'm really new to the game, so I'm not sure of all the restrictions placed on the use of an Ambush Target, but maybe some of those restrictions could be relaxed or changed for the Defensive Target. Things like range, target size, the effect of unit movement, becoming a target, or when the defensive target is released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Simon Posted July 19, 2000 Share Posted July 19, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Henri: Nice idea, but it would alow a gamey tactic: a player wold have a Sherman stick its nose out from behind a building every minute or two, when the Tiger is looking the other way, <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Exactly what is "gamey" about that? Are feints now considered "gamey" along with a handfull of other legit tactics that get labeled "gamey"? ------------------ Simon http://members.tripod.com/~sjuncal/ammodump/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wako Posted July 19, 2000 Share Posted July 19, 2000 What a long topic! But I agree this is one of the most annoying "features" of the current version. Some of the suggested fixes , i.e. def. arcs, priorities, etc., would be nice, but would also involve some significant programming. A quicker fix would be to just have any unit ignore other units that are no threat as long as they have seen a "threat" in the last 5 turns or so that they haven't seen "eliminated". This would fairly easily model the commonsensical (is that a word) "Don't aim at the panicked Sherman crew over there because we just saw (or heard about) a Stuart coming down this street" or "5 turns ago we saw another Sherman on that hill 800m away. Now WE didn't kill him, and we haven't heard anyone did, so he's still out there somewhere". These other things would be nice, but I'll take the above as a fairly easy to implement fix anyday. ------------------ wako "All models are wrong - some are useful.'' - George E.P. Box Check out my CM webpage at http://ccpirate.webjump.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark IV Posted July 19, 2000 Share Posted July 19, 2000 Once you had that arc... ...you could have a Recon by Fire command (I prefer a "Lay Waste" command): "Put one round of HE through every floor of every building in this arc, unless a person or vehicle appears, then put one through him too, or if multiples appear, go into threat assessment and kill the biggest threat first." Come to think of it I could give the whole damn army this command and just sit there drinking til Taps played... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derfel Posted July 19, 2000 Share Posted July 19, 2000 Couldn't resist putting in my oar in... A lot of solutions to this particular problems have been suggested here and I'm not the man to say which are practicable, instead I'd like to add the following to ANY of the above mentioned solutions: Wouldn't it be neat if the "Threat Assement Solution" (my generic name for the solution to the problem, TAS for short) could be linked to the tank crew's experience. i.e The better quality crew the more precise the threat assesment would be. This would mean that an expert crew would rarely (if ever) waste time and ammo on escaping enemy crews whereas a green crew would be likely to fire at anything that moved. I don't know much about tankers, but this sort of behaviour is certainly common among ground-pounders. Comments, anyone? -Derfel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisl Posted July 20, 2000 Share Posted July 20, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Henri: A possibly good solution proposed on the Usenet forum is to allow the Tiger to "see" the enemy tank for some time after it disappears from sight, so that it "knows" that there is a hidden threat. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Targeting is already pretty sticky - I just had a tank that was tracking an enemy unit at long range maintain lock after the unit was behind a building (quite a ways back--maybe 100 m the other side of the building). I had a unit inside the building, and the tank opened fire on the unit behind the building, striking the building and setting it afire. Really annoying, as my unit in the building was well hidden and could have remained so, but had to get the hell out and get shot by a whole bunch of nearby enemy units. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts