The AI is taking advantage of me....

[dalem]

Hey folks-

I'd like to weigh in with another view on this topic, one that will probably not be popular.

Maybe it works fine the way it is.

I've never even been *in* a tank or other AFV, but I've read about them. A lot. Like many of us here on this forum, I have a decent little library of reference material for the period and topic.

I've read this thread, and other "tank target stickiness" threads, and I am reading one common factor in all of them: "target rich environment". And in this target rich environment, some folks are questioning the tendancy of a tank to switch from one target to another and back again, seemingly with no memory of previous threats. Seems like the tank's AI is acting confused.

Well, why wouldn't it be confused? All the accounts I've read of tank combat portray a very confused environment (loud, smokey, bouncy, jarring, sweaty, tunnel-visioned, etc.). Many targets equal many potential threats, even to a Tiger or Sherman Jumbo or British Firefly - rest assured that a lucky 37mm round or grenade can end a behemoth's day with just as much finality as the high-velocity, big-bore boys.

In my opinion, the most important things on any tank are its tracks. Use them. If your tin can is getting confused by the choices available, back it out of there and reduce its choices. I'm fairly certain that many tank commanders on all sides in all types of vehicles were quite comfortable with yelling "driver, REVERSE".

I'm not trying to be pedantic or snide. But please remember that Steve and Charles have told us over and over and over again that Combat Mission is not like other computer wargames or simulations. It says so right in the manual. Hell, that's why I bought the darned thing. It seems pretty clear that parking your butt in the town square and taking on all comers is not going to play out like some of us think it should. But I've played Battlezone. What I played last night was not Battlezone.

So before we start telling Steve & Charles to rewrite their code, maybe we should pay attention to what they've been telling us all along and re-think our tactics.

-dale

[Dar]

With all due respect, Dale, even though I'm not a tank crewman either, I would find an enemy tank at my two o'clock position much more threatening than a mortar crew at my eight o'clock, and if that tank popped smoke, I wouldn't think, "Oh, it's gone! If I can't see it, it must not be there." and rotate the turret 180 degrees to engage the mortar crew. I'd always want my thickest armor and gun facing towards the most serious threat, and a threat that pops smoke is still a threat.

Don't get me wrong: Charles has done a phenomanal job with the AI! However, the Villers-Bocage scenario and operation particularly reveal that the Tac AI crews are lacking in short-term memory, and having a Cromwell re-emerge in same spot after the smoke dissipates and nailing your Tiger with a rear turret shot as it's picking off routed half-track crews is quite frustrating.

However, I don't envy Charles on this-- Regardless of what he comes up with, it won't satisfy everybody! But he's still my hero.

Dar