Jump to content

Possible Bug to Fix in CM2


Recommended Posts

Unfortunately I must point out a problem I found.

I am in a battle where my opponent has used flamethrowers to set a vital set of buildings on fire, dening my use of them. Very smart.

To counter I decided to destroy these buildings to increase my LOS over the rubble.

The problem is that units will not area target burning buildings. I build a test map and tried every allied Armor unit against buring buildings. At most I would get one burst of .50cal at the building. You could watch a fast turret start to move and then quickly return to the normal position.

Artillery still can destroy a burning building, but no DF HE is possible.

Like I said, not a normal situation but something to look into.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Wildman -

If the building is on fire, you can't see through it because of the smoke as well as the building itself, right?

So why do you think a rubble pile of flaming (or worse still, smoldering) timbers will be any easier to see through?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't get what's to look into.

You can't trace line of site through rubble. It's not like it falls down flat into a neat pile of broken bits. The bitmap is merely an abstrat representation of a building that people can't go into anymore.

Saying there's a "bug" is a bit of a stretch I'd say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity, does a burning building always become burning rubble when it is destroyed?

Edit: Just ran a little test with about a dozen burning buildings and three 240mm spotters. Everyone of the buildings became burning rubble, so Wildman wouldn't have gained any LOS from destroying them.

[ 05-30-2001: Message edited by: Kingfish ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Phoenix:

You can't trace line of site through rubble.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Interesting statement. I've drawn lines of sight through rubble many times. Judging by what I've read on the board, so have quite a few other people.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ciks:

You can't trace LOS through rublle if you are on the same height level the rubble is. If you're higher, then no problem.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And naturally, the smoke from burning rubble is harder to see through than simple rubble..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simple fact of the matter is you should be able to target, fire on, and destroy burning buildings with direct fire. At the moment these buildings are "magically" protected from everything but artillery. Its like they get the "mighty fire-shield of ultimate defense" as soon as they start burning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wildman:

I am in a battle where my opponent has used flamethrowers to set a vital set of buildings on fire, dening my use of them. Very smart.

To counter I decided to destroy these buildings to increase my LOS over the rubble.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I am flattered to be the subject of a post... as others have pointed out, flaming rubble has the same LOS blocking function as a flaming building - I tested that first.

You'll just have to go around the buildings. Oh, yeah, and down snow-covered city streets with direct-fire HE waiting for you. Nevermind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I appriciate all the feedback, there are two reasons to bring this up to fix in CM2.

1. It's unrealistic. Really the inability to fire at a burning building is unrealistic. Unless there is some historical order or precedent that says no burning buildings will be shot at.

2. I do realise that at ground level the rubble will block most LOS, however from the multipule 2-story buildings behind them I could have had direct LOS for my multiple FOs. That is why I wanted the buildings removed. I needed to at least try this tactic and I couldn't because of CMs inability to allow DF at burning buildings.

Given BTS' commitment to accuracy I thought this deserved a mention. I guess I should have stuck by my original idea of just sending them an email.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wildman:

I guess I should have stuck by my original idea of just sending them an email.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, that's probably a bad idea. The last thing that BTS probably wants is 200 emails per day suggesting bug fixes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...