Another case for relative spotting

[Juardis]

Not to beat a dead horse here, but...

Reading Citizen Soldiers by Stephen Ambrose (actually, I'm listening to the tape of it), there is this passage in the 1st chapter about tanks and infantry in the hedgerows.

Tanks were severely hampered in the hedgerow country. The narrow tree lined lanes between the rows was too restrictive for tanks to maneuver in or traverse their turrets. So they tried going through the opening in the hedgerow into the fields only to discover all the openings were pre-sighted for mortar and fausts. So they tried to go over the hedges without success. They couldn't hang out on the main roads because the Germans had the high ground with 88s having nice fire lanes to them. American doctrine was for the tanks to provide close support to the infantry and the two were supposed to work in tandem.

However, one of the personal stories related the problems of this doctrine. Basically, there was this squad/platoon/company walking down a road when incoming arty started landing. One of the infantry guys looks around and sees a church steeple and thinks that's where the spotter is. So he turns to a buttoned up tank that is supposed to be providing close support and he can't get it's attention. He bangs on the side but to no avail. He ultimately gets in front of the tank and waves his arms to stop. Finally he got the tanks attention and directed them to fire at the church.

Since tanks couldn't lead the fight, and soldiers couldn't communicate with buttoned up tanks, the tanks were relegated to bringing up the rear while in the hedgerows. At least, that's what Ambrose said.

I guess by the time Hurten forest rolled around there were external phones on each tank to allow the infantry to communicate with the TC inside the tank, so that helped some but most infantry didn't know those phones were there.

Which brings me back to my crusade and beating the dead horse. Tanks know too much. Communicating with infantry was difficult at best. I have ideas how to model this, but I'm sure no one is interested. So I just want to request again that somehow this get put into CM2 and not wait until CMII.

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

Jeff Abbott

[aka_tom_w]

" Which brings me back to my crusade and beating the dead horse. Tanks know too much."

this is a very difficult issue.

I agree tanks do know too much.

For CM2 they should "know" less

(I know that buttoned tanks have their spotting ability reduced but still it "feels" like the know too much? IMHO)

I would be interested in hearing your opinions on this one.

Absolute spotting is the culprit here and it should be addressed as BEST as technically possible for CM2 to realitically model the differences in technology and communication and control that should be (hopefully) modeled for the Russian and German troops. I understand this difference was profound and substantial.

Juardis why don't you share your idea's with us here?

I for one am curious.

-tom w

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 03-20-2001).]

[Guest Offwhite]

I think I remember reading in Doubler that phones on the rear decks of tanks originated in Normandy, disappeared after the breakout, then reappeared in the Hurtgen. Granted, given casualty rates and newly arrived divisions, the troops fighting in the forest may not have been familiar with the practice.

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

Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep

Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap

- Rudyard Kipling, "Tommy"

[DeadHorse]

Juardis -

Thank you, I was getting a bit sore.

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

You ain't smelled nothing until you smelled a Dead Horse rotting in the sun. -- Somebody

[Leonidas]

Originally posted by Juardis:

Tanks know too much. Communicating with infantry was difficult at best.

I doubt that anyone disagrees with the exact point you're making. Yes, battlefield communication was poorer than CM makes it look. But where do you go from there? Are you only proposing some kind of targeting restriction? Or some more pervasive change that would prevent tanks from reacting to what the infantry sees? (After all the big danger to being buttoned is that you don't see the 'zook/'shreck hiding up ahead.)

Any proposal along those lines must address the basic question: Will this change make CM more realistic, and more fun?

(Copy and Paste from prior post)

I think everyone is pro-realism, and most assume that more realism is generally more fun. But they don't agree on what realism is.

The most common assumption is that 'realism' means making the player experience what a particular individual (such as a company or battalion commander) would experience in a battle. The trouble is that a company commander sim would be a really boring game, because each individual involved in a battle has little or no perspective on the overall picture, and a narrow range of decision-making power.

Another problem with a company commander sim is that it wouldn't create realistic battles, because current AI isn't capable of imitating human decisionmaking at the unit level. So a one person company commander sim could only show what it would be like to be company commander over a bunch of really stupid people, which I see as completely unrealistic.

CM is not a company commander sim. Instead, it puts the player in 'God mode' and allows some degree of player decisionmaking all the way down to each individual squad and tank. So to the extent that the player can control the units, you get realism in their actions.

But player control or 'micromanagement' brings its own loss of realism. The trouble is that there's just one of you. In a real battle there are many different commanders all trying to work together, and that produces fascinating problems in communication and coordination that have a big effect on battle. But there is no way to replicate this communication/coordination problem in a one player game. If the player makes decisions for each individual unit (to save them from AI stupidity), then those units will necessarily be much more coordinated than they would realistically be.

So the realism problem is not a technological problem, nor is it something that can simply be fixed by BTS trying harder. The problem is that 1) AI technology is still too primitive to make realistic unit-level decisions, and 2) CM is only a one- or two-player game. If you let the player control the units, then the units are too smart and too coordinated. If you don't let the player control the units, then they are too stupid.

The only solutions I can imagine are 1) a radical revolution in AI technology, or 2) a massive online version of CM (some 10-15 years in the future) in which each tank, squad and team is actually controlled by a separate human being.

Right now, CM splits the difference between the two. It leans towards letting the player make most unit-level decisions. But in some areas (particularly tanks) the player's control is limited, and he must rely on the TacAI to do the right thing.

Personally, I find AI stupidity to be more unrealistic than perfect information flow.

And more importantly, a game based on unrealistically perfect information flow is more fun and will sell better than a game based on unrealistically stupid units. This is why I always advocate more detailed commands to substitute human judgment for AI decisions.

[aka_tom_w]

"But player control or 'micromanagement' brings its own loss of realism. The trouble is that there's just

one of you. In a real battle there are many different commanders all trying to work together, and that

produces fascinating problems in communication and coordination that have a big effect on battle. But

there is no way to replicate this communication/coordination problem in a one player game. If the player

makes decisions for each individual unit (to save them from AI stupidity), then those units will

necessarily be much more coordinated than they would realistically be."

This is very well written.

It is a great analysis of the AI communications and control situation in CM as it is currently modeled.

BUT it will HAVE to addressed to model the wholey unco-ordinated nature of the Russian commande structure in WWII.

Some How, Some Way BTS has a Vision of how to use the available technology and soon to be enhanced CMBO code to make the experience of Playing the Russians somewhat akin to wielding a sledge hammer, trying to drive a nail into a tree, while intoxicated.

I Can hardly wait to see what they come up with as a solution !!!

-tom w

[Juardis]

The ultimate solution is that you, the human, only see what your units with radios or in LOS or C&C of a unit with a radio sees. That means your sniper is out there on his own. The only way to give him orders once out of LOS or C&C is to get someone with a radio in his LOS or C&C. Once he gets back in C&C he can give a mini scouting report as he tells of what he has seen. Then little unit markers could pop up over the map much like they do for when enemy units are out of LOS. Basically though, only you the human can give orders and only to those who have radios.

Same with tanks. Unbuttoned tanks can communicate with infantry or other tanks via their radios. If their radios are damaged or they have no radios, then they can only communicate with you the human when within C&C range of someone with a radio. Likewise, they too can give an intel report of all they have seen when they were out of communications with you the human. If they're buttoned, they can only give/receive orders if they have radios. They can only see what other tanks with radios see and nothing of what the infantry sees.

Yes, you may have instances where your tank is firing at something yet you the human are clueless as to what he's firing at. That's the nature of command. You don't know everything. You may have instances where your mortar teams are firing at something you don't see.

To make all this work, you need the ability to set target priorities for when your units are out of C&C. It's one idea. Obviously a lot of testing would have to take place to determine how much fun this is, but it would certainly necessitate a different style of play, that's for sure.

Barring that, just make it so tanks can only communicate with other tanks provided both have radios and/or are within LOS of each other or with infantry ONLY if they're unbuttoned. If buttoned, they only see what other tanks with radios see or what they themselves can see through the vision blocks (realistically see, not some HQ unit 650m in the fog). If buttoned, they cannot communicate with infantry or if they can, the command delay should be very long (like 2 minutes or longer).