V1.1 A MAJOR BUG ???

[Xavier]

Hi,

I just perform my first battle with V1.1 against the AI when something strange happend. I have two Churchill tanks on a bridge. Enemy forces are in front of me but I see no possible target for my tank.

During the turn's resolution a german crew is spotted at 60 meters at nine o'clock by my tanks. And I see both my tanks turning their turret AND THEIR HULL in direction of the german crew to fire on him .So now, both tanks exposed their side to the major enemy location!

So I perform the same test with 1.05 and 1.1.

With 1.05 you can keep your hull in a dirction and engage enemy with weapons in the turret on another direction. But this seems not to be possible with 1.1 When you give a target to your tank. It always rotates in direction of the target (like a Self propelled gun)!

I don't know if it's volontary but I think I would prefer playing with the 1.05 system. Is there a special explanation to this?

[Forever Babra]

This is a deliberate change in 1.1 By turning the hull, the turret can be brought onto target faster. This is not a bug.

[Xavier]

oh, sorry and thanks for your quick answer(I really thought it was a bug)

but when I made my test I don't think target acquisition seems much more faster with this method. And In my opinion you partially lost the advantage of having a turret. In 1.05 I may have the choice of rotating or not my tank in the same direction of a target engaged by the turret. This choice doesn't still exist in 1.1

I think this choice may be an open door to some srange(gamey)tactics. I just have to send an unit(even a crew) on side on your tanks and so your tanks will rotate and 'll show me their side even if you know I have anti-tank weapon somewhere in front of you...

[aka_tom_w]

I played Rune's a "River Runs through it"

yesterday using V1.1 and I would like to report I saw a German Panther on a road, as I played against the computer ( the Panther was under the computer AI control) loss its head/mind/decisiveness and got very confused when a halftrack approached it from about 250 m on the road in front of it and an infantry squad approached it from its 10:00 o'clock (front left quadrant) both were not real threats but percieved as EQUAL threats and the Panther went into complete kinip****S! swinging its turret and hull violently back and forth for about 40 -50 seconds not firing at either while not knowing which to focus on.

the hull swiveled as quick as possible to help the turret.

the Halftrack was dead ahead at 12:00 o'clock, then I thought the Panther was going to blow up and self destrcut from all the twitiching before it finally got a shot off at the HT and KO'd it.

I would say we should all watch for tank behaviour that looks like hopeless indescieveness between two equal threats.

It was entertaining.

-tom w

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-10-2001).]

[Guy w/gun]

LOL...what I thought was a major improvement, someone already has a problem with!!!

I've been busy all day, so I haven't had time to try out the 1.1 patch. I hope this little hull rotation fix will benefit some of the slower, less decisive German armor *cough* tiger *cough*

[Bruno Weiss]

Yeah, them Panthers had that problem. So many targets so little tungsten.

Actually, who "thought" this was an improvement. (Hehe, demanding accountability). Personally, I'm sitting here reading this and wondering...huh. You mean to tell me that CM no longer allows for a turret swing? The entire tank goes hither skither aiming at targets instead of the historical and appropriate method of simply turning the turret? Well, I'm confused... And wondering if I should now get 1.1 outa there and put 1.05 back?

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

"Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses

open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth."

-Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916)

[This message has been edited by Bruno Weiss (edited 01-10-2001).]

[Guy w/gun]

Well, atleast the hull swiveled with the turret! I really wish tanks weren't so indecisive PERIOD.

[Xavier]

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

the Panther went into complete kinip****S! swinging its turret and hull violently back and forth for about 40 -50 seconds not firing at either while not knowing which to focus on.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I checked the same thing. It happends often and looks strange.

This change is may be good for slow turret tank but in a way you lost the benefits of faster turrets.

[Guest KwazyDog]

I believe it does Guy.

Ive played probably well over fifty various games with the new hull rotation tweak it really does help out those big heavy German tanks. Its a scarey site as the allied player to see your first shot against a Panther miss, and instead of just the turret turning towards you, the whole tank brings its front armour around.

Tom, I did see the bahaviour you mentioned once in a LOT of games, so I wouldnt worry about it. It is a result from a change people asked for where tanks to be able to identify threats more quickly. I dont think you will find it a problem.

Dan

[Guy w/gun]

Well Bruno, when you put it that way...maybe it isn't acurate. I just meant that to me atleast, it's the most infuriating thing in the world to watch a tiger with a very slow turret to sit still and to try to target a flanking Sherman when it could turn it's hull to help targeting and save it's self

[Xavier]

I understand tank rotating if the target may be a danger for it(i.e an enemy tank, an AT weapon) but why rotating if the target is just a minor one(like a crew)?

In 1.05 , during my order phase ,I've the choice to engage a target with my turret and to wait for another one in another direction

with my bow mg. Why it's no more possible(I'm so sade )?

[Bruno Weiss]

I don't disagree with that assessment at all Guy, infact it might be one of the reasons the Germans lost after all. I suppose what I'm driving at is, has CM become as close of an approximation of historical accuracy in a wargaming experience that we've all touted for quite a while now, or has it changed to accomodate popular demand. And ofcourse then the next step would be revisionist history, but I'll leave that one for somebody else.

The idea of a tank in the heat of battle with numerous targets swinging thisa way and thata way, to and fro, might be a saving grace for accurately modeled armor which suffered from just such historical problems, such as slow turrets, but then again isn't historical accuracy what we all sort of wanted? I mean otherwise, let's put in some Starfleet Cruisers and Klingon Birds of Prey and have a real time of it...?

I have to say at this point, I'm nothing short of flabberghasted?????

Oh, and wonderful. BTS has pulled Version 1.05 off of their download area? What the devil is going on here??? This was supposed to be a final, no longer in beta. Who beta tested this? You mean, it made it through a beta test and NO ONE said anything about this? No one questioned the historically accuracy of this? Now what, ever one is downloading this thing and thinking it's a final wrap, all tested, all approved and ready to go and someone pulls out this stunt?

After last week where we devoted ten thousand threads and a hundred and two arguments over the historical accuracy of the use of crews, someone just ups and robotizes the tanks on account of it ain't popular that some of them act and behave with slow turret responses as would be accurate?????????????????????

Steve, man, we gotta talk bud...

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

"Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses

open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth."

-Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916)

[This message has been edited by Bruno Weiss (edited 01-10-2001).]

[Guest KwazyDog]

Firstly, I believe it is historically accurate for tanks, especially the heavier German tanks, to turn their hulls to aid the turret in bringing the main gun to the target.

I will have to double check this, but tanks with move and move fast orders will use their turret alone to engage. Its when in hunt mode that a tank will stop when a threat it found and turn to engage as soon as possible. With the German (and pretty much all) tanks, their armour is usually the strongest at the front, so it is of great benefit for them to turn their hull aid in both bringing their gun around quicker, *and* turn their front amour to the threat.

Xavier, I have not seen the problem you describe in games I have played, so I would suggest that you keep playing and see if the problem shows itself again...

Dan

[Xavier]

I'm not an expert in tank warfare or history. But I think if I was a tank commander I would like to keep my strongest armor thickness in front of the enemy. I would never rotate my tank to engage a stunned crew armed with pistols at 60 meters!

I ask myself if the same thing(tank rotating) happens with a hull down tank or a tank with no bow mg(if it exists )?

[Bruno Weiss]

Kwazydog, I do not disagree that upon a lazy day, where a single target lumbered into view, that a crew would most probably turn their vehicle (if they had time), towards the target. What I'm questioning is in the heat of battle, (as described above with the Churchills), and particularly where there are more than one target, (as described above with the Panther), that a crew would swing and sway the entire vehicle around as if taking part in a boogie dance.

No, that ain't accurate, it ain't even logical. It's downright dangerous and not even good sense to turn your side hull or rear hull towards the enemy's line of strength in order to point the gun...AAaaarrrggggg!

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

"Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses

open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth."

-Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916)

[Guy w/gun]

I have heard from many people on this board that are very acquainted with WWII history that the Tiger I had a very small turning axis. I would assume that a TC of a tiger would have the tank rotate its hull toward any targets, especially if it was in a defensive role and not moving

[Xavier]

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

Firstly, I believe it is historically accurate for tanks, especially the heavier German tanks, to turn their hulls to aid the turret in bringing the main gun to the target.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I agree

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> With the German (and pretty much all) tanks, their armour is usually the strongest at the front, so it is of great benefit for them to turn their hull aid in both bringing their gun around quicker, *and* turn their front amour to the threat.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, but again why against 'soft' target too?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Xavier, I have not seen the problem you describe in games I have played, so I would suggest that you keep playing and see if the problem shows itself again...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sure,I'll keep playing But everyone can buid a test scenario and check what I'm talking about.

[Guest KwazyDog]

Bruno, I disagree to be honest.

If you were in a tank, say a Panther, and an enemy threat (even a simple Stuart) comes from you right side and attacks, would you sit there and wait happily with rounds bouncing off of the *side* of your tank whilst your turret slowly turns to engage, leaving you thing hull side towards your enemy or would you think damn, I dont want to die at the hands of that thing, kill it ASAP as it is a threat NOW and can kill you now, then worry about other enemies that *may* be elsewhere.

I know which I would prefer...!

You have actually played with 1.1 btw bruno, havnt you? I get the impressions by your posts that you havnt tried it yet. If not, give it a go before knocking it down, I honestly have found it to be a great improvement, one that has been in there for most of the public beta releases and one that no one has had a problem with.

Dan

[Bruno Weiss]

Okay Guy, if true (be careful now), then why are the Churchills and Panthers doing it as described above?

Kwazydog, ah infact that is precisely what I'd do if the bigger threat was in front. I certainly wouldn't be swinging the tank back and forth and I presume round and round in a multiple target environment. That is I believe, why the turret was designed to do that. Otherwise, there would not be this big benefit of having a turret over say a Stug which does not. By the way, are the Stug's dancing also?... Ofcourse they are, their supposed to. So we've what, made a Stug of all the turreted tanks?

No, I haven't tried it. I was all set to, until I read this. Again, you have to keep things in context. Given a single target, sure I'll go along with this. Given maybe even two where one is of lesser importance again, sure maybe. But a multiple target environment, or one described with the Churchills above where the tank exposes it weaker armor brazenly inviting a side puncture from a hidden AT gun to aim it's gun at a target 90 degrees to port or starboard...

And as you just pointed out, and asked me; "wouldn't (I) turn the hull...", however it would appear that (I), no longer have that option, that the AI now decides for me. That is what the rotate button is for. If I'm a dummy and don't point the hull in the direction of the threat appropriately, then (I), will suffer. Which is sort of what CM does, teaches ya how to fight, I don't particularly want to just watch the AI do it for me, or have CM take options away from me. And talk about gamey!!! Now, all a fellow has to do is jump a halftrack out there and surprise a tank, and have it turn towards it leaving its weaker flank exposed ofcourse where you've cleaverly hidden an AT gun to take advantage of the AI's now predetermined and calculable action?

You guys are kidding me right. I know, this is all like a put on by Steve to get even for the crew thing...

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

"Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses

open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth."

-Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916)

[This message has been edited by Bruno Weiss (edited 01-10-2001).]

[Guest KwazyDog]

Xavier, I do understand the problem you had. It results from the fact that the unit to you rear could have been a Panzerschrek, thus you tank reponds to it as if it is a possible threat. If you have a movie (or sample scenario) of the issue, send it in and I will pass it onto Charles for future refence to see if it the Tac AI may be tweaked a little further to handle this situation

Dan

[Xavier]

it's not a change just for the tiger or the heaviest german tanks in defensive situation but it affects ALL the tanks in ALL the situations even when you are the attacker

and (I suppose, but I've not tested yet)even with fast turret tanks. Rotating means more manoeuver and more time to stabilize the aim for a tank with a fast turret, no?

[Xavier]

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

If you have a movie (or sample scenario) of the issue, send it in and I will pass it onto Charles for future refence to see if it the Tac AI may be tweaked a little further to handle this situation

Dan<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thank you Dan, I check one and I'll send you the file tomorrow because now it' time to sleep here

Thank you again for all your repplies...

[Seahawk-vfa201]

I would agree that swinging left and right toward possible targets is not a good idea. I have seen the behavior against SINGLE targets and it looks very realistic.

Maybe (MAYBE) the AI does not have a weight factor for equal danger threats. A simple one could be FIFO policy: First IN, First OUT (hopefully off the game) and always putting the thicker armor toward the biggest threat.

It looks like the AI had not the possibility to ignore the second equal threat and engage for good the first one.

In case of different threats (infantry vs armor) I would cry BUG if the tank kept swinging: in one (only ONE) case it happened the AI did the right thing: a Sherman wnet under fire from my Puma AND my infantry (firing to force it buttoend right before the Puma was getting into LOS). It was a pleasure (from the accuracy point of view) to see the Sherman forget about the infantry and rotate the turret and turn the hull at same time to get to fire back at my Puma. It got brewed the same but, oh BOY, it did way faster than before engage the Puma.

So the question is: does the AI have a policy to resolve equal threats?

PS

if CM was not providing you with the info on some unidentified unit (Crew?, Anti-Tank?, Infantry?) would you be right away in the position to decide where to point your hull without gambling your life?

PPS

But then again, the Panther swaying to and fro on the bridge is odd looking

[Bruno Weiss]

Well yeah, and like I added in an edit above. So what, now all an opponent has to do is confuse your armor to take advantage of a predeterminable action? That is, you send your tank down the road, the opponent knowing the tank is going to turn left and right towards targets, simply jumps some lesser unit out on the left or right, and all the time has a hidden counter measure placed so as to take advantage of the weaker armor that he knows will be exposed. I mean, so now what comes next ofcourse, is some big debate that decides that to avoid being gamey we need to wait for the tank to resume its original position before firing on it?

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

"Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses

open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth."

-Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916)

[This message has been edited by Bruno Weiss (edited 01-10-2001).]

[Seahawk-vfa201]

Bruno: yep, that would be terrible

The AI should be able to decide not to turn the hull on occasions but I bet it is going to be not so straightforward to program that behavior. It should compute a probability of threat compared to a current lack of LOS in order to act against a possible ambush. The reasoning would be: I have what seems to a lesser threat on my right, a euql less threat on my left, an unknown situation (no LOS, short LOS. obstacles) in front. I do take my time, engage first, getting out of way of second, and keep hull toward what could be a higher threat in front.

If BTS can generate that kind of AI than it would be sort of miracle.