Hellcat Stops To Engage Panther. Why Dammit?

[Col Deadmarsh]

I sent my Hellcat on a "Fast Move" around the flanks of a Panther on top of a hill about 500m away. While on the way, it has a shot at the Panther and takes it. He hits but the shell broke apart. Ok, this is fine but then, instead of continuing on with his order to go to the Panther's rear, he stops to engage the Panther. Guess who won?

I can maybe...maybe see stopping to engage if I was in "Hunt" mode since he was perpendicular to the Panther but not in Fast Move. Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't that mean keep moving no matter what?

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

Youth is wasted on the young.

[Dittohead]

Hmmm I would guess the Panther won. Now what do I win?

[Mlapanzer]

Question:What was the level of the Hellcat?

An annoying at times fact of CM life. Your units don't always do what you tell them to do. I set up a Hellcat once in a good hulldown positon behind a stonewall and what did the idiot do when a tiger took a shot at him. Did he reverse down the slope NOOOO!

He moves forward and.... I can't stand to finish it was Too ugly.

[The Commissar]

You have to give credit for BTS where it's due! In their never ending scrutiny of every tiny detail of the war, they did not forget to model Bubba, the hillbilly driver!

Seriously though, this is probably just an AI quirk. Happens sometimes, just like in real life.

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

"...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..."

- Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back"

[Warmaker]

What was the experience level of the Hellcat? If it's low I can see it making a stupid mistake or that the tank commander gave a really bad command. Don't know if that's consolation enough though.

Well, sorry to hear your dilemna... *secretly high fives the Panther's tank commander*

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

"Uncommon valor was a common virtue"-Adm.Chester Nimitz of the Marines on Iwo Jima

[jd]

Also look to see if it was continuation of a prior order (red squares) if you issue new orders (white squares) the unit stops, waits and then proceeds, that's tripped me more than once

[Col Deadmarsh]

Dittohead wrote:

Hmmm I would guess the Panther won. Now what do I win?

You win what's left of my AC. I'll send it over piece by piece so you can put it back together.

By the way, it was a veteran Hellcat so stupidity is not tolerated.

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

Youth is wasted on the young.

[Moon]

Two possibilities:

A) you used the HUNT command anyway by mistake

the Hellcat vets started thinking "our CO is a rotten b%&§ for sending us up here, alone and unsupported into enemy territory. Let's get the heck outtahere!", the hit the breaks and want to reverse - then destiny strikes...

Funny enough, GREEN troops might have though "our CO is our idol, let's drive on"

Martin

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

"An hour has 60 minutes, each minute in action has a thousand dangers."

- Karl-Heinz Gauch, CO 1st Panzerspähkompanie, 12th SS Panzerdivision

[Olle Petersson]

Originally posted by Colonel_Deadmarsh:

While on the way, it has a shot at the Panther and takes it. He hits but the shell broke apart.

I suppose they stopped before taking this shot, right? Otherwise they'd be very lucky to score that one in a hundred (or so) hit...

Then they just figured out "Wow, we got the range right, and we've got the firepower to poke a hole in that monster. Let's do it before he brackets in on us!"

Cheers

Olle

[Jarmo]

My guess is that the cat people decided to reverse to safety.

Did it stay there for a while or is it possible they were

just about to back off?

It's one of my pet annoyances when a tank gets scared, buttons up,

pops smoke, and then reverses into the line of fire of some other tank.

[Mattias]

Have never ever seen a "fast" moving vehicle stop to engage.

Set up a test run with two Hellcats zipping ("fast") back and forth over open hills in front of four stationary, ammoless, Panthers.

And hit the certainly do. Most shots are misses of course but now and then they hit, one lucky fellow hit 4 times out of 20 at ranges 700, 570, 590 and 625 meters, going full tilt along the front of the Panthers.

Something you'd expect from a M1A2 or a Leo2 but an unusually good day for a Hellcat.

M.

[Lmandrake]

Sometimes tank crew behavior seems inexplicable. On the plus side, I have had a Hellcat kill a Tiger while making a mad dash for cover.

There is defnitely a luck factor in CM. Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you don't.

Nonetheless, I find it maddening when my allied tanks decide to stop and slug it out. Unless its a jumbo, you don't even need to check on it before the next turn.

[mensch]

Originally posted by Mattias:

Have never ever seen a "fast" moving vehicle stop to engage.

M.

I have.. my M8 was making a fast dash between cover and it decided to engage a StuG... ARRGGH!.. they were regulars but it pissed me off watching it put on the breaks and fire off three rounds that gleeefuly bounced off the hull of the StuG.. no suprise there only to end up in a spectacular explotion killing all the crew but one.. so pissed off I sent him forward to get slaughtered by something.. which he did the bastard. I won't name the git I was playing cuz he will just say.. "dem da breaks" har har.. funny guy.

[Guest Mikey D]

The AI has a STRONG tendency to make tanks shoot-em-when-they-see-em, instead of ignoring the threat and completed the commanded dash to destination X.

I still don't know if that's a flaw in the logic or not, or if the object of the AI is to force you to keep your Hellcat out of line-of-sight of the target til the maneuver is completed.

[Jasper]

TC: "OK we'll dash around and catch him from behind."

Driver: "Yes, sir - sound pretty dangerous as we might run across some currently hidden enemy unit on the way. Full speed ahead."

10 seconds later.

Gunner: "He's spotted us sir. He's pivoting to face us. Should I fire?"

TC: "No dammit, drive faster than he can pivot or his turrent can transerve. I thought you said this thing was fast!".

2 days later.

"... Sgt. Gutz believed that his Hellcat could move faster than a Panther could pivot. The tactic of flanking the enemy, is of course encouraged, but only when the enemy is unaware of the manuenver. Once spotted Sgt. Gutz's flanking manuever was doomed to failure, becase the M-18 is not fast enough to get behind a pivoting Panther. After being spotted his best hope for survival was to (a) knock out or damage the Panter's main gun and / or ( dash for cover. Sadly he did neither.

The surviving members of his crew mourn his loss, while the investigation continues into the new German .45 cal MG's apparently mounted on Panther tanks. The single bullet through Sgt. Gutz's head killed him instantly."

[Col Deadmarsh]

Olle said:

I suppose they stopped before taking this shot, right? Otherwise they'd be very lucky to score that one in a hundred (or so) hit...

Then they just figured out "Wow, we got the range right, and we've got the firepower to poke a hole in that monster. Let's do it before he brackets in on us!"

No, they shot and hit going full speed from about 280m out. Then the Panther swiveled it's hull and turret to try to lock on. The cat took a shot at me and missed. Then, my Hellcat took another shot on the run and missed. It was then that he stopped, on a dime, and waited there as the Panther took it's second shot and hit my side.

Even if he was at the end of a movement order and had to change direction a little, he shouldn't have come to a complete stop like that. The Panther was on a hill, had the advantage AND the next shot, plus my Hellcat didn't turn around to engage which would've made it harder to hit from the front. It kept its side perpendicular to the Panther before it got knocked out so it didn't seem like it was a decision to just fight it out right there. It seemed more like the AI seizing up.

I should also point out that my Hellcat didn't have Tungsten so its success at killing the Panther from the front while at a lower elevation would be slim.

Jasper said:

TC: "OK we'll dash around and catch him from behind."

Driver: "Yes, sir - sound pretty dangerous as we might run across some currently hidden enemy unit on the way. Full speed ahead."

10 seconds later.

Gunner: "He's spotted us sir. He's pivoting to face us. Should I fire?"

TC: "No dammit, drive faster than he can pivot or his turrent can transerve. I thought you said this thing was fast!".

2 days later.

"... Sgt. Gutz believed that his Hellcat could move faster than a Panther could pivot. The tactic of flanking the enemy, is of course encouraged, but only when the enemy is unaware of the manuenver. Once spotted Sgt. Gutz's flanking manuever was doomed to failure, becase the M-18 is not fast enough to get behind a pivoting Panther. After being spotted his best hope for survival was to (a) knock out or damage the Panter's main gun and / or ( dash for cover. Sadly he did neither.

That's pretty funny. It's possible the TC realized that the Hellcat wasn't fast enough to flank the Panther in that situation and so they decided to take their chance right there. It still doesn't explain why they didn't turn to face the Panther to decrease the silouette.

It would've been interesting to see what they would've done if that was a Tiger up there with a slower turret. That they could've gotten around easily. I still believe though that my opponent knew what I was up to and rotated the turret while I was beginning my flanking manuever so as to help out the cat a little in turning to fire. Those things have slow turrets and shouldn't be able to turn that fast in my opinion.

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

Youth is wasted on the young.

[This message has been edited by Colonel_Deadmarsh (edited 03-05-2001).]

[Leonidas]

I think that the tank AI is an area much in need of work. It's ironic that so much work went into the physics of shells hitting armor, but the tank AI is so weak.

I'm not claiming to be an expert on tank tactics. It's a complicated subject. But there are definitely moments when you would like to convey some critical piece of information to the tank, and CM won't let you.

This became clear to me in a small battle against the computer. It had one Panther left, and I had one TD left. My zooks were doing their best, but it wasn't clear that they would do the job. The Panther was lumbering around a stand of trees. In 30-60 seconds it would appear in the open, giving a side shot to my stationary TD.

I could hear the radio chatter. The infantry in the trees is reporting on the Panther's progress. The company commander has already announced that this Panther is the last enemy AFV sighted in the area. The guys in the tank realize that if they don't kill this Panther, their buddies in the trees are likely to be steadily eliminated by its HE shells.

So the order is to rotate and sit, waiting for the Panther to come into view. Sure enough, it lumbers from behind the trees. My TD takes it shot, and misses. The Panther sights, and begins the slow process of bringing its turret around. My TD has at least one more shot, maybe two more before the Panther can get off its first shot.

So naturally, my TD throws smoke and retreats.

Yeah, yeah, I know the cover stories about people getting scared. But that isn't what's being modeled. It's just a tank AI that 1) can't fathom the battle going on around it, and 2) can't absorb any information from the commander about how to fight.

[Pak40]

Originally posted by jd:

Also look to see if it was continuation of a prior order (red squares) if you issue new orders (white squares) the unit stops, waits and then proceeds, that's tripped me more than once

Colonel, I think jd is correct. Try to remember if you issued the "fast move" on top of existing "Fast move" orders.

[Mattias]

Cover story?

You are being unfair Leonidas. The only commander around that battlefield that can fathom the situation to the level you require is... you...

You expect the AI to operate at the same omnipotent level of awareness as the player despite the fact that this would in most cases be grossly unrealistic.

The local infantry commander would most probably not be able to communicate directly with that TD and certainly not convey information of the kind you require (i.e. exact threat evaluation etc).

The tacAI reacts on an individual basis and does not take into account the over all situation, as would a real life crew do in that situation, where the survival of the tank and crew is at stake. Not much used dead after all.

You might frown at the concept of fear but perhaps you might accept the idea of tactically sound thinking, In the end you don't have any kind of guarantee that your TD will be the winner in that duel.

M.

[Pak40]

Originally posted by Colonel_Deadmarsh:

That's pretty funny. It's possible the TC realized that the Hellcat wasn't fast enough to flank the Panther in that situation and so they decided to take their chance right there. It still doesn't explain why they didn't turn to face the Panther to decrease the silouette.

I'll explain it for you: The cat was trying to take at shot. Since it has a better chance of hitting a target while not moving, it decided not to rotate the hull. It considered taking a shot ASAP higher priority than rotating the hull. This seems perfectly logical to me.

For every inch your hull rotates, the gunner has to rotate the turret the opposite direction. This presents a problem when trying to aim at a target.

Unfortunately, the Panther got his shot off before your Hellcat.

Originally posted by Colonel_Deadmarsh:

Even if he was at the end of a movement order and had to change direction a little, he shouldn't have come to a complete stop like that.

If he was at the end of a movement order, he definitly would have come to a complete stop immediately. From my memory, that's how CM works.

[Olle Petersson]

Originally posted by Colonel_Deadmarsh:

... It still doesn't explain why they didn't turn to face the Panther to decrease the silouette.

Of course not, the M18 has a turret that can rotate, which allows it to fire off a broadside. This is highly advantageous and most desireable, judging by the number of posts I've read discrediting turretless AFVs in this forum.

("Disadvantage: Doesn't have a turret so it can't fire to the flanks." or something in that style...)

Cheers

Olle

[Seanachai]

Originally posted by Mattias:

Cover story?

You are being unfair Leonidas. The only commander around that battlefield that can fathom the situation to the level you require is... you...

You expect the AI to operate at the same omnipotent level of awareness as the player despite the fact that this would in most cases be grossly unrealistic.

The local infantry commander would most probably not be able to communicate directly with that TD and certainly not convey information of the kind you require (i.e. exact threat evaluation etc).

The tacAI reacts on an individual basis and does not take into account the over all situation, as would a real life crew do in that situation, where the survival of the tank and crew is at stake. Not much used dead after all.

You might frown at the concept of fear but perhaps you might accept the idea of tactically sound thinking, In the end you don't have any kind of guarantee that your TD will be the winner in that duel.

M.

Thank you, Mattias, for making one of the more valid points here. I'm often confused by people who expect a representation of armoured combat to reflect the tank crew reaching for the armour penetration, armour thickness, probability to hit, and precise vehicle identification charts, and making split second decisions on what they should do next.

In combat, do you suppose a TD commander radioed the gunner and driver with: "Sorry, boys, but combat analysis of our gun, their armour, our speed, their profile, and given what we know about that barely id'd tank indicates we simply don't have a chance. Hold fire and move to that intricately pre-plotted position from which our calculations give us a better chance of success."

I imagine, in fact, that it was a little bit more of: "Good Lord, there's a kraut tank (winging thought, Panther? God, probably), let him have it!"

The question should be: does the game model actual combat in the 40's, or should the AI behave with precisely and optimally calculated responses? I would regard the latter as so thoroughly unrealistic as to make play meaningless, and return results you wouldn't find in the field. If you wish to give the Hellcat a complex, computerized risk/success assessment capability, why not give it laser sights, radar, and projectile guidance, as well?

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

Tremble, tyrants and you perfidious opprobrium of all the parties,

Tremblez! your parricidal projects finally will receive their prices!

But these sanguinary despots, But these accomplices of Berli,

All these tigers which, without pity, Bauhaus the centre of their mother!

We will enter the career When our elder is not there any more,

We will find there their dust And the trace of their virtues

[Kitty]

Originally posted by Moon:

Two possibilities:

"the Hellcat vets started thinking "our CO is a rotten b%&§ for sending us up here, alone and unsupported into enemy territory.

Let's get the heck outta here!

Funny enough, GREEN troops might have though "our CO is our idol, let's drive on"

"...they just figured out "Wow, we got the range right, and we've got the firepower to poke a hole in that monster. Let's do it before he brackets in on us!"

"...a tank gets scared..."

Hehe, I didn't know that the AI had human emotions and lil' guys hidden inside it that talked to each other like that.

Just kidding of course, I've personified the AI like this too, but it is kind of intersting how when we start talking about things like this we tend to start attributing human characteristics to the program. It makes me think that this game does a pretty good job of simulating human reactions under stress . . . and provoking stress in humans in non-stressful environments. =)

Kitty

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

Hamsters at War!

Chicks With Tanks

Lorak's FTX

"I'd rather the Bees than your Mask of Shame." - Stuka

The McNoldy Group

[Leonidas]

Originally posted by Mattias:

Cover story?

You are being unfair Leonidas. The only commander around that battlefield that can fathom the situation to the level you require is... you...

You expect the AI to operate at the same omnipotent level of awareness as the player despite the fact that this would in most cases be grossly unrealistic.

The local infantry commander would most probably not be able to communicate directly with that TD and certainly not convey information of the kind you require (i.e. exact threat evaluation etc).

The tacAI reacts on an individual basis and does not take into account the over all situation, as would a real life crew do in that situation, where the survival of the tank and crew is at stake.

Originally posted by Seanachai:

I'm often confused by people who expect a representation of armoured combat to reflect the tank crew reaching for the armour penetration, armour thickness, probability to hit, and precise vehicle identification charts, and making split second decisions on what they should do next.

. . .

I imagine, in fact, that it was a little bit more of: "Good Lord, there's a kraut tank (winging thought, Panther? God, probably), let him have it!"

The question should be: does the game model actual combat in the 40's, or should the AI behave with precisely and optimally calculated responses?

I politely disagree. There is an inevitable loss of realism in CM, but it runs the other way. What's missing is the fact that in a real war those soldiers are real men, with a keen interest in surviving. That means they pay attention. Real men are much, much smarter than our little AI facsimiles.

I don't think it's realistic to act as if the soldiers are untrained and discovering their jobs on the battlefield. Real soldiers are carefully trained. They spend hours upon hours absorbing data on their equipment and enemy equipment they are likely to face. They spend hours and hours practicing how to fight, and how to deal with various contingencies. Knowing that their lives and their friends' lives may depend on it, they train very hard.

So yes, a real tank commander would know exactly under what conditions his tank could kill an enemy tank. His life and the lives of his crew depend on him knowing that information, and making good decisions based on it.

There is no way to model a real army in a one player game, because you can't simulate the effect of every soldier being a trained, intelligent human being. The player in CM is not merely company commander. He is also commander of every platoon, squad, team, and tank on the battlefield. The basic flaw I see in CM is that you aren't given enough control over the individual units, so you get to play "Company Commander of the Lobotomized." It would be far more accurate to at least allow the player to convey the essential information to the individual units. That doesn't ensure compliance with the orders, of course, but at least it gives the AI better information to work with, and thus a better chance of approximating what a real soldier would do.

[Guest Germanboy]

Originally posted by Leonidas:

I don't think it's realistic to act as if the soldiers are untrained and discovering their jobs on the battlefield. Real soldiers are carefully trained. They spend hours upon hours absorbing data on their equipment and enemy equipment they are likely to face. They spend hours and hours practicing how to fight, and how to deal with various contingencies.

That would be the same 'real' soldiers who were told (lied to, more like it) that there Sherman tanks were the cream of the crop and no German tank could stand up to them? The same soldiers who were drafted out of the infantry when tanker losses ran too high? The same soldiers who were commanded by 90-day wonders?

Just wondering if those are the soldiers you are talking about. Because if not, you are not talking about the US tankers in WW2.

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

Andreas

Der Kessel

Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission.