Why Can't You Pause Before Shooting?

[Col Deadmarsh]

I'm playing a game right now where I need to use my tank to smoke different areas of the battlefield so I can move troops across the terrain without them getting ripped to shreds.

Because of the current limitations, I cannot pause for 30-45 seconds before shooting my smoke. Instead, I have to start from the beginning of the turn and use up the entire tank's supply.

Not only that, but I cannot spread out the smoke to cover the entire area that needs to be covered. I am stuck firing smoke rounds at the same place for the entire turn. I should be able to pause 15 secs, area smoke, pause 15 secs, area smoke somewhere else, etc.

I don't consider this micro-management. I consider this common sense. If a tank only has a certain number of smoke rounds to do a job, that commander will use the rounds sparingly to complete the task.

Therefore, I am perplexed (to put it mildly) that one cannot pause and then shoot just as you can pause and then move. In addition to this, here is another huge reason why pauses need to be allowed in the middle of turns--so one can area fire or smoke different areas in the turn.

[lcm1947]

I'm with you on this. I don't feel having the ability to spread gun fire or in this case smoke in different areas micromanagement. You are ( we ) commanding a tank are we not? Very good point.

[Pzman]

try usesng artry spotters smoke it works a lot better and it covers a lager area.

[Mattias]

It's micro management, sure enough.

However, unless things have changed in later patches, a tank which receives a smoke fire order will only fire until it hits the intended target.

That could well be on the first round unless you are trying to place smoke somewhere far off.

So, if you hit, only one round will be used.

M.

[MadmaN]

yse tis is neded

[Michael Emrys]

The ideal would be either to enable the player to specify how many rounds are to be fired, or to make the AI a bit more sensible. Since neither of those things are in the near future, you're stuck with having to develop a workaround. One that I haven't tried yet but that might work is to target an area that the firing unit has no LOS to and then move it to where it can see it. Then, if you want, you can put a pause on the movement. Aside from being clutzy, the hangup here is that the firing unit might forget your targeting order before it acquires an LOS. Still, it might help.

Rob's suggestion to use artillery smoke instead is basically a good one, but sometimes you have no choice.

Michael

[Col Deadmarsh]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rob/1:

try usesng artry spotters smoke it works a lot better and it covers a lager area.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Um...yes Rob, I'm aware that arty smoke does a better job but you don't always have arty smoke. In addition to this, you might not want to wait 2-3 minutes for the smoke to come in. Your momentum could be lost by then. Another problem is that your arty, if you have a team, might not be able to acheive LOS on the position you want to fire smoke at. In fact, it's happening right now in a game of mine.

Michael, your workaround is an orginal thought but it would seem hard to carry out. What we need here is a change, not a workaround.

[aka_tom_w]

perhaps I am mistaken but I don't think you can "area target" to a place that you do not have LOS to. It just won't stick? It a good Idea and a GREAT workaround but it you cannot target (with a Tank) for the purpose of firing smoke, to a place you do not have LOS to.

Anyone else?

I agree that is it micro-management, but so are most other things we do in the game so I don't think it is such a bad request.

The BTS answer might have something to do with FOW and how this fine degree of control and cordination you are seeking was not historically availabe on the ETO WWII battlefield. Maybe it was? I'm not a gorg and I don't know.

But you are asking for a VERY finely co-ordinated combined arms manouver that may not be historically accurate?

comments?

-tom w

[Michael Emrys]

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

perhaps I am mistaken but I don't think you can "area target" to a place that you do not have LOS to.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh. Never mind.

Michael

[JoePrivate]

Another suggestion though not new, give your tank the smoke order(in LOS) then have it move away after a specified pause so it will be out of LOS from the original target, voila it won't fire any more smoke. It works...

Of course you will probably insist you should be able to smoke more than one area in one 60s turn right?

[Michael Emrys]

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

Another suggestion though not new, give your tank the smoke order(in LOS) then have it move away after a specified pause so it will be out of LOS from the original target, voila it won't fire any more smoke. It works...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's it! I remember seeing that before now. I just remembered it backwards.

Michael

[Banshee]

You won't always be able to get out of LOS in 60 seconds, but it is still a good kludge.

[Banshee]

Here is my idea (from another thread) on implementing this and other fixes (the menu system is the meat of the idea, you can skip all the blathering):

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael emrys:

So the answer for too much micromanagement is to add more micromanagement? I've come across this argument before, and the only way I can think of for its proponents to avoid its obvious illogic is that they are blinded by being heavily prejudiced in favor of micromanagement to begin with.

But that is contrary to the spirit and philosophy that CM is based on. It seems to me that the only solution consistent with CM's purpose is to improve the AI so that it doesn't do egregiously stupid things. For instance, a lot of different problems would be solved if the AI had an instruction along the lines of: "If there is a known high-threat or high-value target in the vicinity, withhold fire on lower threat or lower value targets". Granted that might not be exactly a snap to program and debug, but something along those lines would go a long way towards answering a number of complaints. A lot of other complaints, like the hull down question should be handled in the same way.

Michael<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't agree that the better AI will preclude the need for micro-management. How do I tell the AI my strategy? I regularly use my AFV's as a screening force for my MLR, trying to seperate the enemy AFV's from the infantry . No AI in the world would know this is my strategy. Adding finer detailed commands would allow me to implement my tactics. IMHO what should be done is give finer detailed commands, but the default behavior would let the AI work it's magic.

I envision a menu system exactly as it is set up now. Small exception you would see a little arrow next to the command which would give you other options (think of Start->Programs->Accessories->etc in windows, sorry mac im not sure how it works on your systems)

Example menu item:

AMBUSH->Infantry

AFV's

TARGET-> x number of rounds

SMOKE->X number of rounds

MOVE->Until Enemy is spotted

Until Fired upon

So I could click AMBUSH and it would be the default ambush behavior, or fine tune it for Infantry or AFV's.

Too much micromanagement answer is not more micromanagement. AI deficiencies (both in game and ones where AI doesn't know your tactics (e.g. You can't "brief" the AI on what you want to do)) answer is more micromanagement. AI will never be very good (it is VERY hard to code) I have seen very few games where AI has been noteable. Plus it would be MUCH faster to write the above commands than a perfect the AI. The AI would still have to be modified to accomodate some changes (ex. A tank with Ambush->AFV command sees a zook coming within firing range might tend to break ambush command earlier, but a gun wouldnt)

Also experience level would affect how well a unit follows your commands (adding to realism). You may micromanage the heck out of your units, doesn't mean they will do it right.

I always wondered what BTS's thoughts on this type of stuff was.. maybe they will read this thread.

[Col Deadmarsh]

One thing I didn't include in my original post was that this "pause before firing" thing would also be useful for just area firing with HE shells too.

Some of those tanks only had a short supply of HE rounds like the Hummel and firing an entire turn would use up a good amount of it's ammo. I played one game where I had this exact tank and needed to area fire a batch of woods where I thought the enemy was before I could move in some recon. Well, with that gun I only needed a couple of shots to do the trick but not being able to pause first, I had to use 5-6 rounds which was really overkill.

And just think if you had an M-10 with only 6-7 shells, you'd exhaust that HE supply almost within one whole turn.

This "pause before firing" change is necessary. It's no more micro-manangement than pausing before moving and I really hope it's implemented in CM2 along with backwards compatibilty for us Western Front fans.

[Mattias]

Colonel,

Pause for movement is necessary to aid in moving a large number of vehicles that are in close proximity to each other.

I see no similar need for pause for firing.

If anything over use of ammunition is the historically correct alternative. Even when not under fire panic, a few extra rounds would be fired into the target "for good measure". If we are to believe the popular conception of WWII this behaviour was particularly prevalent on the US side.

M.

[JoePrivate]

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

Some of those tanks only had a short supply of HE rounds like the Hummel and firing an entire turn would use up a good amount of it's ammo. I played one game where I had this exact tank and needed to area fire a batch of woods where I thought the enemy was before I could move in some recon. Well, with that gun I only needed a couple of shots to do the trick but not being able to pause first, I had to use 5-6 rounds which was really overkill.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Really? Which variant of the Hummel were you using that could fire 5-6 rounds in a turn?

BTS is aware of what's posted on the board. In absence of a comment from them regarding CM2's features, and there have been none yet as far as I know, we will all have to wait and see.

[Bruno Weiss]

I would agree with Michael emrys. There are many situations where it would be a great improvement to be able to specify a given number of smoke rounds, rather than to have a tank continue to pound away with smoke, even after it has moved to another location.

I do not believe that in real life combat, the order comes down to; "Fire smoke, fire whole bunches of it, fire till you hit that ant hill over there at 500 meters, just shoot the stuff till you run out."

More likely, the order would be; "Fire two smoke rounds on target." Or one, or three, whatever the predetermined amount needed was.

[Homba]

I agree with Colonel. It would even be nice to fire a few HE shells into TWO houses during one turn, than being forced to fire at one house for the entire turn. Ammo conservation must have been taken into consideration sometimes. Why not allow multiple area-fire commands (smoke or HE), and have the unit switch off between them unit the end of the round? I have always found it quite limiting to have to use ~1/5 of my HE load on a single house for recon-by-fire purposes. A pause before area-firing helps... multiple area-targeting would also help. This way you could spread five or six shells down a woodline, instead of being forced to put them all in one place.

Homba

[aka_tom_w]

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

I agree with Colonel. It would even be nice to fire a few HE shells into TWO houses during one turn, than being forced to fire at one house for the entire turn. Ammo conservation must have been taken into consideration sometimes. Why not allow multiple area-fire commands (smoke or HE), and have the unit switch off between them unit the end of the round? I have always found it quite limiting to have to use ~1/5 of my HE load on a single house for recon-by-fire purposes. A pause before area-firing helps... multiple area-targeting would also help. This way you could spread five or six shells down a woodline, instead of being forced to put them all in one place.

Homba<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well at the risk of being accused of even furether micromanagement I too would welcome these changes....

"Why not allow multiple area-fire commands (smoke or HE), and have the unit switch off between them unit the end of the round?

snip

A pause before area-firing helps... multiple area-targeting would also help. This way you could spread five or six shells down a woodline, instead of being forced to put them all in one place."

It would be nice to target each round

while were at it, and how about...

"One smoke round here

2 HE into that house and

another smoke round over there..."

I'm not being sarcasitic, but it will boil down to a request for players to micromanage where each and every round (of differing types) is fired and when that happens.

So if this discussion continues it would not surprise me to have others here agree that it would be wonderful to select what ammo you want, when you want to fire it and be able to fire it with surgical prescision, all within one minute at multiple targets.

It would be nice to specify "secondary" armour targets. Meaning, shoot AP at this AFV until it is dead then immediately target THIS AFV over there and shoot at it until it is dead.

I think we should be mindful of our micromanagement requests, BUT, sure, like some other folks here I too would welcome and enjoy using MORE micromanagement tools. (this request of course could be complimented with the 'rotate turret independent of hull order' request)

Comments?

-tom w

[ 04-11-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[ 04-11-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[Mattias]

Nope not me...

It is 60 seconds we are talking about, an extremely short time as far as unified action is concerned. Combat is a slow process most of the time.

Personally I enjoy not being able to influence the battle to 100%. As long as the tacAI is doing a credible job with the details the "detachment" only enhances the sense of uncertainty and, mostly, controlled chaos.

And in my book the tacAI is doing what it is supposed to do.

M.

[Banshee]

I disagree with Mattias, but that is just me . I for example would love you use the area fire command a little more to supress tree line (blind firing when there is no target), while my men run to it. This supressive fire currently would take out my own men because the tank will stupidly fire round after round until the end of the turn, even if your own men are present (and in full view of the tank beforehand, i.e. on the rush on the way in, no way to be mistaken for the enemy then). "Supporting/Supressive" fire is very difficult to achieve right now.

[JoePrivate]

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

I disagree with Mattias, but that is just me . I for example would love you use the area fire command a little more to supress tree line (blind firing when there is no target), while my men run to it. This supressive fire currently would take out my own men because the tank will stupidly fire round after round until the end of the turn, even if your own men are present (and in full view of the tank beforehand, i.e. on the rush on the way in, no way to be mistaken for the enemy then). "Supporting/Supressive" fire is very difficult to achieve right now.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let me know what game you are playing :confused: ! Next time you happen to boot up CM, area target the location your infantry are about to move to and count the number of men your own tank stupidly takes out. Perhaps you'll notice your tank stops firing its main gun once friendlies are nearby.

[Mattias]

Joe is right.

Earlier today I charged two squads into a church, both entering from the West side.

At the same time I had two tanks (Sherman 75 mm) firing area fire at the NE and SE corner as I knew there was an enemy squad sitting on the East side.

-Perhaps a bit of a daring tactic, but I like to stretch it a bit aginst the AI.

What happened was that the tanks where able to get of two HE shells each, plus MG fire, before the assault squads where about to enter the church.

but..

As soon as the squads entered the tanks stopped firing HE but continued to spray MG fire into the corners.

The HE was endangering the assault squads, the MG's where not.

I couldn't have micro managed it any better.

M.

[ 04-11-2001: Message edited by: Mattias ]

[Scipio]

I agree. Timing the fire would be fine.