"Hunt" = Sunday stroll till ya die!

[OGSF]

I haven't seen this before and wonder if the AI is performing as it's Makers intended. I have a regular PSW 234/3 which has flanked the opponent and is in hunt mode approaching a clump of trees. All around is open ground with light fog (LOS 150+ yard).

It encounters a "crew?" hiding in the clump of trees, about 20 yds away. The crew shoots at the PSW (*ping* *ping* *ping*) which continues to roll along it's assigned "hunt" course, it's only reaction being to button up. No attempt at all to engage it's antagonist.

It continues to carefully follow the looping course asssigned to it, as a bazooka team at 30 yards distance fired three rounds at it. The third one kills it. Not a single shot fired in return by the PSW, which had all it's ammo BTW. I think the driver might have waved at the bazooka team as it made it's last course adjustment.

I don't understand why it didn't engage the crew or the bazooka team - it was in hunt mode after all. A complete waste of an armoured vehicle and the skill which enabled it to flank an attacking enemy and penetrate the enemy's rear positions. I may as well have driven a bloody truck down there.

Somebody do sumfink!

PS In the same turn I discover that a two story building occupied by a couple of my squads is being shelled by artillery. And there is a smoke round smoking away inside the building on the ground floor. I haven't seen that before either - nope, not in 250 days of playing I haven't seen that either.

What's going on?

OberGruppenStompinFuhrer

[This message has been edited by OGSF (edited 02-04-2001).]

[Guest Mike the bike]

Probably your crew never saw them - just because there's an icon visible to you on the map doesn't mean that all of your troops can see it.

And of course they buttoned - but for all they know the shots might be coming from 400 yards away - so they keep moving looking for a target.

[Tris]

Wrong. This happens continuously and the yellow "sight lines" almost always appear.

Apparently, the Hunt command will not allow for the AFV to "stop and engage" ground troops the same as it would it's opposite number (if it ever did--I forget what it was like back with v1.05), and this might or might not have a connection to the infantry engagement tweak((s) made along the way. No matter, Hunt is not a good command to issue willy nilly to an AFV if this vehicle is headed into terrain which might well contain infantry assets with anti-armor capability. Best to first sweep (and hopefully sanitize) that area beforehand with your own groundpounders.

(I've "learned" that the hard way . . . several times now. )

[This message has been edited by Tris (edited 02-04-2001).]

[Guest Michael emrys]

Originally posted by Tris:

...this might or might not have a connection to the infantry engagement tweak((s) made along the way.

Could be. Remember all those months of moaning and gnashing of teeth by those folks whose Tigers were shooting at infantry in the Villiers Bocage battle?

Michael

[Tiger]

the Hunt command will not allow for the AFV to "stop and engage" ground troops

This has been happening alot with my tanks, which will hunt past infantry (not just crews), and only engage these infantry "in passing" with the turrent machine gun. This is not good as often what will happen is that the turrent will end up facing backwards towards the infantry the tank kept rolling past as it continued to hunt forward.

Now it encounters a tank in front of it (one which I had sent it forward to to take out), with its turrent faced backwards = dead tank for me. Apparently hunt is supposed to work like this?

~Tiger~

[JoePrivate]

Interesting observations guys except AFVs using 'Hunt' have never stopped to engage infantry, AT teams excluded IIRC. If an AFV blunders into enemy infantry at very close range, the TacAI will take over and reverse the AFV safely away ...usually.

[OGSF]

Originally posted by JoePrivate:

Interesting observations guys except AFVs using 'Hunt' have never stopped to engage infantry, AT teams excluded IIRC.

Someone around here can't win! If the AFVs attack infantry, they get killed by tanks. If they are programmed to only attack tanks, they get killed by bazooka teams.

Seems that any enemy ought to be a threat, just varying priorities. If it sees a crew, and that is all it sees, then it shoots at the crew. If a bazooka team hoves into view - higher threat priority - new target acquisition.

The reason the PSW was in back by itself, was because my opponent is attacking, and all that I could have expected to find were routed troops and FOs'. Unfortunately a routed bazooka team had recovered sufficiently to change it's underwear and shoot at my poor little PSW. The PSW should have been shooting up anything that moved.

But it didn't fire a shot....just carefully followed it's hunt path until it died.

I wonder if that's how the real war was won / lost.

OGSF

[jasoncawley@ameritech.net]

Let me get this straight. A moving, buttoning AFV in *fog* fails to see and fire at a previously hidden bazooka team (in cover I presume) for about 30 seconds, and the reaction is not "c'est la guerre" but "zombuddy do zumfink!"

Uh huh. All your troops eat their wheaties, so they should never miss, right? Really...

[Vanir]

I think Jason has a point. A moving, buttoned vehicle in fog will rarely spot an AT team firing at it on the first few shots. The question is did a yellow targeting line appear between the AT team and the 234 and when did it appear? AFAIK a hunting vehicle will fire on spotted infantry with its turret even if it doesn't stop. If your 234 did not even attempt to return fire it must not have spotted the AT team in time. Otherwise it would have to be a bug and you should then send in the replay to BTS.

I think it has always been the case that hunting vehicles only stop when engaging other vehicles. You just have to be real careful about operating vehicles without an infantry screen.

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

You've never heard music until you've heard the bleating of a gut-shot cesspooler. -Mark IV

[This message has been edited by Vanir (edited 02-05-2001).]

[von Lucke]

This has been brought up before (by myself, among others). The "Hunt" command has been tweaked since 1.05 --- load it up and try it yerself. Used to be AFV's on the hunt did stop when encountering Infantry targets --- I used this function all the time.

Now, in 1.11, the "Hunt" command only seems to work AFV vs. AFV --- and as ODB... er, NOFX... er, OGSF pointed out, it tends to be fatal.

[Guest tero]

Just a question for OGSF:

How far had you plotted the next/final waypoint ?

In my experience (German) armour/AFV's (without the allempowering gyrostabilizers) are prone to proceed to the final way point before they attempt engageing the target they have spotted.

[OGSF]

Originally posted by tero:

Just a question for OGSF:

How far had you plotted the next/final waypoint ?

In my experience (German) armour/AFV's (without the allempowering gyrostabilizers) are prone to proceed to the final way point before they attempt engageing the target they have spotted.

It was quite a long way, it had been in hunt mode for about two turns.

And Jason, you got it straight like a dogs hind leg. Daytime, light fig, visibility way in excess of 150 yards. Distance to "crew" and bazooka team, under 30 yards. It was not buttoned until the crew fired their low ammo pistol at the armoured vehicle. The armoured vehicle buttoned and kept going. For the 7 months plus I have been playing this game, hunt meant "advance aggressively until contact is made, then engage". If the AVF buttoned, then it had made contact - no engaging though. The crew did not become visible until the AFV saw it - no other of my troops were in a position to spot it. So the only ones who saw it were the AFV - but no shooting.

My point is this. The "hunt" command is useless if the vehicle don't hunt. If it sees the enemy and doesn't shoot, it isn't hunting. If it spots the enemy, which it did, then takes fire from the enemy it spotted, which it did, and doesn't shoot back - then it isn't hunting.

If I want it to behave like that, I can use the "move" command. I could even reverse it towards enemy positions with the tank radio playing Wagner. If I tell it to hunt, I expect it to engage any enemy it encounters.

This is probably related to the tweaks stemming from the Whitmann experience, as has been suggested.

OGSF

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

You posture more than Marcia Brady with books on her head and you chatter like a dolphin near the fish bucket. - Dalem

[Iskander]

Originally posted by OGSF:

But it didn't fire a shot....just carefully followed it's hunt path until it died.

OGSF

You're welcome, too!

Actually, I was wondering what happened myself (yes, I'm his opfor for this one). I could not believe that my pants-filled-with-poop "shaken" 'zooks were able to get off three shots with not the slightest return fire. I've checked it from my angle and yours with "size" set to "realistic," and it's still remarkable. Up until reading all this I also assume that it was a freak combo of fog and "buttoned up." Actually, unless BTS admits to something, I shall still think that.

Then again, it may be a side effect of you tinkering with the codes as you keep cheating! (that's a Thread joke, so don't the rest of you get all excited).

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

"I send you a kaffis of mustard seed, that you may taste and acknowledge the bitterness of my victory."

[Hakko Ichiu]

Originally posted by OGSF:

It was not buttoned until the crew fired their low ammo pistol at the armoured vehicle. The armoured vehicle buttoned and kept going. For the 7 months plus I have been playing this game, hunt meant "advance aggressively until contact is made, then engage". If the AVF buttoned, then it had made contact - no engaging though. The crew did not become visible until the AFV saw it - no other of my troops were in a position to spot it. So the only ones who saw it were the AFV - but no shooting.

IIRC, the AI's propensity to have AFVs target crews was drastically reduced in one of the later patches. So, the PSW just buttoned up when it took fire from the crew -- pretty sensible, if you ask me -- rather than spend a lot of time targeting it, and therefore leaving itself vulnerable to getting targeted by s.t. else. Of course, once it was buttoned, it was in a much worse position to react to the 'zook.

Seems to fall into the immense distribution of possible events called "stuff happens."

Then again, maybe it's another example of BTS's hard-coded pro-allied bias. I have evidence of a vast bourgeois internationalist conspiracy. The truth is out there. The phone company killed Kennedy.

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

Ethan

-----------

"We forbid any course that says we restrict free speech." -- Dr. Kathleen Dixon, Director of Women's Studies, Bowling Green State University

[Jeff Heidman]

Originally posted by Hakko Ichiu:

IIRC, the AI's propensity to have AFVs target crews was drastically reduced in one of the later patches. So, the PSW just buttoned up when it took fire from the crew -- pretty sensible, if you ask me -- rather than spend a lot of time targeting it, and therefore leaving itself vulnerable to getting targeted by s.t. else. Of course, once it was buttoned, it was in a much worse position to react to the 'zook.

First off, IIRC the poster said the first target was a "crew?". In 1.1 that could be a MG team.

Did the PSW take a casualty when they buttoned up?

The idea that a zook could get off 3 shots before the Puma got turned to engage seems unlikely but not really that hard to beleive.

Bad things happen when "flanking" AFVs run into enemy AT infantry at 30 yards. Shrug.

Sound to me like your "flanking" AFV stumbled into a trap, intentional or otherwise.

Jeff Heidman

[JoePrivate]

Originally posted by von Lucke:

This has been brought up before (by myself, among others). The "Hunt" command has been tweaked since 1.05 --- load it up and try it yerself. Used to be AFV's on the hunt did stop when encountering Infantry targets --- I used this function all the time.

Now, in 1.11, the "Hunt" command only seems to work AFV vs. AFV --- and as ODB... er, NOFX... er, OGSF pointed out, it tends to be fatal.

Well I loaded it up as you suggested von Lucke, 1.03 and 1.05, as I am getting old and my memory may not be as razor sharp as it once was. AFVs will not stop to engage infantry targets while 'Hunting'. AFAIK that has been the same since the Beta, I'm not sure what led you to say otherwise. I was mistaken about the AT teams, in 3 runs an AFV would continue hunting even after identifying it as such.

[This message has been edited by JoePrivate (edited 02-05-2001).]

[stevetherat]

UG/OG/whatever, makes no dirrence.

I have encountered your problem before. No, not your mental instability, nor your urinal tract problem, but your CM problem.

It almost always occurs when your AFV officer has had his head (too many h's!) blown clean off his shoulders and down into the muddy tyre grooves it made while, gamily, sniffing Isks rear end. The first 'crew' you encountered was probably an MG post. Iskandy could confirm this.

For a short time, your vehicle will wander, as in a daze, while the crew have a bare fist fight trying to decide the new pecking order.

I strongly advise that you check the movie again, you skirt wearing Scrote, to see if I'm right.

Now go and put some troosers on tranny.

stevetherat

[Kingfish]

I can easily see several variations of this argument, depending on the outcomes. Here's a few off the top of my head:

1) AFV encounters crew, stops to engage, zook pops AFV. Complaint: "Why didn't my AFV ignore the crew, it was no threat, this must be a bug"

2) AFV encounters crew, ignores and continues on, encounters zook, turns to engage. Crew turns up to be a .50 MG team, which pops the AFV from behind. Complaint: "Why did my AFV ignore the crew, it could have been a threat, this must be a bug"

3) AFV encounters crew, turns to engage, zook fires on distracted AFV, misses, AFV turns to engage higher threat zook, enemy tank rolls in and pops AFV. Complaint: "why don't hunting AFV ignore infantry units and concentrate on enemy armor, this must be a bug"

The list can go on and on...

[Porajkl]

Hmm, and what do you say on this stupidity of "hunt" command... I ordered my Tiger to hunt and he found one Churchill... Instead of stoping and engaging him (while he had some cover from nearby trees) the Tiger continued to roll a few meters more and found two more Churhills (#$*? damn!). Yes, that is the right time to stop! I don't know what the crew has been thinking to do such stupidity (by the way, the crew was crack unit, not some greens!) Needless to say what the outcome was... My Tiger was quickly dispatched in three to one guns duel.

Why did't Tiger stop and engage the first Churchill and only after finishing him off it should proceed with "hunting"! Or am I wrong?

Facts: all three Churchills were also spotted and identified by my infantry, placed somewhere else. Visibility was great (day, clear) and Tiger couldn't misidentify the first Churchill for some halftrack (as I said, infantry identified all three). When Tiger saw Churchill it was instantly yellow line between those two tanks, but Tiger continued to roll on. Tiger was unbuttoned. When he saw another two Churchills, he had all three "yellow-lined" and the first one became after that a red one. Tiger fired but missed, three guns of Churchill's didn't. Two were Churchill 8, with 125mm penetration hollow charge projectile. I could also issue an order "move" or "move fast" and get the same result. Why even exists this order???

[Jeff Heidman]

Originally posted by Porajkl:

Hmm, and what do you say on this stupidity of "hunt" command... I ordered my Tiger to hunt and he found one Churchill... Instead of stoping and engaging him (while he had some cover from nearby trees) the Tiger continued to roll a few meters more and found two more Churhills (#$*? damn!). Yes, that is the right time to stop! I don't know what the crew has been thinking to do such stupidity (by the way, the crew was crack unit, not some greens!) Needless to say what the outcome was... My Tiger was quickly dispatched in three to one guns duel.

Why did't Tiger stop and engage the first Churchill and only after finishing him off it should proceed with "hunting"! Or am I wrong?

Facts: all three Churchills were also spotted and identified by my infantry, placed somewhere else. Visibility was great (day, clear) and Tiger couldn't misidentify the first Churchill for some halftrack (as I said, infantry identified all three). When Tiger saw Churchill it was instantly yellow line between those two tanks, but Tiger continued to roll on. Tiger was unbuttoned. When he saw another two Churchills, he had all three "yellow-lined" and the first one became after that a red one. Tiger fired but missed, three guns of Churchill's didn't. Two were Churchill 8, with 125mm penetration hollow charge projectile. I could also issue an order "move" or "move fast" and get the same result. Why even exists this order???

The "yellow-line" is not a line from your Tiger to the Churchhills, it is a line from the Churchhills to the Tiger signifying that they are targetting him.

So the answer is that your Tiger may not have engaged the first one until he was in LOS of all three.

This is not an exact science, nor should it be. There is no way you can expect your crews, regardless of their experience, to perform perfectly every time. Do you really think you can stop a 50-ton tank the very instant you see a target? Do you really think you have that target engaged the very isntant it comes into view?

There *are* some problems with the TacAI in the 1.1 patch. Hopefully they will be addressed in the 1.12 patch. However, *this* is not one of them.

Jeff Heidman

[Leonidas]

OGSF,

IIRC, a change in the latest patch was that any AFV that saw armor would stay in 'armor only' mode for the next three minutes or so, and refuse to engage infantry. This was part of how they fixed the earlier problem of tanks obsessing over fleeing crews and getting their turrets out of position for the next enemy AFV. Perhaps that was why your PSW 234 didn't engage infantry. Given the informational constraints imposed on the AI, it's a fair compromise, IMHO.

Wouldn't it have helped if you could have radioed to your PSW 234 and told them that all enemy armor in the area had been destroyed, and it should concentrate on infantry? Don't you think that a real company commander would have done that? Apparently, many CM players insist that this level of realism not be introduced to the game. So I think you will lose your PSW under the same circumstances in CM2 as well.

[Guest Germanboy]

Originally posted by Leonidas:

Wouldn't it have helped if you could have radioed to your PSW 234 and told them that all enemy armor in the area had been destroyed, and it should concentrate on infantry? Don't you think that a real company commander would have done that?

Hmm, seems it is 'Let's blame the AI for our very own mistakes day' again.

How would the 'real' company CO know that all the armour was destroyed? The point of recce is to find out whether that is the case. Unfortunately in Real Life™ the enemy did not hand over a note on the amount of armour they could buy before the battle, to enable you to tick them off as they vanished.

Yellow line - incoming target line

Red line - outgoing target line

Infantry spotting stuff nearby - irrelevant, since they have no means to communicate it to the Tiger.

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

Andreas

Der Kessel

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

[Jeff Heidman]

Originally posted by Germanboy:

Yellow line - incoming target line

Red line - outgoing target line

Infantry spotting stuff nearby - irrelevant, since they have no means to communicate it to the Tiger.

While I do not think this is an example of a TacAI problem for the reasons I stated, your last comment is factually incorrect.

For better or worse, CM models every single unit as having telepathic communications with every other unit. So inability to communicate, while realistic, cannot be used as an explanation for the issue described.

Jeff Heidman

[Guest Germanboy]

Originally posted by Jeff Heidman:

For better or worse, CM models every single unit as having telepathic communications with every other unit. So inability to communicate, while realistic, cannot be used as an explanation for the issue described.

Jeff Heidman

Thanks for the correction - learn something new about the game every day. Maybe I should read the manual one day.

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

Andreas

Der Kessel

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

[Jeff Heidman]

Originally posted by Leonidas:

OGSF,

Wouldn't it have helped if you could have radioed to your PSW 234 and told them that all enemy armor in the area had been destroyed, and it should concentrate on infantry?

It would help make the game even more unrealistic than the absollute spotting already makes it.

Don't you think that a real company commander would have done that?

No, since a real CO would ahve no idea if the AFV he sent around on his flank would run into armor or not.

Apparently, many CM players insist that this level of realism not be introduced to the game. So I think you will lose your PSW under the same circumstances in CM2 as well.

Many CM players realize that absolute spotting already introduces a rather large realism hit to the game, and see no reason to leverage that unrealistic behavior to even greater lack of realism by allowing the player to issue commands he would never have the knowledge to issue had he not had the already unfortunate information the game and absolute spotting already give him.

Jeff Heidman