Is it too easy to spot AT guns?

[Hortlund]

This is my highly subjective opinion. I have done no testing whatsoever, in fact this entire post is based on my experience fighting against AT guns, or depending on AT guns on the defence.

I think it is too easy to spot enemy AT guns.

Situation 1:

3 Veteran or regular AT guns (German) vs 7 veteran or regular T-34s. Situation: T-34s driving around (hunt) without using overwatch, all crew exposed. AT guns hiding in woods or scattered trees. AT guns open fire at 3-400 meters. Each AT gun gets off 2-3 shots before being taken out. Estimated time between 1st shot from AT gun to T-34 turrets targeting Guns ~20 seconds.

Situation 2:

3 Veteran StuGIIIs advancing across open field (1 using hunt command, 2 moving fast), all crew exposed. 1 Regular Soviet AT gun (late 45mm model) open fire from ~1100 meters. StuGs spot AT gun before it gets off its second shot. AT gun was hiding in brush.

Situation 3:

9 Regular T-34s advancing across open field (using hunt command), buttoned due to infantry small arms fire. 3 veteran/regular German AT guns open fire at ~800m. All German AT guns are spotted, engaged and destroyed within 20 seconds.

[ January 11, 2003, 12:54 PM: Message edited by: Leutnant Hortlund ]

[Laox]

I agree! I noticed this but had not done any tests.. it would seem that there is once the game decides a tank knows from where a shot came, the *exact* location is tagged (and then hit) even though there may be no good LOS to it. Whereas in reality you would notice "incoming fire from that clump of trees" ..

I bet someone will have an argument as to why it the behavior is correct though

[Lindan]

Gun spotting depends on a lot of variables and was EXTENSIVELY tested in the beta team. Any cmbo veteran can attest that guns are harder to spot than in cmbo. In cmmb they are very effective.

(you know that a flak88 is easier spotted than the tiny 37mm )

[Hortlund]

Well, yes, I have no doubt that the AT gun spotting model is working exactly the way it is intended. What I am questioning are some of the results. I'm not saying that the model is bugged or flawed. Neither am I saying that it is working wrong or using faulty parameters, for I know nothing about it other than the results. And in my opinion the results are wrong. In my opinion it is too easy for tanks to spot AT guns.

Now, Im not claiming to be a AT gun grog here, neither am I claiming to be a panzer grog, but from what I have read on warfare on the eastern front and tank warfare in general, at the moment it is too easy for tanks buttoned or unbuttoned to spot AT guns. The results of this is that AT guns are really expensive one shot weapons. They fire once or twice, then they are spotted and destroyed.

[YankeeDog]

Much of the problem is borg spotting. As it is right now, if an infantry unit half a klick away from the targetted tank spots the firing ATG, the tank instantly knows exactly where the ATG is. IRL, it would probably take several minutes for this kind of detailed information to reach the TC.

IMHO, the chance of any one individual unit spotting a firing ATG 'feels' about right (not that I've ever been fired upon by an ATG while riding in a tank!!). As a little experiement, try putting a single buttoned Tank on a map with an ATG on a hill about 700-800m away in a tree line. That ATG will get quite a few shots off before it's spotted, and in fact it is often never spotted (other than a sound contact). Even if the tank starts unbuttoned, unless the tank spots the ATG on the first shot or two (i.e., before the TC buttons up), the tank will usually not spot the gun at all and will get taken out sooner or later.

Then do the same setup except give the tank a platoon of friendly infantry at least 500m away from both tank and the ATG, but with good LOS to the hill with the ATG on it. The ATG will be spotted within 2-3 shots, and unless it's caused serious damage to the tank by this point, the tank will usually bring it's gun to bear on the ATG and win the fight.

This is, of course, completely unrealistic - IRL it would take some time for the infantry platoon to communicate to the tank that it sees an ATG in the treeline firing at it, and even more time for the infantry platoon to communicate *exactly* where the ATG is. There's a big difference between a quick radio message saying "There's a gun firing on you from that hill to your left!", and communicating detailed targetting info like "There's a gun on the hill at about 2 o'clock from your position, about 10m back from the treeline, approximately 70m north of that large oak tree." The former message gives the Tank crew a general idea of where to look, while the latter would actually allow the tank crew to begin area firing at the gun's position even if they actually spotted the gun themselves.

Just pointing out, the problem is not with the spotting model per se, but rather with the way the flow of information between units is modeled. Hopefully, this will be fixed with the new game engine. Until then, CMBB on EFOW is a big step forward in term of ATG survivability when compared to CMBO.

Cheers,

YD

[SgtMuhammed]

I agree that there needs to be some way of simulating the delay in passing information. Even today it is hard for tanks and infantry to talk as both are usually on their own frequency which may or may not be known to the other. Now imagine the situation in WWII were the frequency of the radios was often changed by changing the crystals of the radio itself. This often ruled out direct radio contact between the tanks and the grunts. To make up for this most tanks had an intercom that people on the ground could use to communicate with the crew but it would still take time to get someone to the tank and then to get the crew on the phone.

I realize that the borg spotting is for the player's benifit because we have a god like presense on the battlefield but it does give the units some unrealistic abilities. It would be more realistic to show enemy units and allow you to click on them to see who can spot them, much as you can tell who is shooting at them. The more units spotting an enemy, especially within the same platoon, would increase everyone's chances of spotting but not make it automatic. I know this would take a pretty hefty rewrite but I do believe it is something worth pursuing. The change would have to be noted though or you will get gripes about "Hey! How come my tank couldn't target that AT gun when it had a clear LOS?"

Looks like you guys will have to tighten the code for the next engine or use 2 CDs.

For what its worth I have had AT guns last quite a while and get loads of kills even in a target rich environment. One key seems to be having other units to distract the enemy. If you think about it though this is not that far off from RL. I really have no major gripes about the system now but we can always strive for perfection. So far you guy have gotten a lot closer than anyone else out there.

[Das Reich]

Originally posted by Leutnant Hortlund:

Situation 1:

3 Veteran or regular AT guns (German) vs 7 veteran or regular T-34s. Situation: T-34s driving around (hunt) without using overwatch, all crew exposed. AT guns hiding in woods or scattered trees. AT guns open fire at 3-400 meters. Each AT gun gets off 2-3 shots before being taken out. Estimated time between 1st shot from AT gun to T-34 turrets targeting Guns ~20 seconds.

Quit your bitchin' and send me the next turn....

[cbb]

Originally posted by Leutnant Hortlund:

This is my highly subjective opinion. I have done no testing whatsoever, in fact this entire post is based on my experience fighting against AT guns, or depending on AT guns on the defence.

I think it is too easy to spot enemy AT guns.

Situation 1:

3 Veteran or regular AT guns (German) vs 7 veteran or regular T-34s. Situation: T-34s driving around (hunt) without using overwatch, all crew exposed. AT guns hiding in woods or scattered trees. AT guns open fire at 3-400 meters. Each AT gun gets off 2-3 shots before being taken out. Estimated time between 1st shot from AT gun to T-34 turrets targeting Guns ~20 seconds.

Situation 2:

3 Veteran StuGIIIs advancing across open field (1 using hunt command, 2 moving fast), all crew exposed. 1 Regular Soviet AT gun (late 45mm model) open fire from ~1100 meters. StuGs spot AT gun before it gets off its second shot. AT gun was hiding in brush.

Situation 3:

9 Regular T-34s advancing across open field (using hunt command), buttoned due to infantry small arms fire. 3 veteran/regular German AT guns open fire at ~800m. All German AT guns are spotted, engaged and destroyed within 20 seconds.

I didn't play much CMBO but based on my understanding of tank vs. ATG combat on the eastern front, ATGs seem way too vulnerable to me. Either they are being spotted too easily or they are being hit too easily.

[coe]

On Christmas day I had an extensive discussion about this with a few friends of mine, it seems that borg spotting might be a rather difficult thing to solve....and how will you do it if the

AT fires towards the end of the turn? Then the human player can borg spot for his/her units. How will one build a delay into that?

Conan

[GRUMLIN]

AT guns are NOT too easy to spot. I had a very good game with Kimmo where 4 panthers were kept buttoned down by a 37mm in scattered trees 800m away that a LMG and a section leader - both with binocs - could NOT spot.

Likewise, have just finished a PBEM where a 150mm inf gun of mine was in woods and fired all game in sight of nme without being spotted - maybe because I had a +2 stealth section leader covering him. Try using the stealth bonus on guns and see your kill ratio go up.....

[Das Reich]

Originally posted by GRUMLIN:

AT guns are NOT too easy to spot.

<snip>

Likewise, have just finished a PBEM where a 150mm inf gun of mine was in woods and fired all game in sight of nme without being spotted - maybe because I had a +2 stealth section leader covering him. Try using the stealth bonus on guns and see your kill ratio go up.....

Good point, company and Battalion HQ's with good stealth would make them harder to spot. Problem is, its hard to have a HQ for each gun. They should probably be set up in batteries so that one HQ can command 3 or 4 guns or something.

[SgtMuhammed]

coe

I think you could build in the delay by not allowing you to target the unit until the firing unit has spotted the target itself. When you try you would get the message "target not spotted" or something to that effect. It would just be a variation on the "out of range" or "los blocked" routine. You would still be able to area fire, which would reflect the fact that it is easier to give general rather than specific directions.

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by coe:

On Christmas day I had an extensive discussion about this with a few friends of mine, it seems that borg spotting might be a rather difficult thing to solve....and how will you do it if the

AT fires towards the end of the turn? Then the human player can borg spot for his/her units. How will one build a delay into that?

Conan

Not a total solution, but here's one thing that would help:

BFC has previously stated that the game does not currently track what units have 'spotted' a given enemy unit. IOW, a given unit is either 'spotted', and it's presences is known to ALL enemy units, or it is not, there is no inbetween.

Now, let's assume that the engine rewrite changes this and the game tracks relative spotting for every unit. This fixes the internal game 'borg spotting', but it does not change the fact that the player still effectively has 'borg spotting' - i.e., the player still sees a composite of anything seen by *all* of his units, and can issue targeting and movement orders accordingly.

One change that would reduce (but not entirely eliminate) the fundamential unrealism of the player's perspective, would be to allow the player to issue TARGET orders only at enemy that a given unit has actually spotted. Players could still issue "Area Fire" orders onto the vicinity of a unit that the player can see, but the individual unit has not spotted yet. "Area Fire" is considerably less effective that Direct Fire in CM, though, so some of the effect of the player's "God" perspective would be reduced (though certainly not eliminated).

Here's another change that would help, and could be done right now in CMBB: Make Targeting/Firing orders subject to Command Delay. I've never quite understood why it takes time for a CM Commander to convey a movement order to a unit, but Firing orders are instantaneous. If this were done, even if an Enemy ATG were spotted on the last second of a turn, it would still take several seconds for the players' order for the tank to 'area fire' onto the vicinity of the gun to take effect.

The combination of these two would 1) reduce the effectiveness of fire at targets a giveb unit had not spotted yet, and 2) make 'unspotted' fire take longer to get started in the first place.

This seems like a good start to me. At the very least, both these changes would certainly tend to give ATGs a longer life span on the battlefield.

Cheers,

YD

[SgtMuhammed]

I think the movement delay vs firing reflects the fact that it is harder for the TC to kick the driver to wake him up than the gunner.

I used to carry what I called my "emergency communication facilitator." It was a big stick so I could whack my driver if he was ignoring me on the intercom.

[ January 11, 2003, 05:19 PM: Message edited by: Sgtgoody ]

[Schrullenhaft]

As has been stated... the problem is the absolute ('borg') spotting that is currenlty modelled in CM. This effect is amplified by the number of units present... each of them has a chance to spot the (in this case) ATG. The more units, the more chances the ATG will be spotted and engaged.

Relative spotting and the attendant 'unit memory' that will be necessary to accomplish this feature will be the only satisfactory way to reduce this unrealistic feature.

Unfortunately I don't think that the 'fire order delay' will be a popular option. While the end effect might make for an occasionally more realistic engagements it will more than likely ruin a majority of them. People will be screaming bloody murder at such a change (people are already screaming about the perceived heightened chance of bogging in CMBB). Many things in CM are an issue of balance and what can be accomplished with the current engine (which defines/limits what can be added in and what variables can be accounted for). While a fire order delay may work for recently/initially spotted units (the realistic factor) it may be a problem to implement when the target blinks in and out of contact. Without an 'unit memory' about contacts (and other potential factors) there'll be a delay each time an unit fires at such a target - which many people will claim is inaccurate and a total nuisance to play. Also, should there be fire order delays if there is no covered arc, but none if there is one and the (potential) target falls in that arc ?

Perhaps further tweaks can be performed to the spotting model involving stationary units (even if they fire) and covered arcs of the 'hunters' (with an increased chance of spotting for the narrower the arc that covers the target ?). Those units that don't have a covered arc that falls on the target would have a negative modifier for their spotting attempt (though it could still be a better chance for spotting than an unit without a covered arc - if the arc is close to the target, etc.). Admittedly even these suggestions are probably too much since they may not fit properly into the current spotting model (and they may be more painful to code up than I realize).

[Tigrii]

Two things: one, the large flash caused by firing a cannon makes it fairly easy to spot. Two, if you want more gunning time, prepare the by buttoning with sharpshooters. This makes it slightly easier to kill (because if it's already shocked and the AT round kills someone, they bail out) and it's harder for them to see the ATGs.

[SgtMuhammed]

Muzzle flash is pretty over rated. Most guns don't have nearly the signature you would expect, and the signature they do have dissapates pretty quickly.

[Canon]

If you place you ATG on a reverse slope, the only things that can see it are those cresting the slope, and are subsequently targets...

Just my 2 cents (or pennies)

Joe

[Olle Petersson]

Originally posted by YankeeDog:

... allow the player to issue TARGET orders only at enemy that a given unit has actually spotted. Players could still issue "Area Fire" orders onto the vicinity of a unit that the player can see, but the individual unit has not spotted yet. ...

I'd support this, with a tweak.

When using the LOS tool or about to issue a Target order and pointing at the intended target, the text "Unspotted" would appear (just like the current "Hull down" message).

Then it would be possible to use the Target order exactly the same way it's handled now, with "Unspotted" being treated as if there was no LOS.

Target the enemy unit directly and shooting will begin once the target is spotted. Target the ground nearby and it will be immediate area fire.

Cheers

Olle

[Reverendo]

Though I have no combat experience and therefore I cannot state wether AT guns are too easy to spot or are not, there is a small test I was forced to run that I want to share with you:

As soon as I got my paws on the demo version of CMBB, I called a friend of mine to play a hotseat battle in the Citadel Schwerpunkt scenario. I played as the Germans and, as he stated shortly after the battle, he did not change the deployment of the Soviet forces in the slightest.

While I did win the scenario, I was amazed at the performance of the Soviet 45mm ATs, not only because of the astonishing number of penetrations he managed to cause on the front armour of my Panzers III and IV -out of sheer luck most of the time, as it normally exceeded what was expected from the gun according to the tables and my own experience playing the Soviets afterwards- but mainly because of the number of shots it took me to find the position of his guns.

As soon as my Panzers made it to the crest that serves as a gate to the valley -and having eliminated the AT guns I had met through the loss of a PzIV and the immobilization of a PzIII- they started taking fire from a number of AT guns from the opposite hill. I instantly saw generic markers of gun sound contacts -quite off-target as I confirmed later-, and nothing but that for six turns straight. One of my Panzers, which got very lucky indeed, took as many as 24 shots before giving, and yet did not spot any of the guns at all. Another one, ignored by the Soviet artillery -they were far too busy shelling the others- stood unbuttoned watching the fireworks for six turns without even seeing a muzzle blast.

If they are too easy to spot, my Panzer crews certainly need a set of Dienst Brille as soon as possible

[RowdyTexan]

what the hell is a borg???

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by RowdyTexan:

what the hell is a borg???

It's from Star Trek: The Next Generation (TV Show). The Borg are a wierd race of cyborgs that are all connected in a wierd, collectively conscious computer network. Since they're all connected by a big computer network, what one borg sees, they all see. Hence, the reference to 'borg' spotting in CM.

Cheers,

YD

[ January 12, 2003, 12:24 AM: Message edited by: YankeeDog ]

[Ant]

I've just started a certain well known scenario, which shall remain nameless to avoid spoilers, and I can state that it took me bloody ages to find an AT gun or two that were picking off my tanks.....and I had a fairly good idea where they were. I did notice, however, that trying to find them with binocular equiped units was a lot more effective than non binocular units. Particularly as it was at quite long range.

[CMplayer]

The problem seems to arise when there are many units which have a chance to spot the gun. Because there are many, even if the chance of any one of them spotting the gun is low, it's almost certain that at least one of them will, and then the borg spotting comes into effect in its unrealistic and devestating way.

But simply reducing the chance to spot guns would be unfair in cases where one gun is up against a single tank.

A solution would be to reduce the chances for additional units to sucessfully spot. What I mean is that at any given spotting opportunity, the unit with the best chance to spot the gun would try at it's normal spotting percentage. Additional units would spot at an ever diminishing fraction of their normal chance.

This is probably the correct solution, as long as 'borg' spotting is the norm.

If this is impractical because units don't all spot 'at once' another alternative would be this. Every time a unit tries to spot a gun(or whatever), the engine internally marks that gun as 'subjected to a spotting attempt'. This marker lasts some number of seconds, and reduces all other incoming attempts to spot by a percentage. The more likely the initial attempt to spot was, the greater subsequent attempts are docked. (so that if a unit 1000 meters away with practically no chance has a go at it, nearer units attempting a tenth of a second later won't be unfairly penalized).

[ January 12, 2003, 06:09 AM: Message edited by: CMplayer ]

[CMplayer]

double post

[ January 12, 2003, 05:59 AM: Message edited by: CMplayer ]