WineCape Posted August 25, 2003 Share Posted August 25, 2003 Apart from possible spreading of fires when tiles are very dry + windy, do strong winds in CMBB impair the ability of a player to pick up sound contacts compared to non-windy situations ceteris paribus? Sincerely, Charl Theron ----------------------------------------------------- </font>Sponsor of the (now infamous) Invitational (Ari Maenpaa)</font>Sponsor of the 2 WineCape Tourneys (Fangorn’s Brazilian customs drank the wine prize up! + KiwiJoe)</font>Sponsor of the Nordic Championships in honor of Nabla (His scoring system revolutionized CM tourney play)</font>Rumblings of War, aka RoW I/II/III and beyond tourney sponsor (Wreck/Ali+Kanonier+Jon_L/~)</font>Grateful donateur to the drinking habits of Battlefront.com (Baldy received the Fat Bastard Chardonnay)</font>Thank You donation send to Manx (He used to run the “sexiest CMBO modsite on the net”)</font>Wine donation send to Team Boots & Tracks for their scenarios created specifically for RoW tournaments</font>Wine donation send to Gordon Molek for his CMMOS utility (Thereby making the installing of CM mods a breeze)</font>Wine donation send to Andrew Fox for his CM modding work</font>Wine donation send to Keith Miller @ Scenario Depot for his dedication in hosting CM scenarios</font>Sponsor-to-be of Pengville’s “Gamey Bastard” tourney (In honor of Seanachai + Lars for showing an act of kindness to an outerboarder - Well, bribery does pay.)</font> [ August 25, 2003, 08:34 AM: Message edited by: WineCape ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joachim Posted August 25, 2003 Share Posted August 25, 2003 IIRC The manual (CDV booklet or the pdf-file) says that weather impacts spotting and hearing. Guess that means wind conditions and not just fog&rain. Gruß Joachim 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterX Posted August 25, 2003 Share Posted August 25, 2003 Good question. The only effect seems to be on smoke drift and dissipation. Wind should have an effect on longer range fire and target acquisition. But it doesn't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bogdan Posted August 25, 2003 Share Posted August 25, 2003 Yes, very interesting question. Someone will have to make a test. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WineCape Posted August 25, 2003 Author Share Posted August 25, 2003 Originally posted by PeterX: Good question. The only effect seems to be on smoke drift and dissipation. Wind should have an effect on longer range fire and target acquisition. But it doesn't. Peter, yes, AFAIK CM does not (as of yet) model wind on ballistics. Probably too complicated. The question is if it has any effect on spotting; if not, I hope it will in some CM incarnation. Scarhead, I have the USA version of CMBB + manual. Cannot for the life of me find the text regarding wind effect other than fire spreading/smoke dissapation. Anyone care to enlighten me? Sincerely, Charl Theron [ August 25, 2003, 12:47 PM: Message edited by: WineCape ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 I tested it. Turns out that wind conditions DO have an effect. Still and breeze are the same, but I had a regular Panzerschreck team target a SU-85 at 95 meter range. In still conditions the hit percentage was 55, while in strong wind it was 44. 'Windy' was something inbetween. I also tested the same with PaK36 and an ATR at the range of 1 km, and the difference was even more significant (relatively). So wind effects on hitting have been modelled, but you probably won't notice the difference when firing a FlaK 88 at point blank. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterX Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Are you sure about that, Sergei? We had a lengthy discussion on this topic a few months ago. I tired to retrieve it but the search only goes back 30 days (Or 'Any Date' which takes forever). The consensus then was that CM does not model wind effects on ballistics. However, I'll be happy to be contradicted. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 Maybe that testing was done prior to 1.03. Anyway, I'm sure of my test results and they should be duplicable. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WineCape Posted August 31, 2003 Author Share Posted August 31, 2003 Very interesting regarding strong windy conditions vs. Hit% Sergei. Could you send me your test if you still have it? If not, your paramaters for testing strong windy conditions with AT-guns and shrecks? Much obliged, Charl EDIT: for my spelling is woeful at 6:00am SA (GMT+2)Time [ August 30, 2003, 11:37 PM: Message edited by: WineCape ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted August 31, 2003 Share Posted August 31, 2003 I didn't save anything, but it is a very simple test. I just loaded the editor and placed a Panzerschreck ca. 100 m away from the target. Do this, and check the hit %age with the LOS tool. Then go to parametres and change it to strong wind. Now re-check the hit probability. It should be lower, or then my version of CM is a pre-alpha-CMX2. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joachim Posted September 1, 2003 Share Posted September 1, 2003 Originally posted by WineCape: Scarhead, I have the USA version of CMBB + manual. Cannot for the life of me find the text regarding wind effect other than fire spreading/smoke dissapation. Anyone care to enlighten me? Sincerely, Charl Theron Sorry, read this a bit late. Which kind of enlightenment do you like to hear? Yes, weather impacts hearing and spotting (according to the manuals as well as in RL and my gaming experience). Wind is not mentioned explicitly in that regard. I do not know if CDV (european distributor) consider wind as a part of weather. I do. Gaming (and RL) experience supports that wind influences hearing. No tests, just a feeling. Gruß Joachim 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefly Posted September 1, 2003 Share Posted September 1, 2003 Originally posted by Scarhead: I do not know if CDV (european distributor) consider wind as a part of weather. I do. The manual is the same in both versions, it's just partly in .pdf in the CDV version. I don't know who did the German translation though, I only have the English version 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted September 1, 2003 Share Posted September 1, 2003 Strong winds might decrease the ability to hear the enemy. But a light breeze from the enemy's direction should also make it easier to smell them, an important advantage when troops haven't seen a soap for two months. Especially the Soviet mine dogs have accurate noses (to play the dogs input the code X-Y-X-X-X-A-B-A-Y in the title screen after you have completed the game once at medium difficulty, and the face of Madmatt should show up). OTOH Germans had toilet paper more readily available which balances things. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joachim Posted September 1, 2003 Share Posted September 1, 2003 Originally posted by Firefly: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Scarhead: I do not know if CDV (european distributor) consider wind as a part of weather. I do. The manual is the same in both versions, it's just partly in .pdf in the CDV version. I don't know who did the German translation though, I only have the English version </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted September 1, 2003 Share Posted September 1, 2003 Can't remember whether I did translate 'Assault Rifle' as Angriffssturmriffel oder 'Nicht projizierende Abstandswaffe die 'Bumm' macht'. Must be my age. Which one would be right? Have you got anymore examples with dodgy expressions in the CDV manual (preferably from the German manual though and not from Google and the Sueddeutsche)? If so, feel free to email them to me, I am actually quite interested in getting better at it, and would like to learn from my mishtakes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joachim Posted September 1, 2003 Share Posted September 1, 2003 Originally posted by Andreas: Can't remember whether I did translate 'Assault Rifle' as Angriffssturmriffel oder 'Nicht projizierende Abstandswaffe die 'Bumm' macht'. Must be my age. Which one would be right? Have you got anymore examples with dodgy expressions in the CDV manual (preferably from the German manual though and not from Google and the Sueddeutsche)? If so, feel free to email them to me, I am actually quite interested in getting better at it, and would like to learn from my mishtakes. Hey, if you did translate it, I have to re-read it and enjoy . Somewhere in my head I recall some errors. But as I encounter so many errors during my life, I can't say where I encountered them anymore - except for those serious ones I made myself . Must be the age - or the time on this board. Or both. PS: Mail nach Hause mit Prüfauftrag geschrieben! Gruß Joachim 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rexford Posted September 1, 2003 Share Posted September 1, 2003 Based on research with noise impacts from auto traffic: 1. winds above a certain speed tend to bend sound waves upwards, and turbulence has the same effect 2. sound seems to carry better in winter (made noise readings for aircraft landing at the local air carrier airport during summer and winter) 3. low vegetation tends to absorb sound waves and reduce noise impacts For wind effects on ballistic accuracy, the lateral impact on first shots can be substantial but is a function of range. Second and follow-up shots usually include corrections for lateral error (jump, trunnion cant, wind, etc) so steady wind is an initial but not continued problem. Gusts are another matter. The Americans published analyses of crosswind effects on 75mm, 76mm and 90mm APCBC during WW II: LATERAL DRIFT DUE TO 10 MPH CROSSWIND (16.1 kpH) 75mm APCBC fired at 619 m/s 0.55m lateral drift at 915m 2.20m lateral drift at 1829m 4.66m lateral drift at 2744m 3"/76mm APCBC fired at 793 m/s 0.46m at 915m 1.83m at 1829m 4.53m at 2744m for 3" APCBC 4.09m at 2744m for 76mm APCBC 90mm APCBC fired at 814 m/s 0.32m at 915m 1.35m at 1829m 3.13m at 2744m 90mm APCBC fired at 854 m/s 0.24m at 915m 0.99m at 1829m 2.25m at 2744m The lateral drift due to other factors varies but is a fairly good percentage of wind effects. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WineCape Posted September 1, 2003 Author Share Posted September 1, 2003 Interesting Lorrin... It seems that the typical close tank duel range in CMBB combat might not be THAT much of a influence regarding CM's ballistic engine calculations with regard to wind, seeing that projectile lateral drift being usually less than a metre at range 1000m. At most, Charles (probably) factored a certain lower hit% into a hit probabilities when there is strong wind. That's enough for me IF it is the case. But I will test tank/ATG duels later tonight at 1000m and play with wind settings to see the effect on Hit% as reported by Sergei. Will report later my limited findings... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WineCape Posted September 2, 2003 Author Share Posted September 2, 2003 Yup, my limited test confirms what was so ably tested by Sergei earlier regarding Wind vs. Hit% -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Target T-34, 847m+ away from these units below, hit % as shown -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 50mm ATG - Still = 39%, Windy = 39%, Strong = 36% [847m] 37mm ATG - Still = 36%, Windy = 35%, Strong = 33% [855m] 75mm ATG - Still = 44%, Windy = 43%, Strong = 40% [884m] 88mm ATG – Still = 47%, Windy = 47%, Strong = 44% [900m] 76.2mm ATG - Still = 39%, Windy = 38%, Strong = 35% [850m] Pz. IVG - Still = 41%, Windy = 40%, Strong = 38% [863m] Pz. IIIN – Still = 28%, Windy = 27%, Strong = 22% [871m] EDIT: All units above = regular, shooting from N-S, wind lateral from E-W [ September 02, 2003, 05:40 PM: Message edited by: WineCape ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterX Posted September 2, 2003 Share Posted September 2, 2003 That's fascinating, so BFC really has thought of everything! This will have implications for long range desert gunnery in CMAK. What was the size of your sample? Also, it might be worthwhile to measure mortar fire drift. That seems like it should be a weapon highly susceptible to wind conditions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Other Means Posted September 2, 2003 Share Posted September 2, 2003 excellent tests gentlemen. did anyone notice an effect on spotting effect though? i think lines of troops at different ranges fast-ing across the map with the wind one way, being spotted by a HQ. then reverse the wind direction & see if the spotting range varies. i'd do it myself but i'm at work. . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hat Trick Posted September 2, 2003 Share Posted September 2, 2003 Interesting results on the "to hit" probabilities. I wonder if crew experience plays a factor as well. A crack crew should be better able to adjust for wind than a conscript crew, other things being equal. In fact, if the wind speed (and direction) is constant, I would think that a crack crew would have no penalty to its "to hit" probablity, certainly not after the first shot. Even conscript crews should start to zero in on a target after the first shot, with wind having an increasingly minor effect on "to hit" probabilities, by virtue of its constant effect on the rounds fired. What is more important than the speed of the wind is its variablity. The more the wind varies (in speed or direction), the harder to accurately adjust fire. Of course, stronger winds may be correlated with greater variability. All in all, given the distances involved and the ability of units to adjust their fire, I would expect wind to play a pretty minor role in "to hit" probabilites in CM. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rexford Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 The following net site offers an interesting summary of how climate and weather influences sound waves: http://www.ourhealdsburg.com/noise/outdoor_sound_transmission.htm If one stands on the end of an active aircraft runway and faces into the wind, they may not hear an oncoming aircraft due to the bending up of the sound waves. [ September 02, 2003, 08:52 PM: Message edited by: rexford ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ales Dvorak Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 Originally posted by rexford: [QB2. sound seems to carry better in winter [/QB]In this case without snow? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joachim Posted September 3, 2003 Share Posted September 3, 2003 Originally posted by Scarhead: IIRC The manual (CDV booklet or the pdf-file) says that weather impacts spotting and hearing. Guess that means wind conditions and not just fog&rain. Gruß Joachim Checked this. Weather impact on spotting and hearing ist in the general "weather" section. Listed for each weather, but no mentioning of wind. @Andreas: Translation of the manual is not bad, really not bad (I'm from Southern Germany ). "Biggest" flaw found yet was "Pacht&Leih" - even my GE history book says lend&lease. Fixed expression, just like rock'n'roll (never heard a translation of that ) First Amendment or Bill of Rights. Gruß Joachim 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.