"Un-hittable Gun" Game Bug?

[Industrializer]

Ladies, this IS a bug

OK, here is another proof: In a flat city map I ordered a PzIV G tank (green crew but happened with vets, too, this has nothing to do wit experience!) to AreaTarget a small light building at 288m distance.

Here is the situation, pic2 shows that the map is indeed flat and no crest in the way.

Now my tank was fireing for 2 mins at the target without scoring one hit! All shells fell way short but his MG was always hitting the building. After 2 mins and 10 fired shells the result was like this:

All shells fell down infront of the building, some were even hitting the exact same spot as previous rounds! At 300m the gravity has no influence on the shells path and it'll leave the gun and fly in a straight line. A small building is approx. 3m high! There is _no_ way even a constript crew would miss more than one shot and absolutely no way that the shots would fall short!

This IS a bug, period.

[WWB]

I can see that the map is not completely flat. There are obvious breaks in your LOS line. Maybe it is the JPEG compression, but you should post the map for examination.

I did design the scenario in question from the beginning of this thread. The gun is in just about a perfect position. So perfect the TacAI would not see it. I also remind you all that the StratAI has issues seeing linear cover, like walls. Much less LOS advantage cover like hillcrests. These positions are easy to see, at least to me. Place the gun where it can barely see over the hill and it pays off, big time. Which is not gamey--the germans and soviets did such all the time. Why risk getting hit when mother nature provided you with natural cover. In fact, such traditions ran thru artillerymen for a long time. Just after the advent of mobile field artillery, someone realized it was a damn good idea to use the slope of hills to your advantage. Why die needlessly?

WWB

[RoughRoad]

Referring again to the original post, here is the final "post mortem" on the situation described there...[Which was one (1) defiladed German 105mm artillery piece vs. what ultimately turns out to be twelve (12) T-34's and six (6) Kv-I's that can't seem to hit the gun for their life]:

After 23 turns of constant bombardment by a couple companies of Ruskie armor (over 250 incoming HE rounds), not one HE round lands within 8m of the gun (although the short rounds have dug a 10' deep slit trench leading up to the gun's defiladed position). In the meantime, the gun slowly picks off one T-34 after the next, finally capping 11 of the 12 (somebody else got the 12th before the gun could get to it).

Personally, I'm convinced that there was more at work here than good tactical placement-- I think that the gun could hit the Russians but that was completely impossible for the Russian armor to hit my gun. Of course, the Russian AI didn't "know" this-- that's why the Russian armor sat back and hopelessly fired away for 23 turns while the 105 picked them off one by one. As others have also said, I believe that there is clearly a bug with the LOS/LOF mechanisms when it comes to armor firing at guns in defilade

In light of this, when attacking an enemy gun in such a defilade position in CMBB, the obvious answer is to try to take it out with other types of fire (indirect, MG fire, infantry, whatever)-- but if those options aren't available and it's not possible to maneuver to a non-defilade angle on the gun, it seems to me that your stuck either trying to avoid the thing entirely, blinding it with smoke (if your tanks carry smoke), and/or charging the durn thing. When you're attacking with tanks, you seem to have a much better chance of hitting a pillbox firing slit than upi do of hitting a defiladed gun.

If you're defending with guns against an AI armor attack (as I was) the best answer is probably to avoid setting-up your guns in defilade at all, or else run the risk that, no matter how big the force increase or experience bonus you give the AI, it will still devote all of its energies on completely hopeless game-long effort to hit your "unhittable" gun.

[Industrializer]

I can't post the scenario because it's a still ongoing CMBB tournament map at WarfareHQ. If you wnat the map I suggest you contact the scenario designer: scipio@warfarehq.com

An I can assure you, the map is almost 100% flat

OK, I took another shot taken halfway along the distance towards the building, you can see that the building is in a small valley, judging from the proportions I'd say approx 20cm lower than the terrain in front of it.

90%-95% of the building is still clearly visible but judging from the impact craters the tank seems to aim at the end point of the area target line (which seems to be at ground level !!), trying to shoot in a straigt line at it thereby hitting the street. But no tank commander would try to hit a building at zero elevation, he would aim at the middle of the building.

That's were I think the bug is, the programmers simply forgot that guns and buildings have a height and instead the tanks are aiming at the base of the enemy gun/building and if there is just a small crest in the way they'll hit it instead of the target.

So, this is a bug, please fix

[ March 03, 2003, 11:23 PM: Message edited by: Industrializer ]

[Beckman]

Great post, the ones above with pics. I was going to add pics tonight involving BUILDINGS. I was thinking about this on the way home, and bam here ya go, someone beat me to it. THE BUG is not just guns people. Have we put to bed the silly notion that it is not a bug?

As with any bug, this is repeatable, and not just with guns but with buildings guys.

Aim at a building, and all you get is a tight grouping, and they are ALL short. Thus the gunner thinks he is doing a good job, NOT.

I can't hit a house now, I can't hit a ATG now, but we have folks telling us about bla bla bla. Wittman can hit all these things, why can't the game? Cause it's a BUG, that WILL get fixed.

Also, yes MG's from AVF's DO SUPPRESS crews but the HE never gets close, as stated.

Why should it? The bug prevents the gunner from thinking he is missing what he is aiming at.

HE thinks he is doing a great job. WE see him miss with all this ammo AND we see buildings not get touched.

AND we see folks who think this is NOT a BUG!! Can I play games against u folks, or can I sell you a bridge.

As to something prodcutive, it seems to be related to HULL DOWN and the line of fire ot the NON vehicle target.

I agree with another poster who said they think BTS moved the problem down stream but failed to completey solve it. I concur.

Thanks for the pics and screen shots man! Good luck takin that town!

[PeterX]

In light of this, when attacking an enemy gun in such a defilade position in CMBB, the obvious answer is to try to take it out with other types of fire (indirect, MG fire, infantry, whatever)-- but if those options aren't available and it's not possible to maneuver to a non-defilade angle on the gun, it seems to me that your stuck either trying to avoid the thing entirely, blinding it with smoke (if your tanks carry smoke), and/or charging the durn thing. When you're attacking with tanks, you seem to have a much better chance of hitting a pillbox firing slit than upi do of hitting a defiladed gun.

This could be a REALLY big problem with early war Stugs which lack MGs!

[MrNoobie]

Aim at a building, and all you get is a tight grouping, and they are ALL short. Thus the gunner thinks he is doing a good job, NOT.

now that you mention it this happened to me recently on a QB battle. i had a KV targeting a house and he kept aiming short. i really didnt think of it much cuz i was busy concentrating my force in one area but a couple of turns in the game i noticed that the houst was still standing. i still won though maybe thats why i didnt think of it much.

[Schoerner]

Originally posted by Industrializer:

[QB] Ladies, this IS a bug

OK, here is another proof:

It's not a proof.

In a flat city map

As everyone can see clearly on the second picture, there is an elevation in front of the house.

What kind of commander are you, to aim at the ground, although there is an elevation in front of it and although the house is big enough to target higher?

Now my tank was fireing for 2 mins at the target without scoring one hit!

And why don't you give a new (better!), area-target order?

Maybe it is your targetting that causes the problem?

At 300m the gravity has no influence on the shells path and it'll leave the gun and fly in a straight line.

Wrong.

If you would have read the post in this thread about the drop of a Browning-MG only, you wouldn't say this anymore.

Maybe it's a bug, but what you are showing is definately not a "proove" but it is explainable and easily to solve.

[Kanonier Reichmann]

The problem Schoerner is that when you area target a single story building you are only given the one choice and that is to target the base of the building. If there is some way to target a single storey building half way up its wall I'd love to hear about it as I haven't managed to be able to do it yet in over 2 years of playing CMBO & more recently, CMBB. Obviously a 2 storey building doesn't present a problem as you can target the upper level but a single story one certainly does cause problems if there is a small ridge in front of it.

Regards

Jim R.

Regards

Jim R.

[Schoerner]

Jim, i'm remembering i was able to area target MGs out LOS on the top floor, while the base of the building was hidden behind an elevation.

If i'm remembering correctly i also was able to area target small buildings that were only partially visible while their bases were completely hidden.

[SonBae]

See that is the problem with this whole question. The tank is not targeting the spot where the rounds are impacting. The tank is targeting the base of the building or the gun with HE. You can run a LOS check and it will show a clear LOS, then set target and all looks good to go...then the tank fires and every blessed round falls into the little hill...and to make matters worse, the reverse doesnt happen to the gun, where its shots follow the JFK magic bullet flight path up and over the little rise to impact the tank.

Dont know if it is a TacAI issue casuing the tank to fire when it REALLY doesnt have a clear LOS to the target...a conflict with TacAI and LOS or what. All I know is something definately wierd is happening...doesnt quite make sense, and is repeatable.

[Industrializer]

Originally posted by Schoerner:

As everyone can see clearly on the second picture, there is an elevation in front of the house.

What kind of commander are you, to aim at the ground, although there is an elevation in front of it and although the house is big enough to target higher?

You can't change the evevation at which you want to target a small building. You can only target the base and hope that the TC hits the damn thing.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />

Now my tank was fireing for 2 mins at the target without scoring one hit!

And why don't you give a new (better!), area-target order?

Maybe it is your targetting that causes the problem?

</font>

[WWB]

Industrializer, that test is flawed. There is clearly a hill between your tank and the building. It is not completely flat as you claim. I would bet a tank in the same spot as the building would be "hull down."

Did you think of aiming for a different spot on the building after the first turn's shots went arwy?

Still, I will try and set up some more scientific tests here. This anecdotal "Waa, waa, I lost the game because I could not take out something I should have manuvered on anyhow" evidince is worthless. If one can find some hard data, using at least 100 tests, then so be it. Otherwise this is just idle chatter.

WWB

[Dschugaschwili]

I think the whole problem described in this thread comes from the fact that non-vehicle units can not be hit directly in CMBB. Only the ground under/near the unit can be hit with gun/arty shells. Because of this, a gun in a "hull down" position can sometimes not be hit by a tank in any way.

We would need the possibility of gun hits against guns to remedy this problem. A "hull down" gun would then still be very hard to kill because killing near misses are not possible, but there is still a small chance of hitting the gun itself.

Dschugaschwili

[Industrializer]

Originally posted by wwb_99:

Industrializer, that test is flawed. There is clearly a hill between your tank and the building. It is not completely flat as you claim. I would bet a tank in the same spot as the building would be "hull down."

[Soddball]

Originally posted by Industrializer:

Well, as I said earlier, this 'hill' is in reality more like a 20cm sinkhole in which the building is standing , there is no rise between the tank and the building and just a drop of approx 20cm (it's really hardly visible that the building is a little lower than the surrounding terrritory)

The absolute minimum that "20cm sinkhole" can be is 1.25m if we're talking about the smalles possible elevation change in CM. More likely it's a 2.5m (standard elevation) change - which to me looks like the height (roughly) of one storey of a house (not including the roof). Is that a one-storey house you're firing at?

[PeterX]

I think the whole problem described in this thread comes from the fact that non-vehicle units can not be hit directly in CMBB. Only the ground under/near the unit can be hit with gun/arty shells. Because of this, a gun in a "hull down" position can sometimes not be hit by a tank in any way.

I think you hit the nail on the head. Over multiple turns, involving several AFVs the odds, it seems to me, would be pretty good that a shell or two would take out the barrel or a crew member. This can't happen in CM.

Something else that doesn't occur in CM (I believe): explosive follow through. It's logical that an HE shell would produce shrapnel that would wash over the target area following the trajectory of the shot. IOW, the blast radius would extend toward the rear in an oblong pattern.

Something really needs to be done. I set up a test case with a Russian 57 AT in 'hull down' position' on a rise take on 2 platoons of Mk4s. After 8 turns, all ten were smoking wrecks. The AT team didn't lose a member.

[Soddball]

Whatever the apparent 'problems', I believe that it's more realistic than CM:BO, where AT guns had the life expectancy of a l33t 5sp33k d00d in a Bren Gun Tripod Thread. Perhaps people should bear that in mind too.

[Sergei]

I believe this is a serious problem. It rises it's ugly head in almost all battles I play, particularly when there are tanks firing at 1-story buildings. I have had plenty of the situations described by Industrializer, and it's funny how some of you claim that it's not a bug. :confused: Maybe you haven't played the game yet, but if you do, it's there.

The problem with this is not, that tank guns sometimes hit a berm between them and the actual target. That is supposed to happen every now and then, and after that the gunner realises, "D'oh, it fell short" and aims the next round a tad higher. No, the problem is that the gunner frequently hits a slight rise, then hits it again, and again, and again... if in someone's opionion this doesn't constitute a bug, then fine, but it is a flaw in the game, nevertheless.

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Soddball:

The absolute minimum that "20cm sinkhole" can be is 1.25m if we're talking about the smalles possible elevation change in CM. More likely it's a 2.5m (standard elevation) change - which to me looks like the height (roughly) of one storey of a house (not including the roof). Is that a one-storey house you're firing at?

Soddball, maybe if you looked at that picture, you'd see that the tank has a LOS to the building. First of all, the building is clearly visible from the tank, and secondly, the game agrees with this because otherwise the tank wouldn't be firing. If you don't have anything valuable or constructive to this discussion, you could as well leave it.

[Ex Bellator]

Don't give up Industrializer, I've reported geniune bugs before and the forum guys always take a lot of convincing.

FWIW I have seen this behaviour and have sent in files to Madmatt as well. No reply yet, but I would recommend you keep sending files, and anyone else who sees it should do the same.

My latest experience was in PBEm where a Stug was trying to area fire and plonked half his HE ammo allowance 30m short of its target for a whole turn. I cancelled the fire, moved him, turned and guess what, he did the same with the other half of the ammo :mad:

[Industrializer]

OK, I'll try again to illustrate what I think is buggy in CMBB.

I drew a little sketch with the situation I encounter in the PBEM. The targeted building is in a small sinkhole (and no, it's not like 1,50 as one member said, it's really just barely visible!) and the tank is ordered to area fire at the building. What happens is that the tank tries to fire at a point at ground level inside the building but on it's way to that point the shells impact in the small rise infront of the building. The building is clearly visible and if the tank would aim at approx. 1m height it would hit the building easily!

[BadgerDog]

Hello game experts...

Still being a novice, I wanted to post some pics of one of my current PBEM matches, so I could get some comments and feedback from the more experienced game players about how they interpret these pics.

The following weapons platforms are all firing at what's termed a "light" AT Gun.

Left to right (HMG, Panther G - 75mm HE, HMG, 250/9-20mm HT - 20mm, 81mm Mortar, Panther G - 75mm HE, Panther G - 75mm HE)

Left to right (HMG, Panther G - 75mm HE, HMG, 250/9-20mm HT - 20mm, 81mm Mortar, Panther G - 75mm HE, Panther G - 75mm HE)

Frontal view showing gun and exposure above stone wall and craters in front

Localized crater damage from incoming 20mm, 75mm HE and 81mm rounds

Zoomed-in pic of localized crater damage from incoming 20mm, 75mm HE and 81mm rounds

3/4 zoomed in close-up of localized crater damage from incoming 20mm, 75mm HE and 81mm rounds

Frontal view showing gun and exposure above stone wall and even more craters in front

So, what does everyone think? Is there anyway I can kill this "light" AT gun quicker?

Is it possible that this is some kind of game engine anomaly, or am I seeing one of those things referred to as "it's just a graphics representation of what's really happening"?

Having been the recipient of erroneous incoming 105mm arty fire in real life, I do have a small sense of what's it's like. I can assure you, it's definitely far better to give than to receive. So, I would have thought that with this incredible amount of close proximity incoming fire as compared to real life, this gun crew would have either panicked and abandoned their "light" gun, or be in body bags. In the CMBB game, they seem to be tough enough to continue firing though all of this incoming barrage (direct and indirect fire), plus stayed cool enough to bag the 250/9 HT, although it's possible he "bought the farm" due to incoming arty. BTW, they finally abandoned their gun after 4 minutes (not sure what weapon finally did the trick), but perhaps that's really the answer in itself.

I also think the point that someone made earlier in this thread about the LOS pointing to the "base" of the unit is correct. That would explain the LOS going through the slight knoll in front. IMHO, I believe Dschugaschwili said it the best and his point "that non-vehicle units can not be hit directly in CMBB. Only the ground under/near the unit can be hit with gun/arty shells." is significant and perhaps it's the key to the entire discussion.

Just my two cents... as always...

Regards,

Badger

[xerxes]

That's just one tough gun Badger. I'd guess he's vet or better with a x2 heart bonus HQ. Most guns get abandoned with just a fraction of the firepower you threw at him.

I'd also guess if you watched the films closely, you'd see the gun "ducking" down behind the wall occaisionally. If you were letting you tanks auto-target they'll stop fireing and the gun can recover morale. If, on the other hand, you area target your tanks will finish him off much more quickly.

[Soddball]

Originally posted by Sergei:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Soddball:

The absolute minimum that "20cm sinkhole" can be is 1.25m if we're talking about the smalles possible elevation change in CM. More likely it's a 2.5m (standard elevation) change - which to me looks like the height (roughly) of one storey of a house (not including the roof). Is that a one-storey house you're firing at?

Soddball, maybe if you looked at that picture, you'd see that the tank has a LOS to the building. First of all, the building is clearly visible from the tank, and secondly, the game agrees with this because otherwise the tank wouldn't be firing. If you don't have anything valuable or constructive to this discussion, you could as well leave it. </font>