ww2steel Posted August 20, 2006 Share Posted August 20, 2006 I think it had been fairly well decided in the psat, but as I am doing so many mobility tests right now I thought I would do this too. {Test info, skip if you don't care... map was 3km wide map, 1km long, 100 tanks, 49 on each 'height', tanks 50 and 51 were on the cliff and did not move. I recorded fastest actual time (removes command lag), number of immobilizations, and actual distance traversed (removes distance not covered by immobilized vehicles). Heights were '19' for high and '0' for low.} The test covered 275 kilometers with JPz I. Exactly 19 high and 19 low became immobilized. The low vehicles did manage to cover 3.4 more kilometers, but this is counterintuitive (the low areas would cause more vehicles to get stuck), and insignificant given the large distance covered. The m/Imm ratio: (total meters/immobilizations = how far the average vehicle will go before it gets stuck or breaks down) High: 7141m Low: 7323m This is obviously very close together, and should be considered the same value. Conclusion: Terrain height is insignificant. Hope this helps! Mike 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonxa Posted August 20, 2006 Share Posted August 20, 2006 Hm, never thought about having height as a parameter. Was this with the "move" command? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Other Means Posted August 20, 2006 Share Posted August 20, 2006 It's the thicker air. Gives the engine more HP. You know ww2steel, it's great that you're doing all these but I can't help but wish you were here 3 years ago, before all this tumbleweed. Will you be doing something similar for CM:SF? You'd get yourself a whole heap of friends then. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ww2steel Posted August 20, 2006 Author Share Posted August 20, 2006 This was with 'fast'. Some people think that lower areas will be soggier (they are greener after all) and thus more prone to getting stuck. I used to stick to the high ground when I was a noobie... then I realized that I'll get stuck regardless! I may do this stuff for SF, but I'm really into the east front. Who knows. I've had the game forever (since it came out) and tested a ton of stuff. I have about 300 pages of my own game manual set up. What I'm trying to do now is just put it into something other people can use. Mike 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evzone Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Mike, just had a look at your site and was completely blown away. Excellent stuff! As for bogging, it's happened to me only twice since I started playing CM. I am relatively new to CM, just under a year, but I play on average two QBs a day, and I virtually always use vehicles. The first time it happened was due to my ignorance; I think I tried to take cover in soft ground! Something silly like that. The second time was recently and I was able to get out by giving Reverse and Move orders. It took a couple of turns but it worked. It might be something that occurs more frequently in CMBB, which I only just purchased. Or maybe it's because I'm rather careful. I keep wheeled vehicles on roads or dry, flat ground and I very rarely order them to go fast, that's just asking for trouble. If I'm expecting rugged terrain, I avoid them altogether and use tracked vehicles instead. Evzone 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ww2steel Posted August 21, 2006 Author Share Posted August 21, 2006 Good tactics, Evzone, and all comply with my testing. The only thing I have not tested is how to recover from getting bogged. (It's hard to get enough vehicles bogged at the same time to complie a significant amount of data in any time efficient manner. For a while it seemed that pushing a vehicle with another vehicle would give about a 20% better chance of unditching the bogged one, but even the 100+ tests I did does not have a high confidence of significance. I do not think that alternating R/M commands helps, but that didn't stop me from issuing them last night to a SdKfz250/8 that was in trouble! Thanks for the compliment on the web site. Mike 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evzone Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Mike, now that you mention it I think I used another more powerful unit to give my bogged unit a nudge, in conjuction with repeated R/M orders; completely escaped my memory. I think we can have faith in the simulator and respond to such problems in the same manner as we would in real life. And just as in real life, sometime's it'll work and sometimes it won't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evzone Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 -new bogging incident- I was boasting in a previous post that I've had vehicles get bogged down on only two occasions since I began playing CM a year ago. Well, third time today. I wouldn't be relating this banal incident if it weren't for something unusual happening. At least I have not heard about it occurring before. Crusader is in some brush, behind a hill, out of sight from the enemy, about 20m from the road. I give a Move order and just before it hits the road it gets bogged. Next turn I try to give a Reverse order back into the brush hoping that might free it but no luck. A turn later, I try giving a Rotate order but to no avail. Third turn, I give a Fast order and the tank from 'Bogged' becomes 'Immobilized'. It completely broke down on me. Has anyone had this happen to them before? Is giving a Fast order when bogged a proven no-no or was it a bit of a fluke? Thanks Evzone 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidFields Posted September 1, 2006 Share Posted September 1, 2006 The veterans may give a more thorough answer--but I believe there is a certain chance each turn of a bog turning into an immobilize. Don't think the "Fast" order affected it. (The posts on "bogging" almost have a religious overtone--I am not being negative, just noticing. I think we would be posting on the humidity in our house, or what shoes we were wearing, when we bogged, if we didn't restrain ourselves on how likely(?!) crazy that is. And yes, I "handle" my bogged vehicles very carefully, and softly, with my mouse clicks--as though that would help it unbog, or prevent immobilizations.) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ww2steel Posted September 5, 2006 Author Share Posted September 5, 2006 Hi, The reason there is so much misinformation out there is that so many people keep posting 'results' after only doing twenty or so tests. I have 3000+ kilometers of tests and I still post my information as being still in the testing phase. Fast does cause increased bogging potential, but it seems only in certain terrains, such as scattered trees. That is another reason there are so many mixed results (such as the no reverse bogging myth, which in some circumstances is actually the worst way to travel by both speed and immobilizations). The more tests I do, the more I find that the mobility process is quite complex. IMO, changing the movement order has no effect once a vehicle gets bogged... but I do it anyway. Mike 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.