Tankist Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 Originally posted by aka_tom_w: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by tracer: Vanir ausf B, that's "Pakfan's interface mod", and you can get it at the data base. I use it to, cool mod. And I played the "Borisovka Station" battle agian, and I agree with aka_tom_w, looks like the AT bug is fixed. I mean crap, what do people want?? a instant hit everytime your Pz fires at a AT gun?? I think BFC has got it down to a balance. I have no idea if it is realistic? :confused: I don't know how hard AT guns were to spot and then hit? (in Real Life) :confused: BUT now in the game in v1.03c, I would say this aspect of the game is "well balanced" and certainly playable as it is no longer impossible to hit AT guns behind a ridge. Just on the "feel" of "Borisovka Station" scenario alone I think the AT gun Bug has been completely dealt with and that aspect of the game works fine now. In fact in playing v1.03c lately (a lot) I would go so far as to say ALL aspects of the game work fine now. IMHO -tom w </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 Originally posted by Dirtweasle: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Tankist: I've noticed a bug with the HUNT command in 1.03c (Windows version). A platoon of unsurpressed Pz 38(t) was approaching a patch of wood. All Pz had HUNT order. They have seen and were engaging an enemy gun position ahead. But instead of stopping to engage the gun from a halt position, they simply continue to move! I checked it with version 1.01, and here the HUNT command works as expected; the tanks stop and fire at the gun; after destroying it, they continue to HUNT (exactly as the HUNT command is described in the manual and as it always worked). In 1.03c the HUNT seems to work like a simple MOVE command; obviously a severe bug. I've already sent a save file to Matt. Tankist Actually that is how it is supposed to work. HUNT stops to shoot at AFV type targets only AFAIK, and MOVE to CONTACT stops at all contacts. Additionally HUNT will resume if the target first ID'd is destroyed while M.T.C. the vehicle stops until next you give them an order to move or TACai makes the thing move. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmatt Posted April 29, 2003 Author Share Posted April 29, 2003 Charles looked over the HUNT issue as reported and its not a bug. Here is what he said when I showed him an example of tanks not halting when under HUNT against a Soviet AT gun: It's not a bug. Hunt behavior only stops to engage when: 1. The target is a vehicle (which can be reasonably killed), or 2. An anti-vehicle threat (which can be reasonably killed) In this scenario, neither condition is true, so the tanks keep rolling. These tanks are Pz II's with pipsqueak 20mm guns, and the "target" is an AT gun. So rule #1 fails because it's a gun not a vehicle. Rule #2 also fails because the AT gun can't "reasonably" be killed with a pipsqueak 20mm gun whose HE barely does anything (and in fact the AT gun can easily kill the Pz II, so it's not smart for the Pz II to stop and engage it). When I changed my test to be a 100MM AT Gun against a platoon of Tigers, the Tigers did halt when they came under fire and properly engaged as expected. The reason it is different in 1.01 and 1.02 (where the tanks seemed to halt too frequently) is due to several small refinements in TacAi thinking as well as a combination of other fixes and new changes recently implemented. Madmatt p.s. Some other changes have also been made recently of which I will comment on soon. [ April 29, 2003, 02:50 PM: Message edited by: Madmatt ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 Many thanks for the clarification Matt! We are of course looking forward to the FINAL v1.03 (d? z?) final final patch -tom w 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest PondScum Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 Originally posted by Madmatt: p.s. Some other changes have also been made recently of which I will comment on soon. Ahhh, good - waiting to see if I need to email you my Russian-armor-gameplay bug again 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteppenWolf Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 I don't know if this is a bug but I tried to create my first scenario. It had 2 platoons of german recon inf. in hiding as scenario defaults. The germans are supposed to assult. Now when I let the computer take the germans with scenario defaults it seems like none of the hidden assets are used! This reconds that are the closest to the enemy lines and are well equiped are not even touched. I simply wonder why is the computer avoiding the usage of hidden units. SteppenWolf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pzman Posted April 30, 2003 Share Posted April 30, 2003 Originally posted by Kanonier Reichmann: I believe the term "Ind" stands for "Independant" and not "Individual". Doesn't look like anything approaching a "bug" to me. Regards Jim R. Its a bug because I am building this as a scenario and bought a platoon of KTs. Look at the third picture again and tell me there is no bug. Its calling tanks which are part of a platoon independent. I know its just a visual issue I just though I would point it out. I have seen this happen only with reinforcements in scenarios. I am using 1.03c btw. [ April 29, 2003, 06:29 PM: Message edited by: Panzerman ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracer Posted April 30, 2003 Share Posted April 30, 2003 There's still the BMP glitch with the 251/16 MG having the grey box under it> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlatCmdr Posted April 30, 2003 Share Posted April 30, 2003 Not exactly a bug issue, but perhaps a playability issue: What about the incidence of tank commanders automatically unbuttoning in the minutes/turns that follow after having been instructed to button up? This obviously is an issue when sharpshooters are present. There however doesn't seem to be an occurance of this in CMBO, and I was wondering, if in like fashion, the power could be taken away from the AI and placed back into the hands of the player for CMBB too? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MGONZOM Posted April 30, 2003 Share Posted April 30, 2003 Stephen Wolf, Hide will stay hidden in all scenarios if AI is playing with the hidden units. Radio Spotters will also stay in jeeps too if they are on AI side. For that matter all soft targets will no move, including some ACs on Allied side, i have not seen AC problem on German side.. What is frustrating about AC problem is a armored recon company will not move at all unless provoked but troops still stay in them, they do not dismount.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ant Posted April 30, 2003 Share Posted April 30, 2003 Originally posted by PlattCmdr: Not exactly a bug issue, but perhaps a playability issue: What about the incidence of tank commanders automatically unbuttoning in the minutes/turns that follow after having been instructed to button up? This obviously is an issue when sharpshooters are present. There however doesn't seem to be an occurance of this in CMBO, and I was wondering, if in like fashion, the power could be taken away from the AI and placed back into the hands of the player for CMBB too? In CMBO once the AI buttoned up it would never unbutton itself, which lead to a severe handicap for AI AFVs which had buttoned: ie, visibility penalties. AFAIK it was decided to implement an automatic AI unbuttoning in CMBB which removed the visibility penalties for the AI. Unfortunately this behaviour seems to have become part of the human player's side as well. I agree with you: A human controlled force should remain buttoned until the player instructs otherwise, don't know if it's possible to code into CMBB now though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishu Posted April 30, 2003 Share Posted April 30, 2003 Originally posted by Ant: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by PlattCmdr: Not exactly a bug issue, but perhaps a playability issue: What about the incidence of tank commanders automatically unbuttoning in the minutes/turns that follow after having been instructed to button up? This obviously is an issue when sharpshooters are present. There however doesn't seem to be an occurance of this in CMBO, and I was wondering, if in like fashion, the power could be taken away from the AI and placed back into the hands of the player for CMBB too? In CMBO once the AI buttoned up it would never unbutton itself, which lead to a severe handicap for AI AFVs which had buttoned: ie, visibility penalties. AFAIK it was decided to implement an automatic AI unbuttoning in CMBB which removed the visibility penalties for the AI. Unfortunately this behaviour seems to have become part of the human player's side as well. I agree with you: A human controlled force should remain buttoned until the player instructs otherwise, don't know if it's possible to code into CMBB now though. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted April 30, 2003 Share Posted April 30, 2003 The automatic opening up is very annoying and underdeveloped. I had tanks unbutton in the middle of artillery fire, when nearby tanks were hit by HE and when a nearby TC has just been sharpshot while both where open. None of that is realistic. I would recommend disabling this code for the human player. Or as a compromise: if you open up, then only at the end of the turn, after artillery ended. Then the player can close them again if he chooses to do so and has no fire phase where the tank is open. No spotting ebenefit will result from this zero-time unbuttoning. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted April 30, 2003 Share Posted April 30, 2003 Tanks unbuttoning after another nearby TC has been sharpshot (nice wordplay!) would be realistic IF the tanks had no radios. I'm of the opinion what's undermodeled in the game is the isolation and poor situational awareness of some of those early war tanks. As for tanks unbuttoning at inappropriate times, I recently saw some something in V1.02 I'd never seen before. My unbuttoned Panther commander actually had the good sense to button-up when he spotted an approching Sturmovik fighter! In the past the commander would've been hung out to dry, most likely killed by a near-miss rocket attack. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted April 30, 2003 Share Posted April 30, 2003 Originally posted by MikeyD: Tanks unbuttoning after another nearby TC has been sharpshot (nice wordplay!) would be realistic IF the tanks had no radios. I repeat from my posting: both tanks were open, one gets sharpshootet while the second is open. I could hear the death cry all over the map. There was no other battle activity. As if the other incidents wouldn't be enough to warrant a layoff of this code. Do it for the AI. Why was it introduced for players in first place? To guard newbies? [ April 30, 2003, 11:05 AM: Message edited by: redwolf ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted April 30, 2003 Share Posted April 30, 2003 If the player orders the tank to button up IT SHOULD STAY BUTTONED that would be logical and make sense to me. THe TacAI should be able to button the tank when it wants to it. If the Tac AI buttoned the tank the TAC AI should be able to unbutton it. BUT the players order to Button Up (Damn it!) SHOULD override all Tac AI orders to unbutton. I find this issue only a minor annoyance and basically if I lose a TC (CC for some here) due to TAC AI error, I just chalk it up to the fog of war (EFOW) or simply "**** Happens", say "oh well" and move on. I can live with it either way. -tom w 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmatt Posted April 30, 2003 Author Share Posted April 30, 2003 Originally posted by tracer: There's still the BMP glitch with the 251/16 MG having the grey box under it> Thats been fixed and will be in the final 1.03 patch. Madmatt 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PlatCmdr Posted April 30, 2003 Share Posted April 30, 2003 Good comments guys and glad I'm not alone on this. I've had PBEM after PBEM where I move a group of tanks atop a nice overlook position which turns out to be sniper rich. My dominant overlook turns out instead to be a shooting gallery for well hidden sharpshooters, sniping one tank commander after another, only because the AI deems this to be an inappropriate threat and unbuttons the hatch? Well, with no response from BFC, it doesn't seem likely this will be corrected in 1.03, but hopefully is something that will be addressed for CMAK. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteppenWolf Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 Thank you Gonzo, That was my first attempt at scenario design and I just expected the AI to touch and use the hidden units. Anyhow your information is useful even if it is a bit limiting for scenario design, it means a lot of options would not work if the computer controlls this forces Ah well there is always the new engine to look forward too. Maybe things are improved by then SteppenWolf 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve McClaire Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 Not sure if this is already a known bug, but it happend to me with 1.03c. A BA-64 is ordered to 'reverse' around some trees, then 'move fast' close to a ridgeline and before finally using 'seek hull down'. It begins to execute the move near the end of a turn, and during the orders phase of the next turn I see the orders have been changed by the AI -- the BA-64 has already reversed past the first waypoint, yet that 'reverse' waypoint is still in its orders, but is now in front of the armored car. The rest of the waypoints are in the same location, but are now set to reverse instead of 'move fast'. The final 'seek hull down' remained unchanged. I can provide files for this if anyone wants to look at it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSulo Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 In my last game I had something weird happening. I noticed that the "cease fire" button was pressed down, even though I am sure I hadn't clicked it. When I tried to "un-click" it, nothing happend. Never had this problem before. File sent to Madmatt. (matt@battlefront.com, right?) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 SuperSulo, this is the "auto-ceasefire" feature at work. No bug. Martin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 (double post) [ May 01, 2003, 05:11 AM: Message edited by: Moon ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSulo Posted May 1, 2003 Share Posted May 1, 2003 Yup, I just didn't notice that the button actually would be "pressed". Thanks for clearing that up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmatt Posted May 1, 2003 Author Share Posted May 1, 2003 Originally posted by PlattCmdr: Good comments guys and glad I'm not alone on this. I've had PBEM after PBEM where I move a group of tanks atop a nice overlook position which turns out to be sniper rich. My dominant overlook turns out instead to be a shooting gallery for well hidden sharpshooters, sniping one tank commander after another, only because the AI deems this to be an inappropriate threat and unbuttons the hatch? Well, with no response from BFC, it doesn't seem likely this will be corrected in 1.03, but hopefully is something that will be addressed for CMAK. Actually we have something in store in 1.03 which should help out this situation. More details once the final patch is released. Madmatt 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.