Jump to content

Ai aim to weak points?


Recommended Posts

Question popped up in my mind when I saw my short barrelled PzIII shoting hopless against a KV1 side without any attempt to take at last an immobilization with some hit in the tracks ( I know because I saw all the round broken or ricocheted on the side upper armor). my general question is: when we are aiming the target the TacAi is supposed to look for the better impact zone or is all ruled by percentage chance? I remember that is a random one per cent to hit a weak point like the turret ring or a visor but for a greater spot like the track/wheels/suspension or better when the upper and lower hull have different armor size/slope?

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it might be something to do with ballistics. If target was even partially "hull down" (I mean not hull down as much as to get message), chance to hit tracks and wheels are lot less than optimal. I don't know if CM:BB engine calculates it, but lowest part of tank can be really easily masked by even slight changes in terrain.

In my last game, my Pz IVE immobilized KV-1 that was coming towards it from higher elevation with track hit (hitting once lower and upper hull front first). And was then KO'd by same KV-1 with turret and upper hull hits by same KV-1.

I think that ballistic "geometry" in CM:BB takes to account even slightest differences in elevation (that might need really sharp eye to notice) and hit distribution changes accordingly.

I have no idea if that's really the case, but I bet someone will tell if my "suspicion" is right. If it's, it's damn good modelling.

Cheers,

M.S.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to Stevem early CMBO builds had aiming for known weaker points built in. The feature was dropped because it created a random mess of killer bees. The effectivness of the small shooters because instanlty unrealistically high.

[ January 16, 2003, 08:12 AM: Message edited by: redwolf ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The way it is now is actually the most realistic. If you ever look through tank sights, at normal combat ranges (from about 500 to 1500 meters) a tank is pretty small. You can see enough to know what you are shooting at but asking the gunner to hit a specific part of the tank is asking a little much. This is especially true if your opponent is moving, the wind is blowing, someone is shooting at you, the sun or shadows are interfering with your sight picture, well you get the picture. Most gunners will put the sights center mass, adjust for movement or wind, and let fly. While there were ace gunners who could call their shots these men were few and far between and even for them it was a matter of luck for most engagements.

Having critical hits (for lack of a better term) ruled by chance is pretty realistic as that is normally what determined them in actual combat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...