The Archer Tank Destroyer, why wont it destroy tanks?

[First Mate Detrius]

Finally I can make a contribution!

I have been looking forward to trying the Archers...and OBOY do I love them!

What I have found is that "hull down", "shoot and Scoot" dont work with them...wich is fine, I like controling this for my self either way.

Please remember to "REVERSE" when in a hostile inviroment! Do NOT use "MOVE" or "FAST" commands!! ..because then you'll be fascinated wathing your archers doing tiny piruettes and getting nailed by puny enemy tankers.

In a battle against a friend here the other day I had 5 Firefly, 5 other late shermans and 4 archers.

I must admin this wasnt my best day with the shermans, but hey....

The end result was 10 dead shermans because I thught I could use 'em hull down against panthers, tigers and Hetzers....I was wrong

Now I only had 4 archers left against 4 tigers, 4 hetzers and 8 panthers (VD).

Fortunalty I held all victory locations, so my opponent had to advance.

I used them as inteded...mobile AT guns. Narrow shot windows where the opponent hopefully had to expose his flank.

To make a long story short. My Archers minced them up! All (4) Tigers destroyed, 2 Hetzers (the 2 left had no guns) and 6 Panthers!

I had some help from my ATs here, but not much.

The Archers won the day!

Remember guys: "REVERSE"! and if turn to...turn to OPPOSITE from enemy!

...am I only being obvious here...?

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by CMplayer:

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

Seek hull down, shoot and scoot, etc., will all result in your Archers moving to the designated point normally, and they're dead meat. You can only use them from an established ambush position and hope that they kill their target before they get cold feet (tracks?).

BFC didn't think of that and allow for shoot n scoot etc to be executed in reverse? (at least for archers) Jeez what a clunky piece of code. It would have been better to leave the archer out altogether. </font>

[CMplayer]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

Okay, how about this (I think someone suggested it several months ago): Give the Archer a reverse order up to a point where it looks like it will be hulldown but still have a shot at whatever you wish to target. Try to time it so that it arrives just a few seconds before the end of the turn. At the beginning of the next turn, give it a haul ass order out of there and if necessary a pause so it has at least ten seconds to get off a shot or two. Of course all this requires more skill and timing (and a fair helping of luck) than just using S&S, but there it is.

Yes. That's how we all did shoot 'n scoot in CMBO.

[Michael Emrys]

Ooops! FMD beat me to it. Well, I said someone had suggested it...

Michael

[Soddball]

I'm certainly finding that units like the Deacon and the Portee stink like sewage. No matter how often you tell them "Look, reverse up the slope, wait until you spot a tank, shove off an AT round and run like buggery" they go "reverse, fine, I can do that." Then as the enemy unit rumbles into my covered arc the driver bellows "Holy cow! A halftrack! Run away! Run away!" whilst the six-man gun crew cling on for dear life.

Eventually the unit is abandoned, not I suspect from damage but because the gun crew lynch the driver for being such a wet and a weed. :mad:

[Gordon]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

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

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

Seek hull down, shoot and scoot, etc., will all result in your Archers moving to the designated point normally, and they're dead meat. You can only use them from an established ambush position and hope that they kill their target before they get cold feet (tracks?).

BFC didn't think of that and allow for shoot n scoot etc to be executed in reverse? (at least for archers) Jeez what a clunky piece of code. It would have been better to leave the archer out altogether. </font>

[CMplayer]

Originally posted by Gordon:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

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

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

Seek hull down, shoot and scoot, etc., will all result in your Archers moving to the designated point normally, and they're dead meat. You can only use them from an established ambush position and hope that they kill their target before they get cold feet (tracks?).

BFC didn't think of that and allow for shoot n scoot etc to be executed in reverse? (at least for archers) Jeez what a clunky piece of code. It would have been better to leave the archer out altogether. </font>

[Panzer76]

Originally posted by First Mate Detrius:

Remember guys: "REVERSE"! and if turn to...turn to OPPOSITE from enemy!

...am I only being obvious here...?

Yes:

[Redwolf]

I think we shouldn't mix up two different issues:

1) lack for inverted commands for "backwards" vehicles

2) Archers chickening out from Pz IVs, analogous to the IS-2/ISU-122 but this time without ROF disadvantage

For me, 1) is fine apart from the excuse, they don't want to extend the old engine and this would be a fair amount of work.

IMHO, 2) is a serious issue.

I tried to reproduce it but couldn't. This it not surprising since the ISU-122 situation could also could not be reproduced in an artificial scenario. Panzer76, can you make the map and situation available? Was it a Quckickbattle? Where the Archers standing or coming with with "seek-hulldown"?

[Ron]

Originally posted by Gordon:

Note that one BIG problem with using reverse to approach a firing position is that the TacAI prioritizes reaching the reverse waypoint over firing at a target (wisely in the case of most vehicles as you are probably running away), so if you mis-plot that puppy your Archer is going to be exposed and not get off a shot.

Gordon

You know I think the fact the TacAI prioritizes Reverse over shooting may be related to the issue Panzer76 described. I am *guessing* so bear with me.

I can recall two instances of this behavior, once in CMBB and now in a current CMAK Pbem. In the current game I had maneuvered a Marder III® but had overshot the mark so reversed it into a hulldown position. Almost as the Marder reached its destination, two Stuarts crested the hill in front of it. Instead of stopping at the final waypoint, the Marder continued reversing away then broadside(!) to the Stuarts. Lucky for the Marder it had a couple friendlies nearby to cover for its *mistake*. IIRC that was the same sort of situation with a T-34 in CMBB.

Now that may be something reproduceable with the editor and worth looking into. Personally it has only happened twice for me in many, many games so isn't really a big deal.

Ron

[ December 19, 2003, 12:56 PM: Message edited by: Ron ]

[flamingknives]

I don't think that the Archer is a good choice to go hunting around with anyway, as the driver has to be out of position in order to fire the gun. I'd view it as an ATG that can run away. Trouble is it's very hard to hide vehicles in CM.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Gordon:

Reverse to hull down was also rejected for the first reason above.

This strikes me as odd, since the practice was that the gunner looking through his sight called the stop.

:confused:

Michael

[CombinedArms]

I confess I haven't used the Archer in CMAK but I had great luck with them in CMBO. I think the key is to use them as an ambush vehicle. Set them up covering a keyholed area BEFORE the enemy AFV's arrive. Then blaze away as they come into view. The Archer's lethal, accurate gun is its main protection, but after one turn of firing, the jig may be up. So FAST move out of there and set up in a new ambush position.

I don't think reversing into firing position while in LOS of enemy AFVs is going to work too well, OTOH

[stikkypixie]

small question, i always had the impression that soldiers fight better in groups because they felt more secure than alone, so why can't those archers think "hmm alone i won't stand a chance but with my buddies i can take them on!"

Is this true, and if so can't they make the TacAi be aware of frienlies in the area who might actually help?

[Michael Emrys]

I don't know. On the one hand, morale definitely improves in a group. On the other, what if everybody decides "I don't want to be the one the bad guys kill!"?

Michael

[Other Means]

i think the code would have to do a backwards LOS lookup. so if a unit A is in LOS of n units that can harm it, those n units then get a moral bonus proportional to n to counter cower, while A recieves a morale drop in proportion to the threat. that would work (...i think) for many on many situations.

and there is ---><--- this much chance of it happening in CMAK.

[CMplayer]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

I don't think that the Archer is a good choice to go hunting around with anyway, as the driver has to be out of position in order to fire the gun.

If the crews and their commanders had any sense they would train the maneuver. The driver backs up, jumps to the ground, they fire x-number of times, the driver gets back into his seat very quickly (having practiced it) and they drive away. Sure this is just speculation, but it's just as much speculation as the so called 'reasons' which Gorden related BFC as having given.

[CMplayer]

Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

I don't know. On the one hand, morale definitely improves in a group. On the other, what if everybody decides "I don't want to be the one the bad guys kill!"?

That's why soldiers train and have officers that give them orders. That's why there are little red heart icons on leaders in CM. That's why there should be a "!" tag for orders.

[CMplayer]

Originally posted by stikkypixie:

small question, i always had the impression that soldiers fight better in groups because they felt more secure than alone, so why can't those archers think "hmm alone i won't stand a chance but with my buddies i can take them on!"

Is this true, and if so can't they make the TacAi be aware of frienlies in the area who might actually help?

The problem with this, and the TacAI in general, is that we're talking about EXTREMELY ADVANCED algorithms. No matter how good of a programmer Charles might or might not be, no single person in a garage startup is going to solve all those problems. That's why I think the game should have a lot of SOPs to let the player tweak the TacAI. What the AI can't satisfactorily handle needs to be left up to the player. Covered arcs are a good example of this sort of command, but a full blown SOP screen, like in TacOps would be even better.

[Panzer76]

Originally posted by redwolf:

Panzer76, can you make the map and situation available? Was it a Quckickbattle? Where the Archers standing or coming with with "seek-hulldown"?

I used them as others pointed out, they should be used. It was a QB map, medium hills and med trees, Italy March 45. The Archers crested a hill in hull down position and with covered armour arcs over the roads. SO, they were in pos and waiting for it's prey. I dont know if it's worth mentioning but the Archer that chickend out didnt reverse, but fast moved forward. Of cos, that meant it exposed himself to other potential threats. It didnt matter though, I cancled his fast move order and targeted the PzIV, it died half a min later.

[Lawyer]

Originally posted by CMplayer:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Emrys:

I don't know. On the one hand, morale definitely improves in a group. On the other, what if everybody decides "I don't want to be the one the bad guys kill!"?

That's why soldiers train and have officers that give them orders. That's why there are little red heart icons on leaders in CM. That's why there should be a "!" tag for orders. </font>

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Panzer76:

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

Panzer76, can you make the map and situation available? Was it a Quckickbattle? Where the Archers standing or coming with with "seek-hulldown"?

I used them as others pointed out, they should be used. It was a QB map, medium hills and med trees, Italy March 45. The Archers crested a hill in hull down position and with covered armour arcs over the roads. SO, they were in pos and waiting for it's prey. I dont know if it's worth mentioning but the Archer that chickend out didnt reverse, but fast moved forward. Of cos, that meant it exposed himself to other potential threats. It didnt matter though, I cancled his fast move order and targeted the PzIV, it died half a min later. </font>

[Panzer76]

Originally posted by redwolf:

The map is forever lost, but the main thing here is that you have a hill where the Archers can be placed, and a PzIV 1.2 km away coming over a small hill with the hunt command.

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Panzer76:

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

The map is forever lost, but the main thing here is that you have a hill where the Archers can be placed, and a PzIV 1.2 km away coming over a small hill with the hunt command. </font>

I did that and the Archers stayed put.

That's why I say we need the exact map. The same thing happend with the ISU-122 in the monster tank thread: the behaviour could not be reproduced with a plain test map just having the same distances and hills and approximate positions. I had to re-important the map in question into a new quickbattle and reproduce it from there.

Not that it was worth the time...

[Sirocco]

This thread touches on one of what are, to me at least, two of the main issues with the CM engine. At the moment, units have little situational awareness.

In this example, the Archer knows *it* can spot the Pz.Kpfw IV, and it knows *the Pz.Kpfw IV* can spot it. What it can't take into consideration, with the current code, is that other friendly units are also targetting that particular target.

Were it to have that situational awareness, it would be much more likely to stand and fight, although, of course, it might still panic and withdraw, depending on the circumstances.

And that shortfall in the code isn't limited to armour. You see it most often with infantry. If you're advancing a squad over open ground, with the rest of the platoon overwatching, unless those overwatching squads have a good solution to any targets that engage the maneuvering squad, they won't fire.

Along with borg spotting, this is one of the two issues I'm expecting to be resolved in the next engine.