DUST complaint & suggestion

[BDW]

After playing CMAK for a few days I have come to the conclusion the dust FX as currently implemented do not reflect my understanding of how dust behaves in reality.

I tested the dust the following way: hot, dry map, no wind. I dropped 20,000 pts of 300mmm rockets in a pre-planned arty barrage on turn 1 (wow that was fun!). I would expect THE MOTHER OF ALL DUST CLOUDS to be kicked up and linger on the map for many turns. Instead, the dust was gone by the end of the next turn! In other words, there was no cumulative effect of heavy shelling reflected with the dust effect.

I am very happy to see dust FX in the game finally, but the effect should take into consideration all of the following factors:

- ground type

- wet vs dry

- wind

- size of shell

- number of shells hitting within a certain radius of each shell

Therefore, a single shell hitting wet ground on a windy day will have a very short and small dust effect. Whereas, twenty 300mm rockets landing on dry ground within 50m of each other on a calm day will create a large, lingering dust cloud.

Also, the same logic might apply to vehicles on the move: A single jeep will kick up less dust of shorter duration than a column of Tigers.

If not patchable for CMAK, then consider it a request for CM Deux.

thanks

[MikeyD]

Ummm... I think that's mostly how it works already. Drop a few 25 pdr rounds into the middle of the Sahara and you get big dust clouds. Miss with an AP round and its smaller. A mortar round is smaller still. A fast moving vehicle raises more dust than a hunting vehicle. And I believe the dust will linger longer (I love that word combination ) on still days than on rainy windy days... at least it does with collapsed buildings.

[BDW]

I don't think you read my post closely enough, or maybe I was not as clear as I should have been.

What is missing is a cumulative effect on size and duration based on the factors I listed.

Yes, an AP round makes a smaller dust cloud than a 25pdr, but 300 AP rounds hitting the same spot at the same time should kick up a much larger dust cloud that lasts longer than the cloud created by the individual round.

I think the problem now is that the engine handles dust clouds separately for each round. What I would like to see is the following:

If two rounds land right next to each other, then there is a single, larger dust cloud created (rather than two separate dust clouds of short duration)

[Michael Emrys]

I think you may have a point, but it is not as strong as you may be thinking. The length of time dust hangs in the air, assuming constant atmopheric conditions, is dependent on particle size and weight and how high into the air it is blown. The quantity of dust blown into the air has nothing to do with duration, though it will of course effect the size and density of the cloud.

So, larger shells should produce longer lasting clouds, but only because they tend to blow dust and debris higher into the air. Should they last longer than a minute after the shells stop going off? Maybe, maybe not. See, the thing is how dense does the dust have to be to be counted for the effects that CM is tracking, and that hasn't been specified yet.

Michael

[CMplayer]

This reminds me of how humorous it is when adjacent tiles are on fire. You can shoot between all the separate columns of smoke.

[BDW]

Michael,

Good point. It was my understanding that the physics work like this: round 1 throws up dust cloud, then round two lands near same spot sending more dust into air and also propelling existing dust cloud higher into the air, thereby creating a larger dust cloud that lasts longer.

Also, when a shell explodes, it is not just dust from the ground, there is a smoke element as well, right?

[Kingfish]

Originally posted by BDW:

Michael,

Good point. It was my understanding that the physics work like this: round 1 throws up dust cloud, then round two lands near same spot sending more dust into air and also propelling existing dust cloud higher into the air, thereby creating a larger dust cloud that lasts longer.

Also, when a shell explodes, it is not just dust from the ground, there is a smoke element as well, right?

Unless the second round is packing more explosives (and thus releases more kinetic energy) I can't see how the second shell will propel the first dust cloud any higher. As I see it, it will only create the same dust cloud in terms of size and duration, only now twice as dense.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by BDW:

Michael,

Good point. It was my understanding that the physics work like this: round 1 throws up dust cloud, then round two lands near same spot sending more dust into air and also propelling existing dust cloud higher into the air, thereby creating a larger dust cloud that lasts longer.

Also, when a shell explodes, it is not just dust from the ground, there is a smoke element as well, right?

I think the effects you mention are probably too negligible to be tracked by CM. In other words, we have now split the hairs so fine we can't see them well enough to make further cuts.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

One thing I would very much like to see in CMx2 though is progressive degradation of LOS over distance after taking all efects into consideration. As it is now, LOS tends to be binary, you have it or you don't. The exception is LOS which passes through vegetation, which seems to be progressive sometimes.

If this were done, then a dense dust cloud would block LOS closer to the spotter than a more tenuous one, even if their dimensions were the same.

Michael

[tar]

I thought that line of sight always had progressive deterioration. Doesn't LOS degrade with distance even over clear terrain? Or only if it actually lines on the ground?

Although more of a haze effect would be welcome.

[BDW]

I agree wholeheartedly about adding degradation of LOS through smoke/dust.

Re: the dust - I still insist that the more dust put into the air, the longer the dust cloud will exist, due to the cumulative effects. It is the effect of fine dust carried on the air that I am talking about. You cannot tell me that if a hundred 300mm shells landed in one spot of dry earth on a dry day that the dust cloud created would disappear within a minute. You would have a large, dense cloud that would be carried on the breeze and would therefore exist at a higher density for a longer duration than that from a single shell.

Now I am going to have to test this in real life, damnit. Anyone have some 300mm rockets I can borrow?

[junk2drive]

I live in the arizona desert. my commute includes a shortcut of 2 miles of "dirt" road. speed 35-45 mph. i can see other vehicle dust trails in the near distance, and my own out the back. in terms of turn time one minute, my dust lasts one to two turns on calm days, not long when windy 20-30 mph.

never been to afrika tho.

dust never lasts when im hiding, last too long when im trying to shot at the enemy, lol

[PeterX]

I thought that line of sight always had progressive deterioration.

Well, yes, That's why the LOS line turns from bright blue to blue to dark blue. Unless I'm missing something. (Which is a possibility)

[BDW]

When it comes to smoke or dust, the LOS tool seems to become binary. In other words, it would be nice to have partial line of site (think dark blue bar) a certain distance into the smoke/dust cloud - the same way it works for targeting into woods.

This way you would be able to target enemies near the edge of the dust/smoke.

[CMplayer]

Also, I'm pretty sure that the total range from firer to target should influence LOS through dust. What I mean is that there could be cases where two LOS go through the exact same dust cloud, that LOS would be blocked if the total range is 1000 meters, but relatively clear if they're only 50 meters from each other. The longer the total range, the more that half-transparant dustclouds become totally obscurant. Especially the farther the cloud is from the viewer. (this could actually lead to cases where LOS is NOT two way, i.e. one can see out of some things that the other guy has a harder time seeing into)

[GreenAsJade]

Sheesh! Now we have dust grogs!!

[Michael Emrys]

Grogs are grogs and willing to split hairs on any subject they've even remotely heard of.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by PeterX:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />I thought that line of sight always had progressive deterioration.

Well, yes, That's why the LOS line turns from bright blue to blue to dark blue. Unless I'm missing something. (Which is a possibility) </font>