Neskire Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 I am playing the 2 Pounders and Tigers scenario PBEM. One of my M3s bogged on open ground. Is this bog another way of saying "random mechanical breakdown"? My tank was attempting a shoot and scoot...could a fast move increase a chance of bogging? :confused: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rabidbvr Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 hello one and all... Bogging means just that either in soft sand mud etc... and while trying to get out you can become imobile ie throw a track etc hope this helps happy hunting 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Russian Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Originally posted by Roger Eriksen: I am playing the 2 Pounders and Tigers scenario PBEM. One of my M3s bogged on open ground. Is this bog another way of saying "random mechanical breakdown"? My tank was attempting a shoot and scoot...could a fast move increase a chance of bogging? :confused: Bogging is just what you said it is. A one size fits all reason for a vehicle to quit moving forward. Whatever that reason is. Threw a track, killed the transmission, motor quit, whatever. Even stuck in the sand. Go figure... Panther Commander 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted March 11, 2004 Share Posted March 11, 2004 Yes, fast move does increase chance of bogging. Martin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Russian Posted March 12, 2004 Share Posted March 12, 2004 Originally posted by Moon: Yes, fast move does increase chance of bogging. Martin Does soft ground? Panther Commander 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted March 12, 2004 Share Posted March 12, 2004 Yes, soft ground increases chance of bogging. Dirt roads are prone to bogging too, at least if the conditions are "wet". I'm not sure if "damp" dirt roads are very bog-prone. Move slowly over wet dirt roads. Treeburst155 out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sand digger Posted March 12, 2004 Share Posted March 12, 2004 Got a forward moving Sherman 'bogged' once. Put it in reverse and it got out. Nice touch, AI. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted March 12, 2004 Share Posted March 12, 2004 Pure coincidence, Sand Digger. There is no movement order you can give that will get a vehicle "unstuck", or even increase the chances of it freeing itself. It is all just luck. Treeburst155 out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tar Posted March 12, 2004 Share Posted March 12, 2004 Yes, fast move does increase chance of bogging. Perhaps it increases the chance per unit time, but you will still go farther, on average, before bogging using "Fast Move" than plain "Move". If there is substantial risk of bogging, you should avoid Move and use Fast or Hunt instead. As far as I can tell, there really is no reason to use the Move command with vehicles in the CM series. I stopped doing it entirely, relying on Fast, Hunt and Reverse instead. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yeknodathon Posted March 12, 2004 Share Posted March 12, 2004 I should think the rate of boggs is a Jim. [ March 12, 2004, 04:19 AM: Message edited by: Yeknodathon ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted March 12, 2004 Share Posted March 12, 2004 Tar, Are you positive about that? My testing awhile back seemed to indicate otherwise. It was distance, not time, that bogging seemed to be tied to. I seem to remember slow moving units getting further on average without bogging. I could be wrong though. If you're POSITIVE, thanks for info. If you're not positive, I'll have to run some tests to answer the question with certainty. These little things must be known. Treeburst155 out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted March 12, 2004 Share Posted March 12, 2004 I am nearly certain that a test will prove Tar wrong. It's too long ago to dig it out but I remember vaguely that Charles had foreseen this potential loophole and made sure that the code remains realistic. In real life, in most cases, you would have a better chance to get further when moving slow, and that's how the code should work in CM. Martin 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted March 12, 2004 Share Posted March 12, 2004 And low ground causes more bogging than high ground. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted March 12, 2004 Share Posted March 12, 2004 Thanks, Moon! Sergei, I hadn't noticed that. A nice little gameplay tidbit. Thanks! Treeburst155 out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted March 12, 2004 Share Posted March 12, 2004 Well, I came to the same results as tar, independently: from my testing, fast move has a higher bog chance per time, but not per distance. What I believe this mismatch in opinions might be based on is that tar and I tested for continuous straight drive, which means rather high average tempo, due to lack of acceleration phases and curves. What Charles might have coded in is that mixed going in fast mode, that means including acceleration and curves, gets you less meters between bogging. Assuming that is correct, what is the more useful depends you your play: if you do actual combat permanently in mud, then you get more meters with "move". But if you try to stay on roads and only cross difficult ground from one road to another, and that in just one straight move, then you are better off in "fast". All that assuming my speculation is correct. This is hard to establish without source code. Also disclaimer: last test I did was somewhere in CMBB. But on the positive side, if the above is correct, I also think it is the most realistic thing to have: a straight fast dash through mud is often the best thing to do, but going max tempo while cruising around in mud just gets you bogged. [ March 12, 2004, 04:43 PM: Message edited by: redwolf ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted March 12, 2004 Share Posted March 12, 2004 Alright, that does it. I'll have to test this out again. The question is, which game to test it in? CMAK bogging is not nearly as bad as CMBB (although dirt roads may be worse). I'll go with CMBB because the knowledge is more useful in that game. Let's see what I can find out. I'm thinking up a good time vs distance test now. Treeburst155 out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted March 13, 2004 Share Posted March 13, 2004 Note that you need to make up your mind whether you want to test meters until bog or meters until immobilization. They should correlate linearly (probably with a crew quality factor) but immobilization is obviously easier to test because you can skip watching the turns. I would prefer you test CMAK as none of us did that yet but as you like 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted March 13, 2004 Share Posted March 13, 2004 Here's my test results. I'm not sure we learn anything from this. There could be a luck factor involved. 20 Regular Panther Ds travel a straight line through solid "mud" for 10 minutes on flat terrain at level 7 in CMBB. The test was run at "fast" speed, then again at "move" speed. Fast Speed results: 18,260 Panther Meters were traversed in 10 minutes. There were 3 Immobilizations, with one unit in a "Bogged" state at the end. Move Speed results: 14,280 Panther Meters were traversed at the end of 10 minutes. There were 3 Immobilizations, with TWO units in a "Bogged" state at the end. The fast movers did better! They covered 4,000 meters more in the time allowed, while suffering the same number of immobilizations. Did the 20 "Movers" get unlucky; or did the 20 "Fast Movers" get lucky? The Fast Movers had the same Immobilizations per minute, and less per meter travelled. Judging by this test, there is no bogging related reason to move slowly through mud. Something is wrong with my test. Maybe I don't have enough samples. I probably need to run several hundred Panthers through the course for each speed. As for CMAK, I did a comparison test between CMBB and CMAK shortly after CMAK was out. I started a thread on it. Bogging in CMAK is noticeably less likely to occur than in CMBB. Perhaps I can dig up the thread. I had some good numbers for that one. Treeburst155 out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted March 13, 2004 Share Posted March 13, 2004 I think a more useful - and quicker to do - test would be: "How many Panthers make it through 1000 meters at all, no matter how long it takes"? Do for both move and fast. That is the cardinal question when deciding how to cross from one road to another through mud or when temporarily leaving a road to fight from one specific combat position. It is also quicker to test because you just hit GO until everybody is either immobilized or crossed the 1000 meters and then you count the immobilized ones. I think your sample size needs at least to be 100 vehicles, that is what I used back then (5 runs of a 20 vehicle scenario). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted March 13, 2004 Share Posted March 13, 2004 Trying to determine the margin of error in my test...... If bogging is a function of time, my test should have shown some difference, if one exists, between "Move" and "Fast". The test ran for 200 minutes (20 Panthers x 10 minutes)at each speed. If there was a respectable difference between Fast and Move, based on time, I should have seen SOME difference in results, I think. If bogging is a function of distance, either the "Fast Movers" got lucky, or the "movers" were unlucky. How many kilometers would I have to move a Panther to determine Immobilizations per kilometer fairly accurately? It's a tough test to get a grip on. Treeburst155 out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted March 13, 2004 Share Posted March 13, 2004 You're right, Redwolf. I should run them until they cover a set distance or become "Immobilized". I think that's what I did before with my CMAK/CMBB comparison. Treeburst155 out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted March 13, 2004 Share Posted March 13, 2004 Out of 100 attempts to move the Regular Panther D at "fast" speed, over mud, a distance of 1,000 meters, there were 26 Immobilizatons. The same test at "move" speed saw 22 Immobilizations. I think the stats pros would say this is a statistical dead heat. With this test I have tried to determine the odds of becoming immobilized before travelling 1,000 meters. I have tried this for "Move" and "Fast" speeds. The difference in the immobilization chances for the two speeds cannot be determined with confidence without running the test about 500 more times, because the difference is not large. An alternative would be to double the attempted distance, which would double the odds of immobilization for both speeds, therefore doubling the difference between these odds, making the difference more perceptible. I lose either way however. I either do 500 one kilometer tests, or 250 two kilometer tests. I've a hunch the difference in immobization chance between the two speeds per kilometer attempted is about 10% in my specific test. However, that 10% may represent a 50% increase going from "move" to "fast". Even so, the bog chances are low enough at "move" that the 50% increase is not much of a concern IMO. I'll be moving fast over the mud from now on. Treeburst155 out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted March 13, 2004 Share Posted March 13, 2004 Use StuG IIIGs, the masters of CM bog. That's give you your statistically meaningful numbers much quicker. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted March 13, 2004 Share Posted March 13, 2004 If th StuG is twice as likely to bog as my Panther, I would get meaningful numbers twice as fast.....I think. Even so, I'd still need about 250 tests. It's a time consuming test, even clicking through it quickly. I've seen enough. I say run 'em hard through the mud if speed is preferred for some tactical reason. If you're not in a hurry, move slow to knock a LITTLE BIT off your bog chances. As for the time vs distance question which got me started on this testing, have my tests shed any light on that? I don't think so. Time would have to be constant, rather than distance, as in my first test. In fact, I don't think we can determine the time/distance question by testing. We would have to total all the time tanks managed to remain unbogged during a rather long, fixed time period. We would have to know the time of immobilization. Even then, how do we know distance wasn't what triggered the bog? I'll bet it's distance, because that makes more sense. Testing bogging is a PITA. I'm satisfied that "move" speed reduces chances of a bog; but not enough to prevent me from moving fast if I think there is a good tactical reason to do so. Treeburst155 out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Treeburst155 Posted March 13, 2004 Share Posted March 13, 2004 erased due to faulty reasoning Treeburst155 out. [ March 12, 2004, 11:57 PM: Message edited by: Treeburst155 ] 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.