Ooops - Whopper BUG with German Halftracks

[Ex Bellator]

I apologise if this is old news. I've just finished a TCP battle where my German opponent was using a platoon of SPW-250/10 Halftracks.

We have EFOW on and eventually the Halftracks get within range of my small arms and AT rifles. I am then very suprised that my ATRs refuse to shoot at them at all, but every kind of small arm down to a pistol opens up on them as soon as they can.

Eventually it dawns on me what is going wrong, the generic graphic for a Halftrack which isn't 100% ID'd is (rather stupidly) a Gun Tractor. It seems that this is fooling the Tac-AI into thinking it is a soft target!

Therfore the Halftracks are virtually invulnerable with EFOW on, as ATRs refuse to engage them and infantry insist on spraying them with harmless bullets.

I have a couple of screenshots if the BFC boys are interested. I'm afraid this needs an urgent fix.

[ParaBellum]

I encountered the same problem when I played the AI a few days ago. I was wondering what the AI was doing when it assaulted my positions with 4-5 gun tractors! I mean, I've seen the AI doing silly things but that was really scary.

I was even more astonished when I opened up on them with several MGs and a platoon of infatry less than 150m away and couldn't kill them.

After the AI surrendered, the "gun tractors" suddenly turned into various versions of the SdKfZ 251...

Yes, the vodka ration was cut drastically for my men after this incident...

[akdavis]

This, along with some sound contact issues, is a good argument for less generic unidentified unit markers. I understand not immediately identify the exact model of every vehicle or exact type of infantry unit, but sound and shape should provide a great deal more immediate information. For example, once in visual contact, halftracks should be identified by "Half-track?" Similarly, based on sound, mortars and ATRs should not receive the "infantry?" sound contact. Their sounds are unique and immediately identifiable.

[Silvio Manuel]

akdavis,

I agree but I bet this won't be addressed until CM 3 w/ the new engine.

[ October 26, 2002, 07:57 PM: Message edited by: Silvio Manuel ]

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Rex_Bellator:

I apologise if this is old news. I've just finished a TCP battle where my German opponent was using a platoon of SPW-250/10 Halftracks.

We have EFOW on and eventually the Halftracks get within range of my small arms and AT rifles. I am then very suprised that my ATRs refuse to shoot at them at all, but every kind of small arm down to a pistol opens up on them as soon as they can.

Eventually it dawns on me what is going wrong, the generic graphic for a Halftrack which isn't 100% ID'd is (rather stupidly) a Gun Tractor. It seems that this is fooling the Tac-AI into thinking it is a soft target!

Therfore the Halftracks are virtually invulnerable with EFOW on, as ATRs refuse to engage them and infantry insist on spraying them with harmless bullets.

I have a couple of screenshots if the BFC boys are interested. I'm afraid this needs an urgent fix.

If the AT rifles won't engage that sounds serious to game play to me.

Anyone else have anything to report on this issue?

-tom w

[Michael Emrys]

What confounds me is why halftracks should be indentified as gun tractors rather than the other way around. Red infantry would have encountered halftracks in the line more often and would have had more reason to be apprehensive about them. Thus they would have been more likely to identify doubtful contacts as halftracks.

By the same token, when playing the Germans, I have noticed their tendency to hastily identify all Soviet halftracks as M17s. This too strikes me as unlikely.

Michael

[Nippy]

After the AI surrendered, the "gun tractors" suddenly turned into various versions of the SdKfZ 251...

I've had this problem to as I play with nothing but EFOW. I had an entire platoon of Tanketts banging away at various "gun tractors" to no effect. All of them turned out to be 251 Ht's

[flamingknives]

Part of this is the refusal of ATRs to use Tungsten against soft targets.

Esp. the all tungsten loadouts (PTRD, PTRS, PzB39(?))

Why can't these be modelled as AP?

[Bone_Vulture]

I don't understand why wouldn't the AT rifle fire at ALL soft vehicles... Those rounds would make short work out of the engine & transmission.

[CMplayer]

Originally posted by Bone_Vulture:

I don't understand why wouldn't the AT rifle fire at ALL soft vehicles... Those rounds would make short work out of the engine & transmission.

Good point. Actually no, it's not. It's a VERY good point.

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Bone_Vulture:

I don't understand why wouldn't the AT rifle fire at ALL soft vehicles... Those rounds would make short work out of the engine & transmission.

Not to mention the crew or occupants

:eek: !!

-tom w

[Bone_Vulture]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

Not to mention the crew or occupants

:eek: !!

True; I wouldn't want to be driving a truck through a muddy field, if there was an 1337 Soviet AT team with their 5up3r 5n!p4r_r1fl3 on the opposite side.

[Ex Bellator]

The funniest part about this bug is seeing the absolute torrents of small arms fire pouring in from all sides and all ranges. I can imagine every Ivan tapping the man beside him, pointing and yelling 'Hey Comerade! Look at that! A dumb-ass Gun Tractor, that'll look great on our Kill sheet!'

Meanwhile, as every single un-hidden unit in range will literally empty their small arms magazines into it for no effect whatsoever, the ATR teams disdainfully look on, refusing to lower themselves to mere Gun Tractors.

As German Halftracks are being thought of a Soft targets, about the only thing they need to fear is an HE loaded gun, nothing else will hurt them as AP rounds will never be fired at them.

When the battle is over, and the Gun Tractor which is sat 50m in front of the Soviet positions suddenly is revealed as a Halftrack, I swear I can almost hear the Halftrack crew saying 'Ta-daaaaaaa!'. Then if you get close to the foxholes, you can hear Ivans with empty weapons slapping their foreheads and responding with a Russian 'D'oh!'

[Nolloff]

Could it be that this is related to an armor arc command (I hope it´s the right term as I own the German version). Did you assign one to the units which didn´t fire? I´ve seen this happen with Russian recon vehicles which did not get treated as armor in combination with the arc by my German AT guns.

Nolloff

[Ex Bellator]

No!

[James Crowley]

I've not had CMBB long enough to notice this but if AT rifles are not/unable to target anything other than "hard" targets, then IMO there is a major problem with their useage.

As a real AT asset they are extremely limited; which is why they were also used extensively in street-fighting and built-up areas (firing into and at buildings - which could be regarded as hard targets)

Tanks can be instructed to target soft targets with AP and even (as it says in the manual)'fausts will sometimes be used against infantry. So why not AT rifles?

This wouldn't seem to be too much of a problem to fix, assuming BFC agree that it is "broken".

[PeterX]

As a real AT asset they are extremely limited; which is why they were also used extensively in street-fighting and built-up areas (firing into and at buildings - which could be regarded as hard targets)

IMO, the Soviet ATR team is the single most useless unit in CMBB. They're not worth the mouse clicking required to move them out of the Allied Setup Zone.

In a recent QB, three of these unter-teams had multiple side shots on a Lynx at <20m for no effect. The Lynx, however, showed more respect than I would have, given past results, and reversed smartly out of 'danger'.

Yet,IIRC, the penetration of the AT rifles is rated at 37 and the Lynx's side armor at 30.

[ October 27, 2002, 09:27 AM: Message edited by: PeterX ]

[Michael Dorosh]

I think the solution is to have two different unidentified vehicle types - "armoured halftrack" and "unarmoured halftrack" - not that a Russian could tell from a distance how much armour a vehicle had, naturally, but the distinctive shape of the 251 would lead the Red Army to guess that some model of 250 or 251 was coming his way (and not the distinctive look of the Sd Kfz 6 or 7)

[Ex Bellator]

Guys, just to clarify, incase I am confusing people as usual, the problem is nothing to do with ATRs, they are just a symptom.

The problem is that because a Gun Tractor is being showed for any unknown German Halftrack the TAC-AI assumes that the Halftrack is a Soft Target.

I would guess the fix is simply to substitute another German Halftrack model for the generic Gun Tractor now being shown.

[Edit] MD makes a valid point though, a Gun Tractor and a Halftrack are going to need different 'Unknown' generic graphics if they haven't already. Otherwise with my fix suggestion, the TAC-AI might start thinking actual Gun Tractors are now Hard targets

[ October 27, 2002, 10:05 AM: Message edited by: Rex_Bellator ]

[PeterX]

Rex posted:

Guys, just to clarify, incase I am confusing people as usual, the problem is nothing to do with ATRs, they are just a symptom.

Sorry for the somewhat OT digression but I feel the ineffectuality of ATR teams may merit a thread on its own.

[Bone_Vulture]

Originally posted by PeterX:

IMO, the Soviet ATR team is the single most useless unit in CMBB. They're not worth the mouse clicking required to move them out of the Allied Setup Zone.

In a recent QB, three of these unter-teams had multiple side shots on a Lynx at <20m for no effect. The Lynx, however, showed more respect than I would have, given past results, and reversed smartly out of 'danger'.

Yet,IIRC, the penetration of the AT rifles is rated at 37 and the Lynx's side armor at 30.

As I haven't seen anyone answering this one yet, I'd like to point out one thing. The AT rifles fire rather small, solid slugs. If the targeted tank has a properly tempered armor there'll be no spalling, and the slug penetrates the tank "clean", without hitting any critical items, or wounding the crew.

[xerxes]

You haven't faced ATRs with early war thin skinned tanks, HTs and ACs have you? ATRs pound these vehicles hard at long range and the ATR is rather difficult to detect. I've had an ATR gun damage my PzIV swinging the tide of an entire battle.

But that's off topic, gun tractors would be awfully rare in the field of view of the enemy, unidentified units should be seen as high probability units or greatly feared units. (neither of which is a gun tractor I think)

[PeterX]

Never mind...

I just ran some idle tests. The ATR teams WERE able to kill some AFVs at close range, including a STUG. I didn't see any misidentifying HTs as tractors either.

[ October 27, 2002, 12:08 PM: Message edited by: PeterX ]

[Renaud]

IMO, the Soviet ATR team is the single most useless unit in CMBB. They're not worth the mouse clicking required to move them out of the Allied Setup Zone.

They are a great hazard to most armored cars and all HT-type vehicles. In fact the risk posed by cheap and plentiful ATR's is enough to keep german HT and AC's far back. Consider them 'HT/AC repellent'. Note that I haven't experienced the reported problem with halftracks being identified as prime movers and thus avoiding AT fire.

In one scenario I stopped the advance of a AI PZIV platoon with 2 flank ATR's. When the ATR's penetrated the sides of the PZIV's at 80 meters or so, the whole platoon stopped advancing, then later backed up and milled around in confusion for the remainder of the game. (The platoon HQ tank backed up into a infantry AT ambush and got grenade-killed)

If you hide all your units you will get very poor spotting and vehicle-ID. I always keep at least one HQ unit with good FOV not hidden so they can spot and correctly ID things for me. Keep em far back or with restricted fire arc so they don't open fire.

I agree that ATR's should be able to fire at softskinned vehicles. Haven't had occasion to need this yet.

Ren

[ October 27, 2002, 12:12 PM: Message edited by: Renaud ]

[James Crowley]

Hmmm.

Just done a small test (yes, yes, I know)which produced some interesting (depending on your point of view) results.

Two AT rifles (S and D) 1943, both 100% tungsten ammo.

One marder, one rifle platoon,(both de-ammo'ed) one gun tractor and one truck.

Distance between opponents about 180m

I targeted the truck and the inf platoon. No go.

They targeted the marder and peppered it with about 25 shots - mixture of partial and full penetrations, track hits and richochets and got, from the Russian perspective, a recorded "knock-out".(interestingly, from the German viewpoint the marder had a gun hit and the crew were panicked. So no brew-up or bail-out, but still showed up to the Russian as a KO)

One of the AT rifles then mis-identified the gun tractor as a halftrack, fired at it and got a recorded "hit". It then correctly ID'ed it and promptly stopped firing.

Neither AT rifle could be persuaded to fire on the squad, the truck or the tractor from then on.

The German squad, showing "low" ammo didn't engage the AT rile teams at all, presumably because they posed no threat to them (?)(would it have if the AT rifle had fired at it?)

This doesn't seem quite right.

AT rifles were obviously designed to fire at tanks but why wouldn't they target almost anything else if there are no tanks around.

They would be at least as effective against infantry as a sharpshooter and should be able to disable any non-armoured vehicle even if it took several shots.

Are they programmed not to see infantry as a threat?

Perhaps AT rifles could be allowed to shoot at soft targets (just as AT guns can)with the player having the option to use the cover-armour command if preference is needed for armoured targets.

As far as the AI is concerned, perhaps armour should be the programmed priority but if there is none in sight, other, soft, targets could be selected. If not, then AT rifle teams, chosen either by the computer or the player, are about as much use as a choclate teapot in battles where the oppostion have no armour.