Panzer Grenadiere in CMBB

[kappa]

i was wondering if there will be an option avalible in CMBB that allows troops to move

with the tank (using it as a partial "cover")

while attaking over an open plain.

e.g. you plot a path for your tank (at walking speed) and automatically a selected squad

will follow the same path behind it, allowing the squad to be less exposed, making the crossing of a open plain a little easier.

what are your opinions? :confused:

[Mattias]

I would advice against it in most cases.

Using a tank as cover means bunching up and if you are advancing over open spaces that is not what you want to do. A single well spread out squad is a much harder target to get at than a bunch of bone sacks clinging to a noisy and smoking 3 x 3 meter target which every weapon within sight are turning their attention to.

I don't mean to squash the idea, it's just that it is usually not a good thing to do. But making the tanks actually provide realistic cover would be nice.

M.

[TSword]

I would also like to see that, since it was common practice (whether good or bad is irrelevant).

I read somewhere from a german tankcommander that he critized exactly this tactic, because the tank attracts naturally a lot of fire towards him (but what would you do on the perfectly flat steppe ?).

Nevertheless it was common practise on both sides, especially for inexperienced troops.

But much more important, inf sitting in an armoured vehicle should be able to shoot from it, or atleast replace a wounded MG-gunner (Since it was the squad which operated the gun in a SPW), and they usually had 2 MG's at their disposal.

[kappa]

true, but in the game it dose not matter wether a tank or a squad moves onto a open plain they will both be spotted equally fast, plus in CM you can not spread out a squad, so instead of letting them advance without cover, you could just as well let them advance behind a tank.

[kappa]

madmatt,

any info on that?

[zukkov]

yes, it was common practice. infantry would hide behind the tank attempting to avoid small arms fire. but that question raises the bigger question, which has already been asked. and that question is whether or not the game should allow a "follow the leader" command. this was more in reference to a column of vehicles convoying down a road, but it's the same principle. also it would mean that units of varying experience levels would have to have the same delay. and lastly a tank would have to be recognized as cover(i'm not sure if that is currently in the game or not). personally, i would love to see that put into cmbb if it's not already part of the game's features.

[Michael Dorosh]

Isn't this a coding issue? I thought active vehicles could not provide cover for other units, or block LOS.

[kappa]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Isn't this a coding issue? I thought active vehicles could not provide cover for other units, or block LOS.

i did not know that.

so, active vehicles do not provide cover?

but they block LOS, dont they?

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by kappa:

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

Isn't this a coding issue? I thought active vehicles could not provide cover for other units, or block LOS.

i did not know that.

so, active vehicles do not provide cover?

but they block LOS, dont they?</font>

[kappa]

yes, but a knocked out tank dose block your LOS, dose it not? :confused:

[Doug Beman]

This has to do with how the CM engine treats terrain vs. vehicles. No vehicle-object can block LOS; the calculations necessary to do this correctly would significantly increase development time, etc. Once a tank/vehicle has been KO'd, the wrecked-vehicle .bmp becomes part of the terrain as far as the game engine is concerned, thereby blocking LOS.

DjB

[Mud]

Kappa, did you read his post? No, no, no, and asking again will not change the answer, until possibly after the engine rewrite for CM II (not CMBB).

[KNac]

this would need a lot of computer power because the game should update the position of each vehicle in the battle in a fraction of a second. however is possible with actual computers, but programming time is needed

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by kappa:

yes, but a knocked out tank dose block your LOS, dose it not? :confused:

Again NO..

"yes, but a knocked out tank dose block your LOS, dose it not?"

only if there the tank is burning and there is smoke coming from it, then the smoke blocks the LOS, the actual tank itself STILL does not block LOF and you can shoot right through it as though it was not there (With an area target order for instance directly through the KO'd Tank)

seriously

-tom w

[ May 06, 2002, 12:40 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[SF]

Off topic here, but are you the same Kappa from AH & AW?

[kappa]

Originally posted by SF:

Off topic here, but are you the same Kappa from AH & AW?

[kappa]

Originally posted by kappa:

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

Off topic here, but are you the same Kappa from AH & AW?

</font>

[sebastian]

Originally posted by KNac:

this would need a lot of computer power because the game should update the position of each vehicle in the battle in a fraction of a second.

updating the postion in a fraction of a second has to be done anyway, to make the vechicle move.

and CM is not simulated in real time anyway. the simulation is done in the background, and then visualised. currently this takes much less then the simulated time (60sec). with a realistc LOS, you would have to wait longer for the blue progress bar to fill. that's all.

the problem is that the postion of a infantry unit is abstracted to a single point. a tank would block the sight to the unit completely, or not at all. just like the houses do already.

i would prefer to use the cover-model of the stone walls: if infantry hides behind a stone wall, you still have LOS to it, but the exposure is low. a tank schould decrease the exposure of the unit behind him.

[ May 07, 2002, 06:03 AM: Message edited by: sebastian ]