yunfat Posted October 17, 2002 Share Posted October 17, 2002 Here is the text from a conversation in the forum, my question involved foxhole spotting. Should they have the same abilities as troops and guns to dissapear and reappear? 04:49 PM yunfat: does any notice that in CMBB you can see foxholes even when you cant see the units in them, am I alone in thinking this is a bug, a big one 04:49 PM yunfat: ? 04:50 PM Rune: but i can do one better 04:50 PM Jarmo_abse: no no no no 04:50 PM Rune slaps Jarmo with the GI COmbat demo 04:50 PM Jarmo_abse: shhheeettt 04:50 PM Jarmo_abse: ah, didnt see it 04:50 PM yunfat: all i seem to do on attacks is target foxholes, even when it shows there are no troops in them I know they are there 04:50 PM Jarmo_abse: was going to download it today 04:51 PM Rune: ask wacky 04:51 PM Jarmo_abse: but then downloaded the need for speed demo instead 04:51 PM Rune: yunfat not necessarily true 04:51 PM Rune: i can set premade foxholes 04:51 PM Jarmo_abse: it sucked 04:51 PM Jarmo_abse: I often place fallback foxholes forward 04:52 PM Rune: as do i 04:52 PM Jarmo_abse: just to play mind games 04:52 PM yunfat: Rune, all I am saying is, the foxhole remains visible even when the troops in the foxhole are not 04:52 PM Rune: give that to matt 04:52 PM yunfat: maybe its a mac thing 04:52 PM Jarmo_abse: it's not so strange 04:52 PM Rune: but so you know, they dont necessarily have troops in them 04:53 PM Jarmo_abse: when you dig a foxhole, you usually have a big pile of dirt around it 04:53 PM yunfat: Rune, yes they do, i know from the AAR that they were there, and that I eliminated them 04:53 PM Jarmo_abse: easily spottable 04:54 PM yunfat: i think its a bug, how can you see a foxhole. which appears empty, but you cannot see the gun in the foxhole? 04:54 PM Jarmo_abse: gun is one thing, ok 04:54 PM yunfat: yet in the AAR the gun is clearly there 04:54 PM Jarmo_abse: but infantry can stay down invisible 04:55 PM yunfat: jarmo, well, they arent invisible to my area fire, because when I see a foxhole all i have to do is target it and the troops in it almost always die 04:56 PM Jarmo_abse: yeah, I dont see that as wrong, as long as you're shooting HE 04:57 PM yunfat: so you think its cool to see a foxhole, yet not be able to see a full squad in the foxhole, thats absurd 04:57 PM Jarmo_abse: I'd suggest posting on the BFC forum, rather than reporting it as bug 04:57 PM Jarmo_abse: yeah, that's about it 04:58 PM Rune: Jarmo has military experience with the tings 04:58 PM Rune: things 04:58 PM Jarmo_abse: if someone digs a hole in the ground it's easily visible 04:58 PM yunfat: jarmo, for example, a gun fire at one of my tanks, I cant see the gun, but I can see the foxhole, and I know the gun is in the foxhole, thats absurd 04:59 PM yunfat: i agree that maybe troops can be hidden 04:59 PM Jarmo_abse: but if you're in the hole, below ground level, you cant be seen 04:59 PM Jarmo_abse: I agree gun should be seen if the hole is seen 05:00 PM yunfat: jarmo, by your reasoning you should see a foxhole before you see enemy troops then, but this isnt the case, the foxhole only becomes visible after the troops in it have revealed themselves 05:01 PM yunfat: so, when the troops in the foxhole dissapear, I still know they are in there 05:01 PM yunfat: and i can blow them to shreds 05:01 PM Jarmo_abse: I think I've seen foxholes before the troops in them 05:02 PM yunfat: well, the troops who built those foxholes arent competent then 05:02 PM Jarmo_abse: but yes, if they go down, they can be "unseen" 05:02 PM Jarmo_abse: yeah, I think it's a "hasty foxhole", not hidden too well 05:02 PM Jarmo_abse: or hidden at all 05:03 PM yunfat: jarmo, but in CM there is only one type of foxhole 05:03 PM yunfat: in CMBB its the hasty "Im over here" kind 05:03 PM Jarmo_abse: I'd like there be more, but right. 05:03 PM Jarmo_abse: but it's not like it's visible a mile away 05:04 PM Jarmo_abse: except after it's first seen 05:04 PM yunfat: once troops reveal themselves, they are dead, at least in CMBB, i just tagret the are around the foxhole and everyone seems to die 05:05 PM Jarmo_abse: if you have that much a superior firepower, then I guess so 05:06 PM yunfat: if my tanks are in the area, i just area fire behind foxhole and everyone dies 05:06 PM yunfat: no way to escape 05:06 PM Jarmo_abse: tanks are nice that way 05:06 PM yunfat: guns and troops disapear, but where they are hiding doesnt, 05:07 PM yunfat: i just think thats weird 05:07 PM Jarmo_abse: escaping is difficult in BB 05:07 PM Rune: no it isn't 05:07 PM Jarmo_abse: I suppose it could go down to "last location marker" 05:07 PM Rune: just have to use support fire to escape 05:07 PM Rune: leaps and bounds 05:07 PM Rune: have a nice scenario that will teach that 05:07 PM Rune: 05:08 PM Jarmo_abse: any suggestions perhaps? 05:09 PM yunfat: jarmo, yeah, make foxholes as hard to spot as the troops in them, and give them the ability to dissapear once the troops in them stop giving up their location, either by muzzleflash or sound 05:09 PM Jarmo_abse: the troops would still leave a location marker.. 05:10 PM yunfat: yes, but many times those location markers are innacurate, which I like 05:10 PM Rune: but once a foxhole was spotted, why would it disappear 05:10 PM Rune: the infantry i can understand, they hide 05:10 PM Rune: just asking 05:11 PM yunfat: Rune, because when a foxhole opens up on you, odds are you arent looking straight at it, or you would be dead 05:11 PM yunfat: the troops that do spot it die 05:11 PM Rune: but once spotted, why would you forget where it was? 05:11 PM yunfat: because the troops that spotted it are now eliminated 05:11 PM Rune: and if they dont die? 05:12 PM Rune: all or nothing, remember 05:12 PM Jarmo_abse: relative spotting = engine rewrite 05:12 PM Rune: not relative spotting yet 05:12 PM Rune: exactly 05:12 PM yunfat: then they are so paniced, they cannot give an accurate location 05:12 PM Jarmo_abse: fat minds think alike 05:13 PM Rune: yunfat, even in the most stressed situation, you dont forget something that could kill you 05:13 PM Rune: that is from experience 05:13 PM yunfat: im saying that many pillboxes in WW2, and many foxholes, you wouldnt even notice if you walked right over them 05:14 PM yunfat: this of course is the exception 05:14 PM *** Mambo_Up_For_a_Game_CMBO has signed off IRC (Connection reset by peer) 05:15 PM yunfat: Rune, even if you did know the location, you wouldnt stick your neck out to point it out to someone else if half your platoon was just eliminated, you would tell someone when you found cover, "its over there somewhere" 05:15 PM yunfat: and "I'm not going back" 05:15 PM Rune: no, as a platoon/squad leader, i say "at this section of the map are dug in units" 05:15 PM Rune: or 05:16 PM Rune: 50 meters to the left of those trees are foxholes 05:16 PM Rune: you do not need to stick your head out to do it 05:16 PM Rune: remember a fixhole is not one foxhole, rather a series of them 05:17 PM yunfat: rune, yes, but wouldnt that mean a generic marker, and not a fixed location? 05:17 PM Rune: or even a foxhole 05:17 PM yunfat: rune, as in when troops dissapear, even when they stay in the same location 05:17 PM Rune: depends on the situation and terrin, you can be rather exact 05:17 PM Rune: or not, depending on the circumstances 05:18 PM yunfat: rune, well, every foxhole i have spotted has stayed fixed, and i dont think that realistic, but opinions are like assholes i guess 05:19 PM Rune: i see your point, but for each one, there would be a time you COULD see the foxhole 05:19 PM *** Guest25398 (java@=DQw66848.upc-d.chello.nl) has joined #Lobby 05:19 PM *** Guest25398 is now known as Screeny 05:19 PM Rune: and until they have randomness included, it could not be done 05:19 PM yunfat: i think that troops in certain foxholes can eliminate or rout the troops that spot them, and then they "lose" the location, thats what i would like 05:19 PM Rune: for example, the t34s armour changed from factory to factory 05:20 PM Rune: but what is a certain foxhole 05:20 PM Rune: see the can of worms? 05:20 PM *** Guest36631 (java@=lr00_465_271_954.eugn.uswest.net) has joined #Lobby 05:20 PM Rune: t34s, talked long and hard with charles about a log log feature that would vary the amount of armour from tank to tank 05:20 PM Rune: but that then means each units has to have a history 05:20 PM Rune: lots of coding 05:21 PM Rune: same thing here 05:21 PM Jarmo_abse: ding 05:21 PM *** Jarmo_absentminded has left #Lobby 05:21 PM yunfat: rune, well, when you see muzzleflash coming from a foxhole, or a gun, then the foxhole can be fixed, but lets say you just have a recon team out and they get eliminated, all of them, how do they communicate the postion of that foxhole, they dont 05:21 PM Rune: but in the engine they do 05:22 PM Rune: cannot be changed until the rewrite 05:22 PM Rune: think of it as a toggle 05:22 PM Rune: either spotted or not 05:22 PM yunfat: rune, im not saying its wrong, im saying that i think its wrong, you guys know more about real war than I do 05:22 PM Rune: remember, you are talking fortifications, and not units 05:22 PM Rune: no, i agree with you in certain circumstances 05:23 PM Rune: but unfortunately, hard to code those in 05:23 PM *** Stix (stix243@211.26.74.gg090=) has joined #Lobby 05:23 PM Rune: heya stix 05:24 PM tlkiileric: night all 05:24 PM *** tlkiilerich has signed off IRC (QUIT: User exited) 05:24 PM Rune: i am hoping for stuff like what you suggest in the rewrite 05:24 PM GravesRegi: just took out a KV with a hungarian hand grenade 05:24 PM yunfat: see, in woods the troops in the foxholes just dsappear, but i know where they are because of the foxhole, either the troops dont build well hidden foxholes, or the foxhole should be hidden to the same degree as the troops in them 05:25 PM Rune: Graves, sure it was a grenade? 05:25 PM yunfat: thats all i am saying 05:26 PM Rune: like i said, in certain circumstances i agree, but not all cases 05:26 PM Rune: and can't code randomness like that now 05:26 PM yunfat: rune, also, how does a gun dissapear, and the foxhole doesnt? 05:27 PM *** Guest97033 (java@=LQfjox-umx781-239.genuity.com) has joined #Lobby 05:27 PM Rune: that you have a point 05:27 PM Rune: i agree with, liek i said, send that to matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renaud Posted October 17, 2002 Share Posted October 17, 2002 Not sure what the problem is here. I can easily imagine spotting piled-up dirt or other tell-tales of earthworks and excavations, before you see the troops in them. Or the other way around, seeing gun flashes and smoke signatures, then the gun, then the earthworks. Troops reappearing and disappearing in earthworks, then losing sight of the earthworks, then gaining sight of the troops and earthworks again, also makes sense to me. Sounds like a good way to spoof a enemy who likes to use 'recon by fire' on foxholes. Place a lot of dummy foxholes and trenches so they will waste ammo. Ren Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaiser Soze 71 Posted October 18, 2002 Share Posted October 18, 2002 That would be a good tactics - making dummy foxholes & trenches Like in Winter War, Finns slowed down the Russian advance by digging holes in the road and then putting the sand back to those holes. It looked like the road was hastly mined and the Russians had to check every hole while the tanks were waiting Improvising is important! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameroon Posted October 18, 2002 Share Posted October 18, 2002 The way I see it, seeing foxholes (units or no units) is entirely realistic. And units hiding is also realistic (ok, maybe guns are an exception here). What is unrealistic is being able to see things that some unit does not see. Until we get that (relative spotting), it would be, IMHO, out of place for a permanent, non-moving object to appear and disappear off the map. In other words, why should foxholes disappear "randomly" when other non-moving objects do not? Yes, it is perhaps more tactically significant than other things (like knocked out vehicles). However, I think it would be mismatched without relative spotting. Hope that was clear and made sense, even if it isn't agreed with Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts