'HULL DOWN' vs. unknown enemy position?

[vanwag]

So in a QB I had wanted to move my Panther G up the back of a hill using Fast Move, then draw a Hull Down point to a salient about 500m away where I thought some IS2's would emerge from. Problem is that the Panther kept moving all the way to the end of the Hull Down waypoint.

When using Hull Down, does the enemy have to be ID'd? If there is no Hull Down possible, how do you keep your tank from driving alll over the Eastern Front looking for one?

Thanks!

[Matias]

I've had the same experience so I keep meaning to do a test to figure out exactly how and when to use Seek Hull Down - darn Quick Battles!

You're probablly already doing this but I've gotten into the habit of just using Hunt, Cover Arc and Shoot & Scoot. Planned right (cresting hills and pointing the turret in the suspected direction of the enemy) they tend to leave me in hull down position once the fur starts flying.

I do find it worrysome though because as I've learned how to use each of the more esoteric commands, Advance, Assault, Shoot & Scoot, etc. I've kept discovering how crucial they are to winning the game! I will be watching this thread with keen interest...

[Vergeltungswaffe]

That is typical behavior, if your Panther had no target. It will go along your order line to the end. If you have a definite target, you should put the order marker on top of the intended target, and use a cover armor, of course. But, be damn sure that the terrain is favorable for finding hull-down.

I rarely use this command. I prefer to find a small crest or ridgeline and then use shoot and scoot, if my opponent has equal or superior AFV's, or at least till I know whats out there, or a short hunt just to the edge of the ridge if I think my AFV is superior. That way it will be hull-down anyway.

[Redwolf]

This has nothing to to with presense or identification of enemies.

There problem is that there was no hulldown position relative to the point you indicated. Typically this is the result of accidentially placing the point on the reverse slope instead of on top of a ridgeline, so that the point is never visible before actually moving there.

I had that enough times already that I don't regularily use seek-hulldown anymore, besides other issues with the command as indicated in the "monster tanks retreated part 2" thread.

Classic "hunt" seems to be about right, you hunt into what you think will be a hulldown position and inspect whether it actually is hulldown the next turn. If you screw up, you are hull-up. But of you screw up in seek-hulldown, then you end up going through the open altogether, plus the risk of bogging. It makes a difference what kind of situation and what kind of vehicle I have. A strong heavy slow tank has better use for seek-hulldown than a swift tank with thin side armor.

[Krazy Canuck]

When using Hull Down, does the enemy have to be ID'd? If there is no Hull Down possible, how do you keep your tank from driving alll over the Eastern Front looking for one?

Thanks! [/QB]

[Matias]

Redwolf, your instructions seems good and clear, however they seem to conflict with my experience.

In playing the second 'tutorial' scenario for CMBB, when I got to the bit where I was supposed to place my assault guns hull down to the town I ended up with them wandering out into the open onto the reverse slope (and incedentally getting popped). For thoose not familliar with the scenario imagine a simple ridge with my AFVs on one side and a town on the other (hidden from their view). I fast moved them halfway up the slope, then placed the seek waypoint in the town. Now I suppose what could have happened is that the terrain model was telling my drivers that they were in LOS with the town although it appeared very different in the interface....

Guess the test to run (I will later this weekend if no one beats me to it) is to start with a tank on the near side of a ridge with a target on the other side (say a pillbox facing the wrong way). Then test LOS to the pill box, and note the point at which the line turns black. Plot seek to the pill box and see if the tank stops right around the area where the LOS check failed (I guess this has to be a sharp ridge or else it would go farther). If thats the case the trick is simply to check you dont already have LOS to the seek point, cause if you do your AFV will go a huntin'...

'Course seems like if it was that simple the interface itself could do the check and warn the user / reject the command (seek hull down waypoint cant be placed in LOS like a move point cant be placed in impassable terrain).

Any thoughts folks?

[Redwolf]

I agree with the "should and could warn" part.

I don't understand why your example is different from what I said. Looks like the same situation for me. This command is less impressive than very.

[ December 06, 2002, 10:39 PM: Message edited by: redwolf ]

[Matias]

Redwolf,

You're right! Your example is the same as mine, I got your post confused with KC's while replying... I was just looking to simplify the example he gave into a test case...

[Frunze]

OK, people have been saying that if a tank doesn't achieve hull-down it will keep going. Could this be fixed by making the tank with this order stop as soon as it gets LOS? I mean, if a tank has LOS, but is not hull-down, moving forward won't make it hull-down under any circumstances, will it? If anything, moving forward will only expose more of the tank.

[Redwolf]

Yes

[Moon]

Imagine a dip in the ground X meters ahead of your position. Your tank could have LOS along the way, but would only achieve hull-down status once inside that dip.

[CombinedArms]

Originally posted by Moon:

Imagine a dip in the ground X meters ahead of your position. Your tank could have LOS along the way, but would only achieve hull-down status once inside that dip.

I'm not sure I'm reading this right but it sounds to me like some people are trying to use "seek hulldown" to cover long distances cross country--say 500m? Do I have that right? If so, I don't think that's the general idea of the command. I think what Moon is saying is you use it to cover say the last 50m up to a ridgeline or little rise, expecting the tank to pause in the dip or behind the crest where it achieves effective hulldown status. I think unless you've already visualized the approximate location of the hulldown position and it's not very far ahead, you may be misusing the command.

[Frunze]

Moon, I see your point. That doesn't seem terribly common though - it's more common to find hull-down postitions behind a ridge.

CombinedArms, that's not necessarily the problem. Even if you're only a short distance from where you think there's a hull-down position, the place you intend to target may be a long way ahead. And that's where you have to place the hull-down waypoint.

Oh well, the manual does warn us that the hull-down command is best used out of contact with the enemy.

[Redwolf]

Moon, your point is valid but this disadvantage has to be weighted against the disadvantage of driving right to the enemy Gulaschkanone.

From my point of view, the current seek-hulldown command requires that the user can manually inspect the terrain to verify there actually is a hulldown position where he wants, otherwise he risks the charge of death. If the CM engine would allow this kind of manual/optical terrain inspection by the player, the seek-hulldown command wouldn't be neccessary in first place.

[CombinedArms]

Originally posted by Frunze:

CombinedArms, that's not necessarily the problem. Even if you're only a short distance from where you think there's a hull-down position, the place you intend to target may be a long way ahead. And that's where you have to place the hull-down waypoint.

Oh well, the manual does warn us that the hull-down command is best used out of contact with the enemy.

OK, I guess maybe I'm the one who has misunderstood the Seek Hulldown command. You're actually supposed to stick the waypoint out at the point you want to be hulldown TOO? That does seem a bit weird. I think I'll stick with the Hunt command for all but very limited applications.

[tabpub]

Originally posted by CombinedArms:

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

CombinedArms, that's not necessarily the problem. Even if you're only a short distance from where you think there's a hull-down position, the place you intend to target may be a long way ahead. And that's where you have to place the hull-down waypoint.

Oh well, the manual does warn us that the hull-down command is best used out of contact with the enemy.

OK, I guess maybe I'm the one who has misunderstood the Seek Hulldown command. You're actually supposed to stick the waypoint out at the point you want to be hulldown TOO? That does seem a bit weird. I think I'll stick with the Hunt command for all but very limited applications.</font>

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by tabpub:

No, it is not weird. You are having the tank advance to a point where they have visibility to a certain point.

Well, it doesn't stop when having LOS to the point. See my previous post.

I think one thing that too many people have overlooked is that the ability of the crew is factored in to the "success" of this order. Like conscript/greens looking for the HD position and saying "We can't even see the ridge!"

I don't believe this is the case for CMBB.

[Matias]

Thats a good point about inexperienced troops having diffuculty succeding with Hull Down... I could easilly imagine inexperienced troops stoping too far out to be hull down. Though not at the point they're supposed to be shooting at!

But since there could be a dip (as opposed to a ridge), you do have to continue even if you have LOS since the interface doesnt let you give any more specific orders...

HRMMM ... Here's two thoughts for BTS, one more difficult than the other:

1) Perhaps as an aide to inexperienced players a warning could appear when you place your seek point if you already have LOS to that point. Then the manual could explain, "if you get the Already LOS indicator when placing a seek point, be sure that there is another feature between your unit and the seek point, otherwise the unit will travel all the way to the seek point. Remember the terrain in the interface is an abstraction, etc. " This also saves the experienced from having to make a separate LOS check prior to Seeking.

2) Make Seek a two waypint command like Shoot and Scoot. The first way point determines the vector of advance and also a limit on how far to move, the second waypoint is the target. In this case, the unit would move along the first vector, aming at the second point and stop as soon as it was either hull down to the second point or farther than the first way point. The idea being to abstract the order to "got to the *crest* of that hill and *seek hull down*.

Honestly, #1 seems easier and would make me happy because most of my intended usage has been in cresting a ridge, however I threw the second idea in because in Moon's scenario, even if properly understood there might not be a hull down position in that gully, it might be too shallow. A player might still want their tank to keep their distance and not wander into the minefield on the other side say.

Not a big deal either way. I entered this thread because as a newbie I couldnt understand how to use the command, which sure made me feel dumb given how I'd read that the motivation for including it was to make tank usage easier for the novice!

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Matias Duarte:

1) Perhaps as an aide to inexperienced players a warning could appear when you place your seek point if you already have LOS to that point. Then the manual could explain, "if you get the Already LOS indicator when placing a seek point, be sure that there is another feature between your unit and the seek point, otherwise the unit will travel all the way to the seek point. Remember the terrain in the interface is an abstraction, etc. " This also saves the experienced from having to make a separate LOS check prior to Seeking.

This doesn't work. I requires the player to manually inspect the terrain to verify that there is indeed a hulldown position on the way.

If such a manual inspection of terrain was possible in the CM 3D environment then the seek-hulldown command would never have to be added in first place.

[Redwolf]

It just ooccurs to me, that your (Moon) remark around the dip isn't really an issue.

That is because you can always plot an unconditional move into the dip and then a seek-hulldown out of it.

Overall I think a seek-hulldown command which stops in LOS of the target point would be better.

[Moon]

Hi Redwolf, but this command exists... it's called HUNT

The idea for the seek-hulldown command is very much tied into what would happen in real-life. Your tank spots an enemy while crossing some open ground. One of the possible tactics to use is to find a hull-down firing position quickly and engage. The TC shouts to the driver "Seek hull down, engage". The driver is looking for a HD spot in the front 30° arc (roughly his field of view), drives there full speed, and the firing commences. Obviously if you're on a totally flat map, this command is pretty much useless. Also obviously, if you're within almost point blank range of the enemy (say, 500 meters), the command doesn't make much sense either, since you'd rather shoot first at that range instead of looking for an improved position.

redwolf said:

"This doesn't work. I requires the player to manually inspect the terrain to verify that there is indeed a hulldown position on the way.

If such a manual inspection of terrain was possible in the CM 3D environment then the seek-hulldown command would never have to be added in first place. "

Well, it's one thing to find the exact hull-down spot (the one needed for the engine to assign HD status to a unit - this takes experience with the game to get right on the first try), and something totally different to quickly glance on the map and see if there are some dips or hills in the way. While the 3D terrain in CM is an abstraction, it's not like you have to totally guess where terrain features are located

Again, the best use of "Seek hull-down" is either out of view of the enemy (e.g. in order to place an ambush towards a specific location the map) or at a "safe" distance.

Martin

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Moon:

Hi Redwolf, but this command exists... it's called HUNT

Can you hunt a terrain location?

The idea for the seek-hulldown command is very much tied into what would happen in real-life. Your tank spots an enemy while crossing some open ground. One of the possible tactics to use is to find a hull-down firing position quickly and engage. The TC shouts to the driver "Seek hull down, engage". The driver is looking for a HD spot in the front 30° arc (roughly his field of view), drives there full speed, and the firing commences.

Hm, I have never seen the CMBB TacAI drive off 30 degrees of the path under the seek-hulldown waypoints. And the speed is not fast in CMBB, it is move.

I think you mistake CMBB for Steel Beasts

Obviously if you're on a totally flat map, this command is pretty much useless. Also obviously, if you're within almost point blank range of the enemy (say, 500 meters), the command doesn't make much sense either, since you'd rather shoot first at that range instead of looking for an improved position.

The point about this discussion is that I don't want to go into point-black range - but that the current seek-hulldown command does that more often than not.

redwolf said:

"This doesn't work. I requires the player to manually inspect the terrain to verify that there is indeed a hulldown position on the way.

If such a manual inspection of terrain was possible in the CM 3D environment then the seek-hulldown command would never have to be added in first place. "

Well, it's one thing to find the exact hull-down spot (the one needed for the engine to assign HD status to a unit - this takes experience with the game to get right on the first try), and something totally different to quickly glance on the map and see if there are some dips or hills in the way. While the 3D terrain in CM is an abstraction, it's not like you have to totally guess where terrain features are located

I agree it is an order of magnitude easier, but the question here is - how often do you think a bump on the way is sufficient and in reality it is not?

I had quite a few cases where the terrain didn't offer a hulldown position where manual inspection indicated it would.

And vice versa:

http://65.96.131.208:/tmp/isu-coward/pic11.jpg

Hands up in the audience, who of you could by manual terrain inspection figure that the Pz IV is hulldown in this situation, standing on the road on top of a slope?

Again, the best use of "Seek hull-down" is either out of view of the enemy (e.g. in order to place an ambush towards a specific location the map) or at a "safe" distance.

Hm, I think we still misunderstand what we mean.

I want my AFV to stay at the safe distance, instead of driving right up to the point where I wanted to shoot at.

[cyberlettuce]

One problem that most likely exists with the 'seek hull down' command is when there are multiple targets. which target does it seek hull down position in relation to? In theory the afv may well continue to try to seek hull down position until it can be hulldown against every available target. However the 'seek hull down' is a command i seldom use (dont think iv ever used it successfully).

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by cyberlettuce:

One problem that most likely exists with the 'seek hull down' command is when there are multiple targets. which target does it seek hull down position in relation to?

It seeks hulldown relative to a point in the terrain, not relative to a vehicle.

You place the point in the terrain, not on an enemy vehicle, do you?

[Moon]

Redwolf:

Can you hunt a terrain location?

No, but then if you're hunting a terrain location, you also cannot come in LOS of an enemy at that location... so your earlier suggestion won't work in this instance either.

Hm, I have never seen the CMBB TacAI drive off 30 degrees of the path under the seek-hulldown waypoints. And the speed is not fast in CMBB, it is move.

I think you mistake CMBB for Steel Beasts

No, what I meant was a roughly 30° field of view for the driver, which isn't the same as driving off 30 degrees from the path. In CMBB, as you know, the vehicle will take the shortest route to the HD waypoint - which IS an abstraction vs. what would happen in RL.

Hm, I think we still misunderstand what we mean.

I want my AFV to stay at the safe distance, instead of driving right up to the point where I wanted to shoot at.

I understand the problem, but how do we translate this into code? Obviously some kind of check if there is a possible HD position along the path at all when the order is entered would help - thing is, it's not possible to code into the existing engine with reasonable effort. Maybe an automatic cut-off (say, after 100m the tank stops automatically if it didn't find a HD spot)? I believe this was discussed during development, but there was a problem where to set that cut-off... too far, and the command is obsolete because the turn will end. Too close, and it's useless as well. In the end it's an artificial restriction not adding much to order in balance - it could work better in some situations, in others it would be worse (e.g. stopping in full view of the enemy in open ground just because the movement "ran out"...)

Cyberlettuce - the "Seek HD" command will always seek a hull-down position along the movement path relative to the final waypoint, regardless of what enemy units are around and visible.

Martin