Deer-in-the-Headlights: Reaction of Tanks to Strafing Run

[Snarker]

Originally posted by von Lucke:

They start Fast moving --- maybe a whole meter --- and then the 2nd one from the right get's targeted by a jabo, some 1500m up, coming in perpendicular (rather sweet target for the pilot, I suppose).

So, then what?

All six tanks stop dead and their TC's slam the hatches! All six infantry squads bail and start crawling away on the ground!

After the jabo strafes it's target (and it only targeted the single tank), with no periferal damage to any other unit, do the tanks start moving again --- of course, now without their passengers. At the end of the turn, the armor ends up some 100m from it's infantry support, who are on the other side of an open field. Bad.

So, then: Should all 6 tanks have frozen at the sight of a jabo, or just the one targeted? And should they have stopped at all? Wouldn't it have made sense to try and move out of the strafing run --- after all, once the AC lines up, moving out from under it would prolly be a good idea. And why did all six infantry squads bail? Wouldn't just the targeted one jump ship?

I ran a test with 4 t34's w/ riders and a lone Stuka 'buster'. I put 1 tank and it's passenger 500+ m away from the other 3 tanks, which I kept within 40 m of each other. Results: when the lone tank was targeted the other three did not button. When on of the group of three was targeted, not every tank in the group buttoned. Sometimes an untarget tank buttoned, sometimes not. As an aside, the riders usually stayed put even after their tank was hit by the Stuka. Once in a while they bailed, but only after the tank was struck. The map was plain, no place to run for cover, so I'll redo it with some local cover available to see if that helps convince the inf to run.

EDIT: Added cover and the inf will bail and sneak to cover, but only if the attacking plane is making a run on their ride or on a nearby tank. The lone tank at the other end of the map did not button up. No tanks stopped moving. Note that the manual does say airplanes will constitute "contact" if a move to contact order was given and the plane is within 100m.

[ October 02, 2002, 04:48 PM: Message edited by: Snarker ]

[von Lucke]

Just to show that there's an outlier to every statistical equation:

Here are the six T34's one second prior to target aquisition by an Hs-129B-3 (cannons only, no bombs):

Here they are one second after. Note every tank has buttoned and ceased moving --- except the target!!! Ha! I couldn't believe it:

And here is the point were the five remaining tanks decided it was OK to move again, some 10 seconds later. Oddly enough, the targeted tank won't actually be hit for another couple of seconds --- yet he drove on, oblivious. Even the passenger squad stayed aboard.

Though, this is what usually happens:

Or this (those SU-122's are 50m away from the closest T-34):

[Soddball]

Still waiting for the game, so I can't say anything for sure - but would it make sense for planes which are strafing to use the 'covered arc' CMBB style of attack as opposed to the 'target individual' CMBO style of attack? This might sound odd, but surely the aim of a strafing attack is to affect a line of enemy units, rather than a single one?

[Bruno Weiss]

Renaud wrote:

When under air attack (enemy planes spotted in the air) it is advisable to not move the vehicle.

That might be the case for solitary vehicles or vehicles already dispersed, however in a tightly grouped formation like the author shows his tanks were in, it would be highly advisable to quickly disperse. One fat bomb, rocket, or well aimed straffing run would do far more damage to units tightly packed together than if dispersed at distance.

[Foxbat]

Originally posted by Bruno Weiss:

That might be the case for solitary vehicles or vehicles already dispersed, however in a tightly grouped formation like the author shows his tanks were in, it would be highly advisable to quickly disperse. One fat bomb, rocket, or well aimed straffing run would do far more damage to units tightly packed together than if dispersed at distance.

But allowing the TacAI to determine what constitutes a formation, and letting the TacAI determine formation behaviour is a can of worms best left unopened

[gunnergoz]

I love the new aircraft features but one thing I'd like to mention is, a/c almost never operated on the battlefield alone! There was invariably at least one wingman per attack plane, and usually an entire formation would attack together. It seems odd to me, then, to just have one a/c doing an attack run, even in a CMBB-level battlefield and time frame.

So- has anyone tried a battle with 2 or more a/c diving down to wreak havoc? What was the outcome?

[Bruno Weiss]

Foxbat, yes that is what I had said in my original post. AI technology is not there yet to make independent and rational decisions all on it's own. They can do some amazing things AI's that is, but they are still rather archaic and operate based on a "if this, then that - If that, then this", and "shortest distance between two places" technology. Number crunchers.

[Foxbat]

Originally posted by Bruno Weiss:

Foxbat, yes that is what I had said in my original post. AI technology is not there yet to make independent and rational decisions all on it's own. They can do some amazing things AI's that is, but they are still rather archaic and operate based on a "if this, then that - If that, then this", and "shortest distance between two places" technology. Number crunchers.

Tell me about I have some friends who are active in the AI field, and I keep telling them to gewwt on with things... but so far progress has been meagre