hull down imp[ossibility.

[GRUMLIN]

just a rant to say that hulldown is a fricking nightmare to find....i had a king tiger roll up in hunt mode out of a depression, pretargetted on an unsuspecting TD, and still the TD rotates turret and nails me cos my fupping tiger rolls too far up after spotting target.

arghrghrghgrhgrhgr

G

[wbs]

Yeah, I've had that problem also. I have read several times on this board that a good way to get into hull-down position is to start in a depression, move up over a crest in "hunt" mode, and your tank will stop in hull-down position if there is a target on the other side of the crest.

Unfortunately, I have also paid dearly when my tanks rolled to far forward and into full view of the clearly-visible enemy. Now I inch them up a little at a time, but this method just eats up game turns.

Are there any more-reliable methods for finding "hull-down' positions?

[ May 07, 2002, 04:09 PM: Message edited by: wbs ]

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by wbs:

Are there any more-reliable methods for finding "hull-down' positions?

Yeah, wait for CM:BB to come out. In case you haven't already heard, there's going to be a "Seek hull down" command.

Seriously, I sympathize. I often have the same problem. If you're going after an already spotted target, the method you describe above is the best way I know of to do it.

Here's looking forward to elegant solutions.

YD

[Cogust]

Are there any more-reliable methods for finding "hull-down' positions?

Eyeballing? Seriously, after playing a bnch of games and doing both the 'hunt over the top thingie' and the 'one step at the time approach' I have become pretty good at estimating hulldown positions by eyeballing. Remember that hulldown is a binary thing in CM:BO, it's either on or off, which means that you don't have to be that precise in your eyeballing.

[John O'Reilly]

Actually, regarding hull down, I seem to be reasonably proficient at getting into position using MkI eyeball also but then my tanks demonstrate comparable proficiency in getting themselves killed in said position. What exactly is the effect of hull down status? When I see "55% to hit, target hull down" does it mean that the chance to hit has been reduced to 55% by virtue of my hull down status or that in fact the probability is smaller?

Thanks,

John

[Silvio Manuel]

The hit probability will be lower when you're hull-down vs. not (smaller silhouette), AND also its less likely that you will be spotted at all for the same reason...this works well with low silhouette tanks like the StuG/Hetzer/JpzIV, etc. With hull-down, you also entirely eliminate any hits on the lower hull, which is good for some tanks like the Hetzer.

Hull-down is "bad" for the Panzer IV when facing lighter guns like the 37 and 40mm's, on those pesky Greyhounds, Stuarts, and Daimler ACs...since its more likely that a given shot will hit the thin (51mm) turret armor rather than the more robust (73 or 80mm) upper hull armor.

[ May 07, 2002, 11:05 PM: Message edited by: Silvio Manuel ]

[Agua]

Yeah, after you get used to it, it's pretty much an eyeball thing and you can find hull down positions vis a' vis your area of overwarch / target just about anywhere.

BUT, until you get that familiar with finding it, the plain old "hunt" command, starting from a depression and going over a crest is pretty reliable.

[Dirtweasle]

Another option is to order a hunt command to just about where you eye-ball the position to be, and then plot a reverse comand a few meters back, and then another hunt up to just past where you think the hull down spot should be and just for good measure another reverse back down the hill.

That usually works for me...

[Ex Bellator]

I use the hunt/reverse method quite a lot, and it seems effective.

Unfortunately, not only is it difficult to find the correct position, but as mentioned you only get your Lower Hull protected. This enables Assault Guns to us a hull down position, but penalizes Tanks who have to have their Upper Hull exposed as well, instead of just their Turrets. I don't like seeing Upper Hull hits on turreted tanks in supposed 'Hull Down' positions.

IIRC BTS will have a different system in place for CMBB

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Rex_Bellator:

Unfortunately, not only is it difficult to find the correct position, but as mentioned you only get your Lower Hull protected. This enables Assault Guns to us a hull down position, but penalizes Tanks who have to have their Upper Hull exposed as well, instead of just their Turrets. I don't like seeing Upper Hull hits on turreted tanks in supposed 'Hull Down' positions.

The chance to hit the upper hull of turret tank is greatly reduced, though. It doesn't seem to be that unrealistic.

[Radar]

I've got a cool trick that can be used for finding hull down or taking unoccupied LOS checks:

Movement waypoint lines are offset from ground elevation but will stretch directly over terrain if the terrain between waypoints is higher than between the waypoints and next highpoint. They can be used to help you with the LOS tool to gain your orientation anytime when you get in overhead view, are zoomed in or perhaps offset to the firing unit. These waypoint lines I'll call construction lines. They are especially useful on those large maps to reduce the number of times you'll have to zoom out fully to go point to point with the LOS tool. Additional construction movement orders can be overlayed atop the construction line to point out positions like the top of slopes or perhaps a tight keyhole between buildings. Whatever the case, picking the correct path at certain views, is now simpler.

To begin, take one of your foot units as they have the least terrain restrictions. Picking one that has no movement orders is best and give it a random movement command [m,f,s,or c]. Take its first waypoint marker to the target unit that you want to be hull down to and either center the waypoint box or have it placed so that the following WP line will be centered on the targets base and stretch another move command to go past the firing unit through the center of its base or in the direction you want to take to approach the target. This can be your construction line for building movement and orientation orders.

Finding the top of slope at the point you want to go hull down is going to show you where the firing unit will be completely exposed to the target and past the point of hull down, but its a critical part we want to know. Here, the triangle waypoint shape is a better tool to work with than the square in most cases. The leading WP is always a square and the second and on is turned into triangles as you add more WP's.

After you have the construction line in place, trace the LOS tool from the firing unit to the target along the construction line, you don't have to go all the way to the target with the LOS tool, just enough to find the LOS breakpoint. Where the red turns black is where you'll want to put a different waypoint movement rate [m,f,s,or c] WP than on your construction line. You'll need to measure the distance from the firing unit to the breakpoint. To help do this, you can use the LOS tool and put your finger on the screen at the black and red intersection . Note that the LOS tool is only scaled to the nearest meter, but you'll want to get at least to the nearest half meter by stretching the LOS tool to the next hightest and lowest distances to scale the correct distance so it will give you the best results. This is your top of slope mark on the line to your target point. Flip flop between the foot unit to show the waypoint triangle and LOS checks from the firing unit to get the waypoint triangle placement correct.

When distance gets very close, with the waypoint markers being annoyingly opaque and don't scale down as you zoom in, you can't see what your doing. So then you can turn off the vehicle silhouette [shift-v] and select your foot unit to put two WP along the ridge where the last bend is on the construction line. Making them into another line perpendicular to the target construction line where it last bends is the top of slope intersection . Overlaying your movement orders based on the intersection is now easy.

Now here comes the part where I go thin (not bald). I'm not sure how the vehicle height and/or size effects where the hull down grade point for the firing unit will be accounted for at the hillcrest by looking only at the waypoint marker and its elevation in relation to the crest. It seems to, but I haven't been able to tie that part down yet, i,e...how much room to play with? Is the vehicle model identical in all cases (an abstraction) or more specific? Somewhere behind the top of slope will will be a perfect hull down to the target according to the firing unit, though finding only a close rough placement seems to work just fine most of the time.

I'll usually give the firing unit movement orders in normal rate to get up to the elevation break point hull down, as just using the hunt order seems to make the AFV to more likely to overshoot, but a small Hunt order the last couple of meters can be usually be given to good effect.

You can also use another unused foot unit to tentatively check LOS by taking the movement waypoint and putting one point on the hull down point the centering it on any point or unit on the map. Where it breaks or passes through objects can be easily seen. Using the view one helps to see elevation breaks and overhead views along with magnification adjustments helps to see if LOS crosses objects.

You can also use construction lines to determine coordinates for any point on the mapboard:

Have one of your foot units to center itself on a grid or tile intersection (ya dont have too, but it looks pretty). This will be known as coordinate (0,0) or (1000,1000) or whatever. Now extending construction lines from a target point Northerly and Easterly and then measuring from the foot unit with its LOS tool you'll get (0,north) and (east,0) from the foot unit. With this data you can determine the distance between any two points on the map (+/-) using the distance formula:

d=sqrt(sqr(X"-X')+sqr(Y"-Y'))

or ask any Jr. High student.

Remember: Cancel out the movement lines [backspace] and restart the vehicle silhouette[shift-v] that was used in the construction before hitting GO !!! :cool:

[ May 13, 2002, 03:55 PM: Message edited by: Radar ]

[TSword]

Grumlin,

Yes Hulldown is a nightmare.

In fact there are two possible Hulldown postions:

1. Your hitchance is lowered almost the same the enemy has to you -> You gain nothing. This is the lowest possible Hulldown you find it first creeping up a hill.

2. Your hitchance is the same as in the open, enemy has lower hitchance -> This is the kind of Hulldown really worth the name. You have to drive some meters "higher" into Hulldown then 1.

Grumlin, a TD killed your KT front on ? Jentz explains he NEVER found any evidence that the glacis or turretfront of a KT was penetrated.

The only one theoretically capable of that is the british 17 pdr, using the highly inacurate APDS round, but must hit a target around 80 x 30 cm, quite a feat isn't it ?? There's no way the american 76 mm gun can perforate the KT front on, and neither the 90 mm.

[Silvio Manuel]

Originally posted by TSword:

Grumlin, a TD killed your KT front on ? Jentz explains he NEVER found any evidence that the glacis or turretfront of a KT was penetrated.

The only one theoretically capable of that is the british 17 pdr, using the highly inacurate APDS round, but must hit a target around 80 x 30 cm, quite a feat isn't it ?? There's no way the american 76 mm gun can perforate the KT front on, and neither the 90 mm.

Really? Wow. Even with 90mm or 76mm tungsten and/or a hit on the turret ring, or a MG port, or the driver's vision slot...or a metallurgical flaw? I'm no grog but I would think there's always a slight chance, even if it never happened in the war and the odds are stacked against it.

[ May 14, 2002, 12:44 PM: Message edited by: Silvio Manuel ]

[TSword]

Silvio,

Really? Wow. Even with 90mm or 76mm tungsten and/or a hit on the turret ring, or a

MG port, or the driver's vision slot...or a metallurgical flaw? I'm no grog but I would think

there's always a slight chance, even if it never happened in the war and the odds are

stacked against it.

76 mm HVAP has shatter gap in possible kill

range.

90 mm APC can only penetrate turret from point blank.

All others turretring, MG port are those excuses for not penetrating, in fact a 37 mm would already suffice...., but until you hit those spots you're most probably shred into pieces already.

Drivervisions-slot ???? GO AND LOOK AT A KT CAREFULLY, DO YOU FIND A DRIVER VISION SLOT ???? NO, right it hasn't one, there's only a rotatable periscopy (The same in fact as in the Panther G).

Metallurgical flaws ? Again you take your chance and will most probably die in real.

However KT can easily be killed by shots in the flank at or near normal

[Silvio Manuel]

Originally posted by TSword:

Silvio,

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Really? Wow. Even with 90mm or 76mm tungsten and/or a hit on the turret ring, or a

MG port, or the driver's vision slot...or a metallurgical flaw? I'm no grog but I would think

there's always a slight chance, even if it never happened in the war and the odds are

stacked against it.

76 mm HVAP has shatter gap in possible kill

range.

90 mm APC can only penetrate turret from point blank.

All others turretring, MG port are those excuses for not penetrating, in fact a 37 mm would already suffice...., but until you hit those spots you're most probably shred into pieces already.

Drivervisions-slot ???? GO AND LOOK AT A KT CAREFULLY, DO YOU FIND A DRIVER VISION SLOT ???? NO, right it hasn't one, there's only a rotatable periscopy (The same in fact as in the Panther G).

Metallurgical flaws ? Again you take your chance and will most probably die in real.

However KT can easily be killed by shots in the flank at or near normal</font>