Infantry needs a lot of work...

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Pandur]

What we need to do is agree on where the problems are and seek to fix them as best as possible.

so, what of these problems are actually agreed upon!?

-"squad takes 2 action spots" problem, wich isnt a problem itself but the effects it produces in tight areas are. leaping over corners and walls...

related to that is also the cresting behaviour of infantry.

- crawl of death, in all its forms. offesnively in the attack and defensively when a squad is shot up.

- the 3rd big problem i have with infantry is "sometimes" movement from house to house.

</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">

XXOXX North(N)

X X

XXOXX

XXOXX

X X

South(S) XXOXX

O = Door</pre>

[Lethaface]

I formatted my disk and didnt it put it back on, again not because i didnt like the game - i'm an avid fan of the series, i just got bored with it, why would i keep something on my disk that is idle. Did you keep a copy Doom on your computer this whole time? it only took up 3 megs of space.

No personal offence meant

It's just that your not the first one that posts about how they've uninstalled the game from their PC and shelved it behind 10 books, etc etc...

Glad you like the forum, must admit that I too still come here even when I didnt play the game for some time. Ofc we all get bored sometimes. Since my post is far offTopic anyways; no i dont keep Doom installed on my PC I meant to say that I keep games installed when i'm a lil bored with em, happens to every single one of 'em.

Games I uninstall are either really old or wont survive the HD for 1 day. And then I wont go into any forum talking about it, luckily I can spend my time better like here, ranting on guys who do

Night night

[ChrisND]

Actually I DO have Doom installed on my HD. And Wolfenstein 3D, and M1 Tank Platoon. I still play them occasionally.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Lethaface]

Hehe, I still have Rainbow Six raven shield installed and strangely enough, there stil lots of players online who wants to receive 9mm FMJ rounds from the TMP

OnTopic, just completed Ash Shammah (Airport, 2nd campaign mission) for the zillionth time (7 WIA, 1 KIA, Total Victory).

This time the uncons seemed to be hiding much more as before. Quite realistic i think, who wants to pop out their heads when 5 strykers are driving in front of the windows and 80/120mm Mortar shells fly where bullets cant come. Didnt even mention those Apache's...

I even had 1 of my grunts suffering from (post?) traumatic stress disorder. They came out a stryker and under fire in front of the Airport HQ. Then as he leaped over a wall he lost it. He kept leaping the wall front back front back [...]. One of his team mates actually became KIA trying to save him. In the end under lots of smoke cover he finally got back in the stryker. Now how's that for Infantry AI realism

P.S., it might be a bug. Have some save files around that time, however I doubt if its reproducable since it was the first time I saw it. Might be stress disorder after all

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Lethaface]

I dont really have big problems with infantry pathfinding. Most of the time they stick to their waypoints. Perhaps it is the way how you place them? I tend not to place them to close to eachother. I place them quite straight forward so they can decide the details for themselves. This has gotten lots better since I got the game (1.02 orso).

The only problem I have now is how to clear houses cautious. Hunt works the best but i cant say im pleased with it. Ofc house cleaning is a dangerous thing and should lead to some casualties now and then, but i having an option to throw nades and or a choice between charging / cautious entrance, would be nice. Now its just prey and hope they spray

Ok, now really off to bed :S

[Pandur]

Most common problem seems to be that infantry sometimes hang around or spread out into roads. Small teams don't have those problems.

yes i think this is becouse a full squad consists of at least 2 teams(also if they are 3 in case of some US squads). and one team take one action spot. means you order them to go to one but they end up in two. and you cant predict wich one it will be.

worst thing for me is that i can split squads in about 1 of 10 battles i play. its good and nice that a blue player can "work around" that but it leaves the red side a bit doomed.

funny thing is that the red HQ squads dont have the problem as they count as one team->one action spot

The zigzag trenches won't work yet if you try to move down them.

actually i didnt tried to navigate a zig zag trench so far. however i saw half squads also moving out of straight trenches while tasked to hunt along it. one half squad in and one out of it. was in 1.08.

The hint about the face command in the "Unfriendly Face" thread is really useful.

yea, i saw that thread, and i am a fan of face also, but i have limited succes to stop em to leap over corners and walls.

Fast makes them move out immediately. The way to do this, as long as there are no bugs occurring in the situation, is just to put a waypoint outside the south door of the occupied house and another outside the south door of the objective house, followed by a hunt (or whatever) move to go inside.

interessting, do you place them right up on the walls!? does that also work in single tile(1x1) houses!?

problem would be 2 regrouping actions, one unobserved if it works out and one in front of a building wich could house enemys, wich is major pain.

How often are you finding that unless you do a series of waypoints like that, they will choose the foolish path?

hm, to generalize it, every time it isnt doable by straight line. means there are more than 1 ways, i "try" to make sure they take the right one. sometimes that takes bizarr forms, like stoping to hunt at a trench corner, assaulting around the corner for 6 or 7 meters, than another verry short assault in trench just in case a team moved out of the trench(to reformat em ), than hunt again.

basicly i plaster every thing with waypoints, only i try to avoid it as much as possible in enemy observed areas. and there is, where the bad results pile up. either you have em regroup in silly places or you take the chance and just use "one" waypoint and risk you squad wandering off and doing realistic things

so i tend to stack them with so many orders they cant think about anything else.

bigest drawback is that i have em up to 25 seconds regrouping in a turn in total. so thats not fast or fluid at all.

[Pandur]

other quirks i had screenshots of;

this squad doesnt want to go through the backdoor. i kept reloading quiet some times to see if it is possible. i found no way to make em go in from the back.

the original plan was to send the squad to the first waypoint up to the wall corner, and than in the house, but they ran around no matter what.

here, the same location, another squad moves in the abck door of the other house next to the one in the shot above(you can see the other squad in the background too)

here the problem is the way they take into the door. i lined out the path every soldier had to take to reach the entrance.

this cant be totaly related to the wall nearby as i see that really often, also on lone buildings.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Battlefront.com]

Pandur,

That sounds like a bug, but I think it's been fixed (has to do with wall breaches and the fact that tank is there). If one of the testers wants to take a look a look, that would be great. Any takers?

The second problem you noted has to do with how the mechanics of the game system work for entering doors in a way that makes sense to the code. However, by and large soldiers do not run straight for a door and enter it from whatever vector they are currently on. So I think, more than not, it's realistic for the guys to get themselves in front of the door before going on through.

Earlier problem noted with Squads and their teams getting too spread out and going through different doors has been addressed already in the current development build. So those two issues should be much, much better with the next patch.

Oh wait... I must have lost my head here. (clear's through) There are no problems with the game. You're all wrong, and we hate you for trying to poke holes in our perfect work of art. Therefore, no fixes for you!

(sorry, I have a rep to live up to )

Steve

[El Hombre]

My main problems with infantry are the first 2 that Pandur talked about (the third, related to getting into houses, can be mitigated by multiplying waypoints):

- leaping over corners and walls, missing trenches, etc... basically undervaluing cover.

- crawl of death

Incidentally, I'm making a red-on-red fighter vs combatant scenario on extremely mountainous terrain, based on a skirmish 2 weeks ago between Hezbollah and the Druze PSP. Long story short, unbelieveable casualties. What do you expect, assaulting battle-hardened villagers in the dead of night on a mountain face? In a larger tactical sense, CM:SF works very well. I have never found myself thinking in the aftermath of a battle "wtf? this can't happen in RL". True at the squad (and half-squad) level we've got the above major and frustrating problems, but when looked at from a platoon or higher level the abstraction works correctly.

[Pandur]

The second problem you noted has to do with how the mechanics of the game system work for entering doors in a way that makes sense to the code. However, by and large soldiers do not run straight for a door and enter it from whatever vector they are currently on. So I think, more than not, it's realistic for the guys to get themselves in front of the door before going on through

i imagined it for me like some sort of "tunnel" they had to go in to find the door. but when i thought about that for some moments i came to the conclusion thats just BullS.

so i thought its a bug

well i was closer than i would have though and i agree that it perfectly valid for them to position themselfs in front of the door befor going in. i do that the same way

however did you ever walked into your house like these guys did go in theirs!? i did at some points but i was filled up quiet bad at that time.

its not so bad in the end of the day but maybe it can get helped over time.

its just so bad to loose a guy infront of the door becouse he was going spirals, however it looks funny in the replay, especially if he dodged some bullets instead of catching one

ahhh, the replay is a good thing!

overall, great news, thanks for the headsup!

[handihoc]

One other inf prob/bug I have come across several times, including v1.08, is finding enemy inf on the wrong side of a low wall, facing the wrong way, backs to the attacker's (my) approach.

It's my guess that the designer gives them the order to take up position behind the wall, but the coding fails to specify which side, so they can end up 'behind' the wrong side.

On occasion when it's happened (with red, I haven't tested with blue) they've remained in that wrong position and facing even after coming under fire, sometimes for more than a minute or until dead.

[handihoc]

Originally posted by TheVulture:

I would dearly love to see something that indicated roughly where your men will take up positions at their final waypoint (adjusted for the face command naturally). For my money, that is the single biggest improvement that could be made right now. [/QB]

Great suggestion. Don't know how codable it would be, but I remember something similar in, I think, one of the old X-Com games. Worked well. YOu could even include an element of randomness to allow for the dumb f****s in your squad who are going to get it wrong no matter what.

[ May 23, 2008, 04:19 AM: Message edited by: handihoc ]

[Secondbrooks]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

Some people on the board seem to be having much more trouble with infantry than me, and I'm not exactly known for my sterling generalship. Are we looking at a learning curve problem? I can easily imagine a green player purchasing the game, playing it a little, dying repeatedly during charges into mg fire, then they put the game aside in frustration and complain about the experience for the next 6 months. If others are having fun with the game and you're not maybe its not entirely the game's fault.

Yes. Learning to learn game's and engine's limitations and features is quite necessary. Complaints about infanrty getting itself killed because of too accurate small arms fire has decreased quite drastically over time... Well small arms accuracy was degreased, but i think main problem here was that players have their own thoughts about what something should do and how it should perform, now many players have more experience with game and they know what to expect from something.

One thing i agree quite alot with Dragon67 is Marine squad to be packed in one or two action tiles... Does that kind formation already fulfill definition of massgrave? As already this current squad 'packing in one or two tiles'-problem is one of most problematic features of CMSF to me. I don't think i much dare to play with Marines... Then again Syrian side could be much more rewarding as Hassan took half Marine squad with one handgrenad.

[Battlefront.com]

There are a bunch of things going on with the complaints, not just one per person either. Dragon67 is, I think, I good example of someone who is being bit by all three issues I feel are swirling around:

1. Not playing the game as the game is. Each and every game has its own way of playing. Think about two first person shooter games with the same sort of weaponry, quality of the game engine, etc. Almost identical in other words. But one game has the ability to go prone, the other one doesn't. That one tiny tactical feature difference makes a HUGE impact on the games.

Try playing the game with prone, get used to it, then try playing the one without. It's terrible at first. In reverse, the game designers and scenario guys put the prone feature in there to be used, so it's likely that a player who uses it does a lot better than one who doesn't. In some cases I bet the player who doesn't use it can't finish a level or two without it. I'm sure most of you FPS guys out there can relate to this.

2. A certain amount of philosophical adjustment. The closest cousin to CMx2 in a visual sense is a first person shooter, but in terms of gameplay it's wargame. Sometimes people get tripped up on this and have expectations that go to one extreme or the other, yet CM is something inbetween. For example, the whole Action Spot thing. There is an underlying grid, like hexes in a way, but within that there is a lot of variety. It is only necessary for the player to understand that the sorts of cover that is seen visually in that spot is there for the TacAI to use. You don't need to worry about the exactness of how it is utilized. The more people think of a first person shooter game the more likely they are to fuss and fret over exact placement, even when from a game standpoint it doesn't matter.

3. Sub-optimal behavior and bugs. This is now the smallest of the three, I think. But for people that don't have a problem with #1 and #2, it's still a significant issue. To the degree people are running into problems with #1 or #2 this just increases the discomfort.

From our perspective there is nothing we can do to fix #1. If someone refuses to learn the inner workings of the game, that's outside of our control. We had the same problem with CMx1 and any other game we've ever made. It's a standard problem for all games of all types, but wargames tend to have more than their fair share of issues in this regard. Wargames require more tailored features because they are inherently more complex.

Likewise, wargames require more thinking than others so the second issue is inherently highlighted as well. But there are things we can do to help this along. We've done quite a lot with this already and we have a few things in the current development build that should help further.

The last category is something we need to continue working on. Crawl of death is one that at this very minute is still an issue, but we will address it sooner rather than later. Most of the other stuff is either already fixed in the current build or likely to be fixed soon too. SOME PROBLEMS WILL CONTINUE FOREVER. No game of this complexity is perfect in terms of TacAI or pathfinding, therefore no matter how hard we try it will not perform perfectly in all situations all the time. CMx1 has years more development invested into it than CMx2 and this statement is quite accurate for that game system as well. That means that at some point people just have to accept that the game is what it is or stop playing it. But we have more work to do before that time comes

Steve

[DzrtFox]

Anyone who says the infantry behavior is "very good" is either speaking relative to version 1.01 or is smoking crack. Just yesterday I was playing a small map and ordered a Stryker with a mounted Scout squad between two small houses. I pulled the Stryker between the two houses and ordered the Scout squad to Quickly move into the left house. I'll try to draw this in ASCII since I didn't get a screenshot.

----      ----

|  D  S  D  |

----      ----

OK the two blocks are the houses, D is where the doors are located, and S is the Stryker/Scout squad. The Stryker is positioned directly between the two houses with the rear exit in perfect position for a quick exit and entry into the house.

I order a Quick move into the left house, and what does the squad do? Exit the vehicle, haul ass COMPLETELY AROUND THE BACK OF THE RIGHT HOUSE (not even using the door), makes a complete counterclockwise circle around the house back to the front of the Stryker and get mowed down by an MG because they are standing exposed out in open ground while they're headed for the left-hand door.

It should be a (relatively) simple calculation to make a squad exit and walk 2 feet to a door when not even being exposed to fire.

[ May 23, 2008, 09:17 AM: Message edited by: DzrtFox ]

[Pandur]

i think it has to do do with the fact that they wont go too close to a vehicle, or at least try to avoid it. means you actually blocked the entrance it seems.

a situation i had 2 days ago. is it possible to "blast" from a story higher than the ground floor into a adjacent house, to the same floor?

only time i tired it they did ran down the stairs and tried to go into the adjacent house through the door.

[Peter Panzer]

Perhaps this is a good place to ask this question:

Will the "face" command work consistently for infantry in WEGO in the upcoming patch (1.01?)?

Quite often they will not turn in the direction indicated. I attempted to use cover arcs as a workaround, but they will not respond to that either. In my experience, infantry must be "steered" into their desired orientation via the placement of waypoints.

This is very easily reproduced - vehicles seem to work great in this capacity, by the way. Any clarification would be appreciated as this is obviously a rather key command.

[flamingknives]

Originally posted by DzrtFox:

It should be a (relatively) simple calculation to make a squad exit and walk 2 feet to a door when not even being exposed to fire.

Go on then. You implement it.

[DzrtFox]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

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

It should be a (relatively) simple calculation to make a squad exit and walk 2 feet to a door when not even being exposed to fire.

Go on then. You implement it. </font>

[DzrtFox]

Originally posted by Pandur:

i think it has to do do with the fact that they wont go too close to a vehicle, or at least try to avoid it. means you actually blocked the entrance it seems.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by them not going to close to a vehicle. They were riding in this vehicle so why would they try to steer clear of it when they get out?

There was at least 4 or 5 feet of clearance on each side of the Stryker. WAY more than enough for a squad of men to get through the doorway.