Infantry tactics and CMSF

[hellfish]

So I'm sitting in my office, staring out the window and a question pops into my head.

How will CMSF handle infantry on the individual, fire team and squad levels? I'm thinking in a MOUT context here as well - will we be seeing infantrymen stacking outside the door, clearing rooms properly, and will LOS be calculated for individuals?

I'm sure you all know that in a MOUT environment one soldier can see something completely different than another individual soldier who is standing less than a meter away. How will CMSF handle this - to what degree will it be abstracted, will the LOS be calculated from the center position of the fireteam, how will doors and angles affect LOS, etc?

[vincere]

As well as I recall, Battlefront have said that LOS is individually calculated; no more borg spotting

Less abstraction in buildings for things like windows and I think that I remember stairs mentioned; but still cover inside will be abstracted?

[David Chapuis]

I seem to remember battlefront saying there will NOT be 1:1 spotting.

Where is dogface with that search jpg when you need him?

[YankeeDog]

IIRC, you're both right, in a way.

I think that BFC stated that their goal is to make it so that every *Unit* has its own spot calculations. So unlike CMx1, an MG team might spot a distant enemy, and take them under fire, while the Infantry squad nearby fails to spot them, and so doesn't fire at all.

Presumably, this will interact with the improved C&C modeling as well. . . if squad A spots an enemy unit, information should eventually percolate through to the rest of the platoon, and eventually the entire company (unless Squad A is totally isolated and out of radio contact).

However, I IIRC Steve said it would just be way too complicated and hardware-intensive to do spot calculations for every individual soldier. So a Squad, MG team, etc. will continue to spot and react collectively, rather than as a group of soldiers.

IMHO, a reasonable abstraction; under most situations, information would disseminate pretty quickly within a squad or team. As with any abstraction, there may be some outlier situations where things will get a bit unrealistic, but that have to leave at least a few things to improve for CMx3.

Cheers,

YD

[Ace Pilot]

Steve posted the following here about modeling LOS/LOF.

Yes, LOS and LOF are a major concern, but they are not a major concern until we start programming. The ideal state (1:1 LOS/LOF) is the obvious goal for us to acheive. Since we can't acheive it, we will implement the next best possible solution. And that solution will be, more than anything else, hardware dependent.

He later indicated that he would share the solution that they ultimately implemented. Maybe we can pester him into posting it. I think it will be one of the more interesting aspects of CMx2 - reconcilling 1:1 graphical representation of units with LOS/LOF that is not 1:1.

[hellfish]

I was kinda hoping this would pester him.

[Cary]

Originally posted by Ace Pilot:

Steve posted the following here about modeling LOS/LOF.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Yes, LOS and LOF are a major concern, but they are not a major concern until we start programming. The ideal state (1:1 LOS/LOF) is the obvious goal for us to acheive. Since we can't acheive it, we will implement the next best possible solution. And that solution will be, more than anything else, hardware dependent.

He later indicated that he would share the solution that they ultimately implemented. Maybe we can pester him into posting it. I think it will be one of the more interesting aspects of CMx2 - reconcilling 1:1 graphical representation of units with LOS/LOF that is not 1:1. </font>

[lizardman743]

I don't think that 1:1 spotting is a big problem for the most part. For example, if half the squad was shooting at an enemy unit, wouldn't the other half of that squad move to get into firing position? Even if the actual soldier isn't moving to prepare to shoot in the game that is basically what is happening, no?

[Ace Pilot]

Originally posted by lizardman743:

I don't think that 1:1 spotting is a big problem for the most part. For example, if half the squad was shooting at an enemy unit, wouldn't the other half of that squad move to get into firing position?

But this illustrates the conundrum. Steve has already said that the hardware can't handle 1:1 LOS/LOF, so, without 1:1 LOF, what determines which individuals (i.e., which half of the squad) have LOS/LOF?

Even if the actual soldier isn't moving to prepare to shoot in the game that is basically what is happening, no?

If that is the case, then aren't you saying that the graphical depiction of individual soldiers isn't really conveying their actual position? That it is just an abstraction? That could be how it is handled, but I thought Steve had said that the graphical depiction of individual soldiers would be more than just eye candy.

These types of situations are why I think it would be interesting to hear from Steve how they decided to handle the LOS/LOF problem, given the use of 1:1 graphical depiction.

[Cpl Steiner]

But this illustrates the conundrum. Steve has already said that the hardware can't handle 1:1 LOS/LOF, so, without 1:1 LOF, what determines which individuals (i.e., which half of the squad) have LOS/LOF?

Are you sure Steve has said this? I think he has said that LOS is not 1:1 but LOF is. In other words, if only 1 man in a squad has spotted the enemy, they all have, but only the man with a clear LOF will actually shoot at the target. Whether the AI can reposition the men in the squad to put more fire on the target or if this has to be done by the player is another matter.

[Ace Pilot]

Originally posted by Cpl Steiner:

Are you sure Steve has said this?

Yes - see what I quoted above. Steve posted it way back in February 2005.

I think he has said that LOS is not 1:1 but LOF is. In other words, if only 1 man in a squad has spotted the enemy, they all have, but only the man with a clear LOF will actually shoot at the target.

Just to be clear, I'm talking about LOS (can the target be seen?), not spotting (has the target been seen?).

I may have missed it if Steve posted a LOS/LOF modeling explanation since February 2005. But, based on this post from Steve (also from February 2005), I would have thought there would have been an easily found thread on it:

Don't worry guys... you won't have to wait a year to see how we tackle LOS/LOF. It is not the sort of thing we can throw in at the last minute, so it will be done well ahead of the relase date. When we have a system worked out, we'll let you know.

From this, it sounds like the LOS/LOF model should be complete at this point. I'm just interested in hearing how they integrated the LOS/LOF model with the graphical depiction and what abstractions, if any, they used.

[Cpl Steiner]

Ace Pilot,

The discussion here clearly indicates that LOF will be treated differently to LOS in CMx2, unlike in CMx1.

For instance...

Originally posted by Steve

The first one is vehicles blocking LOS and/or LOF. The word is final (for now) that they can indeed block LOF but they can not block LOS. This has to do with computation and RAM costs for tracking moving, variable sized objects. LOF is a lot easier and therefore we can do that. Out of the two, LOF is the more important one. LOS would be hard for most vehicles to block effectively for any length of time anyway, so from a simulation standpoint it really isn't a big deal to leave it out. Leaving out LOF would be, as you CMx1 guys know full well since CMx1 didn't support LOF blocking.

and...

No. When a unit doesn't have LOF it doesn't fire. So if a vehicle comes inbetween target and shooter, the shooting stops.

This latter quote is from a thread entitled Topic: Er... correction... one small thing.

Both quotes are from September '05, so are a bit more recent than the ones you refer to.

The only bit that is unclear is what constitutes a unit for the purposes of LOF blocking. I could be wrong but I think each man will have his own LOF checks, to avoid situations in which men are clearly shooting through walls. I can't find a quote to support this just yet though.

[Ace Pilot]

Thanks for finding that, Cpl Steiner. I obviously missed it.

[lizardman743]

If LOF check will be final then if half the squad is shooting and the other half is not, is there any way to get both halves shooting without moving the whole squad (possibly exposing your guys) or spliting the squad?

[hellfish]

I wonder how ammunition will be dealt with now that we've got individual soldiers. Will individual rounds be tracked?

[Battlefront.com]

I just posted a detailed description of LOS/LOF and Spotting, so I won't recover that ground here.

Ammunition is tracked individually. There is an abstracted "ammo leveling" that happens from time to time, which simulates redistribution of ammo between soldiers of the same unit. This is, however, not abstracted in the sense that ammo is tracked by type. If a unit has a lot of one type of ammo and none of another type, the ammo leveling obviously will have no effect for the weapon that is out of ammo.

You can split squads for more fine control, but the general reason to do that is to cover more ground, not to have greater control over outgoing fire. The latter is handle well for a squad with the Commands and situations that are at the player's disposal.

Steve

[vincere]

The latter is handle well for a squad with the Commands and situations that are at the player's disposal.

Interesting bone. Want to put any meat on it and tell us if there are any new commands we should know about?

[hellfish]

At the risk of becoming the new Dorosh The Necroposter, I was wondering if maybe there was any new info in regards to:

How will CMSF handle infantry on the individual, fire team and squad levels? I'm thinking in a MOUT context here as well - will we be seeing infantrymen stacking outside the door, clearing rooms properly...

[MikeyD]

The most they've divulged about infantry handling concerns 'Action Spots'. It sounds basically like one 8x8 square on a grid targeting another 8x8 square. If your whole unit happens to fit on one Action Square they 'll basically respond the same, if just a portion of your unit is touching the Action Square only the affected portion will do the required action (I hope I'm remembering this right).

About clearing rooms properly, I think they recently said they still had about 600(?) large and small actions left to animate. That sounds like a lot of animations, but I suppose a large percentage could be simple 'look to the left - look to the right' kind'a stuff. I've seen breeching tools on some of their control panel screenshots, maybe there will be an accompanying 'bust-in-the-door' animation.

I'm wondering about infantry handling in the larger context - how the AI will handle the larger tactical movements. Will old CMBB hands have an advantage from their gamey knowledge of how the CMx1 AI controlled its troops?

[ January 04, 2007, 01:45 PM: Message edited by: MikeyD ]