LOS abstraction and 1:1

[panzermartin]

The wonderful new finer terrain mesh is virtually useless in CMSF. Ditches and ground depressions that should provide cover and concealment to infantry are not taken into account. I had men crawling in a very deep ditch and yet they were spotted by infantry 100m away and got shot to pieces through solid ground. Sorry to repeat myself but I dont see many mentioning this and imo its far more annoying than pathfinding, which can be temporarily taken care with more babysitting. I know all the little and not so little bugs will be solved after a couple of patches but this seems as an engine problem. There can be no fun in infantry battles with 1:1 and these LOS/LOF abstractions. I try to play smaller scale battles tha fit better in the CMSF system only to find out that these are unplayable if a mountain or wall is eliminating your small force out of nowhere. Company of Heroes has the same problems with LOS/LOF but you never notice since it is a classic RTS. But CM? In CM all the game is build around who sees and fires first while micromanaging your pixel troops in accuracy of few centimeters. Also, many times Target tool reports no LOS on perfectly flat terrain smth like random invisible walls blocking the view.

The core desing and philosophy of the game is excellent and definetely BFC are on the right track with CMSF, but you just cant ignore this problem, its fundamental and not a harmless engine abstraction.

[ August 05, 2007, 03:25 PM: Message edited by: panzermartin ]

[Pandur]

i think many think so too, but it was allready noticed that often that we need to see what patches are brining and not repeat it all the time.

i also know its not good to let such things rest becouse often it get "overlooked" than

but well not every day.

EDIT:

to add this, i am also rather turned off by this "feature" as i just found that REDvsRED light inf QB´s work rather good.

so i see that happen too relatively often(also the walls ).

[Huntarr]

[ August 05, 2007, 11:30 AM: Message edited by: Huntarr ]

[panzermartin]

Huntarr, I think you just helped to bury this thread as well as yours

That one is about 8ft walls, not very alarming about the LOS/LOF problems encountered everywhere on the map.

[Battlefront.com]

There are some bugs, for sure, and we are looking into getting them fixed as a priority. However, there will continue to be some LOS/LOF abstractions forever. None of us have computers powerful enough to run without such abstractions. There are far less abstractions than CMx1, but they are now more noticable because of the 1:1 graphical repersentation. So from our position, if CMx1 was fun despite the much greater degree of abstraction, CMx2 should be more fun because it has less abstraction.

However, fun is a relative term and it is highly personalized, therefore nobody can say "this game is not fun with it" just as I can't say "this game is fun with it" and have it mean anything beyond our personal preferences.

Steve

[Northman]

What are these bugs exactly? Is the 'shooting-thru-walls'-issue among them, or is this one of the abstractions we have to live with? Should it be possible to hide squads behind walls?

Is there any sort of cover&concealment bonus to compensate for the the damage you take because of LOS-abstractions?

From my point of view a game is fun if it manages to produce results that can be compared to what one would expect in real-life. I wouldn't mind if abstractions are necessary to accomplish this. However, if the abstractions actually reduce the amount of realism instead of increase it, then that's something else. When I play SF I feel like I lose alot of men because I feel I can never tell for sure if an object is going to provide cover or not. I Hope it's bugs. I remember there were some abstractions with CMx1 that one had to get used to(like terrain providing more cover than one would think by looking at it), but I can't remember that they had the kind of impact they have in this game.

[Battlefront.com]

Walls have been a problem for us since the very early days. I do not understand why that is, but then again I am not a programmer! Shooting through walls is definitely a bug that can be fixed, but shooting through the very ends of a wall (i.e. where it stops) might have to remain for a lot longer. This is usually only noticable when angles are just "right". Charles says the work aound for this problem is code intensive and we have other things we must do first.

Yes, you should be able to hid units behind walls. There does appear to be a problem with this, but it is likely the same one that allows some shooting through walls. The LOF calculations require successful LOS first.

Yes, there are some abstractions with "damage" that take into account some of the abstractions. CM's code considers your pixel warriors as having better cover and better spacing than they appear to on the screen. Therefore, if there are trees available for protection there is an assumption that your soldiers are using them to the best of their ability even if the graphics do not show this.

The high lethality you're finidng COULD be the result of one or more bugs, but could also just as easily be differences in expectations between what x,y, and z do in CMx1 compared to what x, y, and z do in CMx2. I've seen testers complete some of the most difficult battles, using Elite mode, that you guys are getting slaughtered in. I've been trying to summon up the energy and time to write a small article about this to help people make some mental transitions to the new environment. I really must do that because I think it will prove helpful to you guys.

As soon as v1.02 is out the door I'll make writing up a short article for you guys a priority.

Steve

[panzermartin]

Thank you for the reply, I was afraid that it was an engine limitation. Ok, I may be a bit over the top with the game stopper thing(edited) but there is definetely some conflict with the abstracted LOS and the "what you get is what you see" 1:1 infantry. Vehicles however dont seem to be affected that much since big rounds dont go through the terrain and walls.

[Northman]

Shooting through walls is definitely a bug that can be fixed, but shooting through the very ends of a wall (i.e. where it stops) might have to remain for a lot longer.

Sounds good. I've noticed the shooting-thru-edge-issue too, but that can be dealt with by positioning your troops farther away from the edge. Not so with the thru-walls-issue!

Yes, there are some abstractions with "damage" that take into account some of the abstractions. CM's code considers your pixel warriors as having better cover and better spacing than they appear to on the screen. Therefore, if there are trees available for protection there is an assumption that your soldiers are using them to the best of their ability even if the graphics do not show this.

Great to hear that. I was afraid cover and concealment was left to be handled by the AI exclusively. I've been close to several heart-attacks already, from seeing my troops wandering off on the wrong side of walls etc.!

I've been trying to summon up the energy and time to write a small article about this to help people make some mental transitions to the new environment. I really must do that because I think it will prove helpful to you guys.

Thanks, that would be much appreciated I think. I know my own and several others initial disappointment with the game was because of the issues discussed here.

[thewood]

Steve, I think may main problem is there is little guidance from BFC on what is abstracted and what isn't. I was never explicitly communicated what we could expect from cover. The bugs aren't helping me get acclimated to the environment. In CM, you used the LOS tool to what terrain you had, and could quickly start to figure out what did what.

Up til you last post, I thought we were in a pretty much WYSIWYG. While I realiezed through various posts that this was probably not the case, I was still assuming a lot.

I'd like to get a clear definition of what tess do, what walls do, etc. Playing CMSF can be a lot of fun, but, right now, its one of the most frustrating games I have played.

I know you will get to this, but these types of claifications are what we needed in the manual and the tutorial, not two pages of back story.

[Pandur]

i think when the LOS issue is more or less on the edge, means there isnt much to hide in but it could work, and i get shot through the ground than its more or less ok, becouse well, it was on the edge.

but when i see a ditch or ravine and i zoom in with the camera to look if its deep enough, i expect that my man are hidden if its obvious that they "will" be hidden in there, a clear LOS issue to name it like that.

when i get shot than clearly through the ground its horrible! ther are still some WEGO players left and these analyze terrain mostly pretty carefull and than try to use every available cover...

for me, thats the difference between LOS issues i can take and cant take.

[Northman]

Another issue which might be related to this: When using the 'area fire' command, the target line automatically snaps to the underlying grid. Does this mean fire is only being directed at that point? That's what it looks like, especially with the .50 cal.

I can see how this is actually a feature that is implemented to prevent "circumventing" the relative spotting system, i.e. using area-fire to target units that your firing unit has not been made aware of yet, as the time it would take for the information about the location of the target to be communicated to your firing unit would be just as much as the time needed to communicate a "fire through the second and third windows from the left end of the third building to the right"-type of order, for example.

[SlapHappy]

I don't know a lot about 3-D programming, but I think this falls under the heading of "collision-detection". It might also having something to do with the bug where vehicles can merge into another creating a Franken-Stryker.

Under certain circumstances the collision detection parameters are not synced to the actual models at the same detail level, thus hard corner of a building is not aligned with the graphic representation shown in-game.

[Renaud]

Here's my probably faulty understanding of the way it works so far...

I think the deal is that the terrain mesh is no longer 1:1 with the LOS mesh. This sometimes results in shooting through graphical stuff, or being blocked by stuff which is in the way (no LOF), but you do have LOS, such as repeatedly blasting the same destroyed tank partially in the way of the actual target.

I think unit locations and fire points on the map are limited to a fixed grid of 'action points' which correspond to the LOS mesh (not the graphical mesh). This is why, when you cancel a move, you see a short quick-move which you cannot cancel which is created by the system to get the unit onto the nearest 'action point'. So be careful not to cancel that last 'slow' crawl move or your guys suddenly stand up and quick-move to the nearest 'action point' (possibly ocated in the middle of the street) with painful consequences.

[SlapHappy]

Originally posted by Renaud:

Here's my probably faulty understanding of the way it works so far...

I think the deal is that the terrain mesh is no longer 1:1 with the LOS mesh. This sometimes results in shooting through graphical stuff, or being blocked by stuff which is in the way (no LOF), but you do have LOS, such as repeatedly blasting the same destroyed tank partially in the way of the actual target.

I think unit locations and fire points on the map are limited to a fixed grid of 'action points' which correspond to the LOS mesh (not the graphical mesh). This is why, when you cancel a move, you see a short quick-move which you cannot cancel which is created by the system to get the unit onto the nearest 'action point'. So be careful not to cancel that last 'slow' crawl move or your guys suddenly stand up and quick-move to the nearest 'action point' (possibly ocated in the middle of the street) with painful consequences.

I've had that happen! I wondered what the hell was going on! Just a few moments ago in the "House Clearing" mission. Total chaos and casualties of course......

[Darkmath]

Ahem...

I recall the LOS through the building edges in CMX1 days which allow a tank to get hit even behind a small house.

So, nothing is perfect.

[Raptor 2101]

I think unit locations and fire points on the map are limited to a fixed grid of 'action points' which correspond to the LOS mesh (not the graphical mesh). This is why, when you cancel a move, you see a short quick-move which you cannot cancel which is created by the system to get the unit onto the nearest 'action point'. So be careful not to cancel that last 'slow' crawl move or your guys suddenly stand up and quick-move to the nearest 'action point' (possibly ocated in the middle of the street) with painful consequences. [/QB]

and this MUST be fixed. there are several problems cousing to this basic problem...

i order a squad to advanced a aream while using the "storm" method (so called in german). during the advanced it shows, that the enemy is stronger than expactet, i ordert to stop. The most vernuable element (siting next to the enemy) turn 180° and run ... ok that the AI choose the trailing Element to rejoin could be logical, but i would have the choise (alternate the WP...), but why the hell they are running? i cant belive thet the US Army has so much suicide boys

second if ordert to crawl they should crawl and dont stand up to reform... i lost always a couple of man, while reform a squad under fire...

[Cpl Steiner]

One of the things BFC said about why CMx1 was so ground breaking was that it dispensed with traditional wargame hexes. With "action points", are we not now lumbered with something like a hex grid again, with units having to trace LOS/LOF from action point to action point and with units doing their own artificial move adjustments to conform to the action point grid? I think this could be part of the problem.