spotting changes in 1.11

[Sgt Joch]

In 1.11, spotting is harder. It takes a longer time before enemy units are spotted, indentified and acquired.

It now pays to put recon units in a good observation post and just let them scan the landscape.

GeorgeMc's new "Forging Steel" campaign really shows this off.

I personally like the change, although it slows down the game, it finds it is more realistic.

What do you guys think?

[Uedel]

slowing down campaign is not good for me. I am a slow player anyways already and the 2h Time limit often already hurting me to finish my objectives..............

Also the spotting in 1.10 was toned down a lot and now even more... i don't know if i like it.

[handihoc]

For me, the more realistic the better. And my guess is that spotting a hidden inf unit, particularly at distance, particularly in buildings or good cover, would not be an easy task, even with the technology US forces have at their disposal. So the spotting seems relatively realistic to me.

Maybe someone with relevant field experience can comment on this?

[Other Means]

It took a bit of tweaking but I like where it's at currently. M1s in particular used to see everything straight away. Now you've got a chance to use AT assets properly - they're dangerous but have to be used with stealth.

We still need to lose the lack of FOW on smoke trails but apart from that I think it works well.

[Uedel]

yeah but my problem with real spotting is that u dont have the right tool on hand.

the RV (Humvee) as Example i am mostly blind to what corners of the map they can look etc, makes them very limited in use.

Also in real time the most military OP´s not under a 2hrs time pressure, no commander of a modern Army would rush in his company to an objective when he expects massive looses. a lot of military ops take waaay longer this is not anymore WWII where high looses are acceptable.

So give me more time and i am glad with spotting like Real World, but with a Gamey 2hrs limit u may watch out in case of spotting rules.

just my 0.02 cents

[Rafik63]

I have to agree with the limitations of the time limit. Most real world operations I'm fairly positive take more than 2 hours on average (perhaps one of the reasons is the need to take absolutely minimal loses)

I patched straight away as soon as i bought CMSF so i wouldn't know what it was like before. Safe to say me and my noobish self are finding the first mission on the campaign difficult because of the very fact i can never clear a hazard free path for my strykers.....

Regards

Salam

[Dietrich]

Yesterday I did a few tests using Normal Dude's Firing Range 55 map (with the settings otherwise default for that map).

I put a Syrian Reserve infantry squad on the roof of the second-nearest building and just let them chill there--no Hide command, no targeting arc, no orders at all.

I put an Army rifle squad (settings in the editor were all at Typical) on the roof of the range tower and had them face downrange. They did not spot the Syrian squad after 10 turns (i.e., 10 minutes). Then I assigned the squad a targeting arc covering the entire building where the Syrian squad was sited. They did not spot the Syrian squad after 10 more turns.

Next I put an Army sniper squad (again with Typical settings) on the roof of the range tower, with the same facing. They did not spot the Syrian squad after 10 turns. Then, as before, a targeting arc. They did not spot the Syrians after 10 more turns.

To me this suggests, though conjecturally, that (in CMSF) infantry--even when positioned on the roof of a building (i.e., with no 'natural' cover), kneeling in readiness, and having no orders to hide or conceal themselves or take cover specifically--will passively try not to be seen.

Later this week I'll run some more tests using the same unit and positioning for Red (though I may put the Syrian unit out in 'the open') and with the gamut of Blue units (infantry as well as vehicles) taking turns trying to spot them. I'll be back with the results. =)

[Taki]

yeah but my problem with real spotting is that u dont have the right tool on hand.

the RV (Humvee) as Example i am mostly blind to what corners of the map they can look etc, makes them very limited in use.

Also in real time the most military OP´s not under a 2hrs time pressure, no commander of a modern Army would rush in his company to an objective when he expects massive looses. a lot of military ops take waaay longer this is not anymore WWII where high looses are acceptable.

So give me more time and i am glad with spotting like Real World, but with a Gamey 2hrs limit u may watch out in case of spotting rules.

just my 0.02 cents

I have to quote that. My opinion aswell. Yes it should be hard to spot hidden units. But if you have the Right Tool or Unit on Hand and just watch a short Sector there definatly should be a chance there. As it is right now there isnt a Single Chance in a Million to spot hidden units?

[Secondbrooks]

Would be interesting to hear how it has changed.

One minute seems to be maximum time spotting needs to be done, after that spotting doesn't get anykind bonuses. Can't say that is hard tested statistics but that is gut feeling i'm having. So basically (if my gut-feeling is reality in game?) sitting men around on hill for half an hour is not optimal solution. More optimal solution, even if not most optimal, might be to move men some amount of distance, pause them for minute and then move them to another spot where they again halt for a minute.

I believe most optimal solution would be to move men 6-12 times shorter amounts of distances while halting for 5-10 seconds. But that goes way too much to micromanagement for my liking

[Sgt Joch]

From what I observed, it can take several minutes observation to spot a unit. In a scenario I am playing, 2 AFVs were hiding in woods. A recon team on top of a building about 500 meters away spotted the first one after about 5 minutes and the second one after about 10 minutes. A M1 on top of a hill about 1 km away also took several minutes to spot them.

Of course, the spotting has probably been reduced as far as we would want it.

[Secondbrooks]

SGT Joch:

I ran little test where infantry were in trenches while my USMC snipers (crack) were overwatching them. Syrian troops hiding in trenches covered with brush and in bare gravel ground. snipers were in top of multistory building.

All spotting happened in one minute, after that i waited 20 minutes and nothing new got revealed if i didnt' fiddle with hide command which Syrians were having issued. Snipers might see more units when i un-hid Syrians (they raised to their knees), but when they went hiding again snipers lost them. I'm not telling distances where enemies got revealed and such as i dont' remember them too well but spotting ranges were from 200 to 800 meters.

Not very great test but made in 100% controlled and observable enviroment, with nothing interfereing it. But Maybe vehicles are different then infantry... Ofcourse it might also be that vehicles suddenly moving little (=turret turning), driver pressing gas pedal or something was involved. If it was regular combat scenario you played?

[Peter Panzer]

In v.1.11, it seems as though structures continue to offer too much concealment.

I would like to know more about how units in buildings or on rooftops are to be preemptively spotted. In my experience, the only way to locate infantry in buildings is to wait for them to put holes in you. The inability of spotting units to win the initiative versus units in structures seems to hold equally true for AFV's and infantry.

My latest experience had a full squad of US infantry with two M1A1SA's in tow remain unable to locate REDFOR infantry in the interior and rooftop of a single story building to their direct front, over open ground at a distance of 50m in broad daylight. There were no civvies in the virtual AO.

The US infantry toted eight pairs of rested, veteran, unsuppressed eyeballs for "spotting" from their exposed, flat position. The two M1's chipped in with six FLIR's (Loader, Gunner and TC) with magnified optics. All BLUFOR units had an unobstucted LOS.

Think the BLUFOR could spot the six homies in pajamas toting AKM's and an RPG standing on a rooftop 50m to their front? Nope. Pehaps said homies habit of heaving a flock of hand grenades on their position would give away the REDFOR's location, especially to the overwatching tank crews scanning the facade with their high tech doodads. Nope. Surely, a second REDFOR squad moving "Fast" across the same rooftop would tip off the BLUFOR, right? Nope.

The REDFOR units were only spotted after they opened up with small arms. Even though the building was observed for over 10 minutes at close range with a host of optics. This, despite their standing head and shoulders above the rooftop wall and their heavily armed compatriots leering out of the first floor windows.

MOUT actions would benefit greatly from a reduction in structure's ability to grant overly high levels of concealment. Could this please be toned down in v.1.12 as I fail to see how MOUT scenarios can be either fun or realistic as things stand.

Relatedly, can we please have the ability to use the Target/LOS tool and set Cover Arcs with M707's (recon Humvee) in-game? I love that they are include in the game, but they are extremely limited in their current utility.

Other than that, v.1.11 is a big step forward and crossed numerous key items off of my personal "BFC, please fix or do somefink" list! Thanks for the continued support!

[Other Means]

I think the point about the "Fast" moving infantry is certainly valid. But stationary enemies in a building? I don't think you'd be able to spot them if they didn't want to be seen.

[Peter Panzer]

Other Means:

I suspect, we are not that far apart on this actually.

I am not asking for a full, near-instant ID of units inside of structures and atop walled rooftops. What I would like to see is AFV's with thermals being able to spot these guys after several minutes or at the very least generate a "?" marker. The same would hold true for infantry, especially those with binouculars, high-powered optics (snipers) and/or ACOGs. Presently, it seems that units inside of structures and on walled rooftops get the drop on those outside and below damn near 100% of the time - that is neither realistic, nor fun.

I find it difficult to believe that veteran tank crewman with access to six thermal, magnified sights would not spot six guys with their heads and upper torsos exposed, repeatedly hucking frags off a rooftop 50 meters to their direct front. Hell, you could count the pores on their noses on full magnification at that range. The game didn't give me so much as a generic "?" contact marker even after ten-plus minutes of observation prior to the skirmish. Mind you, the REDFOR units were not "Hiding" they were full-on, sign-me-up-for-my-virgins standing in front of two M1's!

I agree that it is reasonable for infantry in a building to remain unspotted to those outside some of the time, especially if they are "Hiding." What's more, I find it perfectly realistic for structures to harbor a concealment "bonus." It's just a bit overdone at present.

I hope this helps. Thanks for all of your work on the game thus far.

[Paper Tiger]

Some interesting points there PP...

What I would like to see is AFV's with thermals being able to spot these guys after several minutes or at the very least generate a "?" marker

In any MOUT situation it's a pretty safe guess that there are civilians in that house too and they're probably doing they're absolute darndest to stay down and hidden too. Do your thermal optics discriminate between civvies and combatants?

Mind you, the REDFOR units were not "Hiding" they were full-on, sign-me-up-for-my-virgins standing in front of two M1's!

LOL. I guess the game engine just assumes that if they're in a building and not firing their weapons that they're making some effort to conceal themselves. Those same units with a Hide command will continue to hide right up to the point where you enter their position. Depending on their skill level, they will stay hidden even if you are in the same room as them. Troops with low experience will get jittery and not hide so effectively.

I agree that it is reasonable for infantry in a building to remain unspotted to those outside some of the time, especially if they are "Hiding." What's more, I find it perfectly realistic for structures to harbor a concealment "bonus." It's just a bit overdone at present.

and, from an earlier post...

MOUT actions would benefit greatly from a reduction in structure's ability to grant overly high levels of concealment.

My take on this is that most of us are playing 'worst case' scenarios rather than there being a fault in the game design. If you are fighting against uncons with very low quality settings, they'll give up their positions VERY quickly if you put a bit of area fire on their building, especially in v1.11. Rather than reduce the building's ability to conceal, which SHOULD be almost perfect, instead, encourage scenario designers to reduce the quality of the Syrian forces to more realistic levels. If you're playing MOUT missions as the US v crack/elite, fanatical uncons then you ARE going to have the Army's worst nightmare scenario that can only be avoided by levelling that building beforehand.

[Battlefront.com]

I agree with Paper Tiger's last statement. The truth is spotting enemies in MOUT situations is not an easy thing. If anything we are probably too generous with spotting, even with v1.11. I attended a conference about urban warfare and this was listed as one of the biggest problems. The US government has been handing out huge amounts of money to make this less of a problem. Everything from audio triangulation of gunfire to new thermal devices that can see through walls... it's getting very high tech because binoculars, FLIR, and the old Mk I Eyeball just aren't certain enough.

As has been stated, guys inside buildings are generally trying not to be seen. This is pretty easy to do, actually, especially in certain lighting conditions and when the spotting unit is in motion. Next time you guys are in a MOUT environment, try to figure out how many people are in each room of each room in each building within your field of vision. Obviously it's just you and you have no thermals (unless you are a rich Peeping Tom ), but I think it's a worthy exercise to note how difficult it is to observe very specific conditions within each room.

Steve

[Peter Panzer]

Thanks everyone, I appreciate the opportunity for feedback.

I totally agree that troops inside of structures should be difficult to locate that makes perfect sense to me.

What seems askew is that even troops standing on flat, non-walled roofs of one story structures can hurl frags into the teeth of scanning AFV's and modernized infantry and not be seen, seemingly in perpetuity. Likewise, they can move at a "Fast" pace and not have a chance to be detected. Now friends, those are some serious Juha trickster types right there.

It is the sense of absoluteness I get from v.1.11 in this regard that seems off. It does not seem that there is any opportunity for units associated with structures to be spotted before they open fire with small arms.

Agreed, it should be difficult and in some cases particularly so, to ID the OPFOR in structures prior to their pulling the trigger first. Difficult, yes. Impossible, no.

All I seek is the possibility, however small, that units in structures can be spotted prior to their opening fire if the conditions are suitable. Furthermore, if those dudes are standing on a flat roof waving their danglies at the business end of a pair of AFV's or a twelve pack of Jarheads they should get IDed and hosed.

Structures should not guarantee initiative.

[Taki]

I dont have Problem with: "Infantry in Buildings that are hiding should be hidden for very long"

I understand that point. But the hidden Infantry almost got all their spotting capabilitiy that they can have inside there without any hiding disadvantages. As i mentioned in another post sometime ago that its true that its almost impossible to spot hidden enemys in buildings i ask that question:

Do the US Forces just go out jumping around and wait for a nervous man (wich isnt simulated in the Game, they are Icecold on Ambush Situations) to pull the Trigger and then react to it?

Thats the only way In Game right now to find hidden enemys. Comeon guys, come off that point of view.

Hard to spot = okay for me

impossible without any negtive modifiers for the hidden guys? = absolut no go!

[Paper Tiger]

Furthermore, if those dudes are standing on a flat roof waving their danglies at the business end of a pair of AFV's or a twelve pack of Jarheads they should get IDed and hosed.

Perhaps you should be petitioning BFC for the addition of a 'waggle danglies' command to be added to the command interface.

[Other Means]

What seems askew is that even troops standing on flat, non-walled roofs of one story structures can hurl frags into the teeth of scanning AFV's and modernized infantry and not be seen, seemingly in perpetuity.

I think you're right. Do you have a save of the guys throwing grenades and not being spotted?

I think with them standing on a roof is one of those things I accept as an abstraction - I'm usually not looking at their actual stance. I accept that although the game portrays them standing they're actually hunkered behind the parapet lobbing over it. But I'm probably wrong to do so. Email me the save so I can have a better look at it please.

Ta.

Likewise, they can move at a "Fast" pace and not have a chance to be detected. Now friends, those are some serious Juha trickster types right there.

To my mind "Fast" on the roof should be easy to spot. Fast in a building not - but still possible.

It is the sense of absoluteness I get from v.1.11 in this regard that seems off. It does not seem that there is any opportunity for units associated with structures to be spotted before they open fire with small arms.

Agreed, it should be difficult and in some cases particularly so, to ID the OPFOR in structures prior to their pulling the trigger first. Difficult, yes. Impossible, no.

Steve has it from the horses mouth that this is what happens so I'm not going to argue against hard data.

...although I'd have thought being looked at with thermals - especially at night - would give a chance to be spotted.

I think recon-by-fire should work a bit better as well.

TBH this is one of the hardest things to tweak because there's compelling arguments from both sides. Worth having the discussion though.

As I say, send me the example you're referring to and I'll see if it seems wrong to me as well.

Thanks.

[Paper Tiger]

Steve has it from the horses mouth that this is what happens so I'm not going to argue against hard data

Thank you OM, that's probably the most telling point. Although this is just a game, BFC do pride themselves with their attention to detail in the rendering of their game. If the US Army can reasonably do something, then it's IN the game already. I think expectations of what the US Army CAN do are somewhat exaggerated by some of us forum frequenters and that's really not a bad thing either when you consider the larger implications of it.

Just what real life capabilities do you guys, Taki in particular, think that we're missing from the game that allow people to see through walls? Thermal Imaging? Yes, tanks and IFVs are equipped with these gadgets but what can they actually tell you? There's somebody in that house? But it's a city and that's what MOUT IS. The chances are extremely likely that it's just a family cowering in there. A curtain just twitched? "Open Fire with everything boys!" when it might be some kid or her granny peeping out? Now if you're talking about MOUT in a deserted city, that's a completely different affair but then, that really isn't MOUT is it?

BTW, the 'Recon by fire' bit is how I do it in the game. With v1.11, it works really well too and gives me some measure of initiative.

[Thomm]

I think you're right. Do you have a save of the guys throwing grenades and not being spotted?

I think I saw something like this lately. A RPG team that lobbed grenades well outside their covered arc.

I was upset when they did so, but since they were not spotted, I all awarded them medals!

Best regards,

Thomm

[Sgt Joch]

SGT Joch:

I ran little test where infantry were in trenches while my USMC snipers (crack) were overwatching them. Syrian troops hiding in trenches covered with brush and in bare gravel ground. snipers were in top of multistory building.

All spotting happened in one minute, after that i waited 20 minutes and nothing new got revealed if i didnt' fiddle with hide command which Syrians were having issued. Snipers might see more units when i un-hid Syrians (they raised to their knees), but when they went hiding again snipers lost them. I'm not telling distances where enemies got revealed and such as i dont' remember them too well but spotting ranges were from 200 to 800 meters.

Not very great test but made in 100% controlled and observable enviroment, with nothing interfereing it. But Maybe vehicles are different then infantry... Ofcourse it might also be that vehicles suddenly moving little (=turret turning), driver pressing gas pedal or something was involved. If it was regular combat scenario you played?

My observations are all from the first mission of GeorgeMc's "Forging Steel" campaign. I was surprised by the results as well since spotting in 1.10 and before was very quick. It does appear to me that there is a advantage to spotting over several turns, but maybe we can get BFC to comment.

[gunnersman]

I am playing the TF Thunder campaign once again and am on the third mission. It is the mission which you are to cross the salt pan (assuming you succeeded in the first two missions). The Syrian ATGM launches seem to take forever to spot, dust cloud and all, if at all.

[Peter Panzer]

Good discussion guys, I will try to cover as much as I can.

Other Means:

I think with them standing on a roof is one of those things I accept as an abstraction - I'm usually not looking at their actual stance. I accept that although the game portrays them standing they're actually hunkered behind the parapet lobbing over it. But I'm probably wrong to do so.

Thanks for the open perspective.

I suppose I come at this from the opposite angle. Given that the game goes to length to take into account elevation when modeling various levels of LOS (prone, kneeling, standing, etc.) when I see an onscreen representation of a person standing I say to myself, yep, that guy is standing - not crouching, squatting or practicing his Lotus posture.

TBH this is one of the hardest things to tweak because there's compelling arguments from both sides. Worth having the discussion though.

I agree, but that's the fun of being a tester, right?. Thanks for offering to take a look at a file, that's really all I can ask for. I will get one to you after the weekend and you guys can evaluate things accordingly.

Paper Tiger:

I welcome the counterpoints, thanks for continuing to weigh in.

I think expectations of what the US Army CAN do are somewhat exaggerated by some of us forum frequenters...

True, but I do not count myself among those who grant US military hardware miraculous powers. Remember, all I am asking for is that units have the possibility to locate units in and above structures, which it presently seems the game does not do well or perhaps at all. I am not requesting flawless sensors or X-ray vision.

How do you square this...

The chances are extremely likely that it's just a family cowering in there. A curtain just twitched? "Open Fire with everything boys!" when it might be some kid or her granny peeping out?

...with this?

BTW, the 'Recon by fire' bit is how I do it in the game. With v1.11, it works really well too and gives me some measure of initiative.

If we are recreating MOUT with a semblance of realism and concern for simulated ROE's, wouldn't my request for the ability to possibly ID targets in structures be more apt than your tactic of hammering the structure with ordnance to gain "...some measure of initiative."

See, I don't want to have to level the virtual apartment row as a premptive measure every time because that's the only way the game allows me to "draw first." I want my little guys to be able to at least have a chance to preemptively observe and ID targets as reasonably as possible as is conducted in real world operations. I have included some excerpts from various sources you may find interesting below.

Now before anyone gets torqued, I am not claiming these accounts are an impenetrable collection of "hard data," but they do show I am not as off my rocker as some are implying. In any event, I hope they are interesting. Note, all italics are mine.

3rd Battalion, 5th Marines Second Battle of Fallujah AAR

The egress routes the Guerrillas use are preplanned and well rehearsed. They move in groups and withdrawal perpendicular to Marines' forward line of troops (FLOT). Their movement is through windows of houses, down back alleys, and from roof to roof (only when obscured from Marine overwatch positions).

Now fellas, why do you suppose those sneaky evildoers would only move on rooftops that were out of the Marines LOS? Probably because the Marines were IDing them on a consitent basis and dropping them at range.

"Fallujah Is Realm of Snipers on Both Sides" Jason Keyser, Associated Press (First Battle of Fallujah)

Residents of Fallujah have lived in terror of the Marine snipers and have blamed them for civilian deaths, particularly during heavy fighting in the first week after the siege began April 5. Iraqis said it seemed that just stepping outside or looking out a window at the wrong time could draw sniper fire.

Oh dear. You know what's next.

From the same account...

A 16-year-old living near al-Khulafaa, Mohannad Abdel-Rahman, went up on his roof and was shot in the head by a sniper, his relatives told AP. When his uncle went to retrieve his body, he too was killed, they said.

Damn, looks like Mohannad and his uncle picked the wrong day to go out on the roof without their +4 Cloaks of Invisibility. Turns out, combatants were observing the rooftops, IDing targets (legitimate or not) and scoring hits.

From the same account describing a USMC sniper team...

Crane, 30, from Fort Lauderdale, Fla., and his team spend hours scanning streets and rooftops through powerful scopes that pick up body heat, outlining the shape of a figure in darkness.

Long shots, sometimes at distances of 1,000 yards, have to be finely adjusted...

The Iraqi gunman was casually walking across a rooftop, and he slowly brought a Soviet-made sniper rifle up to aim as though he were a farmer readying to take a few shots from his back porch for fun, said Sgt. Ryan Warden, 28, who was watching the man’s movements.

Behold, the modern US Marine. He can see people on rooftops and engage them at distances beyond 50 meters.

"Conflict in Iraq: The Sniper who Shoots on Video" Jerome Taylor, The Independent (UK)

... in an account given to the Army Times, Sgt Randall Davis, a 25-year-old sniper, described spotting his target, an armed Iraqi on a rooftop about 300 metres away. "It was just getting dark. I saw a guy step in front of the light," he said.

Sgt Davis knew he was watching another sniper by the way the man stepped back into the shadows and crept along the roofline to spy down on a squad from his unit - B Company, 5th Battalion, 20th Infantry Regiment. "Most people, when they get on a roof, will just move around and do what they've got to do," he said in a recent interview here. "But this guy was moving slowly, trying to have smooth motions, trying to stay in the shadows."

He didn't have to wait long before the enemy sniper made his second mistake. "He silhouetted his rifle from the waist up, trying to look over at the guys in the courtyard," Sgt Davis said. His M-14 fired only once. "I hit him in the chest. He fell back. His rifle flew out of his hands... You could see blood spatter on the wall behind where he was standing."

Whatever Sgt. Davis, go choke down some more poundcake. We wargame nerds have it on solid authority that what you describe is unrealistic.

Honestly, IDing someone on a rooftop purposely trying to avoid detection and at twilight no less? At 300 meters? Scoring a hit before the sniper fired his weapon? Silhouehtting his upper body while peering down on targets below? Poppycock. Those Marines should have brought up an M1 and reconned by fire.

From Paper Tiger:

Perhaps you should be petitioning BFC for the addition of a 'waggle danglies' command to be added to the command interface.

Alas, my friend, until BFC models sunburn, we may be reaching for that one (ahem...so to speak).

I hope this is taken in the spirit of fun and helpfulness. I think this game has come a long way and there sure isn't anything else that comes close.

Oh, for those at home keeping score, this is the cue for someone to come in and post half a dozen "we were takin' fire and couldn't locate the source" excerpts.