Vehicle Smoke Launcher Behavior

[c3k]

Gents,

Part of this has already been mentioned. Namely, that the smoke from a vehicle's smoke dispensers should be launched in the direction the turret is facing, not the hull (obviously, this should only be true of turret mounted dispensers). Right now, vehicle SMOKE is tied to hull facing.

This next bit may be common knowledge to the rest of you, but I've only just figured it out.

If I plot a movement command for a vehicle, the SMOKE will be commanded to be placed at whatever the PRESENT hull facing is. That's not too clear. If my tank, for example, if facing EAST but I plot a fast move NORTH then I activate the movement segment and select SMOKE, it seems obvious that the hull will be facing NORTH at the end of the move. However, the 20 meter SMOKE target will be affixed to the end of fast move (as expected) but rather than facing NORTH (as the tank's hull and turret are) the SMOKE will be facing EAST.

This holds true in all cases. The smoke will be ordered deployed in the direction the vehicle is facing at the moment the order is selected, rather than the direction the vehicle will be facing when it gets to that waypoint.

It seems that the smoke may be deployed properly (in the direction the hull is facing when it gets to the ordered location), but the direction (and hence placement) is erroneously depicted.

Next up is the number of smoke deployments.

A Stryker (for example) has 16 smoke tubes grouped in 4 sets of 4. In the maintenance listing (crescent wrench and DAMAGE title) for the vehicle there are 4 Smoke launcher listings. At each ordered SMOKE deployment, 4 grenades are launched. (2 pair each from symmetric clusters.) Yet, the maintenance listing does not change regardless of how many are launched. (This is not in error: after 2 deployments all four clusters each have 2 grenades left. Hence, all 4 smoke launchers are still operational.)

This same maintenance tab (DAMAGE) gives the player information about the load status of various weapons on the vehicle. During reloads or movement, the BMP's AT-4c is greyed out for example.

How can a player find out how many smoke deployments are available for each vehicle?

Thanks,

Ken

[Thomm]

Great post, valid points.

I think I brought up the smoke launcher direction issue earlier, either on the beta board or here. I do not know what is the current status, though.

Best regards,

Thomm

[stoex]

c3k,

+1 on the obvious turret/hull smoke launcher discrepancy...i hope this gets fixed since it is clearly unlogical and can sometimes mean the difference between life and death for vehicles.

I have also noticed the thing about the direction of the smoke command when given at a waypoint. It doesn't concern me that much since I tend to let vehicles use their smoke automatically in defense and only rarely on direct orders. Certainly I never attach smoke to waypoints since I don't always know which way the vehicle will be facing when it reaches the waypoint (due to pathfinding around obstacles). Also I play RT exclusively which lets me pop smoke on the go when I think I need it.

About the number of smoke deployments per vehicle, the only way I've been able to figure out to know how many rounds of smoke a vehicle has is to zoom in and count the tubes, then divide by four, as the discharges seem to come in fours for all vehicles. Most vehicles seem to have two bursts, some four.

[Dietrich]

My observation is that the smoke rounds are modeled -- zoom in on a vehicle with smoke launchers, and you can see the rounds fitted into the launchers. After a Pop Smoke command, you can see which ones are empty and thus determine how many are fired per command and how many you have left. Doing this test with each type of vehicle may be time-consuming, but it's worth it if you want to know how many smoke-poppings you'll get from each type of vehicle.

[c3k]

Dietrich is correct.

The Stryker has 16 smoke grenades. The BMP-1 has 6. Experience has taught me that the Stryker can deploy smoke 4 times. The BMP-1 can only do so once.

The grenade tubes are visibly empty after use.

I do not have the patience to test every vehicle and every model of each vehicle to determine how many times smoke can be deployed. My remaining brain cells are far too limited in number to devote to remembering that information anyway. Now, give me an icon, or bright green menu item and that'd be a different story.

Does anyone want to run the tests and post the results?

Regards,

Ken

[Flanker15]

I would like my vehicles to ease off the smoke grenades a bit more personally.

I hate having my tank pop-smoke and reverse when a 12.7mm bullet hits the tracks. I'd like it if they only used them if they are in real danger of being destroyed.

[stoex]

+1 on that, Flanker15.

I understand how vehicles will try to bug out if they get hit by something and don't know where it came from, but I really hate when a vehicle gets shaken up a bit, but not destroyed, by some AT enemy that my vehicle has LOS/LOF to and can easily destroy...and instead of getting a grip and blasting the enemy to bits, my guys pop smoke and reverse into a nearby forest. Gives the other guy all the time he needs to reload and set up his ambush anew *sigh*

Examples: ERA Bradley vs. RPG, Recoilless Rifle, or BMP-1

[Dietrich]

In playing "USMC Hills and Highways" last night, I observed a rather sensible instance of TacAI behavior involving smoke launchers:

I had an LAV-AT in hull-down position and targeting a static T-54. Immediately after launching the second of two TOWs (both of which missed; in all it used 5 TOWs to score a hit, which was a KO), the LAV-AT popped smoke and reversed back out of sight (even though the T-54 had not brought its cannon to bear). This makes sense, since the TOW launcher takes a while to reload and it wouldn't do to just be sitting there (even if hull-down relative to the enemy). The slight downside to this behavior is that the LAV-AT has one four-round smoke mortars on each side and fires four smoke rounds per popping, and so it can only pop smoke twice.

[stoex]

Dietrich,

That is definitely sensible and desirable AI behaviour...let me just clarify one thing: You say your LAV-AT popped smoke and reversed 'immediately after launchíng its second TOW' at the T-54. I take it the defensive action was actually taken after the second missile missed its target...

Please don't misunderstand, not complaining about 'inaccurate description' or trying to be smart about TOW LOS technicality. No offense meant, just trying to be sure I understand correctly what you are describing.

[Dietrich]

Stoex,

+1 on the clarification. Yes, the LAV-AT fired the second TOW, guided it to a miss (sounds ironic, eh?), then popped smoke and reversed out of LOS. Shortly thereafter, I moved the LAV-AT under cover to a different hull-down firing position, and again it fired two TOWs, then popped smoke and reversed out of LOS. By this time it had used up its smoke rounds. I ordered it into hull-down position again, and it fired (and properly guided) a fifth TOW and scored a knock-out hit. Finally! =)

[stoex]

Thanks Dietrich I thought so...

Repeat: very sound and desirable AI behaviour there! And a thrilling little episode with a happy ending

[Dietrich]

Kein Problem.

*** SPOILER ALERT!!! ***

By being stealthy, I was able to spot both 'emplaced' T-54s without eliciting fire from either of them. Despite calling in three 'quick' 81mm barrages (at least two of which scored definite hits) on one of the tanks, both were actually knocked out by my LAV-AT.

[stoex]

I'm reminded of a very memorable battle I had with ATGM Strykers during the TF Thunder Campaign...I forget the name of the battle, the one where you have a very small recce force scouting for vehicles in a fairly large, rolling desert map.

***SPOILERS***

I had no trouble taking out the first group of Syrians in their BMP's since they where bolting across the map willy-nilly with their eyes closed (it seemed). I got to the last phase line very early, but severely outpaced my javelin teams with my ATGM Strykers. I had one Stryker on each edge of the map, but only one had LOS to the first group of tanks that showed up in the gully and caught me totally by surprise. The Stryker took out one tank, then another tank came up out of the gully about 150m away from the Stryker while he was reloading. He managed to pop smoke in time and beat a hasty retreat. By this time I was scrambling everything else I had to get more eyes on, even shunting my 12.7mm Strykers into view of the tanks for brief moments to keep them occupied. I finally managed to time it such that my ATGM Stryker came back into view just as my Javelin teams were launching their puppies, and by careful targeting and a bit of luck (a miss by one of the tanks), they were all destroyed with no damage to my side (except for the heavy stench of urine inside the trusty ATGM Stryker ). The second platoon of tanks was crushed within seconds as I now had ample overwatch on the arrival zone and plenty of metal death left to distribute!

I must add that some of the things I did in the course of this fight are only possible in RT and might be considered gamey by some grogs (like pausing at half-second intervals to see when the tanks' barrels began to rotate and scooting appropriately). In WEGO I would have been toast within minutes of the first tank platoon's arrival. It was great fun though, and I was biting my nails all the way, whooping every time things worked out with not a second to spare.

[fireship4]

You guys have said "desirable behaviour" but even better would be not to deploy smoke in that situation unless that tank had actually spotted the LAV - reversing back into cover and therefore not wasting precious smoke rounds.

Btw in real life maybe it is possible for crews to reload smoke dispensers? Might be nice if left alone for a while a vehicle could do this in game?

Injecting diesel into the engine to produce smoke also rings a bell... maybe too much to ask for. Though im sure it wouldnt be so hard to add an extra button so a cloud is produced behind the vehicle, you could create lines of smoke...

[stoex]

You are right of course, fireship4....very valid input from a RL perspective.

While your first two statements are both nice ideas, I'm afraid they are probably either difficult to implement in game from an AI POV (deciding when to pop smoke and when not) or rather too low priority compared to other possible tweaks (reloading smoke launchers during missions). The reloading thing would also require a crew member to exit the vehicle, which opens up a whole nother can of worms. Would be nice, admittedly, but hardly feasible.

Honestly I'm happy enough that the AI worries about concealment during ATGM reload sequences, at least under certain circumstances. That is what I meant by 'desirable behaviour'.

As for the diesel injection for smoke trails....well, I think that is considered bad practice in RL as it can lead to engine failure, and it's definitely beyond the scope of CMSF IMO.

[fireship4]

I'm impressed at the AI's behaviour don't get me wrong.

I saw the diesel thing on "Top Gear" a good but way too scripted car program in the UK.

[stoex]

Yeah 'Top Gear' is fun...I watch it when I have time. Funny but not extremely informative....