MarkEzra Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Yep this is confirmed. Concealment is all but gone... ? I just had air guard in Strykers spot a Kornet team hiding ~500m away with Hide orders (hotseat) in brush and bushes, and foxholes... :eek: They spotted them within only a few seconds of coming into LOS of the positions. I earnestly suggest you play more than a few minutes of the game prior to making ANY conclusions. It's poor testing technique and leads often as naught to erroneous conclusions. Oh, and sweeping generalizations aren't helpful when bug hunting. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Strykers do have a pretty good electro-optic suite on the CROWS, let alone the CROWS II (although I don't know if the latter is modelled). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[hirr]Leto Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Yep this is confirmed. Concealment is all but gone... ? I just had air guard in Strykers spot a Kornet team hiding ~500m away with Hide orders (hotseat) in brush and bushes, and foxholes... :eek: They spotted them within only a few seconds of coming into LOS of the positions. Thanks for posting this Adam. Free America still has the right to know about potential issues in the game! LMAO!!! ; ) As Mark said, I wouldn't frame this as a bug or anything yet, but perhaps if more people report this, then we can have some discussion on it. Cheers! Leto 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 v1.20 allows the specific spotting of heavy weapons, like large ATGM launchers on tripods that stand out quite plainly in a relatively open landscape. And once you see the ATGM launcher, you know where to look for the crew. It's not hard to find them, especially when there are dozens of eyeballs looking, many with binoculars, at soldiers who are in what is very nearly open ground, as in the example posted just above. Additionally, the ATGM crew does not appear to be "hiding" as claimed (hiding is a specific state in the game). They are prone, but that is not the same thing. Everything looks fine to me about that situation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkEzra Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Leto - I'm not even calling it an "issue" man... let alone a bug. It's just an observation. No offence to the beta testers or battlefront is intended by this. "Goof"... Let's hope my testing doesn't live up to that particular appellation 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkEzra Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Thanks, prefer PBEM and my Demo dance card for the weekend is full. But I'd be glad to do an H2H PBEM when the Module hits. Just send me a setup (I'll be Red) or tell me what battle type/mix you prefer and I'll whip something up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Thanks but it won't be necessary. It doesn't appear to be a bug. Hiding doesn't add much concealment to troops when they are mostly in the open (i.e. they have nowhere to hide) and/or have a big difficult-to-conceal weapon like a tripod-mounted ATGM. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 I don't see any spotting problems in the screen shots. I mean come on - they are just laying out there in the open with a huge ATGM launcher . The one issue I can't figure out is how Charles can post on a message board when he is a brain in a jar . Incidentally the thought occurred to me that with one to one infantry modeling it would be possible to have individual soldiers going 'berzerk' or 'heroic' under certain circumstances. That guy who charges the machine gun nest after he sees his buddy get killed and just decides that they aren't going to take it anymore. Just sayin' 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Hmmm, if you were manning a crew-served weapon and the other side has the air support with all the cool gizmos helping them spot unwanted things - which includes you - wouldn't you camouflage your weapon pretty well? "Brush" certainly sounds like something where you could build up veggies to cover a tripod weapon, pretty much like a HMG in WW2. That would leave thermal sights to spot the unit. But the thermal sights works on people, so if that is the rationale then the tripod mounted ATGM shouldn't be easier to spot than any infantry unit with the same number of men. All this, of course, assuming the ATGM didn't fire and didn't move. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Thermal sights can actually work quite well on inanimate objects made of stuff like metal that absorb radiation (e.g., from the sun) at very different rates than most natural materials, and therefore tend to have a different heat signature than surrounding natural terrain. Of course, I don't actually know what the radiation absorption/re-emission profile of a Kornet launcher is, but it wouldn't surprise me if it shows up pretty well in the IR spectrum. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Thermal sights can actually work quite well on inanimate objects made of stuff like metal that absorb radiation (e.g., from the sun) at very different rates than most natural materials, and therefore tend to have a different heat signature than surrounding natural terrain. Of course, I don't actually know what the radiation absorption/re-emission profile of a Kornet launcher is, but it wouldn't surprise me if it shows up pretty well in the IR spectrum. But if you cover it up and deliberately obstruct the shape by placing shapes of similar absorbtion around it? Anyway, I don't think that Charles' rationalization of the easier spotting of crew-served weapons is based on thermal sights in the first place. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Anyway, I don't think that Charles' rationalization of the easier spotting of crew-served weapons is based on thermal sights in the first place. Mostly not, but it is a little bit related. For example, the optics on the Stryker do get a small bonus even in daytime because of thermal abilities. It's pretty abstract because it's difficult to attach precise numbers to this sort of thing, but high-quality optics/thermals do generally give CM soldiers a modest spotting advantage. Mainly it's the big ATGM though. CMSF's environment is intentionally sparse, and even the brush is "light" brush. There just aren't many places to hide in the desert. And at less than 500(?) meters range to the enemy, the ATGM teams are starting out in a situation that's not ideal for them. They'd rather be at 1000m or more, where they can hit but are harder to see and (mostly) outside of small arms range. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wengart Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 I noticed that after killing the crew on a ATGM it said weapon abandoned. So is it now possible to destroy or damage a crew served weapon? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wodin Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Incidentally the thought occurred to me that with one to one infantry modeling it would be possible to have individual soldiers going 'berzerk' or 'heroic' under certain circumstances. That guy who charges the machine gun nest after he sees his buddy get killed and just decides that they aren't going to take it anymore. Just sayin' Excellent idea. If it happens once eevry blue moon that would be great. Something to watch out for and get a real buzz when it happens. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 But if you cover it up and deliberately obstruct the shape by placing shapes of similar absorbtion around it? Anyway, I don't think that Charles' rationalization of the easier spotting of crew-served weapons is based on thermal sights in the first place. Sure. That will work just like it would for optical-spectrum concealment. But getting IR camouflage right is actually pretty complex; it's definitely not a case of WISIWYG. The U.S. Military actually spends a lot of time and money figuring out how to do this, and I'm not sure every Syrian regular is going to be all that savvy with this kind of thing. And in any event, as Steve notes, camo or no, that's pretty sparse terrain, and 500m is pretty close range for modern warfare. Any bush (real or manufactured) large enough to fully conceal an AT-14 and crew is probably going to get a very close look, simply because it is the best piece of cover in the vicinity. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pandur Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 crew served weapons can be knocked out for sure, i had this in the brit demo mission just befor. and as you saw it, they seem to abandom it too sometimes, didt saw that myself. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dietrich Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 the thought occurred to me that with one to one infantry modeling it would be possible to have individual soldiers going 'berzerk' or 'heroic' under certain circumstances. That guy who charges the machine gun nest after he sees his buddy get killed and just decides that they aren't going to take it anymore. Just sayin' I suppose so . . . but just because a guy sees his buddy get cut down by an MG and goes berserk and charges the MG position doesn't mean he doesn't get cut down as well. Rather than pitting my hopes on some guy once-in-a-blue-moon charging the MG position and happening to not get hit, I'd rather rely on my men doing the tactically wise thing and taking cover, while a second squad or fireteam discreetly works round to the flank, sneaking up to within 25 meters of the MG position and then lobbing half a dozen grenades into the pit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 I suppose so . . . but just because a guy sees his buddy get cut down by an MG and goes berserk and charges the MG position doesn't mean he doesn't get cut down as well. Rather than pitting my hopes on some guy once-in-a-blue-moon charging the MG position and happening to not get hit, I'd rather rely on my men doing the tactically wise thing and taking cover, while a second squad or fireteam discreetly works round to the flank, sneaking up to within 25 meters of the MG position and then lobbing half a dozen grenades into the pit. I'm just saying that it would add a bit of spice to things that's all - sort of like how people like the wall jumping animation. Troops under fire aren't always cool as cucumbers and they won't act predictably all the time every time. I don't think someone would want to rely on some VC or MOH award winner to carry the day because it would basically be a semi random event. However it would be nice if something like that were possible rather than impossible. That's the kind of stuff that books are written about and would add some flavor. I was just reading through a bit of the Nomonhan battle and the Japanese made a tank attack on a Soviet artillery position in the middle of a thunderstorm at night with the lightning flashes helping to illuminate the Soviet positions. It was pouring rain so hard that the Japanese tankers had to wear their gas masks in order to breathe. Coolness factor close to a ten on that one if you could do a battle like that in CM. I'm as groggly as the next guy but dang it, I like cool stuff too!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theFightingSeabee Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 I agree with ASL Veteran. The rare occurance of something cool would be exciting. Also, some mood enhancements like weather are cool too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.