panzermartin Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 If tube guy dies I shall be heavily distrought Yeah but with buddy aid the legend will live on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 If tube guy dies I shall be heavily distrought Be funny if he turned out to be the last American standing at the end. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Krejcirik Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Be funny if he turned out to be the last American standing at the end. Isn't it likely ? When Tube Guy dies, somebody else will pick-up his bazooka. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sawomi Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 The end is just a new beginning. Tube Guy is made for eternity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mord Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 He's like the Doctor Who of WWII...Yeah, I meant that to rhyme. Mord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanonier Reichmann Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Except the tube looks nothing like a sonic screwdriver... Regards KR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
para Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 The MG team that I had moved up next to the surviving Sherman on Hill 154 no longer has the main gun. I advance them forward with a flanking view of the Villa. Full size Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZPB II Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 They hop over it, neatly animated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
para Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 They hop over it, neatly animated. sweet thats what i was hoping..right when are we going to get some video footage BF? :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomm Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Flavor Objects, of which the Haystack is one, can provide concealment but not cover. I guess you meant "cover, but not concealment"??? Best regards, Thomm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Krejcirik Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 I guess you meant "cover, but not concealment"??? Why, it's more logical for it to provide concealment only. But I wonder does it block LOS directly, or is it abstacted ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkerT Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 I think you are right Thomm ... if nothing has changed in the doodad behavior from CMSF to CM:BN that is! This is from the CMSF forum, but written in a CM:BN thread (before creation of this here fine forum): link to post Correct... Flavor Objects provide cover but not concealment. There is no support for Flavor Objects larger than a single Action Spot. Of course we could create something like a glider, which crosses over many Action Spots, but it isn't worth the programming time to make it happen. Not with so many other things on people's want lists. Steve Hmmm however IMO, in this specific example of haystacks the 'natural' thing would actually be the other way around ... right, I mean at least as depicted in the ongoing CM:BN alpha DAR? Those haystacks look like a man or three can actually hide nicely behind one but they also look loosely bundled so that any bullet would pass right through. But anyway, the doodad behavior is of course also covering all the smaller stuff like barrels, tombstones etc. and onwards down in size where obtaining concealment is somewhat harder but actually providing decent cover. So I guess that overall doodad behavior of providing some cover but not concealment is okay. All the best Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wengart Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Why, it's more logical for it to provide concealment only. But I wonder does it block LOS directly, or is it abstacted ? More logical, yes. However, it would take quite a bit of processing power to correctly model LOS blocking from doodads and it would also require some work to get the tacai to properly use it as concealment. Whereas, with cover the tacai doesn't really have to do anything (you could think of it as abstracted cover) to the point that even if a soldier isn't optimally using the doodad as cover being nearby it may give him some cover from fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Krejcirik Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 Funny, I've always thought doodads provide concealment (less chance of being spotted), not cover. So it's the other way around. Or maybe Tube Guy can get both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottie Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 I understand that a fence or a wall is not a flavoured object but does a fence or a wall provide cover and concealment ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFCElvis Posted January 17, 2011 Author Share Posted January 17, 2011 I understand that a fence or a wall is not a flavoured object but does a fence or a wall provide cover and concealment ? A provides very good cover and concealment. Especially when hiding behind a wall and the spotter is at the same level. A fence will provide very little concealment (if any) and gives a little bit of cover against light arms fire. You can see the bullets bounce off of it sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vark Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 It's great that troops in woods are so concealed but if I were a tank sent into a forest I'd be making that coax and hull MG work overtime. I take it suppression fire is still stationary directional in CMBN and not mobile and between two points, which, if true, penalises armoured units fighting in this terrain. Combat reports in this theatre regularly mention tanks firing virtually non-stop to spray hedges, trees, buildings etc as a deterent to tank hunting teams. Often HE would follow any suspicious richochets observed, when firing into foliage cover, as it could indicate a gunshield being struck, the thinking being, better waste an HE round on a rock than let a PAK escape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanzfeld Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 It's great that troops in woods are so concealed but if I were a tank sent into a forest I'd be making that coax and hull MG work overtime. I take it suppression fire is still stationary directional in CMBN and not mobile and between two points, which, if true, penalises armoured units fighting in this terrain. Combat reports in this theatre regularly mention tanks firing virtually non-stop to spray hedges, trees, buildings etc as a deterent to tank hunting teams. Often HE would follow any suspicious richochets observed, when firing into foliage cover, as it could indicate a gunshield being struck, the thinking being, better waste an HE round on a rock than let a PAK escape. Yes and lets hope that longer (much longer) bursts come from these tanks that are spraying the opposite side of the hedgerow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFCElvis Posted January 17, 2011 Author Share Posted January 17, 2011 It's great that troops in woods are so concealed but if I were a tank sent into a forest I'd be making that coax and hull MG work overtime. I take it suppression fire is still stationary directional in CMBN and not mobile and between two points, which, if true, penalises armoured units fighting in this terrain. Combat reports in this theatre regularly mention tanks firing virtually non-stop to spray hedges, trees, buildings etc as a deterent to tank hunting teams. Often HE would follow any suspicious richochets observed, when firing into foliage cover, as it could indicate a gunshield being struck, the thinking being, better waste an HE round on a rock than let a PAK escape. The TacAI will fire at multiple targets. I didn't target anything while trying to escape because I was still holding out hope that even in withdraw I might get an LOS on the foxholes with the gun and hopefully get a shot off. If I had targeted the woods (which hindsight tells me would have been a better move) the TacAI would have changed the target to the gun if it had become exposed but breaking off my target command would have delayed that some and opened my up to possibly getting blowed up by the gun. I guess we see how well that train of thought worked out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chainsaw Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 It's great that troops in woods are so concealed but if I were a tank sent into a forest I'd be making that coax and hull MG work overtime. I take it suppression fire is still stationary directional in CMBN and not mobile and between two points, which, if true, penalises armoured units fighting in this terrain. Combat reports in this theatre regularly mention tanks firing virtually non-stop to spray hedges, trees, buildings etc as a deterent to tank hunting teams. Often HE would follow any suspicious richochets observed, when firing into foliage cover, as it could indicate a gunshield being struck, the thinking being, better waste an HE round on a rock than let a PAK escape. well you can do something similar already. do plenty of waypoints and every waypoint have different area target commands. put delay on waypoints of you want one spot more fired upon the another. Thats how I do in CMSF and works like a charm! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanzfeld Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 well you can do something similar already. do plenty of waypoints and every waypoint have different area target commands. put delay on waypoints of you want one spot more fired upon the another. Thats how I do in CMSF and works like a charm! It worked but kinda a PITA ya know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chainsaw Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 never had much issue with it being PITA tbh. its not often I need to do it so the few times I do it doesnt bug me. but sure, the amount of area firing might increase plenty in CMBN. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFCElvis Posted January 17, 2011 Author Share Posted January 17, 2011 well you can do something similar already. do plenty of waypoints and every waypoint have different area target commands. put delay on waypoints of you want one spot more fired upon the another. Thats how I do in CMSF and works like a charm! I never even considered that. What a great idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted January 17, 2011 Share Posted January 17, 2011 I think you are right Thomm ... if nothing has changed in the doodad behavior from CMSF to CM:BN that is! This is from the CMSF forum, but written in a CM:BN thread (before creation of this here fine forum): link to post Thanks for clarifying my previous post! Brain fart Spotting is done from Action Spot to Action Spot based on the configuration of the terrain, elevation, intervening terrain, and some other terrain specific issues. There are no exceptions for little bits of terrain within the Action Spot, such as a Haystack. This is why we can't make the Flavor Objects too big. If we did then it would, basically, rival the base terrain in terms of its concealment properties. Theoretically this could be done, but the computational overhead would largely negate the processing friendly Action Spot system. But since we already simulate Cover within an Action Spot, having a Flavor Object offer a variable amount of Cover is not a problem. The system is already taking "micro terrain" into account, such as individual trees, small folds in the ground, etc. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFCElvis Posted January 18, 2011 Author Share Posted January 18, 2011 1512 hrs With the loss of my Sherman on Hill 154 I have lost one of the most important elements of my advance up the hill. Having a Sherman on that hill gives me a big advantage. Together with the Sherman on Hill 144 most of the village can be covered with 75mm HE. If I stay away from the woods edge I feel confident that it is safe to keep a tank up there. With that in mind I commit one of my 3 reserve Shermans to get up on the hill as fast as possible. The rag tag infantry along the treeline of 154 can provide security for the portion of the hill it will be traveling past. As expected, I safely and quickly have an M4 back on Hill 154. Full size On Hill 144 I am being subject to constant hit and run missions by German infantry. They appear, fire off some shots and either disappear or die. It is like death by a thousand paper cuts. Never a major blow but enough to send men to ground and make my organization of troops on the hill difficult. Full size Men continue to arrive at the foot of Hill 144. This is shaping up to be the core of my attack on the Villa. Full size In the center area of operations advancing is very slow. Most of the units I am advancing with are the remnants of 3rd Plt/F Co. They are in pretty bad shape and have been harassed by machine gun fire causing them to constantly go to ground. I haven’t been able to get a read of exactly where the MG fire is coming from. Full size Back on Hill 154 more hit and run actions. The men are in such bad shape they throw their arms up rather than fight it out. Full Size Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts