Tanks not firing at target

[Georgie]

I have had several instances where I give a tank a fire order on a target and the tank doesn't fire. I understand that there is a clear LOF and a not so clear LOF. But, if the target line sticks no matter if the LOF is clear or not so clear the target line stuck, so it seems to me the tank should fire at the target . It would be like the TC telling the gunner to "put a few rounds rite over there, you can barley see it but shoot anyway" and the gunner saying or thinking "OK I can barley make it out but whatever." The trajectory of the rounds would strike the target or come close to it since its trajectory is "engineered". Either that or if the tank isn't going to fire then the target line shouldn't stick. That way you could move the tank for a better shot. How do other forum members feel about this?

[Michael Emrys]

I think that crew should not be drinking so much barley.

Michael

[womble]

I have had several instances where I give a tank a fire order on a target and the tank doesn't fire. I understand that there is a clear LOF and a not so clear LOF. But, if the target line sticks no matter if the LOF is clear or not so clear the target line stuck, so it seems to me the tank should fire at the target . It would be like the TC telling the gunner to "put a few rounds rite over there, you can barley see it but shoot anyway" and the gunner saying or thinking "OK I can barley make it out but whatever." The trajectory of the rounds would strike the target or come close to it since its trajectory is "engineered". Either that or if the tank isn't going to fire then the target line shouldn't stick. That way you could move the tank for a better shot. How do other forum members feel about this?

I agree that if the tank isn't going to fire, the line shouldn't stick. While it may be 'edge' conditions that make the 'aiming/rotating/firing' loop without ever actually firing, they're the sort of edge condition which we as players seek all the time: hull downs, keyholes, that sort of thing, so they happen more often than you might anticipate.

[Georgie]

Drinking "Barley" will be modeled in the Common Wealth module, wont it?

[CharlieMike24]

I think that crew should not be drinking so much barley.

Michael

Clearly they are cereal offenders....

[Boo Radley]

Clearly they are cereal offenders....

I hope you feel shame for that remark.

[CharlieMike24]

I hope you feel shame for that remark.

I understand your point of view. But I think that Barley swillers have a choice about their habit and should not be treat with leniency or as victims of our degenerate society.

[dieseltaylor]

I am surprised any of you has the rite to mock a mis-type.!

[Georgie]

I agree that if the tank isn't going to fire, the line shouldn't stick. While it may be 'edge' conditions that make the 'aiming/rotating/firing' loop without ever actually firing, they're the sort of edge condition which we as players seek all the time: hull downs, keyholes, that sort of thing, so they happen more often than you might anticipate.

It seems to me that this would be a problem for a lot of players especially RT players where time is more critical and the player doesn't have the time to baby sit his tanks. Its possible, I suppose, for a tank to get into the aiming/rotating/firing loop on its own without a target ever being issued by the player. The tank acquires a target on its own attempts to fire but gets stuck in the loop and if the target happens to be a AT gun or another tank just sits there and gets taken out. Is there any attention being paid by Battlefront to the "aiming/rotating/firing loop" problem?

[Chris Ferrous]

Ok, back on topic . . . .

Did the offending tank fire at anything at all, even using its MG?

Yesterday I had my first instance of a tank not firing at the designated target. The target line was crystal clear although there were some bushes close to the left of the LOS.

I was playing the AI in we-go mode and some HTs, which were standing quite a way back but were otherwise exposed, were troubling my infantry. So my tank was supposed to be the solution. It duly arrived on station, didn't find the target by itself, and then ignores the target request having located some remnants of an enemy squad nearby. Fair enough, that's realistic self-preservation, but it ignored the request again and fired at 'targets of opportunity', i.e. far off infantry, and studiously ignored the HT.

By now I was getting pretty frustrated and moved him forward about 15m, but due to the 'action spot syndrome' that didn't really remove the bushes from the left of the LOS. The target order set for the final waypoint was ignored again and throughout all of this, despite its rampant destruction of everything EXCEPT the target, the red target line stuck like glue to the HT when the tank was selected during playback.

FINALLY, when seemingly it could find no excuse not to bother with the HT, it calmly put a round straight through it first shot and blew it to bits!

Thank you, Tank Commander, be a bit more responsive next time!

But, we-go allows multiple playbacks, so I set up my viewing angle to watch the HT go kaboom! Nice one, TC, the HT was unoccupied and presumably had been all along so the tank had done the best thing in the circumstances.

Certainly, when only a few seconds later, an enemy tank appeared, my tank immediately targetted and dispatched it with another kaboom, followed by a secondary KABOOM 45 seconds later. Give that man a medal!

[Oddball_E8]

It seems to me that this would be a problem for a lot of players especially RT players where time is more critical and the player doesn't have the time to baby sit his tanks. Its possible, I suppose, for a tank to get into the aiming/rotating/firing loop on its own without a target ever being issued by the player. The tank acquires a target on its own attempts to fire but gets stuck in the loop and if the target happens to be a AT gun or another tank just sits there and gets taken out. Is there any attention being paid by Battlefront to the "aiming/rotating/firing loop" problem?

actually, id say its more of a problem for WeGo players than RT players... since time is even more critical there.

You give this order to a tank in RT and it doesnt fire, you can switch that order and move the tank at any time. (ie. babying your tank)

You do the same in WeGo and you will have to sit there watching the tank do nothing for 60 minutes (and possibly die during that time) without being able to influence it at all...

so it hurts WeGo players much much more than RT players.

[Georgie]

Ok, back on topic . . . .

Did the offending tank fire at anything at all, even using its MG?

Yesterday I had my first instance of a tank not firing at the designated target. The target line was crystal clear although there were some bushes close to the left of the LOS.

I was playing the AI in we-go mode and some HTs, which were standing quite a way back but were otherwise exposed, were troubling my infantry. So my tank was supposed to be the solution. It duly arrived on station, didn't find the target by itself, and then ignores the target request having located some remnants of an enemy squad nearby. Fair enough, that's realistic self-preservation, but it ignored the request again and fired at 'targets of opportunity', i.e. far off infantry, and studiously ignored the HT.

By now I was getting pretty frustrated and moved him forward about 15m, but due to the 'action spot syndrome' that didn't really remove the bushes from the left of the LOS. The target order set for the final waypoint was ignored again and throughout all of this, despite its rampant destruction of everything EXCEPT the target, the red target line stuck like glue to the HT when the tank was selected during playback.

FINALLY, when seemingly it could find no excuse not to bother with the HT, it calmly put a round straight through it first shot and blew it to bits!

Thank you, Tank Commander, be a bit more responsive next time!

But, we-go allows multiple playbacks, so I set up my viewing angle to watch the HT go kaboom! Nice one, TC, the HT was unoccupied and presumably had been all along so the tank had done the best thing in the circumstances.

Certainly, when only a few seconds later, an enemy tank appeared, my tank immediately targetted and dispatched it with another kaboom, followed by a secondary KABOOM 45 seconds later. Give that man a medal!

Your incident turned out OK. In my instance the tank was supposed to suppress a mg in order for a team to advance, time was critical so it would have been a good thing if the tank had fired at its target as directed. In another instance I had a squad in a building being decimated by a squad in a hedgerow. I had a tank that, according to the target line, had LOF , so I targeted the hedge row with area fire but the tank wouldn't fire so the squad continued to be decimated. Several moves latter I found that there was a slight rise between the tank and the targeted hedgerow so maybe this was the problem but it was not reflected in the targeting line. The target line stuck and stayed stuck for several turns.

[Sitting Duck]

...in WeGo and you will have to sit there watching the tank do nothing for 60 minutes...

I think you probably meant "seconds"

[Oddball_E8]

Heh, yeah... i just woke up when i wrote that

[Chris Ferrous]

Yes, so I can see how it can be hyper-critical for the tank to ignore everything except the targetting order.

I'll report back if I see anything similar.

Generally speaking, not just with tanks, I find LOS can come and go piecemeal. Just now I had a FO with a good LOS of a MG, but when I brought up a mortar into contact with the FO I found the FO was no longer able to 'see' the MG objective or even the ground around it to lay fire. He hadn't moved or had incoming fire in the meantime. Don't get it sometimes. :confused:

[womble]

It seems to me that this would be a problem for a lot of players especially RT players where time is more critical and the player doesn't have the time to baby sit his tanks.

Whut? The edge limits I'm talking about are more likely to happen when you have got time to fiddle and faff til you've got (what you hope is) the absolute minimum exposure of your assets. They're still 'more' likely (than you might expect) for RT players, since they still try and find the edges, even if they don't have the time to get them as fine as often as a WeGoer might (and that would only be when the Pause button isn't available, either through choice or playing head-to-head.

[Scipio]

I ordered area fire to a tank. Target was the 2nd floor of a house.

While the status text was indicating that the gunner is aiming/firing, no shot was fired.

I tried several times to reposition the tank, but it doesn't helped. No friendly troops were close to the target.

The tank had perfect LOS to the 2nd floor, but not to the groundfloor. I wondered if it had something to do with that.

[Georgie]

actually, id say its more of a problem for WeGo players than RT players... since time is even more critical there.

You give this order to a tank in RT and it doesnt fire, you can switch that order and move the tank at any time. (ie. babying your tank)

You do the same in WeGo and you will have to sit there watching the tank do nothing for 60 minutes (and possibly die during that time) without being able to influence it at all...

so it hurts WeGo players much much more than RT players.

Yes, your right, I have had that happen several times.

[Georgie]

Yes, so I can see how it can be hyper-critical for the tank to ignore everything except the targetting order.

I'll report back if I see anything similar.

Generally speaking, not just with tanks, I find LOS can come and go piecemeal. Just now I had a FO with a good LOS of a MG, but when I brought up a mortar into contact with the FO I found the FO was no longer able to 'see' the MG objective or even the ground around it to lay fire. He hadn't moved or had incoming fire in the meantime. Don't get it sometimes. :confused:

I had a situation similar to the "come and go LOF" that you had. I assigned my tank an area target on its left flank, there was LOF for several meters around the target. The tank turned its turret to the target but didn't fire. I noted that the tank didn't fire and during the next command phase I checked for LOF , the turret was still lined up with the target, but didn't have LOF, the target line was still there. I had saved the turn so on a hunch I reloaded and deleted the firing order and gave the tank a face order to the target area. This time the tank not only turned its turret to the prospected target but also turned its hull to face it. I checked LOF again and the tank still had LOF so I targeted the same tile for area fire and the next turn the tank fired. Apparently facing the target with the hull in addition to the turret changed some thing for the better. This observation along with the save game was submitted to BF but no response yet. It seems as though, at least to me, that there are some LOF inconsistencies, not a bug mind you but some thing that might need just a tweak or two.

[dieseltaylor]

I was a bit dismayed that I could not get my tank to deliberately fire at a bailed Sherman. Standing orders shoot till the buggger burns, in game terms I wanted the smoke. : (

[Georgie]

Whut? The edge limits I'm talking about are more likely to happen when you have got time to fiddle and faff til you've got (what you hope is) the absolute minimum exposure of your assets. They're still 'more' likely (than you might expect) for RT players, since they still try and find the edges, even if they don't have the time to get them as fine as often as a WeGoer might (and that would only be when the Pause button isn't available, either through choice or playing head-to-head.

I was thinking of an instance where in RT a tank has been moved and unluckily winds up in an "edge" position but the player doesn't notice and the tank just sits there with a "shoot me sign" and a "maybe" target in its sights and doesn't fire. If that "maybe" target happens to be an AT gun or a tank who has a good LOF on him then he gets taken out. In which game mode this happens the most often I don't know. I don't play RT, I like the micro management and replays too much in WeGO even with the 60 seconds of not being able to (gasp) change an order.

[akd]

I had a situation similar to the "come and go LOF" that you had. I assigned my tank an area target on its left flank, there was LOF for several meters around the target. The tank turned its turret to the target but didn't fire. I noted that the tank didn't fire and during the next command phase I checked for LOF , the turret was still lined up with the target, but didn't have LOF, the target line was still there. I had saved the turn so on a hunch I reloaded and deleted the firing order and gave the tank a face order to the target area. This time the tank not only turned its turret to the prospected target but also turned its hull to face it. I checked LOF again and the tank still had LOF so I targeted the same tile for area fire and the next turn the tank fired. Apparently facing the target with the hull in addition to the turret changed some thing for the better. This observation along with the save game was submitted to BF but no response yet. It seems as though, at least to me, that there are some LOF inconsistencies, not a bug mind you but some thing that might need just a tweak or two.

Georgie, I've looked closer at this and your tank is parked with a tree clipping deep inside it. I think the initial fire order is traced from the center of the tank, but when the turret turns, the tree trunk blocks the gunners sight and you no longer have LOF. Turning the hull causes the tank to change position in relation to the tree. If you move tank back just a bit, it has no problem firing into that area.

One instance of this problem was identified as a bug and fixed, but that was specific to targeting buildings.

[Chris Ferrous]

This might be an appropriate time to ask: does CMBN model restricted turret turning? For instance if the tank is between trees, narrow hedgerows or in an alley where there is literally no turning radius for the turret without it snagging.

[akd]

This might be an appropriate time to ask: does CMBN model restricted turret turning? For instance if the tank is between trees, narrow hedgerows or in an alley where there is literally no turning radius for the turret without it snagging.

Turret turning is not physically blocked, but close restricted terrain can have significant effects on LOS/LOF.

[Georgie]

Georgie, I've looked closer at this and your tank is parked with a tree clipping deep inside it. I think the I initial fire order is traced from the center of the tank, but when the turret turns, the tree trunk blocks the gunners sight and you no longer have LOF. Turning the hull causes the tank to change position in relation to the tree. If you move tank back just a bit, it has no problem firing into that area.

Thanks for the feedback akd, I'll reload the turn and take a look at the tree situation. If I understand what you said then a tree can be clipped,which tanks in the game do when they drive thru a wooded area but the tree will block LOF if its in front of the gunner. I hadn't considered that. I felt that if you can drive thru it then you can see thru it. Gotta know what to abstract and when not to abstract it. I wonder if the wind would have an affect on LOF by blowing branches back and forth in front of the gunners sight? If this is the case then I'll have to turn trees full on if I have a tank parked in a patch of woods to get an idea of how much they could be affecting LOF.