ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics?

[NUTTERNAME]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

Here's a cross-section of the mantlet.
http://i.imgur.com/vMj4Lku.png

There does appear to be some amount of overlap as far as the top portion of the mantlet and the turret armor This is seen in photos also. Clearly the mantlet approaches the top of the turret armor.

View attachment 51982.

Edit: It appears that Charles has implemented a fix just in time for Christmas! Yeh! It just makes me wonder about all the other mantlets and simplified armor models.

 

[NUTTERNAME]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

Interesting relic...note how small the "hole" is that BF is fixated on...

View attachment 51983

 

[Redwolf]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

High unbuttoned, low unbuttoned, buttoned up. Do you really want to micro-manage tanks at this level? Sounds like a tank shooter.
As for the King Tiger. In looking at the cut away of the front turret it seems there is considerable armor protection when a shot is coming from dead ahead. If it comes from 30 degrees or so and hits the mantlet there is no armor other than gun barrel behind it. So maybe 140-170mm? But all tanks even modern ones have this problem. You hit it at the gun barrel and it bypasses the armor.

I don't know one way or another whether I would want this to be directly controlled by the player (micro-managed). However, in any CM game it has been a problem that a simple "heads out but down" mode was not modeled (with or without control) for vehicle operators. The TCs are one thing, but I remember that this has always been an issue for halftrack crews.

Now, when it comes to control, as always I think that a game like CM should be driven by TacOps-like SOPs (which are inherited through the unit) instead of a bazillion of explicit per-vehicle commands.

 

[Old Dog]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

Really good observation/suggestion. That behavior would be common to the Unit. Ceratinly there would be oddball/non-conformists, but they would either learn or be gone quickly in a 'live-fire' situation.

 

[Redwolf]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

Either way, there is nothing realistic about men exposing themselves when weapon fire is going on. No soldier has the same posture when looking around while no known energy is around compared to when the person can hear shots. No soldier ever. Yet at the same time this is what CM has always modeled. In vehicle crew, in how infantry moves and seeks cover (or parks itself in front of cover, not taking into account where the fire is coming from, which real soldiers "occasionally" do), gun crew. The list goes on.

 

[NUTTERNAME]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

Either way, there is nothing realistic about men exposing themselves when weapon fire is going on. No soldier has the same posture when looking around while no known energy is around compared to when the person can hear shots. No soldier ever. Yet at the same time this is what CM has always modeled. In vehicle crew, in how infantry moves and seeks cover (or parks itself in front of cover, not taking into account where the fire is coming from, which real soldiers "occasionally" do), gun crew. The list goes on.

I guess it falls under the "TACAI" control. The toy-soldier modeling just doesn't cut it. Tanks are extremely exposed targets, and sticking out of the top of one is daring anyone to take a shot. Steve defended the killing of TC in droves as claiming it was "A statistical Certainty" or some such jibberish. Then again, he would rather blather on about not doing something than actually doing anything. That is a certainty.

In a related vein...Things like Marder crews sitting stationary while they are being targeted by multiple tanks. And still sitting still after a gun hit! Its just preposterous. The supposed TACAI models super-robotic antics.

 

[Old Dog]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

Well, I know of at least one exception to the common sense 'get down when you hear gunfire'.
There was buck sergeant in our second platoon (Co A 31E ) which was replacing a blown out culvert when Charlie started popping off from the treeline. Sgt Al Benites picked up the '60 and started walking toward the shooter, blazing away as he went. Stoopid, stoopid, but fortunately, he got away with it. Charlie boogied.
This was in about September '68, near Long Than.

 

[Redwolf]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

I guess it falls under the "TACAI" control. The toy-soldier modeling just doesn't cut it. Tanks are extremely exposed targets, and sticking out of the top of one is daring anyone to take a shot. Steve defended the killing of TC in droves as claiming it was "A statistical Certainty" or some such jibberish. Then again, he would rather blather on about not doing something than actually doing anything. That is a certainty.

In a related vein...Things like Marder crews sitting stationary while they are being targeted by multiple tanks. And still sitting still after a gun hit! Its just preposterous. The supposed TACAI models super-robotic antics.

One core thing I never liked about CM (all versions) is to put the load of reasonable (realistic, fun, challenging, useful) behavior all on the magic TacAI. That never had a chance of actually working, and it gets worse and worse as more commands and behaviors are needed.

The whole series would IMHO be much better off by making a lot less different commands but make them flexible with TacOps style SOPs. To put it into computer terms, instead of having a quadratic explosion of commands by multiplying out commands and behaviors against each other O(n^2) you would have linear expansion of player load by commands and SOPs each grow on their own O(n*2).

The most insane thing about it is that the load of implementing that set of actions growing quadratic is on the same programmer that does both the graphics and the physics, and the global AI on top. That can't go well for a project running decades.

The saddest part is that the competition pretty much dropped out of the race. Is anything happening with Panzer Command?

 

[NUTTERNAME]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

One core thing I never liked about CM (all versions) is to put the load of reasonable (realistic, fun, challenging, useful) behavior all on the magic TacAI. That never had a chance of actually working, and it gets worse and worse as more commands and behaviors are needed.

The whole series would IMHO be much better off by making a lot less different commands but make them flexible with TacOps style SOPs. To put it into computer terms, instead of having a quadratic explosion of commands by multiplying out commands and behaviors against each other O(n^2) you would have linear expansion of player load by commands and SOPs each grow on their own O(n*2).

The most insane thing about it is that the load of implementing that set of actions growing quadratic is on the same programmer that does both the graphics and the physics, and the global AI on top. That can't go well for a project running decades.

The saddest part is that the competition pretty much dropped out of the race. Is anything happening with Panzer Command?

SOPs have about as great as chance of being implemented as Command Posts.

I see nothing in the future development that will address many issues with the game. They don't even come through with something like an 'Ambush' command that they have mentioned. This is, sort-of, a "Ambush SOP" that controls a unit's behavior beyond the typical 'TACAI' knee-jerk reactions. Basically this would be a command that would define a covered arc so that the unit is in 'Hide' mode, but it is not penalized for LOS inside the arc area. Or something. Or, anything at this point. The game has gone stale.

Panzer Command has both SOP's and also an inflated command menu.

At this point, I am just interested in what the 'Upgrade' will be. Hopefully they can make the game less of a headache to play.

 

[mOBIUS]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

SOPs have about as great as chance of being implemented as Command Posts.

Panzer Command has both SOP's and also an inflated command menu.

Panzer Command can get away with that because it uses abstraction. The pool table smooth terrain could be considered filled with abstracted hides, logs, copses, ground folds or craters. But where each bullet path is accounted for it is much harder simulate in a non-abstracted world.

 

[NUTTERNAME]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

PC is very abstracted but it is also a 'platoon mover' in that it is closer to reality than the willy-nilly 'individualistic' approach of CM. No way would real WWII attacks be conducted like the uber-fractionalized squads operate in CM. I have said it before...a couple years in the service would have done the principals at BF some real good.

In my post-Vietnam US Army experience, you had CP (platoon or squad command post), two man foxholes (main line), and then OP (observation post) and LP (listening post) out front. These were usually connected by wire communications. A platoon on defense was spread out but had firm control of the terrain in front of it. I liked LP since we could set up the claymores and were most out front (and sneak a smoke). WWII was much the same without the claymores. WWII was just moving the CP forward or back. To get a platoon, that was in a defensive position to instantly attack, as CM does, is fantasy. Platoon and Company HQs are just treated like small armed units that only have value in calling arty.

The bullet paths in CM are easy to account for...they all go to either a leader or someone with a MG.

 

[mOBIUS]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

The bullet paths in CM are easy to account for...they all go to either a leader or someone with a MG.

The British did some tests that indicated that a bullet comes withing a yard or two of a soldier will make him concerned and possibly suppressed for a short length of time. So when individual soldiers and bullets are modeled unit morale or suppression cannot be abstracted. It is a geometric increase in factors that have to be tracked.

 

[NUTTERNAME]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

One core thing I never liked about CM (all versions) is to put the load of reasonable (realistic, fun, challenging, useful) behavior all on the magic TacAI. That never had a chance of actually working, and it gets worse and worse as more commands and behaviors are needed.

The whole series would IMHO be much better off by making a lot less different commands but make them flexible with TacOps style SOPs. To put it into computer terms, instead of having a quadratic explosion of commands by multiplying out commands and behaviors against each other O(n^2) you would have linear expansion of player load by commands and SOPs each grow on their own O(n*2).

The most insane thing about it is that the load of implementing that set of actions growing quadratic is on the same programmer that does both the graphics and the physics, and the global AI on top. That can't go well for a project running decades.

The saddest part is that the competition pretty much dropped out of the race. Is anything happening with Panzer Command?

Perhaps you might like to know that Steve actually believes that one programmer might actually be able to...

Unless someone does something really bad, like drops support for OpenGL, we think CMx2 will be around for at least the next couple of years. While CMx3 will not be as wildly different from CMx2 as CMx2 was from CMx1, the two will not be the same. Our plan, therefore, is for CMx2 and CMx3 to live side by side for a period of time until CMx2's engine is truly at the end of its lifespan. At which point new CMx2 content will freeze and everything shifted to CMx3. Existing CMx2 products will continue to be sold until (like Mac CMx1) they no longer run at all. CMx1 has been on sale for 15+ years now, so hopefully CMx2 will be available for another 5-10 years.

Steve

 

[Elvis]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

Minor nitpicky thing I suppose......Neither of the programmers do the "graphics" (unless I misunderstand what Redwolf means by that.....which wouldn't be the firs time ). The models and animations are done by someone else and the textures are done by someone else.

 

[Redwolf]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

I am thinking of the graphics engine, not the contents.

CMx1 is a bad example for a sufficiently staffed program, the main issue coming to my mind the heavy bug in CMBB with fortification casualty points. That was fixed for CMAK but although CMBB was very similar there was never a CMBB fix. Steve said years later he didn't even know about it which is both ridiculous given how often it was complained about in major discussion threads (including all tournament threads) and not too surprising since they never accepted any form of formal bug submission or bug tracking for customers. It's all behind the Steve filter.

I'm sure other people have their pet peeves, too.

 

[NUTTERNAME]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

If nothing else, it sounds like job security for Elvis.

I think Steve has stated that the Forum (BF website), IS the actual place where bugs are discussed and somehow resolved. That is, as Redwolf said, there is no real ticketing or tracking of Bugs. It really is a laughable 'Mom 'n Pop' shop approach. I scoff that Steve was really a Software Quality Engineer. The continued Banning of people and the large crowd that must not post (there must be more people for their sake), that means the 'Town Hall Meeting' is very small. When I see Steve be a arrogant loudmouth like he was with the King Tiger Mantlet thread, browbeating anyone that actually finds something (and allowing his cast of idiots to trash anyone), and then go on to explain how Bugs should really be handled, it boggles my mind that he thinks he is being productive with his own process. The fact that he was dead wrong about the Mantlet just added to the fun. I think it ended up being "Jentz's Fault".

I have submitted documented Buggy stuff. That is, open a CSR ticket. Mostly, it is supposedly forwarded to someone and the ticket conveniently closed. Without exaggerating, I can't get through a game without seeing very odd behavior or bad modeling.

At this point, I am just looking forward to the next 'Upgrade' that touts better interface or some such. I, like others, are not that jazzed about buying into another family at this point. Not now, or in the "next 5-10 years".

 

[Elvis]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

There is a formal bug reporting system. Not a hodge podge gathering of forum posts. Without getting into detail, all voices are heard. Just because you (and Redwolf) don't have access to it, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

 

[Elvis]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

I'll add.....As Redwolf points out, the competition has bailed. BFC, like'em or hate'em, have survived for what?...17 years? You don't need much more evidence than that to show that, at some level, they know what it takes to survive is this very limited and narrow niche. Ya can't please everyone all the time....but if you can please enough to be the best in that niche and stay afloat...then that's somefink.

 

[NUTTERNAME]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

There is a formal bug reporting system. Not a hodge podge gathering of forum posts. Without getting into detail, all voices are heard. Just because you (and Redwolf) don't have access to it, doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

I think you mean to say "Just because you or Redwolf or many others don't have access to it....etc. etc." You are, of course, speaking of some internal system that bandies about stuff. Steve drops the gavel and you all shut up.

Without going into obviousness, not all voices are heard (or spoken). Just internal ones...that know their place. You missed the Gist. You have been "Steviefied". It doesn't matter what "exists". What matters is what results are produced. Not excuses.

In the service (and I gather that includes MANY nations military services), WE have a very common saying "Results...NOT excuses". I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post. Leave the lame excuses to Steve.

For sure we there's tons of stuff in Combat Mission that do not have real world data points to base our modeling on. Lucky for you guys we're actually very good at doing that We're also very willing to make changes when people point out that our modeling has rough spots. Which is why there isn't a tactical simulation on this Earth that comes even remotely close to Combat Mission's ability to depict tactical combat in a realistic way. And I include massive defense industry simulations in this too, as users and developers of those sims have verified.

Perhaps a few Belgium beers into a weekend...but, you get the drift. They (whoever the hell that is), are the bestest guessers you ever have met, and go ask people that actually have defense jobs!

Speaking of 'Jobs', I saw a recent program on that flaming jackass Steve Jobs. There can be parallels drawn. Without the actual success, but the actual arrogance.

 

[NUTTERNAME]

Re: ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics? Wpn Controls?

I'm sure other people have their pet peeves, too.

Is there a word that can describe a tome of 'peeves'?

Recently, I saw a few instances of the awful vehicle motion inducing even more odd penetrations on highly sloped armor. This is the stupid jerking from either starting or stopping or from main gun fire. A hit on a AFV that is doing this "eye-candy" gets even more bad modeling of hits on roofs and other near horizontal parts. The stupid game does not model gun depression, yet it takes this bad modeling of AFV motion into "effect".

I have driven tracked vehicles. You barely use the brakes since the rolling resistance is so great in most situations. There is SO much youtube EVIDENCE that even a JS-II firing a high velocity 122mm weapon DOES NOT ROCK THE CHASSIS that I wonder what the Judges-son and Steviereno think they are doing? Is it because they think it "looks cool!"? Well, it looks stupid. And maybe it would be possible if Elvis might share those internalized discussions?