ATG/AAA/etc, No Optics?

[NUTTERNAME]

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

But, if they ever do go for multi-processor use over at BF, you can be sure this will be touted to the ends of the Earth. Wasn't relative sighting 'baloney' when CM didn't have it?

To be fair, I think it was the opposite. Namely, CMx1 was a "dead end" because it didn't have relative spotting. Relative Spotting was the Battlefront-Cry actually for CMx2.

Of course, relative spotting was not the cure-all everyone said it was. I even predicted what would happen. That is, people would just abuse the ability to jump back and forth between units to get intel to make decisions for a single unit. Steve scoffed at this like it was pure insanity that anyone would do it. The reality is that some people actually not only do it for vision purposes, but some even do it for auditory reasons! The movie-playback, when viewed in the non-selected unit mode, is even worse! It collates ALL relative spotting and animates it in a "VCR" type control for the player to further abuse!

But, as we all know now, Steve is a visionary who can predict future wars. That is, they predict future wars that involve the US Army that never have happened as time goes by. Just the general location. And, of course, never forget they are the bestest-guessers ever!

 

[NUTTERNAME]

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

Perhaps, This quote should be an indication of what we can expect from CMx2 future improvements...

By this point in CM's lifespan, there's pretty much no bugs left to find in the underlying systems. At least not ones that really matter.
Steve

From this thread...

http://community.battlefront.com/topic/121772-this-is-unacceptable/?page=1

Again, we can hear Steve talking out both sides of his mouth. It almost certainly seems that even HE is saying that it is processor driven. Of course, he does his usual "We is just a wittle-little company guys!" routine.

Personally, I have seen even unbuttoned Panther tanks absolutely blind to buttoned T34/85 tanks that are out in the open and facing 90 degrees away. The T34 turned and shot the Panther dead after 15 seconds.

I find it stunning that Steve claims that spotting depends on the gunner getting a spot? IRL, a Panther TC would use his own V notch 'sight' in front of his cupola and just order the gunner to fire in the case of that Sherman tank being so close.

So, no Bugs left and No Features included. At least that guy might actually get his money back?

 

[NUTTERNAME]

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

Reading through that thread, it occurs to me that some obvious (to me), other issues are also at play. The fact that the usual suspects don't realize or bother to comment on it is typical.

1. The game imposes a limitation on Spotting checks and there is some kooky scheme with a random sequence of 'checks'. Everyone that likes BF seems to nod in agreement and make "Yup" sounds. But, like many discussions, another question must always be asked; Which 'game' are you playing? By this I mean 'Realtime' or Turn-Based? I suspect that Realtime is major determinant in how things are coded. That is, its limitations are spilled over in the Turn-Based limitations. In Turn-Based play, I would gladly accept a longer turn resolution time if it could resolve these plainly unrealistic compromises that the programmer codes. So, it seems to me that Steve (again) is being his usual argumentative and slightly disingenuous self. Or maybe he never thought about this. Eh, doesn't matter. Keep making bigger maps with more units. Weeee! More Treeeees! Weeeeee! Sell Cmx2 for another five years! Uh, no.

2. After rereading that thread, I am struck that no one said anything about the TACAI response of the Panther. That is, you have a AFV taking some pounding, it can't locate or see or target the assailant...so it just sits there? Sorry, a more realistic reaction is to "Pop smoke and beat feet" as we used to say. Again, I have seen crazy instances of this in the game. Recently a Marder that had multiple enemy AFV in its LOS AND was being targeted after it bounced a AP off one of them. They just sit there as enemy fire cracks overhead, they sit there and take a Gun hit that renders them defenseless (but mobile), and then sit there and create a bunch of red crosses. A realistic response would be that the AFV would reverse to cover. Especially since its fire was ineffectual.

I am going to try and recreate that panther behavior I saw in "Myth of Invincibility". I know exactly where I put the panther and hopefully the T34s follow the same AI plan. The panther is between two houses and targeting (covered arc) the open area the T34s roll into. It must be me because every time I play "Myth", the Panthers are out-spotted and even sit there as they get hit after hit.

I have also just played another StuGfest where the Stug-Bug was in full effect. Two guys are unbuttoned and buttoned T34/85 are just "out-seeing" them? The same game showed an immobile T34/85 that was buttoned and facing away from a single German soldier that was crawling towards it (grenade attack), turn its turret and shoot down the German at 9 meters. What ever happened to 'blind spots'? Forget the gun depression.

 

[Redwolf]

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

How to implement LOS checks, or "spotting" as markers move over a map, is subject to many different algorithms that can be employed. By their very nature they scale differently, where "scale" means that putt more of (units | terrain size | terrain complexity) on them makes them slower in a way that is (holds up well | twice as much is half as fast | exponential, meaning twice as much makes 4x or 10x as slow).

In commercial video games you generally cannot generally release with a well-scaling algorithm. Well-scaling algorithms generally perform badly when the data set is small, and the majority of your customers tinkers around with small battles on small computers. You can slow them down for the benefit of a rich user on a ninja computer in 10 years. If you can design an algorithm that is perfect for everything you generally work at Google until age 35 and then retire.

In the case of CM you are also looking at LOS limitations from weather (e.g. fog), semi-transparent terrain (woods, bushes) and to top it off there is sound spotting. Charles is fighting enormous odds here.

However, Steve is oblivious to all of this and pretends that whatever Charles has currently implemented is the only possible algorithm that could be chosen, because everything else is impossible. This is a bit of a PR problem.

All this is a reason why I look forward to the time when open source enters gaming and the Wargaming Winter(tm) that is currently in effect is over. An open source game has a lot more freedom to design in a future proof way. People with crappy computers who don't contribute can join in a couple years.

 

[NUTTERNAME]

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

From what BF says about spotting, that is...its sort of a round-robin deal as far as the sequence...perhaps a gamey approach is to bust up every squad you can so as to make more chances at your guys getting spots. I notice that in games with a swarm of Soviets, they seem to get spots and then even moving shots (when buttoned).

I would suppose at this time, nearly everyone has at least a dual core CPU rig. I just suspect that having one core (in a dual core) dedicated to nothing but the spotting routines while the other hammers away at the 'other-maths' might be worthwhile. Also, since maps are pre-made now (for QB), could the maps come with "known-blocked-LOS" solutions already loaded. Basically telling the game to skip a spotting attempt between units in certain areas (units behind raised terrain,etc.). From the description Steve gave, it seems that a unit checks to see if it maintains a previously spotted unit, and then checks to see what other unit it can spot. I believe he says the whole thing is a seven second cycle?

I can't believe that running units get a spotting attempt of equal randomness as other units?

 

[Redwolf]

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

In a real time game with random CPU power chosen by the user (slow computer) you obviously can't make any such promises, unless you are willing to let the framerate go to hell.

I would have to check my notes but in CMx1 a running unit was penalized. However, CMx1 was strictly range based when it came to spotting. No random factor.

 

[mOBIUS]

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

CMx1 had the worst spotting system of any game I've played.

 

[Redwolf]

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

CMx1 had the worst spotting system of any game I've played.

Not sure. I maintain that in practice for realistic gameplay CMx2 came out worse.

 

[mOBIUS]

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

I've played the demo only once. But, from reading on it I think the problem is that every single man will spot as an individual and then the player, who is at the highest level of command sees what all see. So instead of each squad sighting in CMx1 each individual sight in CMx2. That is a large number of levels of command skipped. So as for realistic command and control you are right. But, there's no way to not to have this problem when you have many units under a single player commander. No game can do it.

 

[NUTTERNAME]

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

I would guess the CMRT demo is at the latest level of "design". As far as WWII, that is. The 'Black Sea' thing is at the latest level of fantasy.

CM gives an almost impossible amount of information (aka "Gamey-Sauce") to the player. 'Great' players are shown in the AAR abusing this information as the Uber-Fanbois gush with praise at their Superstar's prowess. I actually don't know all the identities of the 'in-crowd' (playtesters and other compensated types), but it has reached a sickening level. And that comic-book thing was just pitiful.

In any case, Spotting, Identifying, Sound Contacts, etc. are 'Good-to-Go' according to BF. It has been made clear that they do not see any core-issues with the present game. That is, they want to crank out Families and Modules and Packs and Decoder Rings, etc. based on this present level of code. I am sure people will buy it. For awhile.

If you own CMRT, then you have probably played 'Red Hordes' as the Germans. Basically a battalion of T34 attack a German river defense. How anyone can play this as the Germans and not notice extremely odd StuG behavior is beyond me. As an example, I played probably my best game vs. the Soviets and teh remaining T34 were coming at the rear VL in ones and twos. I had used my ATG, StuG and LATW to great effect and was waiting with a StuG (behind a small hedge) as a sole T34 comes advancing buttoned across an open field I had the StuG pointed at. The StuG was unbuttoned. The T34 rolls into full view, comes to a abrupt halt, snaps its turret over in insect like motion, and fires at the StuG just as the StuG finally fires. Result? StuG with dead gun. Being in a tracked AFV that is buttoned and moving (with steel tracks) is a jarring experience. To think that it could spot an enemy, rotate its turret, aim and fire like that is comical. Yet it happens so frequently. And the StuG is clearly bugged.

This guy did a video. He really sucks at the game. I have KO'd every T34.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6aUoUBsB2Q

 

[NUTTERNAME]

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

No game can do it.

I believe they can try. But BF does not want to try. They want to crank out 'product'.

How would I do this? I would limit the players Intel on their own units. Why should some engaged company or battalion commander know just how many soldiers are actually alive in some section on his perimeter? The game as is, just feeds info he has no connection to. In fact, they should go 'dark' if he has no C&C to them.

The game allows such unreal actions/events without consequences.

 

[mOBIUS]

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

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6aUoUBsB2Q[/url]

That battle is something else. If the AI is playing Russians it sucks. The scene where the T-34 is sitting on a Pak 40 but can't do anything to it is hilarious.

 

[mOBIUS]

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

I believe they can try. But BF does not want to try. They want to crank out 'product'.

How would I do this? I would limit the players Intel on their own units. Why should some engaged company or battalion commander know just how many soldiers are actually alive in some section on his perimeter? The game as is, just feeds info he has no connection to. In fact, they should go 'dark' if he has no C&C to them.

The game allows such unreal actions/events without consequences.

I don't know how one could do it. I read somewhere that the commander should control one level down and have knowledge two levels down. So company ->controls Platoons -> sees squads. But in a game they want to see individuals and not chits of squads. If it were possible to delay the viewing of individual actions for a turn instead of going dark that might do it.

 

[NUTTERNAME]

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

I don't know how one could do it. I read somewhere that the commander should control one level down and have knowledge two levels down. So company ->controls Platoons -> sees squads. But in a game they want to see individuals and not chits of squads. If it were possible to delay the viewing of individual actions for a turn instead of going dark that might do it.

CM sort of already has it. That is, "Iron Mode", level of play. When selecting a unit, only the units (enemy and friendly) are 'spotted' or 'known' (through C&C) along with sound contacts are presented. But, again, when using the 'non-selected unit mode', ALL info is presented to the God-Like player. You make a comment that is inline with my thoughts about this...The player should only be able to view the "Over-All Movie" at the end of his command phase.

The way the game is, along with it's miserable interface, has become ingrained into the DNA of the typical CM-Zombie-Customer. The chance of real change at this point is about at the level of Bernie Sanders getting elected.

And, speaking of ATG (I have so many issues with CM's kludging of these), I saw a bug that I have seen before and may have seen someone start a thread about. Basically an ATG gets hit and takes casualties. Instead of abandoning the gun, or just laying flat crewing the gun, they actually attempt to move the gun away! Two guys trying to move a PAK40 out of a wooded action spot! They rotate first so they can push it muzzle first in the direction of retreat! Alas, another 85mm HE comes in and ends this drill. Ponderous. "Design for Effect"? "Engineered for Effect"? Shut up Steve (SG).

 

[Redwolf]

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

I've played the demo only once. But, from reading on it I think the problem is that every single man will spot as an individual and then the player, who is at the highest level of command sees what all see. So instead of each squad sighting in CMx1 each individual sight in CMx2. That is a large number of levels of command skipped. So as for realistic command and control you are right. But, there's no way to not to have this problem when you have many units under a single player commander. No game can do it.

No, that isn't the problem I see at all. I have no problem with the choice of algorithm. They can do have the spotting work on whatever level they like.

The problem I have is that the implementation of that algorithm is broken. Too many soldiers kneeling right beside a running tank not "seeing" it.

Too many tank platoons cresting a hill and on the other side there is a group of enemy vehicles or soldiers in clusters. They see the tanks come over the ridge in hearing distance, even against the sky. Without exception some will spot the tanks on the ridge and some will not. That's BS.

Or set up a bunch of towed guns as close to each other as possible back in the map. They are well in shouting distance from each other. Then move some tanks into sight. Without fail some guns will just sit there do nothing and not notice a thing while the guys next to them have a major shootout.

It's the implementation. Just as it was in CMx1.

 

[Redwolf]

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

But, there's no way to not to have this problem when you have many units under a single player commander. No game can do it.

Sure, no game can do it. But CMx2 gives it a try and the outcome is worse. Instead of cutting the link between some field figures and player they just make the field figures unrealistically impotent. That is supposed to simulate the same thing but it really doesn't. It just litters the battlefield with individual unit-to-unit actions that make no sense, while the player/commander is still getting instant reports of everything.

 

[NUTTERNAME]

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

Sure, no game can do it. But CMx2 gives it a try and the outcome is worse. Instead of cutting the link between some field figures and player they just make the field figures unrealistically impotent. That is supposed to simulate the same thing but it really doesn't. It just litters the battlefield with individual unit-to-unit actions that make no sense, while the player/commander is still getting instant reports of everything.

They don't model the Battalion HQ an XO's etc. having anything to do but call arty and shoot their small arms. It's absurd.

The more little tidbits that come out about what's "under the hood", the more it shows the game is stretching beyond it's punching weight.

 

[mOBIUS]

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

The problem I have is that the implementation of that algorithm is broken. Too many soldiers kneeling right beside a running tank not "seeing" it.

I don't know what causes this. Maybe the action spot system. PCO doesn't have this problem. PCO does refresh what is visible every 5 seconds, but computes the LOS every fraction of a second or so. (Way back I saw the tests of this where the LOS rubber band wasn't being erased and it looked like a fan when LOSs were drawn to a moving unit.)

I wanted a feature that did reverse LOS where you could click on an enemy unit and it would indicate all of your units that could sight it. So if you wanted to train your guns on that enemy you could go right to your units and shoot it. I think our programmers ran into problems because there may not be a current LOS to a visable enemy unit because the LOS to the enemy was blocked less that 5 seconds before.

That reminds me. We are making a list of to do things right now. I should put it on the list.

 

[NUTTERNAME]

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

The CM customer is really left with just educated guesses as to what is wrong with the Spotting/Identifying/Contact code. I really doubt that Steve's second hand diatribes convey the actual "mechanics" of the system. I am especially irked by this supposed "Random" round-robin deal he described.

As a quick example, let's look at a 3 man team with a LMG. It is actually actively firing at a spotted target 150 meters away. There are other friendlies close by that are not firing due to a covered arc making them cover another direction. Should the firing unit really have an equally random chance at spotting enemy units (or friendly units)? They being actively engaged in the process of targeting and loading and observing, I would think they have their hands full. Especially if they already have an enemy spotted. If anything, when their 'turn' comes up for another spotting-cycle, I would suspect it would actually revolve around the enemy unit target they are fixated on. The concept of Overwatch comes in here. If I want a unit to just observe, I should give it a short firing arc. This will make it 'hold fire' and observe instead of taking action.

Another troublesome remark is the "need for a gunner to get the spot". That is, it seems the AFV crewmen can possibly see the enemy but until the gunner sees it, the AFV might rotate back and forth it's turret or hull. In my experience, I have seen T34/85, that are moving, come to an abrupt halt, snap the turret over, and shoot and hit enemy AFV. All while buttoned. I really suspect all this comes from the poor advice BF gets from its "expert guessers". The main fault is the over-modeling of periscopes and non-magnifying devices for gunners. AFV like the Panther and StuG just had the gunner's primary sight. And the TC/Gunner relationship is undermodeled. The single most important crewman, the commander, is just another set of eyes. In reality, he is the crucial element in sighting enemy and bring the gunner on target. Gunners don't spot enemies except in a very narrow FOV.

In any case, the spotting routines are certainly driven by the need to make 'Realtime' a play option. I can only guess who's brainstorm that was...?

 

[Geordie]

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

That battle is something else. If the AI is playing Russians it sucks. The scene where the T-34 is sitting on a Pak 40 but can't do anything to it is hilarious.

Just watched this battle and it's not a very good showcase for the AI. I might try it as Soviets though the AImdefence might need tweaking a bit.