As I stated in the topic, the case was most evident with SU-122 against my entrenched gun emplacements, which suffered a casualy EVERY turn, without fail. I will keep a saved game the next time I notice in in effect as I have 2 companies of 90mm AA and 2 companies of 75mm AT rifles and they usually do alot of the fighting in defense scenarios...
Venger
That 1 casualty guarantee!!
Moderator: MOD_SPWaW
OK, you have your 10 man squad entrenched, since they can still observe and shoot that tells you that several of them (at least) have their heads up above the edge of the shellscrape - hence big boom nearby they are vulnerable to taking blast/frag injuries.Originally posted by Venger:
Well that certainly blows, somehow an SU-122 must have some type of precision airburst HE round that detonates directly over my emplacement. Blah, that makes no sense. Venger
-
Paul Vebber
- Posts: 5342
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Portsmouth RI
- Contact:
Well I guess you'll just just have to see for yourselves that this doesn't appear to be happening in the latest version 3...
I just shot 20 shots from SU-122s at entrenched 75mmAT guns and got 14 kills - 2 got 2 so 8 did nothing from 30 hexes away.
Direct fire at a spotted unit assumes you *have it in your sites* so teh rounds aren't landing "50m away" but pretty darn close if the crew can shoot straight...
The lethal blast radius of 12-15m or so and a danger area about 3-4 times that (hence the fact troops in adjacent hexes sometimes get hit).
If the AT gun is firing it is assumed they are exposing themselves (No Figmo not that...) so they are assumed only partially protected.
So:
1) in the latest version of the game they do not ccause casualties every shot.
2) For big rounds, fired at a point target, close is good enough and you WILL take casualties quickly from big booms. But I have only seen "streaks" that occur such that its hard to tell if its "luck" or a problem.
I just shot 20 shots from SU-122s at entrenched 75mmAT guns and got 14 kills - 2 got 2 so 8 did nothing from 30 hexes away.
Direct fire at a spotted unit assumes you *have it in your sites* so teh rounds aren't landing "50m away" but pretty darn close if the crew can shoot straight...
The lethal blast radius of 12-15m or so and a danger area about 3-4 times that (hence the fact troops in adjacent hexes sometimes get hit).
If the AT gun is firing it is assumed they are exposing themselves (No Figmo not that...) so they are assumed only partially protected.
So:
1) in the latest version of the game they do not ccause casualties every shot.
2) For big rounds, fired at a point target, close is good enough and you WILL take casualties quickly from big booms. But I have only seen "streaks" that occur such that its hard to tell if its "luck" or a problem.
Paul,
Well, that brings up a whole seperate issue of the gunner of a moving tank spotting and getting 'in his sites' (sic) a dug in, camouflaged anti tank gun nearly a mile away, and being able to put instant fire on it with no shell landing more than a few yards away.... all in a matter of a few minutes. Damn good shooting.
Oh, and Paul, I said '_up to_ 50 yards away.' (Emphasis added.) If you're going to disparage my remarks please at least be good enough to disparage what I actually said. And, by the way, if you don't think a long round that passed close by the gun (say a few feet high) could possibly land that far away when fired from 1000+ yards, well, I have to disagree. Depending on the terrain around the target (say, a gun near the crest of a hill) the shell could easily land _miles_ away.
Well, that brings up a whole seperate issue of the gunner of a moving tank spotting and getting 'in his sites' (sic) a dug in, camouflaged anti tank gun nearly a mile away, and being able to put instant fire on it with no shell landing more than a few yards away.... all in a matter of a few minutes. Damn good shooting.
Oh, and Paul, I said '_up to_ 50 yards away.' (Emphasis added.) If you're going to disparage my remarks please at least be good enough to disparage what I actually said. And, by the way, if you don't think a long round that passed close by the gun (say a few feet high) could possibly land that far away when fired from 1000+ yards, well, I have to disagree. Depending on the terrain around the target (say, a gun near the crest of a hill) the shell could easily land _miles_ away.
Direct fire from an assault gun shouldn't be that difficult, at least not on a stationary target like an AT gun. The first shot may be well off target and used as a pointer but the second and the third should be almost straight on if the gun commander is well trained.
If you count casualties as shell-shocked men, men too scared to function in their role etc etc as well as dead and wounded it makes very good sense that a ISU-122 firing on a AT gun position inflicts large casualties on the crew.
I've had plenty of units going into a killing-spree too though. Most prominent my super-bazooka team, handling their Colt-45's with such expertise that they hit german infantrymen every time. Must be something
If you count casualties as shell-shocked men, men too scared to function in their role etc etc as well as dead and wounded it makes very good sense that a ISU-122 firing on a AT gun position inflicts large casualties on the crew.
I've had plenty of units going into a killing-spree too though. Most prominent my super-bazooka team, handling their Colt-45's with such expertise that they hit german infantrymen every time. Must be something
"If infantry is the Queen of the battlefield, artillery is her backbone", Jukka L. Mäkelä about the Finnish victory at Ihantala.
I vote for bug!
Had this appear lately as well - every shot from Russ. 122mm Arty (offboard) did exactly 1 casualty to exactly the same neighbouring hex, and nothing else, neither to the target hex nor to the units in 3 other hexes as well, for all 5 or 6 rounds it fired that turn.
Arralen
Had this appear lately as well - every shot from Russ. 122mm Arty (offboard) did exactly 1 casualty to exactly the same neighbouring hex, and nothing else, neither to the target hex nor to the units in 3 other hexes as well, for all 5 or 6 rounds it fired that turn.
Arralen
AMD FX-4300
Gigabyte 970A-DS3P
Kingston 24GB DDR3-1600 (PC3-12800)
Asus GTX 750 Ti OC 2GB GDDR5
Kingston SV300 120 GB
Windows 8.1
Gigabyte 970A-DS3P
Kingston 24GB DDR3-1600 (PC3-12800)
Asus GTX 750 Ti OC 2GB GDDR5
Kingston SV300 120 GB
Windows 8.1
I have just made a crude scenario, in which the bug can be reproduced at will. It´s just a vertical row of german 75mm leIG18 and nine hex to the right of it another vertical row, this time entrenched russian paratroopers (with german scouts to spot them). Whenever a gun fires at a paratrooper team at EXACTLY 12 hex range and misses with the gun (almost always), the rifle(s) hit (always). The rifles only miss, if the gun hits or if there are no shots left for the gun. Each gun has one or two targets that are sure hits while the others are treated normally.
If someone is interested (Paul?), he should tell me which files he needs; then I will mail the scenario or a savefile. It is version 2.3 without modifications.
Hans
If someone is interested (Paul?), he should tell me which files he needs; then I will mail the scenario or a savefile. It is version 2.3 without modifications.
Hans
dulce et decorum est pro patria mori.
-
Paul Vebber
- Posts: 5342
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Portsmouth RI
- Contact:
I'm not disparaging anyone, I'm trying to point out that:
-There are assumptions the game makes about direct fire at spotted targets, and how those targets become spotted, that you can take issue with (read my previous posts about "BORG in WW2 clothing"...thats just the way the game is...)
-The game assumes that direct fire is not randomly distributed in the hex, so your statment that direct fire rounds "land up to 50m away" or "miles away" IN THE GAME is wrong. That's not to diparage you, that is to educate you how the game works. The game is not a perfect recreation of "real life" no game is.
Now if you don't like the fact that your dug in AT gun gets sptotted a mile away, then turn the "spotting preferenc down to 50% or so or lower. But spotting chances have nothing to do with whether there is a bug in any of the (several interconnected) infantry casualty routines.
Now, there are about 4 different "bugs" that that are being mixed together here, at least 3 of which we have already addressed in version 3. I'll take a look tonight at this latest "exclusive kill" one. But we are about 40 builds past version 2.3...
[This message has been edited by Paul Vebber (edited August 30, 2000).]
-There are assumptions the game makes about direct fire at spotted targets, and how those targets become spotted, that you can take issue with (read my previous posts about "BORG in WW2 clothing"...thats just the way the game is...)
-The game assumes that direct fire is not randomly distributed in the hex, so your statment that direct fire rounds "land up to 50m away" or "miles away" IN THE GAME is wrong. That's not to diparage you, that is to educate you how the game works. The game is not a perfect recreation of "real life" no game is.
Now if you don't like the fact that your dug in AT gun gets sptotted a mile away, then turn the "spotting preferenc down to 50% or so or lower. But spotting chances have nothing to do with whether there is a bug in any of the (several interconnected) infantry casualty routines.
Now, there are about 4 different "bugs" that that are being mixed together here, at least 3 of which we have already addressed in version 3. I'll take a look tonight at this latest "exclusive kill" one. But we are about 40 builds past version 2.3...
[This message has been edited by Paul Vebber (edited August 30, 2000).]
Paul;
maybe we're all approaching the subject bass-ackwards, looking for fault in the code/game engine when perhaps what we should really be looking at is the combat statistics/results being displayed for our viewing pleasure.
95% of the controversey/misunderstandings seem to stem from the 'to hit' % chance that dislays when a unit is firing.
If i'm interpreting correctly from all the threads that touched on this subject, the % score that we are being shown is the *base* or unmodified score of the firing weapon and is not a true representation of the units chances of scoring a casualty.
Is it feasible within the code to change the display so that we see the 'final' to-hit % score?
This might eliminate some of the head sratching and frustrating caused by frequent hits when players are being shown % scores between 1% and 6%
maybe we're all approaching the subject bass-ackwards, looking for fault in the code/game engine when perhaps what we should really be looking at is the combat statistics/results being displayed for our viewing pleasure.
95% of the controversey/misunderstandings seem to stem from the 'to hit' % chance that dislays when a unit is firing.
If i'm interpreting correctly from all the threads that touched on this subject, the % score that we are being shown is the *base* or unmodified score of the firing weapon and is not a true representation of the units chances of scoring a casualty.
Is it feasible within the code to change the display so that we see the 'final' to-hit % score?
This might eliminate some of the head sratching and frustrating caused by frequent hits when players are being shown % scores between 1% and 6%
Actually, Paul, I have cranked down the spotting percentages. That so many people feel a need to adjust this is perhaps indicative of a dissatisfaction with the default ability? Well, no matter.
You seem to be saying that even misses are assumed to be close enough to do damange. If so, we've found the problem. Where I come from a miss that hits is called, well, a hit. Thus, you seem to be saying that some guns just cannot miss against soft targets. Which is what Venger's complaining about.
You seem to be saying that even misses are assumed to be close enough to do damange. If so, we've found the problem. Where I come from a miss that hits is called, well, a hit. Thus, you seem to be saying that some guns just cannot miss against soft targets. Which is what Venger's complaining about.
-
Paul Vebber
- Posts: 5342
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Portsmouth RI
- Contact:
I tried to explain this in several threads now. The "hit percentage" is a misnomer when applied to soft targets. This is a "problem" the game has always had. There IS NO "hit or miss" when it comes to infantry - there is only "effect" and "no effect" - scaled between the extremes of "wipe the unit out" and "nothing much happens". Casualties and suppression are the measure of shades of grey in between.
The "firepower" of the weapon is multiplied by the "hit chance" (and modifiers for cover, movement, experience, leader skill, firing, etc) - so a low hit chance is supposed to equal a lower chance for an effect.
EVERY direct fire shot at a unit (or indirect shot in the hex) causes suppression. Even misses at hard targets can cause a point or 2 of suppression. Its meant to be a "continuum of effect" not a black and white "hit or no hit". Again that is an underlying design tenent of the game system! One can argue its validity, but its something too intrinsic to the game to change. Disagreeing with an assumption fundamental to the game is not the same as a "bug".
The CEP for a large caliber direct fire shot at a point target is such that it is rare for the target not be vulnerable to an effect from the shell, the danger zone from such rounds are larger than 1 hex.
So how you define a "hit" is problematic. Is a "hit" a round that destroys the gun outright? (for an AT gun or the like the "to hit" chance is used to see if that happens - which can). Is a hit a shell that lands near enough to suppress the target to a certain degree? Casualties were routinely caused from shrapnel from rounds that land a considerable distance away, yet troops survived shells landing nearly on top of them because of pure luck. So what makes a shot a "hit"?
Yes some geometries mean a shot that is fired up hill and misses, may in reality go flying past into the next county. So one might be able to define what is NOT a hit, but those cases are fairly rare. The game just can't deal with that.
I'm not sure what caused the "always cause 1 casualty" in version 2.3 We have tweaked with the code a lot since then and it doesn't seem to do that anymore.
The hit chance you are shown IS the "final". The problem is that vs infantry the variable should say "effect modifier" or something instead of "hit chance". There is NO "to-hit" roll when atttacking a soft target. That is the misunderstanding. Maybe someday we may make a change to the message reports, but it isn't high on our list.
This is a case, like armor penetration, where the game is doing things that are not easily communicated in the existing message struture. In some cases "messages" orignaly meant for debugging by the design team are left in becasue the playtesters liked them.
I have only seen occasional complaints about the spotting defaults. Actually I get more comments that folks think things are too hard to spot, rather than two easy. It depends alot on your playing skill. As you get better, its probably good to turn it down some to have more of a challange.
We can never please everybody with a single choice of default settings. The defaults are chosen for a combination of playability and realism. We give you the flexibility to configure the game to your liking in a great many areas. If you can find a combination that you think is appropriate, then we have done what we set out to do.
We are limited to MODIFYING the engine that is there, so many of these issues require a different game with a different underlying set of assumptions about things. But that would not be Steel Panthers...
The "firepower" of the weapon is multiplied by the "hit chance" (and modifiers for cover, movement, experience, leader skill, firing, etc) - so a low hit chance is supposed to equal a lower chance for an effect.
EVERY direct fire shot at a unit (or indirect shot in the hex) causes suppression. Even misses at hard targets can cause a point or 2 of suppression. Its meant to be a "continuum of effect" not a black and white "hit or no hit". Again that is an underlying design tenent of the game system! One can argue its validity, but its something too intrinsic to the game to change. Disagreeing with an assumption fundamental to the game is not the same as a "bug".
The CEP for a large caliber direct fire shot at a point target is such that it is rare for the target not be vulnerable to an effect from the shell, the danger zone from such rounds are larger than 1 hex.
So how you define a "hit" is problematic. Is a "hit" a round that destroys the gun outright? (for an AT gun or the like the "to hit" chance is used to see if that happens - which can). Is a hit a shell that lands near enough to suppress the target to a certain degree? Casualties were routinely caused from shrapnel from rounds that land a considerable distance away, yet troops survived shells landing nearly on top of them because of pure luck. So what makes a shot a "hit"?
Yes some geometries mean a shot that is fired up hill and misses, may in reality go flying past into the next county. So one might be able to define what is NOT a hit, but those cases are fairly rare. The game just can't deal with that.
I'm not sure what caused the "always cause 1 casualty" in version 2.3 We have tweaked with the code a lot since then and it doesn't seem to do that anymore.
The hit chance you are shown IS the "final". The problem is that vs infantry the variable should say "effect modifier" or something instead of "hit chance". There is NO "to-hit" roll when atttacking a soft target. That is the misunderstanding. Maybe someday we may make a change to the message reports, but it isn't high on our list.
This is a case, like armor penetration, where the game is doing things that are not easily communicated in the existing message struture. In some cases "messages" orignaly meant for debugging by the design team are left in becasue the playtesters liked them.
I have only seen occasional complaints about the spotting defaults. Actually I get more comments that folks think things are too hard to spot, rather than two easy. It depends alot on your playing skill. As you get better, its probably good to turn it down some to have more of a challange.
We can never please everybody with a single choice of default settings. The defaults are chosen for a combination of playability and realism. We give you the flexibility to configure the game to your liking in a great many areas. If you can find a combination that you think is appropriate, then we have done what we set out to do.
We are limited to MODIFYING the engine that is there, so many of these issues require a different game with a different underlying set of assumptions about things. But that would not be Steel Panthers...
-
Venger
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2000 8:00 am
- Location: Home of the 90mm M46, keeper of the Can O'Whoopass
I get the whole percentage isn't everything argument, I just fail to see why all guns over a certain size automatically generate a casualty.
An SU-122 should not generate a free casualty when moving 15mph firing at an entrenched gun position from 4500 feet. The to hit is right - generating such a low angle shot to land at that distance is highly improbable at ground level, even more so at an opponent on a crest, where a miss doesn't generate blast effect but rather results in a shell landing several thousand feet behind the target. At 4500 ft, at a gun height of what, say 10 feet, the angle for a shot of relative flat trajectory means that an angle off the guns axis of well under a degree (.127) is needed to plant that round at the feet of the gun crew. Missing will not likely cause it to create a puff of dirt Hollywood style to the left or right, but more likely well in front or behind. Even if we assume it lands somewhere within 150 feet, a gun crew, entrenched and sandbagged, is unlikely to take a casualty from anything besides a very close detonation.
But that's what happens, regardless, from SU-122's. A modern day Soviet tank would be lucky to hit water if it fell out of a boat, but the SU-122's can't miss my gun emplacements.
Just an annoyance in an otherwise excellent game, the only game that I've played other than Civ/Civ2 that has that "just one more turn" addictive value...
Venger
Have you seen Paul's latest post, Venger? This may help you.Originally posted by Venger:
I get the whole percentage isn't everything argument, I just fail to see why all guns over a certain size automatically generate a casualty.
Venger
Paul> I'm not sure what caused the "always cause 1 casualty" in version 2.3 We have tweaked with the code a lot since then and it doesn't seem to do that anymore.<
It is obvious that the design team knows about this problem and they think it is fixed in version 3. Let's wait until version 3 is out.
BA Evans
Well, if you look at all of Paul's posts he's said, essentially, "Well, it's supposed to do that, and besides, it doesn't do it any more." Which is a bit puzzling, but I'm willing to wait and see how V3 plays out.
Least people think that I'm being unduly hard on the game and the design team I will say that part of the reason I come down pretty hard on relatively minor problems is that the game is otherwise so excellent that what would be a small problem in a lesser game is quite vexing in this one. The game handles most things so well it's frustrating to come across something that doesn't seem to be handled well.
And I have to give Matrix a thumbs up for how they handle criticism on the forums. A few awkward issues seem to be ignored, but overall the design team has been very upfront in admitting when there's a problem and working to get it fixed. This is a far cry from some game companies, not to name any names <coughtalonsoftcough>, where anyone who has the nerve to mention what they think might be a bug will be mocked and savaged, their posts deleted, and they may well find themselves locked out of the board if they persist in trying to point out that there might be a problem.
Keep up the good work, guys. We may bitch and moan, but that's what grognards do, right?
Least people think that I'm being unduly hard on the game and the design team I will say that part of the reason I come down pretty hard on relatively minor problems is that the game is otherwise so excellent that what would be a small problem in a lesser game is quite vexing in this one. The game handles most things so well it's frustrating to come across something that doesn't seem to be handled well.
And I have to give Matrix a thumbs up for how they handle criticism on the forums. A few awkward issues seem to be ignored, but overall the design team has been very upfront in admitting when there's a problem and working to get it fixed. This is a far cry from some game companies, not to name any names <coughtalonsoftcough>, where anyone who has the nerve to mention what they think might be a bug will be mocked and savaged, their posts deleted, and they may well find themselves locked out of the board if they persist in trying to point out that there might be a problem.
Keep up the good work, guys. We may bitch and moan, but that's what grognards do, right?
Can't help but add this having just read through the thread. In the Mice vs. Marshals scenario I noticed something interesting. About turn two or three I ended up with four PIVF2's on the road going into the town on the German right and a fifth tank one hex off to the left of the road. On the Soviet turn the tank company cruises down the hill on the other side of town and my four tanks on the road take their OP fire through the town and don't manage to kill anything (no surprise here due to distance).
Now the odd part is on my turn (German) it starts with my four tanks on the road showing around a 25% hit chance average- good so far. I start by moving my fifth tank on to the road to fire at the Soviets (third position out of five in the row of tanks) and it takes Soviet OP fire which misses.
Since everything is focused on the fifth tank I just moved I start firing off the other tanks going from 25% to over 50% estimated hit chance and out of twelve shots among them not a single kill in the group of eight to ten T34's on the other side of town. Then, I finish with the fifth tank that had to move a hex to get on the road to shoot and get two kills with three shots never showing a chance of better than 15%.
Since I save when I start every turn I went back and played the same series twice more with the result of once the fifth tank got two and once it got one but the other four tanks effectively sitting and not moving never got a kill out of now 36 shots of 25% to 50%+ probability. Took a look to see if Wittman was in the fifth tank but it didn't seem to have any special experience or morale.
I guess I'm wondering if something that moves slightly gets a better actual hit calc result
than something sitting completely still.
Now the odd part is on my turn (German) it starts with my four tanks on the road showing around a 25% hit chance average- good so far. I start by moving my fifth tank on to the road to fire at the Soviets (third position out of five in the row of tanks) and it takes Soviet OP fire which misses.
Since everything is focused on the fifth tank I just moved I start firing off the other tanks going from 25% to over 50% estimated hit chance and out of twelve shots among them not a single kill in the group of eight to ten T34's on the other side of town. Then, I finish with the fifth tank that had to move a hex to get on the road to shoot and get two kills with three shots never showing a chance of better than 15%.
Since I save when I start every turn I went back and played the same series twice more with the result of once the fifth tank got two and once it got one but the other four tanks effectively sitting and not moving never got a kill out of now 36 shots of 25% to 50%+ probability. Took a look to see if Wittman was in the fifth tank but it didn't seem to have any special experience or morale.
I guess I'm wondering if something that moves slightly gets a better actual hit calc result
than something sitting completely still.
-
Paul Vebber
- Posts: 5342
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Portsmouth RI
- Contact:
I explained why the "automatic kill" might seem to happening in the old version, and then verified that it did not seem to be happening in the new version...not sure what else I can say...
Strange runs of luck and repeatability have been problems with SP. Sometimes these "stuck" variables or repeating loops seem to occur. If this has been an issue we've been "dodging" its becasue we haven't been able to pin it down specifically.
Strange runs of luck and repeatability have been problems with SP. Sometimes these "stuck" variables or repeating loops seem to occur. If this has been an issue we've been "dodging" its becasue we haven't been able to pin it down specifically.
Actually, Paul, the issue I had in mind was the US .50 caliber AAMGs always firing along with the main armament out to their maximum range. Always. Irrespective of crew experience. But no one else's MGs show the same behavior. It's been commented on several times, but never gotten an 'official' response.