Borg and Relative spotting.

[z1812]

Hi All,

I just don't see the advantage of relative spotting. Relative spotting requires much more resource to resolve a turn sequence. Why bother? After I check through all my units I know where the enemy is anyway.

Borg and relative spotting seem no different to me. As the overall commander one way or another I will know where every unit is. Why tie up resources for a feature that makes no difference.

It's just tedious checking every unit to see where enemy units are................................. I would rather turns resolve more quickly than tying up resources for a feature that seems..........................well.................useless.

What do you all think?

regards John

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: z1812

I would rather turns resolve more quickly

I see no issue in this regard on my system:

3Ghz Core2Duo
4GB RAM

The time consumed by the computational interlude is typically a small fraction of the forty-second graphical replay at the end of each phase.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Mobius]

Relative Spotting Advantage
1. Adds to immersion. Instead of being like a chess board where everything is laid out in front of the players in relative sighting only enemy that are actually sighted are shown. And if an enemy unit is out of arc it will not be seen by any of your units even if it is right behind them. In borg spotting games I have seen enemy tanks spot my AT gun preparing to fire at their 6 o'clock.

2. Lets sighting be more fine tuned. Each bit of blocking terrain adds a little until it blocks at some point. Woods which are not square edged have holes where LOS can be found and at other points totally block.

3. Allows AI to select targets mid turn allowing it to kill multiple targets as they become visible.

4. This compliments the orders system by letting the AI run your units targeting based on their own sighting situation. Your own orders can concentrate more on getting your units in the right location facing the right direction and with less micro-management.

5. Instead of stretching a LOS tool to each and every enemy unit to see if a unit can see it you know immediately by clicking on it.

6. I'm not sure if many other games have this but there can be fine tuning of the sighting ability by buttoning up, moving, use of cupolas and sighting factors dependent size of target or flash of various size guns.

[thewood1]

CM has most of these. The main thing borg spotting does in CM is that if one unit spots an enemy, any unit with LOS to the same spot now spots the enemy. The one thing that CM has that alleviates this to some extent is the fairly sophisticated FOW. The enemy can be only a sound contact, IDed as only type of unit, or misIDed, like a T70 being called a T34. There is no knowing its a T26M37, it is first listed as an AFV, then a light tank, and then it may be listed as a T26 or T34. Not until multiple units have spotted it for a length of time does the FOW picture start to clear up.

The best sighting in a game is easily POA2. Not only does it have relative spotting, but combines the FOW of CM. It also adds sighting reports that degrade if contact isn't maintained and delays in getting sighting info to other units. This applies to bothfriendly and enemy units. It can be incredibly frustrating to lose sight of your own units and not be able to command them. Of course POA2 was a wreck and took a year to straighten out, but it is fun to play around with.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: thewood1

The main thing borg spotting does in CM is that if one unit spots an enemy, any unit with LOS to the same spot now spots the enemy.

Another behavior that I associate with borg spotting is borg aiming. In the course of play, I routinely watch as all those units simultaneously acquire a target and then all their barrels turn as one to engage it. [X(]

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl
Another behavior that I associate with borg spotting is borg aiming. In the course of play, I routinely watch as all those units simultaneously acquire a target and then all their barrels turn as one to engage it. [X(]

That to me was always the biggest negative of "borg spotting" as well.

[thewood1]

My assumption is that once spotted, your units will fire on it.  The only time that won't happen is there other targets around.  Then the AI goes through its threat routines.
 
CMSF actaully has a pretty good relative spotting routine.  But I have noticed that the delays are pretty short and very morale, experience dependent driven.

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

ORIGINAL: thewood1
The main thing borg spotting does in CM is that if one unit spots an enemy, any unit with LOS to the same spot now spots the enemy.

Another behavior that I associate with borg spotting is borg aiming. In the course of play, I routinely watch as all those units simultaneously acquire a target and then all their barrels turn as one to engage it. [X(]
PoE (aka ivanmoe)

So it not just the borg spotting but it's what is done with it.
That single thing turned me off CMAK the most.

I'm not sure there is any data for sound location from vehicle noise. The only sound location data I have is for locating enemy artillery.

[thewood1]

I thought you siad earlier it was the over-engineered, over detailed part from the demo.

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: thewood1
I thought you siad earlier it was the over-engineered, over detailed part from the demo.

That's what I call it when the synchronized Shermans (beating the Chinese team for the Gold medal BTW[:D]) all turned 180 degrees to fire at my Pak 38 going from a hide to preparing to fire at their backsides. Before the Pak had actually fired yellow rubber-bands from all the Shermans guns as well as the TC's .50 cals where all centered on the Pak.

The 50mm shell didn't hit the back of the Sherman but the front armor. It died shortly under a hail of fire.

[z1812]

Hi All,

The proposition as I see it is:

Does one feel that the extra system resources used are worthwhile to generate relative spotting? Does one want to click through every unit to find the enemy? Some like the idea of relative spotting and some may feel it redundant.

Quote Erik Rutins

"The main determinant for "simulating turn" speed is the total number of units (especially the total number than can see each other) since the biggest time hog is the relative spotting calculations."

End Quote Erik Rutins

Now that we have relative spotting PCK is obviously staying with it. However from my point of view. again considering with a bit of mouse clicking I can see every unit, then I don't see the point. You must only spend more time clicking through units to see what is on the battlefield.

If some find it adds immersion or other qualities then thats nice for them. I cannot see the benefit.

I have the same problem with CMSF. I love the game but find it tiresome clicking through units to see what is there.

regards John

[Mobius]

I was testing my King Tiger model using two of them against six JS-2ms. Both KT were stationary and the JS-2m were moving about 700m away. While the KTs have the same ROF they often would not fire at the same time. While they usually got off at least two shots a phase they would not be at the same instant. Once in awhile the second shot was delayed to after the JS-2m’s shots.

I don’t know exactly why their shots weren’t synchronized but it is possible an aiming clock runs and a certain total amount of time is needed for the target to be in sight in order to fire. With relative sighting moving behind obstacles would not count as aiming time.

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: z1812
Now that we have relative spotting PCK is obviously staying with it. However from my point of view. again considering with a bit of mouse clicking I can see every unit, then I don't see the point. You must only spend more time clicking through units to see what is on the battlefield.

If some find it adds immersion or other qualities then thats nice for them. I cannot see the benefit.

I have the same problem with CMSF. I love the game but find it tiresome clicking through units to see what is there.

You are seeing the end results of all the relative spotting calculations. Relative spotting calculations run continously during the turn processing. It may be done for each second of play. 40 times a phase.

I don’t think enough is done with the relative spotting. Instead of trying to determine which one my units spots an enemy by clicking through them. I would like to just click the enemy unit and have the icons on the HUD highlighted if they are spotting it.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: z1812
If some find it adds immersion or other qualities then thats nice for them. I cannot see the benefit.

The benefit is that it's more realistic.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[thewood1]

I just ran a simple test on a scenario I built years ago to test ATG spotting.

1 - 75mm Pak 40 at 800m at the edge of heavy woods (10m in)
2 - 75mm Pak 40 at 1200m in brush 
3 - 50mm Pak 38 at 1200m in brush 

All are facing the rear of 12 veteran T34M42s that are unbuttoned.

In 1, it took the 75 3 minutes to see the 34s.  It fired twice to kill 1 34 and then all the other 34s immediately rotated their turrets and pummlled the 75 with 12 - 14 shots to kill it.

In 2, it took 15 sec. for the 75 to spot the 34s. The 75 killed 2 34s with three shots and then was spotted and killed after taking 10 HE shots.

In 3, the 50 killed all but two 34s and was never spotted.  The 34s picked up a sound contact within two shots, but had no positive ID.  I played hotseat and noticed the the 34s all had various sound contacts scattered around the gun position.  Whan I compared that to the actual gun position, the sound contacts were up to 50m from the actual.  I just let the AI play in all three tests, but If a human was playing, they most likely would have started laying HE all around the sound contact to suppress the gun.

This test shows the worst of the CM borg spotting.  It is interesting that the gun size and muzzle flash had a significant impact, but if one 34 had spotted the pak38, all that had LOS to the gun position would have spotted it.

I am going to run the same test in PCK and see what happens.

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: thewood1
This test shows the worst of the CM borg spotting.  It is interesting that the gun size and muzzle flash had a significant impact, but if one 34 had spotted the pak38, all that had LOS to the gun position would have spotted it.

Maybe not the worst. Try having giving your Pak guns a hide order the first turn. Then give them orders to fire the next. See how the T-34s react to any activity of the gun crews.
And don't face the gun exactly at the T34s. Make it have to pivot a wee amount.

[thewood1]

I did exactly that...no difference.  Maybe have to be close for that.

Tried it at less than 400m and both guns has to rotate to shoot...no difference. The main difference in the test is that the 50mm Pak38 was immediately IDed as a light gun and got hammered within three shots of the 50mm.

I also has a 88mm Pak43 oon the map 2000m from the 34s. In 15 minutes it knocked out all the T34s from 2000m. It was elite, so its aim was good, but it was never spotted by the T34s.

Just realized I won't be able to run the test on the 75mm at 1200m. I can't find an open area for it. I haven't gone though all the maps yet. Any suggestions?

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: thewood1
Just realized I won't be able to run the test on the 75mm at 1200m. I can't find an open area for it. I haven't gone though all the maps yet. Any suggestions?

I don't think you need to go to the limit of sighting. 400-500m is all that one might need. It's the out of arc that matters.

In PCK out of arc areas are blind spots. I think it was Mraah that had the suggestion of limited range in the blind area behind the tank. At least it will help the AI if that was done. Humans may become aware because of targeting rubber-bands that go to unseen spots.

I

[thewood1]

CM also has the sighting limits, including buttoned vs. unbuttoned and minimum sighting due to limitations up close to a tank.  What is killing the spotting realism is that once one tanks spots it, they all do.  My testing shows that with individual tanks, rearward spotting in buttoned up tanks is woeful.  Never tested it in PCK because I assumed it was the same.

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: thewood1

I just ran a simple test on a scenario I built years ago to test ATG spotting.

1 - 75mm Pak 40 at 800m at the edge of heavy woods (10m in)
2 - 75mm Pak 40 at 1200m in brush 
3 - 50mm Pak 38 at 1200m in brush 

All are facing the rear of 12 veteran T34M42s that are unbuttoned.

In 1, it took the 75 3 minutes to see the 34s.  It fired twice to kill 1 34 and then all the other 34s immediately rotated their turrets and pummlled the 75 with 12 - 14 shots to kill it.

In 2, it took 15 sec. for the 75 to spot the 34s. The 75 killed 2 34s with three shots and then was spotted and killed after taking 10 HE shots.

In 3, the 50 killed all but two 34s and was never spotted.  The 34s picked up a sound contact within two shots, but had no positive ID.  I played hotseat and noticed the the 34s all had various sound contacts scattered around the gun position.  Whan I compared that to the actual gun position, the sound contacts were up to 50m from the actual.  I just let the AI play in all three tests, but If a human was playing, they most likely would have started laying HE all around the sound contact to suppress the gun.

This test shows the worst of the CM borg spotting.  It is interesting that the gun size and muzzle flash had a significant impact, but if one 34 had spotted the pak38, all that had LOS to the gun position would have spotted it.

I am going to run the same test in PCK and see what happens.

In reference to scenario #3, that seems like a truly extraordinary performance. Should PAK 38 really be that effective against T34 at 1200m?

PoE (aka ivanmoe)