Page 1 of 1

Spotting problem

Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2020 6:29 pm
by ncc1701e
One US squad of Rested/Regular soldiers has spotted an enemy unit.

Image

RE: Spotting problem

Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2020 6:33 pm
by ncc1701e
So I decide to bring in a FO team to fire some indirects. The FO team is composed of two Rested/Crack soldiers.
The problem is that they never spot the enemy even after 10 minutes.

The US squad behind them can still see the enemy without any problem.

I am playing with the latest V2.04 patch. Was there any regression lately?

Image

RE: Spotting problem

Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2020 12:41 pm
by MOS96B2P
ORIGINAL: ncc1701e

The problem is that they never spot the enemy even after 10 minutes.

The US squad behind them can still see the enemy without any problem.

Image

This spotting situation comes up sometimes and it can be difficult to always figure out why it happens. In this case, my first guess would be the squad has seven sets of eyes spotting and at least one of the soldiers has LOS. The FO team only has three sets of eyes and none have LOS. As long as all three FO members stay in the exact same spot they probably will not get LOS for a confirmed floating contact icon. Their position or the OpFor position needs to change. Maybe only a very small change. Again just a guess.

It seems the C2 system is working since the FO team shows a tentative contact for the OpFor unit. This probably means the squad of infantry horizontally shared the contact information with the FO team. So while the FO team can't get a positive spot (solid icon) they have been told about the location of the OpFor (faded icon).

As you probably already know the FO team can call for fire on the OpFor position with or without a contact. However, I play with house rules (against the AI) where a friendly unit generally must have at least a tentative contact (so knowledge) of an OpFor unit to take action against said unit. So I find this topic interesting but admit I don't always understand why something is spotted or not.

Below is a link to the BFC Forum. It contains a discussion of house rules and a two page PDF document for house rules. If your interested in using spotting contacts, tentative contacts, C2 in a more realistic immersive manner.

https://community.battlefront.com/topic ... d-14apr20/


Below is a link to a BFC Forum post explaining some aspects C2 and information sharing.

https://community.battlefront.com/topic ... ing-redux/


RE: Spotting problem

Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2020 3:09 pm
by ncc1701e
Thanks for the detailed reply. I have found this thread too in the meantime:
https://community.battlefront.com/topic ... ng-issues/
The other oddity, is that if one has an inf unit that has ID'd an enemy unit, and one moves an FO or an M1 literally on top of the inf unit, the FO or tank STILL will not spot the enemy even after sitting there on top of the inf for several minutes. There is no communication apparently.

And another answer:
First, the misunderstandings about how spotting works:

When a unit shares a positive contact, it generates a possible contact marker for units in C2 or proximity (including tanks) following a variable amount of time, regardless of whether or not the receiving unit has any chance of spotting the target itself (i.e. a unit in comms / proximity but with LoS completely blocked will still gain the possible contact marker). If the unit has LoS to the location and has the means to see the given contact under the current conditions, this possible contact marker will increase the chances of the receiving unit gaining a positive contact for itself. But this is most important: the unit must still spot the contact itself with its own sensors.

All spotting has a highly variable "human factor" applied that can lead to significantly different outcomes in the same circumstances. Anecdotes comparing times to spot are useless for drawing comparative conclusions about spotting beyond possible / not possible. I don't care if 3 times in a row X spotted Z one minute sooner than Y, that does not mean X is better at spotting Z than Y. Now repeat this 100 times carefully controlling all other factors and perhaps we can talk about quantitative differences in spotting ability. (Does this suck? Why yes, from experience it really does.)

Second, what Erwin is encountering in George's scenario:

The US Mech Inf squad has access to 3x thermal small arms sights: 1 on each M249 and 1 on the Marksman's rifle. A split off scout team from a full squad includes one M249 gunner, so it too has a thermal optic. Here is what's a bit weird: the model switch showing these actually on the weapons is tied to a hard day / night time that does not vary based on conditions, but the thermal optics are still considered to be in use when they provide an advantage over day optics. In this case, they seem to be allowing units with thermal optics to see further into the morning haze. Of the infantry units discussed in the scenario, only units with Javelin CLUs also have access to thermal optics. The units without thermals lose LoS at 1668m (at scenario start on my test map using the same date, time and conditions as George MC's map), so if a unit with thermals has shared a possible contact beyond this range with a unit without thermals, it will remain a possible contact for the receiving unit with no chance of becoming a positive contact unless conditions change or the unit alters its spotting equation (moves, acquires a new sensor).

RE: Spotting problem

Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2020 3:54 pm
by MOS96B2P
Yep, those links also have some useful, interesting, information. There is all kinds of information buried in the threads at the BFC forums. The problem can be finding it. IMO the forum search doesn't work that well. Instead I use my browser and type in:

community.battlefront.com Xxxxx.

Instead of the Xxxx enter the topic (C2, spotting, tiger tank, etc.) You can usually find hours of reading material on a given topic.......[:)]

Or if you ever have a question about anything just ask and you are likely to get several responses over at BFC. Generally a friendly, helpful, opinionated [:D] group.