Matrix Games Forums

One thing I find a bit odd about the spotting routine, is the way unmoving spotted units can "disappear" from one HEX. I can well admit that ready infantry can do so, even if previously spotted in that same HEX. But how a 88mm AT gun (for example) just manages to vanish in one turn is a bit hard to understand. I would say that only "ready" infantry should be allowed this ability. Anybody agreing with me ?

Silvarius: I like it that way. Imagine, that in some instances you might only see the flash of the gun instead of the unit proper. You know how you deal with such things, you make your opponent go through the same thing. There's quite a lot of fun to be had trying to figure out how many times you can fire an ATG before the enemy will spot it. Interesting thing though, if V.5 ends up giving us the option of removing the asterisk from play, as we've been told, I'll find myself playing that way, and that changes use of ATGs slightly, when you will only likely know you're spotted by virtue of being fired at.



[This message has been edited by Charles22 (edited February 16, 2001).]

Charles22, I think perhaps you haven't got my point. I meant a unit that had been already spoted. Let's take an example (it actually happened recently) : A 88 mm gun destroys a tank and get spotted by 2 snipers and 1 MG at roughly 10 to 15 Hexes. Both snipers actually shot at it. One turn later, snipers and MG haven't moved (they actually are targetting for the next shot) and what ? the 88 has disappeared ! It is of course at the same place, but the snipers that haven't dropped their eyes from it just can't see it anymore !

My point in the first message was to admit that a "ready" infantry unit can move in the Hex to find some cover. But it should not be so for unmoving units.

Silvarus: I agree with you on this one, once spotted a unit (should) remains spotted, unless obscured by smoke or elimination of the spotting unit, but I don"t believe it can be programmed that way....Can it Matrix???

------------------
Sm:):)th Sailing...chief

No guys, consider how you would model the following: Suppose the reason you spotted the ATG in the first place, was due to an "infantry" squad using it's sighting abilities? What happens if that unit is routed or destroyed? Think of the guys in the tank, particularly if they're moving, it should be rather easy to lose sight of a man's head or whatever we can claim they're firing at when they can see as well as the infantry, when the infantry spot them. While the way spotting is used is somewhat stop-gap it does work pretty well. Just think of the strategy that you should be considering to allow you to fire three or four shots with ATGs and be unspotted. That very thing enters into one of my main strategies, and that is to give the enemy infantry enough suppression to slow their advance, so that my ATGs have longer to fire before being spotted (and I am accounting for something spotted, disappearing, when I say that. If the unit that has truly spotted it has routed, or had enough suppression, it should no longer be able to spot a man's head when they are ducking their own. As well, WE know the ATG hasn't moved, but it's quite natural for people to assume that when they get another chance to look, and see nothing, that the ATG has moved to a different part of the hex, if not to another hex altogether. Naturally, the closer the spotting unit is, the less effort it'll take to realize that what they lost sight of is still there or not. There is a point, of course, where the ATG has fired enought hat it leaves enough smoke to mark it's spot alomst regardless, thus being sighted, but even so, if it's stopped firing for a while, you may not know if it moved. You have to physically spot the gun or the men in order to not lose sight of them, and even those things may disappear due to their covering up better, quickly). There's also a period, closer somewhat, where they've got beyond that fire, and then you're trying to slow them so your foot-based MGs can fire without being spotted. Believe me, you don't want all the tanks spotting like infantry (recon tanks can do that anyway).

Charles22, I agree with you for almost everything you wrote. If anything happens to the spotting unit (suppression, move, etc...), it can make it loose its target, whatever it is. The important point here is that there MUST be something happening. You admit it yourself when you say you try to suppress enemy units in order to impede their spotting ability. But if nothing happens to the spotting unit and the already spotted unit cannot move, it should remain spotted.

I definitly not argue about the other features of spotting (the ability to fire without being spotted, the 50% for non recon vehicule etc ...).

Chief, although I am not a comptuter specialist, I don't think that programming that should be very difficult. It looks more like an additional test to implement in the routine. The question is : "should it be done or not". That's why I've started this thread and thank you and Charles for your opinion.

Silvarius:

But if nothing happens to the spotting unit and the already spotted unit cannot move, it should remain spotted.

That's a good point, and I don't know if it's coded precisely to reflect that or not, but I will say, have you ever, no doubt in your mind, spotted a distant ATG with an infantry unit with no suppression, and then that infantry went completely unsuppressed during opfire? Your answer will likely be that you don't know, and though I think it extermely likely, I can't say for sure I've ever seen that either (have never had reason to notice such a thing).

Here's a bit of using the imagination here. Now this may be right, but I doubt Matrix considered this. Let's assume we have an infantry unit on the player turn who spotted an ATG, which the player decided not to shoot at with anything. During opfire, neither the ATG fires, nor the infantry unit gets suppressed. Now, what do you do, if the only unit with real sighting has no radio? Also, what if it's out of command control? In battle, without a radio, how would the infantry tell anyone 50 or more meters away just what they saw and where? Semaphore? As I say, I don't think Matrix is making the unit need to have a command link and a radio both, or in other words, that the unit has to be spotted by a unit with a radio with a link working to command, which has a link to other commands, but that might fall in the equation somewhere.

Given that the armies have Borg like telepathy to instantly communicate everything perfectly the instant they it, losing track of something every so often does perhaps seem inconsistnat

Watch "The Thin Red Line" for good examples of how screwed up things can get in combat...or for the Modern era, read Blackhawk Down and those where Rangers and D-boys!!

If you don't like that you will NOT like Combat Leader with limited situational awareness and Fog of war both on

[This message has been edited by Paul Vebber (edited February 18, 2001).]

I would only add that the attempt was made to create the uncertainty of maintaining visual contact with the enemy.

There is a point on fixed positions where there might be some room for argument.

Many variables, already mentioned, are called into play in the real war and in this simulation.

I've played the game both ways, and though neither is a totally accurate representation of the true facts, I feel this one we have now is closer to reality than before.

One more thing. Remember, a hex equals roughly 50 yards. The unit(s) do not cover that entire 50 yards but are somewhere within that parameter. Just food for thought.

Wild Bill

------------------
In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Coordinator, Scenario Design
Matrix Games

We were for the most part talking about ATGs, and since most of them are able to move one hex, the matter of their being fixed doesn't enter into it (as well as move within the hex, as WB says). Certainly the 88 flaks and similar big guns would be considered fixed.

Paul : I really like the concept of situational awareness you described in the CL forum. And I like also the concept of incertainty in SPWAW.

But paradoxaly, with this feature applied to fixed units (fortications, immobilized vehicules and heavy gun with 0 mvt in their stat sheet ...), you encourage the defender to be lazy and static on the battlefield. When I notice that one of my 88 has been spotted, I would like to be put under pressure with thoughts like "now that it has been discovered, my precious gun will certainly be put under heavy rolling fire. I MUST do something to soften the pressure in order to enable it to withdraw with the vehicule I had planned to face such a situation...". That is only an example to show the impact of the feature on the ludic side of the game ... In that case, I usually just leave the gun idle for a couple of turns, and it is often enouth to make it as steathy and deadly as before. Against a humain, there is still the pb of indirect fire, but even a human opponent get tired out calling arty fire at an empty HEX after a few turns.

I have to strongly agree with the feature of loosing LOS to units that were spotted.

In combat with smoke, loud noises, etc. its really, really easy to lose track of something. "OK, there was a ATG to the right of that tree but now its not there, Oh, now which tree was I looking at?"

As a former soldier I testify that this happens all the time & I really like this feature.

------------------
An old soldier but not yet a faded one.
OK, maybe just a bit faded.

Originally posted by Charles22:
Silvarius:

But if nothing happens to the spotting unit and the already spotted unit cannot move, it should remain spotted.

That's a good point, and I don't know if it's coded precisely to reflect that or not, but I will say, have you ever, no doubt in your mind, spotted a distant ATG with an infantry unit with no suppression, and then that infantry went completely unsuppressed during opfire? Your answer will likely be that you don't know, and though I think it extermely likely, I can't say for sure I've ever seen that either (have never had reason to notice such a thing).
equation somewhere.

I have, not an ATG but a heavy MG spotted by three units, one that was fired at and yes suppressed. The next turn no MG to be seen this happen at least twice for the same units finally got it to stay spotted by driving an armoured car on top of the MG.

pbear: Yeah, but an MG could just be taken off the tripod (or layed down), and the men lay flat on the ground, and you would probably not see them. If an MG crew had a reason to want to lie low for a while I would think it wouldn't be too difficult. The MG crews aren't anywhere close to immobile. On a rough analysis here, seems to me that most MGs are spotted, regardless. if advancing, within four hexes, if not further out. If the spotter is infantry, I've had the MG spotted on the edge of rifle range. One of the key things people tend to forget with not only the disappearing units, but the others as well, is that often an opponent, if he can tell, which the AI can, that the unit being spotted has stopped firing he will no longer worry about it too much and fire will be redirected elsewhere. I haven't experimented with it that much, but there are times when I've seen a considerable difference as to what happens to some of my units whether they just sit there after they're spotted or fire away. Lot's of times, when I'm blazing away with an MG, and it's spotted, usually with an answering shot from the enemy, if I don't fire anymore after that, during that turn, he'll completely ignore it, a lot of times even during the AI player's turn. It seems the only reason he will try to rough up a unit in that situation, is if it's a very near unit, which in that case it probably won't be able to disappear anyway.

Larry, thank you for your post. I always find the opinion of professionnals very interesting, not being a soldier myself.

Originally posted by Larry Holt:
I have to strongly agree with the feature of loosing LOS to units that were spotted.

In combat with smoke, loud noises, etc. its really, really easy to lose track of something. "OK, there was a ATG to the right of that tree but now its not there, Oh, now which tree was I looking at?"

As a former soldier I testify that this happens all the time & I really like this feature.

Has the situation you describe not something to do with suppression ? In that case, I definitively agree with you.

Originally posted by Silvarius:
Has the situation you describe not something to do with suppression ? In that case, I definitively agree with you.

Surpression (being fired at or nearby fire) could do it. However, just the normal battlefield confusion could cause your attention to be distracted (redistributing ammo, receiving a radio call, intermittent smoke, etc.) and cause you to lose sight of the enemy also.


------------------
An old soldier but not yet a faded one.
OK, maybe just a bit faded.

Originally posted by Charles22:
pbear: Yeah, but an MG could just be taken off the tripod (or layed down), and the men lay flat on the ground, and you would probably not see them. If an MG crew had a reason to want to lie low for a while I would think it wouldn't be too difficult. The MG crews aren't anywhere close to immobile. On a rough analysis here, seems to me that most MGs are spotted, regardless. if advancing, within four hexes, if not further out. If the spotter is infantry, I've had the MG spotted on the edge of rifle range. One of the key things people tend to forget with not only the disappearing units, but the others as well, is that often an opponent, if he can tell, which the AI can, that the unit being spotted has stopped firing he will no longer worry about it too much and fire will be redirected elsewhere. I haven't experimented with it that much, but there are times when I've seen a considerable difference as to what happens to some of my units whether they just sit there after they're spotted or fire away. Lot's of times, when I'm blazing away with an MG, and it's spotted, usually with an answering shot from the enemy, if I don't fire anymore after that, during that turn, he'll completely ignore it, a lot of times even during the AI player's turn. It seems the only reason he will try to rough up a unit in that situation, is if it's a very near unit, which in that case it probably won't be able to disappear anyway.

I understand what you are saying about lossing sight of something during battle. But I would think that with three squads of Infantry spotting a HMG that is firing, someone would realize that it needs to be kept in sight because it represents a large and immidate danger that need to be suppressed and destroyed. Perhaps in game terms the HMG should have not been spotted. This particular HMG was dug-in and only four to five hexes away. Maybe I need to train my guys better.

G-morning
I agree with what Sivarius is trying to point :sometimes spotting rules may be unreal. I too experienced a situation in which my not suppressed infantry units were becoming crazy looking around for spotting a gun that were too close and in such free ground hex that was impossible not to be seen...but I understand also Charles because we can't expect that a programming routine could manage every different context in which this rule takes place..in fact context depends on too many factors and different situations to be considered..sometimes actual spotting rules are more than real..other times context changes and some abstract situation are experienced...
My point is that in open space some weapons are difficult to stay hidden...
apart this everything is much appreciable.

G-morning
I agree with what Sivarius is trying to point :sometimes spotting rules may be unreal. I too experienced a situation in which my not suppressed infantry units were becoming crazy looking around for spotting a gun that were too close and in such free ground hex that was impossible not to be seen...but I understand also Charles because we can't expect that a programming routine could manage every different context in which this rule takes place..in fact context depends on too many factors and different situations to be considered..sometimes actual spotting rules are more than real..other times context changes and some abstract situation are experienced...
My point is that in open space some weapons are difficult to stay hidden...
apart this everything is much appreciable.

Nothing really new to add, but consider this:
Three diff squads have spotted an 88. In one squad they lose track of it due to the SL telling the private who spotted it that he doesn't know what he's talking about, "Because I didn't see squat!".
Another squad calls in the wrong location - ala Larry's 'which tree' analogy. The last squad loses sight because the two guys who spotted it had to deal with some other distraction, and now it's not firing, and the smoke from it's firing has drifted.

Anyway, given that we don't have to contend with false reports of sightings(very common, especially at night), or mistaking friendlies for the enemy, I don't mind a disappearing 88 every now and then.

------------------
JohnWCochran@aol.com