I hate PzIVs

[Weasel]

First off: this post has 14,500 views...holy bat crap!

Second: People seem to be missing the point; if the AT gun can see into the piece of ground I am on then I can see onto the piece of ground he is on. There is no secret to it, it is a fact of nature and terrain. It is nothing to do with suppression, hatches closed, bad luck, it is sucky game code that a unit on a piece of ground can see into hex A, but the unit in hex A can't see the other unit. Vision is a straight line, no curves, dips, or hills, a straight line which is indisputable, thus if you can see me then I can see you. Trying to area fire at the AT gun resulted in red optic lines, LOS blocked. I could not even put smoke in front of the gun, terrain blocked.


So please no more posts about optics, scared tank commanders, uber camoflage, but if you can explain how a straight line can be one directional then please go ahead.

My biggest regret is that I spent $90+ bucks on this game.

[Steiner14]

I do not agree that vision has to be symmetrical.
Just place yourself behind a bush or hedge. You could see through, but nobody will see you or the ground you are placed on.

[Weasel]

Once again you missed the point: if you can see a piece of ground, no matter what is on it, then the reciprical is true. You cannot stand at a street corner and look down the road to the next corner, then go to that corner and not see the one you just came from. It has nothing to do with camoflauge, the sun in your eyes, your hatch being closed, you are eating a can of beans etc etc.

As I stated twice now, from my tanks I had blocked vision to the ground where the AT gun was, I couldn't even get close to it with a target. So if I have blocked vision due to whatever the game is blocking my vision with, then why does he not?

As per your example: sure I can't see you behind the bush BUT I CAN SEE THE BUSH, unlike in the stupid game called CM2, where even the bush cannot be seen.

[PoorOldSpike]

Hey guys I just posted a series of screenshots called 'SPOTTING ANALYSIS' here that sheds more light on the CMx2 spotting mechanics-
https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards...492&page=4

Here's a screenshot from the series which illustrates how a Russian ATG in the woods has just toasted a Pz IV, but the other 2 Panzers aren't returning fire because they can't get a solid lock on him, just a 'partial lock' (faded green icon) because there are too many treetrunks in the way.
They can of course blow him away with area-fire next turn, but units won't do area fire unless the player orders them to-


PS- hey Weasel, I know your situation might be different to that, but we really need to see a screenshot from you to be able to solve it, or even better send me the game file to surgically analyse-
pooroldspike(at)aol(dotcom)

[Steiner14]

Weasel,
you state things (spotting must be reciprocal) and when the game does not follow your assumtions, you call it stupid.
Do you play CMx1 with such a negative mindset, too? Definately not. Especially in CMx1 the player has to imagine many things, if something strange happens, to explain it. That CMx1 is more abstracted probably makes it easier.

I'd suggest you approach CMx2 with the same positive attitude you approach CMx1 and try to imagine a circumstance, that delivers the spotting result you are seeing.
I have presented you one possible explanation. I am sure you can find several others - if you try.
But if you reject everything, but on the other hand can easily accept all the shortcomings in CMx1, then the problem is less game mechanics related, but more a question of the different attitudes you approach the different games.

[Toblakai]

I think one of the main problems with spotting in CMx2 is that the turn calculation (before the replay) has the same routine like the real time calculation. With other words: We are playing a round based game with real time calculations. With all the compromises that RTS will bring. Until this year, I did not know that and was always wondering why in CMx2 typical RTS tactics work more than in CMx1. E.g. in a QB against the AI I can select all my units at one time, move them forward, don’t thing about any tactics and can win the battle. In CMx1 it was nearly impossible. Of course that’s only my experience and they are subjective

[Steiner14]

Toblakai,
I am not sure if I understand your post. What is the conection between the unresponsiveness of the AI and spotting?
The AI in CMx1 had an "operational" component, that made it autonomously react to developments (i.e. "fight" torwards victory locations), the AI in CMx2 only has the individual units' survival AI and fully depends on AI-plans that must be created by scenario designers.

[Toblakai]

Toblakai,
I am not sure if I understand your post. What is the conection between the unresponsiveness of the AI and spotting?
The AI in CMx1 had an "operational" component, that made it autonomously react to developments (i.e. "fight" torwards victory locations), the AI in CMx2 only has the individual units' survival AI and fully depends on AI-plans that must be created by scenario designers.

Does it mean that QBs against the AI are senseless because the missing implement AI tactic? If it's like this, my example won't fit

With my example I wanted to show that because of the real time limitation the spotting frequency is too low and the AI turn calculation is too short for satisfactory results.

[Steiner14]

Toblakai,
I can't really answer that, because the last time I played a QB was at CMx1 times.
It very much depends if an AI plan is available and how well it is suited for the force composition on both sides and the tactics the player applies.
But since the AI in regular scenarios in most cases is no challenge, how could it be a challenge in a QB?

I am wondering that a PBEM player with such an outstanding win/lose ratio like you, is playing QBs against the AI. A honest question: How is that possible that you win against almost every human player but find playing the AI interesting?

[Toblakai]

No, I don’t play usually QBs against the AI 99% of my battles are against human opponents. Against the AI I start only sometimes a short battle to test something.

My example with the QB seems to have serious consequences to my reputation