On_Sabbatical 11 Posted January 9, 2012 (edited) Completely wrong ... It lets no place for improvisation ... Edited January 9, 2012 by On_Sabbatical Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beagle 684 Posted January 9, 2012 Completely wrong ...It lets no place for improvisation ... Still indirect fire, you see the Launcher at an 10° angle... GRAD missiles dont have a variable range RL...impact won't be closer as 8m in that case. You do NEVER position artillery insider direct fire range of an enemy...Tanks and APC are made for thast kind of direct fire.Artillery is always ways behind the actual combat zone. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dwarden 1124 Posted January 9, 2012 one AT manpad with direct line of fire on the grad batery and you got nice fireworks sparked who needs MBT or APC :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beagle 684 Posted January 9, 2012 one AT manpad with direct line of fire on the grad batery and you got nice fireworks sparkedwho needs MBT or APC :) Or that way, made possible through the TOW, METIS tripod fix ;) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rubber Grunt.dk 10 Posted January 9, 2012 Still indirect fire, you see the Launcher at an 10° angle... GRAD missiles dont have a variable range RL...impact won't be closer as 8m in that case. You do NEVER position artillery insider direct fire range of an enemy...Tanks and APC are made for thast kind of direct fire.Artillery is always ways behind the actual combat zone. never say never/allways (both looks like non-combat situations): "Direct fire refers to the launching of a projectile directly at a target on a relatively flat trajectory. The firing weapon must have a sighting device and an unobstructed line of sight to the target, which means no objects or friendly units can be between it and the target." @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_fire - also in a episode of Future Weapons with Mack or is it the tv-episodes with Ross Kemp, they are in Afghanistan where a m119-type artillery is set up on a hill overlooking the surroundings, its also used in direct fire mode with the cannons own optics. (can't find they actual episode...maybe someone knows it?) off-topic M777 @ indirect: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
orcinus 121 Posted January 9, 2012 but a single player needs to be at maximum control of the tank to simulate real humans and their communication in all positions in the tank which the ai doesn't come close to doing...the player(driver or any position) should be considered the total 'human' crew in the tank, thus the player should have control over the ai-positions.your argument is only valid with a tank consisting of human players only and maybe only irl. consider the maximum player-control as a necessary "work-around" in the absence of real-life human communication in the tank and the limits of the game engine. I agree whole-heartedly as an SP mission-player - watching all-AI friendly tanks ignore enemy tanks a hundred metres away, and then having the latter blow away you & your squad is very frustrating. AI commanders of tanks still seem to have the primary requisite as candidates for organ donation. Also agree with Qazdar's comments re AI driving. I gave up on a user SP campaign mission last week afetr twice spending >20 minutes as the AI driver tried to get out of first one then another Zargabad compound using an apparently 10^4-point turns... :eek: BR Orcinus ---------- Post added at 07:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:37 PM ---------- Man please start using this stuff . , ; ! ? :/ Agree. @SmokeDog2PARA: I found your post almost unreadable. Please m8, have a thought for those who, unlike us, are not native English speakers - most pertinently, the BI developers to whom your post was presumably addressed :p BR Orcinus Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
On_Sabbatical 11 Posted January 10, 2012 That 10° angle is because the rockets has a drop and not like a missile which go straight. When AI tank will drive from Sakhe to jilavur correcly without getting stuck,then we can say Ai pathfinding has improved :D Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beagle 684 Posted January 10, 2012 (edited) That 10° angle is because the rockets has a drop and not like a missile which go straight.When AI tank will drive from Sakhe to jilavur correcly without getting stuck,then we can say Ai pathfinding has improved :D Rockets go straight for quite a while, thats why they have betetr range compared to shells. Artillery rocket often burn outside of the tube and still accelerate. @ Rubber Grunt I discussed that tonight with a friend that was an Rocket Artillery Sergeant (Unteroffizier) in the beginnign of his 12 Year duty and he does not know of any direct fore modes or sight for rocket artillery, at least not on LARS...direct fire is posssible with barrel fired artillery. You can see in the video that the rockets motor burn quite a while outside of the tube. Edited January 10, 2012 by Beagle Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tonci87 163 Posted January 10, 2012 I can confirm that. Rocket Artillery is not designed for direct fire. barrel fired artillery on the other hand is capable of doing so. They can be used to defend a position Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
krycek 349 Posted January 10, 2012 I agree whole-heartedly as an SP mission-player - watching all-AI friendly tanks ignore enemy tanks a hundred metres away, and then having the latter blow away you & your squad is very frustrating. AI commanders of tanks still seem to have the primary requisite as candidates for organ donation. Sadly I agree with this,the driver shouldn't designate targets for the gunner but when the friggin idiot gunner stares at the enemy armor not doing anything you tend to have less hair on your head.Although their reaction time has improved in 87816. Also being commander is not an option either,somehow me and my AI driver don't talk the same language,it's like a civilized negotiation between two gentlemen on what route to take something like "no you damn idiot,I said the road near the house,not in the house and.......holy crap we're in the lake now". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NoRailgunner 0 Posted January 10, 2012 Instead of giving player too much gamey control over vehicles BIS should imho look into AI crew/fsm and fix the awareness/scan and threat/"target, fire-at" priorities. :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rubber Grunt.dk 10 Posted January 10, 2012 @ Rubber Grunt I discussed that tonight with a friend that was an Rocket Artillery Sergeant (Unteroffizier) in the beginnign of his 12 Year duty and he does not know of any direct fore modes or sight for rocket artillery, at least not on LARS...direct fire is posssible with barrel fired artillery. You can see in the video that the rockets motor burn quite a while outside of the tube. ok. So we only talk about about rocket artillery... what about the TOS-1 Buratino? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOS-1_Buratino "Effective range 500–3,500 m", can that be considered 'direct fire'? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_DxwZsjmf4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OMAC 254 Posted January 10, 2012 Sadly I agree with this,the driver shouldn't designate targets for the gunner but when the friggin idiot gunner stares at the enemy armor not doing anything you tend to have less hair on your head.Although their reaction time has improved in 87816. Also being commander is not an option either,somehow me and my AI driver don't talk the same language,it's like a civilized negotiation between two gentlemen on what route to take something like "no you damn idiot,I said the road near the house,not in the house and.......holy crap we're in the lake now". HA! Excellent. This post sums up the whole deal for me! Being gunner and using WASD keys to command driver only really works cleanly in open terrain. For cities and towns, and even in areas with significant trees, I do the driving and switch back to gunner when contact is close. But I've had lots of fun commanding the AI driver in the Bradley when I'm the gunner in Zargabad in Eye Of the Typhoon (at least on wide streets near the Mosque)! :cool: Fixing/improving AI driving around clutter is a key to happier players: https://dev-heaven.net/issues/25642 In that repro situation, imagine your frustration if you are the gunner, contact is on the other side of the village, and your AI driver is having to negotiate passing the stopped bus. Not good. However, I have learned to just avoid the clutter of the village and have the driver drive around it, using buildings as cover; that solves the problem of AI driving in such situations. In 1.5 years of playing A2, I don't think I have ever designated a target as driver (thank heavens I never got used to that, as that exploit is gone now). Since 87816 improves AI gunner targeting/engaging, it is even less necessary to target as driver. But I am not sure that the AI gunner targets and engages enough when he is told to engage at will. I will test more. But, in general, tank warfare in A2 really, really works. Big time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beagle 684 Posted January 10, 2012 HA! Excellent. This post sums up the whole deal for me! Being gunner and using WASD keys to command driver only really works cleanly in open terrain. For cities and towns, and even in areas with significant trees, I do the driving and switch back to gunner when contact is close. But I've had lots of fun commanding the AI driver in the Bradley when I'm the gunner in Zargabad in Eye Of the Typhoon (at least on wide streets near the Mosque)! :cool:Fixing/improving AI driving around clutter is a key to happier players: https://dev-heaven.net/issues/25642 In that repro situation, imagine your frustration if you are the gunner, contact is on the other side of the village, and your AI driver is having to negotiate passing the stopped bus. Not good. However, I have learned to just avoid the clutter of the village and have the driver drive around it, using buildings as cover; that solves the problem of AI driving in such situations. In 1.5 years of playing A2, I don't think I have ever designated a target as driver (thank heavens I never got used to that, as that exploit is gone now). Since 87816 improves AI gunner targeting/engaging, it is even less necessary to target as driver. But I am not sure that the AI gunner targets and engages enough when he is told to engage at will. I will test more. But, in general, tank warfare in A2 really, really works. Big time. people seem to forget that tanks need room to manouver and are not mande for the urban environment. Tanks are best in pairs and up to a platton level of 4 tanks that can cover each other. Thinking that one tank in town "to rule them all" is simply wrong use of the tool and has to fail. Real tank drivers have indeeded troubles in confined areas. Tanks do not belong into towns nor do they belong into forrests. Basically Takistan is simply a tank unfriendly terrain except the nother part, same goes for Chernarus. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
On_Sabbatical 11 Posted January 10, 2012 I want koursk battle revived with new tanks :D Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
OMAC 254 Posted January 10, 2012 (edited) Imagine being a Tiger commander of Leibstandarte Waffen SS Panzer division on the endless steppe, approaching Prokhorovka! http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/58/1._SS-Panzer-Division_Leibstandarte-SS_Adolf_Hitler.svg/495px-1._SS-Panzer-Division_Leibstandarte-SS_Adolf_Hitler.svg.png The AI driver might have a problem with those anti-tank ditches! ;) Edited January 10, 2012 by OMAC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dwarden 1124 Posted January 10, 2012 ok. So we only talk about about rocket artillery...what about the TOS-1 Buratino? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOS-1_Buratino "Effective range 500–3,500 m", can that be considered 'direct fire'? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_DxwZsjmf4 again indirect due to fact that TOS is valuable target, it would be priority kill if visible ... so these 500m are 1. exercise 2. emergency (russia is overrun by some foe, nobody cares about safety anymore) 3. wiping some targets w/o any means to fire back Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
orcinus 121 Posted January 10, 2012 (edited) people seem to forget that tanks need room to manouver and are not mande for the urban environment. Tanks are best in pairs and up to a platton level of 4 tanks that can cover each other. Thinking that one tank in town "to rule them all" is simply wrong use of the tool and has to fail. Real tank drivers have indeeded troubles in confined areas.Tanks do not belong into towns nor do they belong into forrests. Basically Takistan is simply a tank unfriendly terrain except the nother part, same goes for Chernarus. Generally I agree with you, however remember Tian an Men Square?, maybe Prague '68, then there was Budapest '56; and much more recently, Libya and (according to some reports), Syria. And of course, WW II, especially in Europe. Tanks do get used in towns & cities, especially against uprisings / large protests. The central point, however, is that AI drivers, AI gunners, and AI commanders have some severe limitations that lead to completely unrealistic events, especially in combination. Actually, as far as tanks are concerned I would love to be able to choose one role (e.g., driver, gunner) & have the AI do the rest; but in general they cannot (yet). Agree with you & Dwarden completely about GRAD, MLRS, etc., btw. Stick 'em well behind the lines & use whatever you want to control them - try Bon's artillery, Rydygier's FAW, DAC arti support, etc., if the BIS module puts you off :) BR Orcinus Edited January 10, 2012 by Orcinus Additional information Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tonci87 163 Posted January 10, 2012 Using Tanks in urban Areas has gone horribly wrong so many times. See Grosny during the first chechen war or Vukovar during the Croatian war. The JNA tried to push into town with a large scale tank attack through the suburbs. It was a complete disaster and one of the attack routes (Trpinjska road) is now known as Tank graveyard. Some photos: http://www.trpinjskacesta.hr/galerija-detaljno.php?id=5 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rubber Grunt.dk 10 Posted January 10, 2012 again indirect due to fact that TOS is valuable target, it would be priority kill if visible ...so these 500m are 1. exercise 2. emergency (russia is overrun by some foe, nobody cares about safety anymore) 3. wiping some targets w/o any means to fire back well; this is as close to 'direct fire' with mlrs-type-artillery that we can get: it has optical sight and is capable of direct fire...still a 1000m would be considered direct fire here. off course it is vulnerable to return fire due its design and the nature of the enemy being engaged and the tactical situation. "To enable the rockets to be positioned on the target with greater accuracy, the system is fitted with a computerised fire-control system that includes an optical sight, laser range-finder, cant sensor and an electronic ballistic computer." @ http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product1246.html "The TOS-1 heavy flamethrower system is intended for direct fire support of advancing infantry and main battle tanks, and moves in their combat orders. It is designed to engage military personnel, fortifications and light armored vehicles." @ http://www.military-today.com/artillery/tos1.htm "The firing weapon must have a sighting device and an unobstructed line of sight to the target, which means no objects or friendly units can be between it and the target. A weapon engaged in direct fire exposes itself to return fire from the target." @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_fire Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vipera 10 Posted January 11, 2012 I want tank,apc or car driver to fast move stright in one direction when I command them "fast forward" as a commander of vehicle and make them "blind" to any obstacles on their path. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beagle 684 Posted January 11, 2012 Just a question of behavior. on roads A.I. drives best in safe and aware mode and colum formation, in terrain it drives best in danger mode and wedge formation...and you can always klich into terrain for an move order...thast the most precise way. A.I. will find its way. ---------- Post added at 02:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:13 AM ---------- Tanks do get used in towns & cities, especially against uprisings / large protests. We are talking about war here, not driving down unarmed humans with tanks. We are talking about tanks driving into city canyons full with trained AT armed fighters. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreday 1 Posted January 11, 2012 Just a question of behavior. on roads A.I. drives best in safe and aware mode and colum formation, in terrain it drives best in danger mode and wedge formation...and you can always klich into terrain for an move order...thast the most precise way.A.I. will find its way. My experience of way too many hours with OFP, ArmA 1, and ArmA 2 goes against what your are saying. It is EXTREMELY difficult to command AI to drive straight anywhere other than a flat desert (even then it's still difficult). It is next to impossible to employ any sort of a tactical maneuver when commanding an AI driver. That is a problem... plain and simple. I really don't understand why it is so difficult to pragmatically disable the AI driver's "intelligence" when a human is in command of his vehicle, and just have the driver blindly follow the human commander's orders. You'd think that nothing would be easier to implement, but alas... We are talking about war here, not driving down unarmed humans with tanks. We are talking about tanks driving into city canyons full with trained AT armed fighters. With all due respect, I feel that you are the only one talking about the tactical employment of tanks here. It has nothing to do with a subject at hand. If the tank crews require a lot of support and caution in cities; it is certainly not because their drivers turn into retards when driving down a straight stretch of road... Peace, DreDay Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
orcinus 121 Posted January 11, 2012 (edited) Just a question of behavior. on roads A.I. drives best in safe and aware mode and colum formation, in terrain it drives best in danger mode and wedge formation...and you can always klich into terrain for an move order...thast the most precise way.A.I. will find its way. ---------- Post added at 02:16 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:13 AM ---------- We are talking about war here, not driving down unarmed humans with tanks. We are talking about tanks driving into city canyons full with trained AT armed fighters. "Best" and "most precise" sounds good, but relative to what? AI driving is still dire even on open roads. I never finished Harvest Red because I got so p'd off as, e.g, supply trucks crashed into my newly-built APCs (which shortly thereafter blew up), small columns took forever to get anywhere, vehicles crashed into roadside buildings like fuel staions & took 20 minutes backing off a few metres then crashing into the building again, APCs turned over & got irrevocably stuck, etc. I could go on, but we've all seen it. I now avoid any mission that involves controlling a column of (especially mixed tracked & wheeled) vehicles. As for war - I recall mentioning WW II; and there was also Korea (a war about which I know much less). I seem to remember newsreels of columns of tanks heading towards Kuwait City, & Baghdad, too... Actually your post touches on another issue (though I don't want to discuss it further as it's getting rather OT for this thread) which is that it ain't good practice to send tanks off on their own, especially against entrenched positons or in urban scenarios; AT soldiers are too dangerous. IRL tanks would always have accompanying infantry - covering the flanks, securing the rear, etc. This isn't so easy to set up in Arma except by heavily-scripted mission design, when IMHO you tend to lose too much of the freeroam/sandbox aspects of Arma. Cheers Orcinus Edited January 11, 2012 by Orcinus typo Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ffur2007slx2_5 11 Posted January 11, 2012 Good job BIS, a strong believe that a new patch will be available. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
