M2 engages M1 with cannon, not TOW ?

[Jimmybar]

I still do not understand, why M2 engaged M1 using the cannon, when it has 7 missiles left.
There was no trees between and distance was about 500 meters.
I saw that happen both in the last TNT and in the last TGIF games.

Usually, when M2 launches to short distances, the missile may fly over, but at least the M2 tries to cause damage, not just draw attention. 500 m is often enough for a missile hit.

Is this just a bug in the game or are there some possible explanations ?
Is there anything I can do to help the poor AI TC to avoid that wrong decision ?

[PS-SCUD]

Jimmy, you must understand that SB is meant to be used as a training tool, as such, eSim decided that the best way to train soldiers in the proper use of the M2A2, would be to demonstrate what not to do.

Thus, the AI has been intentionally programmed to make the wrong decision at every possible moment. That way when soldiers go over the AAR with their superiors, their COs can point out things they did wrong, and look intelligent by doing so.

If nothing went wrong, then the COs would stand there with a dumb look on their face and have nothing to say, or worse, they'd nitpick and mistakenly call proper proceedures mistakes. Soldiers would be trained improperly, moral would fall, respect for Officers would decrease....in short it would be a disaster.

Be very very glad that the M2 behaves the way it does. The fate of the U.S. Army may very well hinge on this behavior.

[Trekker]

Thats acctually the most logic answer i ever heard about this matter...

[Lone*star49]

Thats acctually the most logic answer i ever heard about this matter...
...

Yea, must be right, otherwise what else could be the reason.. lol

But JB, been awhile since I've had the same situation happen to me, but IIRC, if that happens, and you hit the H key for hold fire, and then hit the F key, fire, they will launch Tow..


LS

[ShotMagnet]

A lot will depend on whether or not the M2 has missiles loaded. They can fire twice, then they have to reload. If, in the middle of reloading encounter another target, they'll shoot with what they have left. You can see BMPs do the same thing, for the same reason.

Lots of what an M2, or any other vehicle, will do depends on the behavior given it, as well.


Shot

[TopKick]

PS-SCUDThus, the AI has been intentionally programmed to make the wrong decision at every possible moment. That way when soldiers go over the AAR with their superiors, their COs can point out things they did wrong, and look intelligent by doing so.

That doesn’t make any sense at all. The first thing trainees would do is blame the stupidity of the AI for their mistakes and the commanders or instructors could hardly disagree.

If that is the case, can we count on the “Enemy AI” to be as stupid as the “Friendly AI?” You should always consider that the enemy is at least as intelligent as you are. Having an AI deliberately making wrong decisions could lead to horrible consequences on the battlefield. Computer controlled units, whether friendly or enemy, should be tough opponents. Human controlled units, however, are subject to less than intelligent decisions and reactions.

In addition, I don’t know of one Sim or Game where users didn’t complain about the AI. Why would any software developer, including eSim, intentionally create less than a very intelligent AI, especially when the first two things a user will complain about are the graphics or the stupidity of the AI. The current Steel Beasts is a prime example of that, although I think the AI in Steel Beasts is pretty good for what it does.

Unless you are trying to make the point with absurdity and I missed it.

[PS-SCUD]

Ah ya.....I think my sarcasm was lost on you. Just trying to put some humor into a frusterating part of the game.

[TopKick]

Nah, I picked up on it. But new visitors here may take your word for gospel. At least one member above bit into your explanation and he is a regular. Dumbing down the AI is not a decision even a 2nd Lieutenant would make. :D

[Lone*star49]

Nah, I picked up on it. But new visitors here may take your word for gospel. :arrow: At least one member above bit into your explanation and he is a regular. Dumbing down the AI is not a decision even a 2nd Lieutenant would make. :D
...

Wasn't me, note: "lol" at end of my first statement and, I don't think Trekker did either, as his sense of humor/ style about the flaws of the AI in some areas of SB, are well known by most, just flaws..

Bottom line, my gut feeling says, along with me, he was laughing, with Scud, about his statements..

But, you may have a legit point, that some newbie may well believe it, but not if he reads the entire threads, posts.. hehehe


LS :wink:

[mapman]

LOL PS....almost as good as your History of the List post....

[ShermansWar]

If some newbie beleived it, then he has bigger problems than handling the AI in SB.

[Newbie-Olle]

... Having an AI deliberately making wrong decisions could lead to horrible consequences on the battlefield. Computer controlled units ... should be tough opponents. Human controlled units, however, are subject to less than intelligent decisions and reactions.I thought one major point in the training of military commanders is to "get within the loop" of the enemy.

Given that, an enemy (AI) that behave erratic, random and "stupid" is very tough when it comes to predicting what it will do next. Thus it's nearly impossible to get within it's "loop" and therefore it makes good practice! :mrgreen: :3starSK:

/Olle

[flyboy]

I,m a newbie and caught the sarcasm first go.Wonder how many Lefties fell for it in training though??Being in Ozz lets you see the world from outside the box sometimes,and yes we are quite mad...Nurse,nurse,my medication please.

[Jimmybar]

In the TGIF 97 game M2 s in both sides together killed 8 Leo , 3 M1 , and 8 M2
At least two hits had under 500 m distance.
Gongratulations to AI TC and AI gunner in M2, now I believe that they competent enough.

[PS-SCUD]

The terrain on that map definitely suited PCs and Infantry.

[smogover]

Ah ha... many thanks Shot. Your two missiles & then need to re-load comment puts a few things in perspective.

Guess now I know I should stop killing the F key on my poor ole keyboard :P

[Lone*star49]

Ah ha... many thanks Shot. Your two missiles & then need to re-load comment puts a few things in perspective.

Guess now I know I should stop killing the F key on my poor ole keyboard :P
...

Not to add to this correction, but in this past TGIF, one of my Brads I was personally handling, spotted a Leo, and Tow launcher was up, had 7 ATGM showing, while it was shooting and hitting the Leo with the Bushmaster gun.. I ducked behind some trees, after hitting the H hold fire key, and waited some 4 mins, then moved it into a clear shot BP, and it just starting shooting the Gun, hitting it again..

No damage showing either.., but it was one of those games that had total lag, everything from the map, to the typer, but it seemed to drive fine, and I could see the Leo moving at around than 2000m and it was not skating..

Any thoughts?


LS :?

[TopKick]

Union gunner with Apprentice skills.

[Ratpriest]

Hey,

I had a Bradley kill a T-80 maybe 72 from 1000 meters with cannon. It was in the Argon v1.3 mission at the northern town. My Brad had moved thru woods to flanking Overwatch postions. And run out of TOWS when i watched it kill the tank.

[Ludwigmeister]

What's the Bradley's cannon again? (Too lazy to look, Im studying.. sorta.. while doing this... dont ask).

Ludwig.

[Bluewings]

Bushmaster .

Cheers . :3starSK:

[Ludwigmeister]

Bushmaster .

Cheers . :3starSK:

cal and specs??? I realise this is a totally newb question but.. meh... I'm the coolest newb there ever was. 8)

Ludwig.

[TankHunter]

It is a 25mm auto cannon.

[Bluewings]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/systems/m242.htm

Cheers . :3starSK:

[Homer]

Better site
http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/cv/weapon/M242.html

One thing that annoys me about the AI is when they spot units, they want to go hull down before firing... why cant shoot first then go hull down?

Does anyone know the specifics (beyond the info given in the manual) behind the AI spotting/gunning algorithm? It would be nice to know this because if you understand how it works, it will make the AI more predictable and controllable.

[Ratpriest]

My opinion:

Maybe go hull down to ensure they have't been spotted. Then they lase and come up to fire. I do same if enemy is looking in my direction.

[Bluewings]

One thing that annoys me about the AI is when they spot units, they want to go hull down before firing... why cant shoot first then go hull down?

Because if you fire at a Tank from a Bradley in the open , you have 80% chance to get killed . Why ? Because if the Tank is far away ~2000m +~ it will take :
*1 : 10 seconds to raise to TOW box
*2 : 10 more seconds for the TOW to reach its target
During thoses 20 seconds , you 'll get spotted and a HEAT round will wreck your day .

Now , if the Tank is close by ~or battlesight range~ the Brad gunner will open fire with the Bushmaster (SB1) and you 'll live for 5 more seconds before to get destroyed if you don 't hit something critical on the Tank .

In Pro PE , because you can be the Brad gunner , you can always use my trick and fire right away a TOW , even if the enemy Tank is 100m away ! :twisted:
If your Troopers/Dismounts are ahead of you , they will get splashes from the TOW explosion , but it is a risk you have to take :(

To put it short , if you have the time to find/reach a hulldown/turretdown position , do it .

Cheers . :3starSK:

[Homer]

Because if you fire at a Tank from a Bradley in the open , you have 80% chance to get killed . Why ? Because if the Tank is far away ~2000m +~ it will take :
*1 : 10 seconds to raise to TOW box
*2 : 10 more seconds for the TOW to reach its target
During thoses 20 seconds , you 'll get spotted and a HEAT round will wreck your day .

As opposed to another 30 second in addition to the time you stated? Chances are the Brad is going going to die irregardless of being hull down or not. My point is: It stands the best chance of surviving by engaging as soon as possible and take out the enemy before it can shoot back. I much rather have it shoot in 20 secs rather than waiting 50 secs... thats 30 secs more where the enemy can move out of LOS or spot and engage you.

I noticed the same is true with AI tanks.


In Pro PE , because you can be the Brad gunner , you can always use my trick and fire right away a TOW , even if the enemy Tank is 100m away !

You even stated that you shoot right away when you are a Brad gunner. If argued that firing right away puts you at more risk..... if the AI firing procedure of going hull down first is better then why dont you do it?


To put it short , if you have the time to find/reach a hulldown/turretdown position , do it .

That's the problem with the AI.... you DONT have a choice because it likes to ALWAYS go hull down first.

[Storm91]

In Pro PE , because you can be the Brad gunner , you can always use my trick and fire right away a TOW , even if the enemy Tank is 100m away !

LOL tow has a minimum arming range if memory serves.Dont know what's classifed anymore and whats public info.Its wire guided and a brad has to be at a complete standstill to use it.All i'll say.BTW a 25 mm ap rd will penetrate up to one foot of side turret armor of a m1a2 MBT.Seen it with my own eyes.Dont ask.

cheers

[Bluewings]

fire right away a TOW , even if the enemy Tank is 100m away !

I exagerated to demonstrate a point . I believe the TOW armed itself at 350m , if I recall correctly .
BTW a 25 mm ap rd will penetrate up to one foot of side turret armor of a m1a2 MBT
:shock:

As far as I know the 25mm x 37 M919 can penetrate up to 80mm RHA , and that 's optimistic . 65/70mm RHA for the M791 .
Or does it prove what I said from the begining regarding the steel quality on US Tanks : it sucks .

Cheers . :3starSK:

[Ssnake]

40-70mm RHAe is what we're using as an estimate for 25mm AP munitions, depending on the type.

[Ssnake]

Or does it prove what I said from the begining regarding the steel quality on US Tanks : it sucks .
This is a stupid and inflammatory remark. Just as well I could refer to the infamous rust affinity of French cars which surely are made of French steel. It wouldn't prove anything, just like such a generalized accusation isn't going to help a single bit in a discussion, except helping to derail it.

[Bluewings]

Nils I am sorry to say that you are wrong , and I am right .

French cars do NOT rust anymore . French cars are the best cars in Europe in every test , from safety/crash tests to fuel consomption , building quality and bucks for money . Much better than BMW or Mercedes .

Regarding the steel quality of US Tanks , I did show few facts long ago which I am going to show again :

" All western tanks boost more or less the same thickness of armor up front .

The difference is how the armor react to KE and HEAT , and the quality of the materials employed .
In that department , I believe the Leo 2A5 and the Leclerc leads the pack by a good margin . The Brit Challenger 2 with its Shobham being very close behind .

Usually , Rolled Homogeneous Armor (RHA) appears in 3 forms : Armored steel(RHA) Value :270-300 BHN
Semi Hardened steel (SHS):400-450 BHN
High Hardeness steel (HHS):500-600 BHN
The M1 steel is "High Yield Steel" (HYS):320-380 BHN .

All western Shobham armored Tanks feature Semi Hardened Steel as a part of the layered structure .
Shobham is assume to use ceramics 4 times harder than RHA and much lighter .


High Hardened Steel (HHS) 500-600 BHN , offer 30-35% more resistance than RHA , but its twice the price , difficult to weld .
The Leclerc and Leo feature this armor as a part or the layers .

On the other hand , the M1 has "added" DU layer to "cope" better against hits due to the average steel quality of its armor . Without it (DU) , the latest ammo would go straight through with a laugh . "

There is nothing stupid and inflammatory here but facts . :wink:

Cheers . :3starSK:

[DrDevice]

Well for your "fact" file: arming distance on a TOW is 65m, per the FM, with only the 2B model having 100-300m minimum for it's top attack warhead.

Any fact file on armor quality that can't spell Chobham is crap to begin with...

So you go ahead and champion single-source material. Your "facts," like your conclusions, are as solid as usual BW. :roll:

http://www.transglobal-aerospace.co.uk/17-12/ch2.htm

[Bluewings]

Your "facts," like your conclusions, are as solid as usual BW.
What I said regarding the steel grades is the truth .
What I said regarding the 25mm penetration is the truth .

Then I said "I believe the TOW armed itself at 350m , if I recall correctly . " That wasn 't an affirmation . Thank you for correcting me Doc .

There is some good Chobham and some bad Shobham . As I said , it depends what steel grade you choose to sandwich your Ceramics/DU plates/nuggets .

Cheers . :3starSK:

[stuart666]

Dont want to sound picky, but I want to correct a common misconception. Challenger 2 does NOT have Chobham armour. Its Dorchester, the British verison of Burlington like the M1A1HA and M1A2 has. Its based upon Chobham, but appears to have DU inserts in it. Chobham is a generation behind.

[DrDevice]

Dont want to sound picky, but I want to correct a common misconception. Challenger 2 does NOT have Chobham armour. Its Dorchester, the British verison of Burlington like the M1A1HA and M1A2 has. Its based upon Chobham, but appears to have DU inserts in it. Chobham is a generation behind.

Another example of why this unsourced "fact" on steel quality is questionable at best. They can't even correctly name the armors used in their examples.

[RENEGADE-623]

Wow, every french car i have ever owned or any of my friends have ever owned didnt last too long, and were rust buckets when gotten rid of, and there is no french car out there that can match a mercedes or BMW.

[Bluewings]

This is not true anymore Ren . Until 5 years ago French cars (the cheap ones) did not gave a galvanized chassis . They now have .

The harchest test to put a car through is Africa , and over there 5 cars out of 10 are some old Peugeot 404/504 from the seventies . Thoses cars clocked more than 250.000km in 30 years and they still run like a song . Even Landrovers have a hard time to last that long on African roads/tracks ...

American cars are nowhere to be seen in any World car competitions .

Paris-Dakar : Peugeot/Citroen
Formula One : Renault .
Monte-Carlo rally : Citroen
World Rally Championship : Citroen/Peugeot .
Etc ...

Stuart , British Dorcester IS a Shobham Class Armor . Shobham is NOT an Armor name , but a technical name describing the process of fabrication (different layers in sandwich) .
Its Dorchester, the British verison of Burlington like the M1A1HA and M1A2 has
Incorrect .
It 's Burlington who is a lower version of the british Dorcester .
British Dorcester Armor are Depleted Uranium "nuggets" incorporated in layers of High Hardeness steel (HHS) .
US Shobham is a "layer" of Depleted Uranium sandwiched in between 3 layers of High Yield Steel (HYS) .

Dorchester is superior to US Shobham because it induce a "yawn" in the penetrator due to the placement of the DU nuggets . Basicaly when the penetrator hit something real hard like DU , it "tries" to pierce throught but its path is NOT changed . In Dorcester , the penetrator yawn , bend and is forced to penetrate at an unfavorable angle by the DU nuggets it encounters during penetration .

Have you ever notice that when drilling through stone you sometimes hit something hard ~a layer of stronger material~ but the drilling tungsten carbon "tip" keep going through in straight line but when you hit a "piece" of hard material it can force the drilling tip off its path and the usual result is a broken tip . Same in Dorchester ...

Cheers . :3starSK:

[GaryOwen]

BW might be right about French and British steel being of a higher metallurgical quality than American steel. It's a fact (a real fact --- something that is true in the real world) that pre-atomic age steel has different qualities than steel that was manufactured with exposure to atmospheric and backround radiation in the post-1945 era. "Pre-war" steel (and lead, interestingly enough) is actually coveted for its use in musical instruments such as in steel guitars, banjoes, and steel strings; in shielding for radiological testing and monitoring equipment; and in some electronics manufacturing processes. Apparently, in BWs' world, it may also be useful in the manufacture of spaced laminate or Chobham armor. The British, of course, have a large amount of pre-war steel available to them from which they can make their higher quality armour --- the scuttled fleet at Scapa Flow. And the French, presciently, buried an incredible amount of such high quality "pre-war" steel in the fields surrounding Verdun.

[Bluewings]

pre-atomic age steel has different qualities than steel that was manufactured with exposure to atmospheric and backround radiation in the post-1945 era

You are full of good surprises Garry , not many knows the fact .
France still has thousands of tons of pre-atomic age steel in form of old rails . That steel is stored underground in various facilities , like at Fontaines-les-Dijon (3 miles from home) where the almost entire old Burgondish railway network is (1500km+ !)

Cheers . :3starSK:

[GaryOwen]

And about 500,000 bayonets buried along the Voie Sacree. Unfortunately, it seems, that not allowing Falkenhayn's boys to pass cost the French much more than buried bayonets. The French seem yet to have recovered their "pre-war" vigor. Perhaps an example of natural selection.

[PS-SCUD]

LOL! :lol:

[Bluewings]

Hum ... I did not get that Garry ... :roll:

Cheers . :3starSK:

[stuart666]

Stuart , British Dorcester IS a Shobham Class Armor . Shobham is NOT an Armor name , but a technical name describing the process of fabrication (different layers in sandwich) .
Its Dorchester, the British verison of Burlington like the M1A1HA and M1A2 has
Incorrect .
It 's Burlington who is a lower version of the british Dorcester .
British Dorcester Armor are Depleted Uranium "nuggets" incorporated in layers of High Hardeness steel (HHS) .
US Shobham is a "layer" of Depleted Uranium sandwiched in between 3 layers of High Yield Steel (HYS) .

Dorchester is superior to US Shobham because it induce a "yawn" in the penetrator due to the placement of the DU nuggets . Basicaly when the penetrator hit something real hard like DU , it "tries" to pierce throught but its path is NOT changed . In Dorcester , the penetrator yawn , bend and is forced to penetrate at an unfavorable angle by the DU nuggets it encounters during penetration .

Have you ever notice that when drilling through stone you sometimes hit something hard ~a layer of stronger material~ but the drilling tungsten carbon "tip" keep going through in straight line but when you hit a "piece" of hard material it can force the drilling tip off its path and the usual result is a broken tip . Same in Dorchester ...

Cheers . :3starSK:

Alright, we've both been corrected, I can live with that. :wink:

[Ssnake]

That's all nice and well, yet our damage model calculations are based on RHA equivalents and do take into considerations the different hardness values of various steels. It's already part of the equation, as you can see - as are dU inserts and other tricks as far as Paul and others can reasonably estimate their influence to the RHA equivalent parameter.

And, btw, crash tests and rallye results, as impressive as they may be, have absolutely zero relevance for the rust resistance of a chassis (or the lack thereof). And as far as Africa is concerned, as long as rusty French import cars from Germany are being shipped to Africa for spare part cannibalization, I'm not surprised that they last longer than Landrovers which are being built in fewer numbers.

Finally, in case you didn't get the message, I just wanted to point out with this example that analogies like this aren't helpful unless you want to derail a discussion. Which has worked brilliantly, as far as I can see.

;)

[Bluewings]

Nils , I am not talking about the damage model in SB pro PE , which is excellent , but without being perfect yet . There is so many factors to take into account ... :? (as you know :wink:)
Finally, in case you didn't get the message, I just wanted to point out with this example that analogies like this aren't helpful unless you want to derail a discussion. Which has worked brilliantly, as far as I can see.

You are mistaking Nils . Badly mistaking in fact as YOU did start it with :
Just as well I could refer to the infamous rust affinity of French cars which surely are made of French steel
:lol: :wink:

Cheers . :3starSK: