do computer crews detect atgm launches too easily?

[Captain_Colossus]

from my subjective experience, several times sneaking up on tanks and firing at the rear aspect with an atgm from different vehicles (i.e, bmp-2, m2, hmmwv with tow), a healthy tank sitting still in a relaxed posture usually seems to detect the launch as long as there is a line of sight (that is, not turret down and attacked with a top attack missile) to the launcher as long as the enemy tank isn't already distracted or engaged elsewhere. i've tried this against tanks at various ranges exceeding 2km from behind tree lines and the computer crews pick up that something is happening, the turret will swing at the direction if given enough time. it seems to be related to the 'bug' that you can't kill computer tc's with direct fire of any kind, as soon as the trigger is pulled for example with an autocannon or machine gun, the computer tc's detect the attack the instant the trigger is pulled and shoot down the hatch, alerting the crew- with a missile it's similar, but because of the longer flight time, the whole tank can conceivably get oriented for return fire quickly, in other words.

 

the first questions may question my tactics and this sort of thing. this is not it, i've created test scenarios where m1a1 tanks were skylined and showing their rear to various missile vehicles at +2km and always manage to turn around and face the attacker after the missile is launched. they never see these vehicles until the missile is launched, but this seems to happen every time. they may not turn around in time to get a shot off first, but they do seem to see the missile every single time.

 

[Ssnake]

Not sure if any of the above invitates discussion, but thanks for the hint.

[Captain_Colossus]

fair enough i apologize.. i hope this practice scenario does it better- every single time i run outcome same. shoot tow at rear aspect pf m1 tank, m1 turns around predictably every time. no random variation

 

 

missile test.zip

[Chiquito]

I agree. To be fair this reaction must be random in favor the ATGM even when come front side. 

[Captain_Colossus]

the attachment for the test scenario is embedded between the photos if anyone wants to confirm for themselves. not easy to see the link.

 

this behavior might go undetected but once you see it, it can't be unseen- i tend to see it now in any scenario i run, the computer has a kind of detection advantage in the script

[Ssnake]

Moved this to "Support" because ultimately this is a request for change/reporting a real life/Steel Beasts discrepancy.

And you provided a test case, which is a bonus. If I may be so bold to ask you to add, with spawn conditions, other pairings like infantry with RPG, and infantry with long range ATGMs to this scenario. That would then serve as an excellent yardstick to measure success in our attempts to provide some remedy.

[Captain_Colossus]

I know what the issue is, after a few more trials with a mix of vehicles and infantry, I've unknowingly duplicated a topic I mentioned before:

 

 There is a bug in Steel Beasts that has persisted a long time: in sum, the target tank always has a head start in locating the threat because a computer TC always knows whenever the tank is under attack. Using a large vehicle with an ATGM, you're taking your chances when you fire at a tank at larger distances because simply the act of firing is alerting the enemy crew. One could say this is actually a good representation, large vehicles should have a higher chance of detection, but I think that it's still rather unfair because it can be demonstrated all the maneuvering to an optimal engagement spot can wind up being the cause of its own ruin. Therefore, a vehicle is never really 'ambushed', because the tank commander always knows he is being ambushed- by ambushed i mean he always knows that he is being shot at the moment the trigger a weapon system is pulled and will never be blindsided- artillery, ATGM, main tank gun, auto-cannon, small arms, RPG, whatever it is, the TC is aware the instant the trigger is pulled. The first screen shot here shows another m1 tank off in the distance over 2 km away about to fire at another m1 in the foreground, which is facing away and which can't see it. The instant that main gun flashes, the tank commander 'disappears' down the hatch- he knows he's shot at. The second screen shot is taken just an instant after the threat tank shoots and the computer TC disappears down the hatch.

 

Seems to be the detection routine:

 

-Threat shoots at tank

- Computer TC immediately and always knows the tank is under attack.

- Signal sent from the TC to the rest of the tank: the tank goes through its sorting routines trying to locate threat- a large target in the open of course will be spotted sooner.

 

Users may not notice this even though it's in plain sight, but once you're red pilled, it can't really be unseen. Likely it's not really detected if most of the time players are using tank guns or ATGMs at closer ranges, usually the enemy tank is dispatched or damaged usually before detection routine locates the threat. In the case of ATGMs, because of the slow flight time, given enough time (again say 2 or more km to travel to impact), the target tank more often than not will detect a large vehicle such as a Bradlely shooting at it- smaller ATGM teams are more difficult to spot and may get away with it if they manage to seriously wreck or kill the target vehicle.

 

So in sum, players using slower weapons at longer ranges, in particular missiles, have this effect biased against them; whenever you fire anything at a tank, the enemy TC knows it immediately; the TC is never 'surprised', it's just that the rest of the tank as an extension of his commands hasn't located or reacted to the threat yet. If the weapon hits before the tank locates the threat, it gives the illusion that the tank is being ambushed. With ATGMs though the risk is amplified that the target tank will have the time to locate the threat and respond.

 

 

Edited November 26, 2017 by Captain_Colossus

[Colebrook]

Interesting,I have been doing some tests and the tank turns even if the firing unit is not spotted, is possible that the tank detects the own missile as a target?. The other interesting thing is that only turns the turret to face the atgm, not the hull.

[Captain_Colossus]

the way it works is a bit of a contradiction, the tc senses the firing, but does not sense not the unit firing (yet). if that makes sense- it's as if the moment the trigger is pulled the tc has a light bulb goes on, even if it can't yet see the unit firing (in other words if it sees the signature of a shot, it should see the approximate location of the unit firing, by definition- but that's not how it works per se, unless the firing unit is right in plain sight).

 

another way to appreciate it is all those times when you are in the gunner's position and you hear the hatch of the tc suddenly close, that usually means a missile launch, although no one has spotted the location of the threat yet.

 

 

[Maj.Hans]

2 hours ago, Captain_Colossus said:

the way it works is a bit of a contradiction, the tc senses the firing, but does not sense not the unit firing (yet). if that makes sense- it's as if the moment the trigger is pulled the tc has a light bulb goes on, even if it can't yet see the unit firing (in other words if it sees the signature of a shot, it should see the approximate location of the unit firing, by definition- but that's not how it works per se, unless the firing unit is right in plain sight).

 

another way to appreciate it is all those times when you are in the gunner's position and you hear the hatch of the tc suddenly close, that usually means a missile launch, although no one has spotted the location of the threat yet.

 

 

 

As TC, as soon as I hear the loader flip his hatch shut, I know it's time to back up and get back behind the hill.

 

On a few occasions this has caused slower traveling rounds (T-tanks with a HEAT in the tube) to fall just short of my vehicle as I back up.

[Ssnake]

Well, I certainly have an idea what may be going on there. But I don't want to engage in idle speculation, I don't read the code.

 

We will investigate.

[Maj.Hans]

1 hour ago, Ssnake said:

Well, I certainly have an idea what may be going on there. But I don't want to engage in idle speculation, I don't read the code.

 

We will investigate.

 

Would be interesting to know what the results are.  This has been an issue that's not really been a huge issue in the sim for me but sometimes obvious and annoying.