As far as I'm aware "hit" shots cannot miss/hit intervening obstacles, only missed shots that otherwise would have struck the opposing tank's collision box through favourable scatter.
Though I believe there used to be an issue with Snares striking obstacles en-route to a target, so it may be dependent on collision tables.
Think are quite complicated in Coh2 and not all weapons/projectiles use the same parameters.
Something that applies to ballistic weapons might nor apply to "big explosion", so that is too general comment and and one is better looking to individual weapons and projectiles.
For instance artillery shot as far as I know do not go trough accuracy checks so the can never "score" an actual hit.
Luckily for us Elchino7 already run a test with ballistic weapons.
I tried this on the test range map with cheatcommands and a 100% accuracy shot will go through other vehicles and terrain*.
I basically put a JPIV to shoot a JT, while there were a bunch of other JTs in the middle.
In regards to terrain, you know how if you delete a base building the ground below sunk? Well i just parked a JP4 so it was basically below ground.
That's what I thought, honestly. "hit" shots apparently ignore collision calculations in the same way as hitscan bullets do, I think the only functional difference between a rifle bullet and a tank shell is that a tank shell can still do damage on a "miss". (Though "missed" rifle/machinegun bullets can damage terrain such as wooden fences/carts/etc... so perhaps this isnt strictly the case either? Is it possible that a "missed" bullet can still hurt a model if it intersects with it during its scatter? Has anyone tested a 0% accuracy MG42 against a point-blank model? If this is the case, that sort of changes things dramatically as far as unit positioning is concerned.)
Think are quite complicated in Coh2 and not all weapons/projectiles use the same parameters.
Something that applies to ballistic weapons might nor apply to "big explosion", so that is too general comment and and one is better looking to individual weapons and projectiles.
For instance artillery shot as far as I know do not go trough accuracy checks so the can never "score" an actual hit.
Luckily for us Elchino7 already run a test with ballistic weapons.
Artillery doesn't actually target anything, so that's sort of to be expected, isnt it? Artillery is basically a glorified "Attack Ground" from an invisible unit, to my knowledge, so there's no "hit" calculation for it to bother with.
That's what I thought, honestly. "hit" shots apparently ignore collision calculations in the same way as hitscan bullets do, I think the only functional difference between a rifle bullet and a tank shell is that a tank shell can still do damage on a "miss". (Though "missed" rifle/machinegun bullets can damage terrain such as wooden fences/carts/etc... so perhaps this isnt strictly the case either? Is it possible that a "missed" bullet can still hurt a model if it intersects with it during its scatter? Has anyone tested a 0% accuracy MG42 against a point-blank model? If this is the case, that sort of changes things dramatically as far as unit positioning is concerned.)
There is no collision with infatry entities even for weapon with projectiles.
Small arm do not have a projectile to begin with.
Some weapon can hit entities via another mechanism available to HMG/ST44/BARS... called "focus fire"
Artillery doesn't actually target anything, so that's sort of to be expected, isnt it? Artillery is basically a glorified "Attack Ground" from an invisible unit, to my knowledge, so there's no "hit" calculation for it to bother with.
I was not referring to barrages.
Mortar shots, scott shots..., aim at things but can not "score" hits they can however score collision hits.
I tried this on the test range map with cheatcommands and a 100% accuracy shot will go through other vehicles and terrain*.
I basically put a JPIV to shoot a JT, while there were a bunch of other JTs in the middle.
In regards to terrain, you know how if you delete a base building the ground below sunk? Well i just parked a JP4 so it was basically below ground.
There are a few objects though that catch accuracy rolls even though they shouldn't. JJJ managed to find some (some barrels on Nexus iirc) and they got fixed but there may be more.
I don't know if ballistic shots that have passed accuracy check and have score a "hit" can collide with unit that stand between gun and target or if collision hit checks are only for shot that have "missed".
I guess I can test with one of the high accuracy TDs at some point.
I tried this on the test range map with cheatcommands and a 100% accuracy shot will go through other vehicles and terrain*.
I basically put a JPIV to shoot a JT, while there were a bunch of other JTs in the middle.
In regards to terrain, you know how if you delete a base building the ground below sunk? Well i just parked a JP4 so it was basically below ground.
Not that I didn't trust your test, but how did you set it up? I am pretty sure that in the editor there is a value that allows a projectile to travel a certain distance without collision. At least in the case of the terrain it could be an explanation, and depending on the setup of the "vehicle block" test it could be as well.
My take on this was that I sometimes try to save a damaged vehicle by parking a healthy one in front of it and it works surprisingly well. Therefore I thought that all ballistic projectiles have collision checks.
Second, in the case of ATGs (most notoriously the Raketenwerfer) but also some other vehicles I see regular collisions with world objects as well as terrain (for example, in rails and metal a bunker or OKW HQ that is placed at the sloped hillside is near indestructable by ATGs because they will just fire into the hill). So that in turn would mean that either ATG projectiles are handled differently from tank ones or that fences etc are differently handled than all other objects (which seems to be the case as posted by Vipper).
Obviously I might have just been lucky plus there probably is subconscious confirmation bias, but overall I had the impression that ballistic objects can be somewhat reliably "intercepted" (more so than those ~20% chance of intercepting a scatter shot).
There are a few objects though that catch accuracy rolls even though they shouldn't. JJJ managed to find some (some barrels on Nexus iirc) and they got fixed but there may be more.
oh wow, i did not know this and also assumed accuracy rolls will always home in on the target. well, maybe this is also the answer for the flamer conundrum then.
Welp, after reading the posts I missed I think we can all agree that this engine determines collision by reading the cards, black magic a using a pair of dice all together...
Welp, after reading the posts I missed I think we can all agree that this engine determines collision by reading the cards, black magic a using a pair of dice all together...
now it is finally all beginning to make sense, haha.
There are a few objects though that catch accuracy rolls even though they shouldn't. JJJ managed to find some (some barrels on Nexus iirc) and they got fixed but there may be more.
I guess i should clarify that what i meant by terrain is basically the default GROUND.
Not that I didn't trust your test, but how did you set it up? I am pretty sure that in the editor there is a value that allows a projectile to travel a certain distance without collision. At least in the case of the terrain it could be an explanation, and depending on the setup of the "vehicle block" test it could be as well.
My take on this was that I sometimes try to save a damaged vehicle by parking a healthy one in front of it and it works surprisingly well. Therefore I thought that all ballistic projectiles have collision checks.
Second, in the case of ATGs (most notoriously the Raketenwerfer) but also some other vehicles I see regular collisions with world objects as well as terrain (for example, in rails and metal a bunker or OKW HQ that is placed at the sloped hillside is near indestructable by ATGs because they will just fire into the hill). So that in turn would mean that either ATG projectiles are handled differently from tank ones or that fences etc are differently handled than all other objects (which seems to be the case as posted by Vipper).
Obviously I might have just been lucky plus there probably is subconscious confirmation bias, but overall I had the impression that ballistic objects can be somewhat reliably "intercepted" (more so than those ~20% chance of intercepting a scatter shot).
Note: this was not a recent test but something i did couple of months ago.
The JPIV with 0.04 ACC vs 26 size of JT, means that it can never miss while stationary. I basically park several JT perpendicular in front of the JPIV and targeted the JT at 60ish range. You could see the shell going through the vehicles while an attack ground would collide with the first vehicle in sight.
A different batch of testing was done by destroying a copy pasted HQ so the terrain was deformed and moving the JPIV so it's cannon was basically parallel to and barely above the ground. Same thing happened. Same with making the JPIV basically have it's gun aiming towards the sky or having the JPIV been below ground.
If that is case maybe the faust ability could be changed to use similar parameters to ballistic weapons and similar projectile in order to avoid the faust bug.
Can any one confirm if hand held flamers use a projectile or not?
Fair enough, sounds like everything works as intended then.
It does not mean that what you did did not work. It did not work shot that "score" a hit, Shot that "missed" and might had collide with vehicle in the rear where probably stopped by the vehicle in-front.
Mortar shots, scott shots..., aim at things but can not "score" hits they can however score collision hits.
Ah, i see, fair enough. It's probable that units such as the Mortar, Scott, etc, do go through accuracy checks, however, but it's probable that they simply have 0% accuracy. That's how I'd have programmed it, in any case.
It makes no functional difference though, you'd still be right that they can't score "hits".
There is no collision with infatry entities even for weapon with projectiles.
Small arm do not have a projectile to begin with.
Some weapon can hit entities via another mechanism available to HMG/ST44/BARS... called "focus fire"
Focus fire is, to my knowledge, not for the purpose you're stating. My understanding is that "Focus Fire" is a property that some elite squads have (notably Obersoldaten) that has all members of a squad aim at the same model, rather than randomly spread their aim/damage between models in a squad. All squads that don't have "focus fire" active will randomly shoot at any model that is in range
It doesn't mean that "missed" shots can hit, but simply that the squad/unit won't just shoot at a single model until it dies, and will instead change targets with every shot/burst.
Interestingly, with focus fire "off", an unit will randomly shoot at models in squads near to their target on occasion, as well as the squad they're ostensible "targeting" (Even if you direct them to shoot one squad specifically. With focus fire "on", a squad will NEVER hit a model outside of the squad they are targeting, and they will NEVER hit a model in the squad the unit is targeting other than the "focused" model (unless the firing model is simply out of range, in which case it will shoot at a different model). Evidently an HMG with "Focus fire" would be kind of bad, as it would be less able to spread suppression to multiple nearby squads (except through the "aoe" suppression mechanic)
Small Arms must have a "projectile" of some sort (Though it's clearly a hitscan raycast), due to them being able to hit intervening cover (and damaging it, at least visually) even with the "focus fire" property being set to "true", as evidenced here in this screenshot (Which also demonstrates the fact that Obersoldaten are bugged to have inherent suppression to their weapons)
Unrelated, but I have also learned that shared veterancy (Such as that which the Kubel has) allows an unit to also gain experience when a model is damaged or is killed, as shown here in this image:
However, this only works with infantry models. Nearby vehicle damage, or allied vehicle deaths, do not provide the Kubel any experience... and the Kubel also cannot gain a star a veterancy from either allied model damage, or allied model deaths. The kubel or a nearby allied infantry unit must do damage to, or kill, an enemy model or vehicle to push it "over the edge" and actually gain a level of veterancy.
The Kubel can apparently gain no experience from allied vehicles in any way, nor from allied AT guns (Even from model drops from that squad, or from crew damage, seemingly). I suppose that makes sense, as it would vet absurdly quickly otherwise.
None of this is important, or relevant to this discussion, but I thought it was interesting anyway, and was learned during the testing of relevant things.
If that is case maybe the faust ability could be changed to use similar parameters to ballistic weapons and similar projectile in order to avoid the faust bug.
I thought that the Faust bug had been fixed already, by reducing the speed of the Faust projectile?
It does not mean that what you did did not work. It did not work shot that "score" a hit, Shot that "missed" and might had collide with vehicle in the rear where probably stopped by the vehicle in-front.
I know, I just was under the impression that intercepting those shots works reliably. And at the times it did not work, I attributed it to engine quirks (a shot phasing through a vehicle is not surprising in a game where vehicles phase through each other from time to time). Turns out it is rather the other way around: Shots phase unless you have a rarer scatter shot that might collide with other objects.
I thought that the Faust bug had been fixed already, by reducing the speed of the Faust projectile?
It was an attempt, but players reported to have seen the bug afterwards as well. Don't know if it is rarer or anything, but apparently it is still there.
Sanders once had a nice test pic of this. But no, focus fire means that a shot that missed the accuracy role might do damage to models in proximity.
But that's as much knowledge as there is out there. No one has tested it properly to try to find out how it works exactly.
Small Arms must have a "projectile" of some sort (Though it's clearly a hitscan raycast), due to them being able to hit intervening cover (and damaging it, at least visually) even with the "focus fire" property being set to "true", as evidenced here in this screenshot (Which also demonstrates the fact that Obersoldaten are bugged to have inherent suppression to their weapons)
I think this "projectile" is only a visual representation. If it is calculated as a projectile, then it had no meaning to the actual gameplay as far as I know.
Let me clarify something:
1) Mortars and similar units as far as I know do not go through accuracy checks at. For instance the pack howitzer has an accuracy of 1 and it would always hit if did go trough accuracy check.
As I already have pointed outed different weapons types like "ballistic", "explosion", "Big explosion" and the projectiles behave differently.
2) Focus fire is weapon property and not squad property and it does allow the damage to spread to more than one model. You can clearly see this with kubel that damage more than entity when it fire.
3) Small arm do not have projectiles because it would really mess up the engine to calculate the thousand of round fired in 4vs4 game. They can damage world objects PTRS destroying cover is prime example but that was done by the engine without a projectile being involved.
3) Shared veterancy is gained when the unit near gain veterancy (as far as I know) and since the target unit gain veterancy for taking damage the unit with shared veterancy would also gain.
The shared veterancy does not work with all units but specific units like infatry, hmg, mortars. Else units with shared veterancy near a tank would gain XP like crazy
4) Think faust bug is improved but not fixed completely.
3) Small arm do not have projectiles because it would really mess up the engine to calculate the thousand of round fired in 4vs4 game. They can damage world objects PTRS destroying cover is prime example but that was done by the engine without a projectile being involved.
Err, I call completely wrong on that one. Can you provide a reference on that or relevant experience? They are still most likely being done with casting rays, or the CoH1 target cell-based approach, or other solution from the essence engine sometime between 2006 and coh2 release. Projectiles or not, it is still a standard O(n²) complexity (as for as good any collision detection and response in older game engines) for the same in-game results, so what you say there is completely void of sense and logic.
3) Small arm do not have projectiles because it would really mess up the engine to calculate the thousand of round fired in 4vs4 game. They can damage world objects PTRS destroying cover is prime example but that was done by the engine without a projectile being involved.
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
