I think this is one of the most overlooked aspect of computer wargaming.
While ballistics, armour values, AI and the like are often greatly modelled, smoke and its effect on combat seems to be under-modelled as a rule, particularly in 3-D games. Smoke screens are a little different, but smoke, dust and debris from shell impacts as well as vehicles and buildings on fire barely make an impact on gameplay.
My impression from combat footage is that smoke can seriously degrade battlefield visibility. I assume the lack of smoke in games is limited by computer performance or could it be to make gameplay more fluid by removing an obstacle? Either way, it bugs me the air is so clear during the course of digital combat. Thoughts?
Quote from: IronX on November 13, 2015, 03:21:07 PM
I think this is one of the most overlooked aspect of computer wargaming.
While ballistics, armour values, AI and the like are often greatly modelled, smoke and its effect on combat seems to be under-modelled as a rule, particularly in 3-D games. Smoke screens are a little different, but smoke, dust and debris from shell impacts as well as vehicles and buildings on fire barely make an impact on gameplay.
My impression from combat footage is that smoke can seriously degrade battlefield visibility. I assume the lack of smoke in games is limited by computer performance or could it be to make gameplay more fluid by removing an obstacle? Either way, it bugs me the air is so clear during the course of digital combat. Thoughts?
I think SABOW does it well.
Unless a programmer is really trying to make an AI honest smoke is useless unless in a MP setting.
That said, I've never served. So to me smoke is used more to mask movements and allow troops to dig in to defensive positions. Typically unless artillery is involved it's pointless to shoot direct-fire weapons into or out of a smoke cloud...all you do is waste ammo.
And Nefaro is right. Smoke done right will burn up a vid card.
Good smoke effects are, indeed, very gfx hardware intensive.
Smoke is well represented in the Combat Mission games and vital to advancing over open ground. Fog also is included in-game but doesn't drift like smoke does. I think spreading fire would be a real killer to implement in a computer game.
Combat Mission has always modeled smoke screens, but does it model other kinds of ambient smoke ? I don't think smoke screens are what Iron X is talking about.
That's right. I'm thinking more about the lingering effects of smoke from burning vehicles and buildings and to a lesser extent dust from artillery, bomb strikes and cannon fire. I don't think games like Combat Mission simulate it particularly well. But I guess it does depend on environmental conditions as well, which I might be overlooking.
A few points...
1) CM models smoke/dust effects from vehicle dust, muzzle blast, and explosions. My opinion is that it doesn't model the longer lingering effects.
2) CM2 smoke doesn't seem to have much impact on FPS, at least on the various laptops I have used. In CMSF, the impact was horrendous, but in CMBN and after, they made some kind of change that minimized impact.
3) The Grav1team games make smoke and dust look better, but I don't know what the simulated impacts are.
The original CM trilogy had lingering fire and smoke but the current games only have smoke screens and burning vehicle fire and smoke. But the addition of flamethrowers from Red Thunder gives hope that maybe we'll eventually get some more incendiary scenery to behold.
I recently saw a screen shot of arma 3 where the smoke from a burning hmmv was getting sucked into the rotors of a landed chopper and was getting thrown all over the place - the devs have actually implemented the rotors effects on smoke - but I've never seen it effect the battlefield as it usually goes straight up - which I can only assume means the scenario designer hasn't put wind in
I recently posted a video of the new squad game and the smoke grenades in that look very effective - the enemy used it to storm a gate at the rear of a farm - but nothing was burning
SPMBT models smoke very well, whether from vehicle movement, burning equipment, artillery, etc.. It's a major tactical factor, particularly before the advent of thermal sights.
Quote from: Airborne Rifles on November 15, 2015, 06:39:29 AM
SPMBT models smoke very well, whether from vehicle movement, burning equipment, artillery, etc.. It's a major tactical factor, particularly before the advent of thermal sights.
I think smoke is even produced by small arms. When you shoot too much form one hex.