Matrix Games Forums

Deal of the Week Battle Academy Battle Academy 2 Out now!Legions of Steel ready for betaBattle Academy 2 gets trailers and Steam page!Deal of the Week Germany at WarSlitherine Group acquires Shenandoah StudioNew information and screenshots for Pike & ShotDeal of the Week Pride of NationsTo End All Wars Releasing on Steam! Slitherine is recruiting: Programmers required
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Future Directions - Features

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command Ops Series >> RE: Future Directions - Features Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Future Directions - Features - 7/9/2010 11:24:02 PM   
Franklin Nimitz

 

Posts: 541
Joined: 6/23/2007
From: The House of the Mouse
Status: offline
A different approach to the Fire command that I think would be more suitable for an operational game is using it as a "set kill zone" order- if you give a unit or formation the Fire command it will either:
(a) If the unit can see the location the fire command is set at, it will face that direction, and will fire if an enemy unit moves into the kill zone, or
(b) If the unit cannot see the fire command location, it will move to a location where it can see, and then defend per (a).

This could be used with the ambush selection quite effectively, or conventionally on defense to ensure the critical approaches to a position are covered.

(in reply to GoodGuy)
Post #: 151
RE: Future Directions - Features - 7/10/2010 3:51:29 AM   
Arjuna


Posts: 17784
Joined: 3/31/2003
From: Canberra, Australia
Status: offline
FN,

I like your idea. It's much more realistic that the unit tracker approach. Do I take it that you also want to restrict the force's fires to that zone alone. Ie if a threat appears elsewhere it won't fire at it.

_____________________________

Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com

(in reply to Franklin Nimitz)
Post #: 152
RE: Future Directions - Features - 7/10/2010 6:25:38 PM   
loyalcitizen


Posts: 203
Joined: 2/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

FN,

I like your idea. It's much more realistic that the unit tracker approach. Do I take it that you also want to restrict the force's fires to that zone alone. Ie if a threat appears elsewhere it won't fire at it.


I like the idea. I would answer your question by saying that it wouldn't fire at the threat unless fired on by it.

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 153
RE: Future Directions - Features - 7/10/2010 7:07:02 PM   
Franklin Nimitz

 

Posts: 541
Joined: 6/23/2007
From: The House of the Mouse
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

FN,

I like your idea. It's much more realistic that the unit tracker approach. Do I take it that you also want to restrict the force's fires to that zone alone. Ie if a threat appears elsewhere it won't fire at it.


Perhaps that could be adjustable based upon aggro setting- ranging from min(ambush mode)- units will fire exclusively in the kill zone; up to max aggro, where they fire at anything that moves that they can see anywhere. In that case, the kill box setting would really only help govern the deployment of the units.

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 154
RE: Future Directions - Features - 7/11/2010 6:23:53 PM   
Swamp_Yankee


Posts: 986
Joined: 5/8/2002
From: Connecticut, U.S.
Status: offline
Forgive the ignorance here, I'm a new owner who has read through the manual and is on day 4 of the tutorial - Assuming the enemy is in the unit's LOS, would just having it set to defend with high Aggro & ROF ensure they would keep the targets under fire until the targets were destroyed or moved out of LOS?

_____________________________

"The only way I got to keep them Tigers busy is to let them shoot holes in me!"

(in reply to Franklin Nimitz)
Post #: 155
RE: Future Directions - Features - 7/11/2010 7:10:39 PM   
Franklin Nimitz

 

Posts: 541
Joined: 6/23/2007
From: The House of the Mouse
Status: offline
yes, but this 'kill zone' idea is to ensure that units will position themselves to ensure they have a LOS to a particular patch of ground.

(in reply to Swamp_Yankee)
Post #: 156
RE: Future Directions - Features - 7/13/2010 2:59:24 AM   
Swamp_Yankee


Posts: 986
Joined: 5/8/2002
From: Connecticut, U.S.
Status: offline
Yes - I like the "kill zone" idea very much - I was referring my question more to the original issues raised.

_____________________________

"The only way I got to keep them Tigers busy is to let them shoot holes in me!"

(in reply to Franklin Nimitz)
Post #: 157
RE: Future Directions - Features - 7/13/2010 11:49:50 PM   
hank

 

Posts: 623
Joined: 8/24/2003
From: west tn
Status: offline
The kill zone concept is good IMHO. After thinking it through ... as a tanker for example ... if you lock on to a group of armored targets, they're usually in a Kill Zone and whether those targets are in unit A (or company A) or unit B is irrelevant. If you can see them, they are targets of opportunity.

good stuff

(in reply to Swamp_Yankee)
Post #: 158
RE: Future Directions - Features - 7/17/2010 6:29:48 PM   
Stryker


Posts: 55
Joined: 8/9/2003
From: Los Angeles, CA
Status: offline
How about a message about capturing/intercepting the enemy's supply convoys? I spend a fair amount of time making sure my supply lines are in order and try to fix situations where my convoys are getting intercepted. It would seem that having the reverse information (i.e., capture of enemy supply convoy) would be useful intelligence. I think it may also help in tracking down those "pesky" units way behind your lines since their supply must be getting intercepted as well.

(in reply to hank)
Post #: 159
RE: Future Directions - Features - 7/19/2010 11:24:57 PM   
RockinHarry


Posts: 2948
Joined: 1/18/2001
From: Germany
Status: offline
Now having played with the demo a little bit, things I´d like to see in the future would be, arty smoke missions, flame tanks (brit Crocodile would be cool in particular), blinking or highlighted units, after clicking the related message in the message box, turnable map (I prefer moving/playing my units bottom up, which feels more naturally to me), a "LOS area" option that always allows checking LOS as under perfect (weather/TOD) conditions, a more accurate micro grid of maybe 50m, to avoid those gross inacuracies, when using the terrain data tool and compare with what you actually see on the map, a more realistic FOW presentation (looks unrealistic, when a unit is one time reported as beeing a Panther tank unit, another time a Stug unit and so forth. Units should be reported as basic infantry, tank, or else and then grudally uncovered to be of the correct type over time), distinct weapon sound FX, at least for those that have one (like german MG42 buzzsaw,..), including primed/unprimed bridge status info to FOW routines, an automatic stop (configurable, like in the HOI game series)for particular important game status messages. So far so good.

_____________________________

RockinHarry in the web:

http://www.myspace.com/rockinharryz
http://www.youtube.com/user/rockinharryz
https://www.facebook.com/harry.zann

(in reply to Stryker)
Post #: 160
RE: Future Directions - Features - 7/21/2010 1:21:34 AM   
Joe 98


Posts: 4032
Joined: 1/5/2001
From: Wollondilly, Sydney
Status: offline
The messages come in 3 colours: Red, Yellow and Green.

That the player can choose that the game pauses on:
Red, Yellow and Green messages or;
Red and Yellow messages or;
Red messages only or;
Neve pause on a message.


When I click on a mesage in the message box, it centers the map over the unit. However sometimes its not obvious which unit it is. That the unit be highlighted in a Red, Green or Yellow border as the case may be.

Click on the map and the coloured border goes away.
-




(in reply to RockinHarry)
Post #: 161
RE: Future Directions - Features - 7/21/2010 4:46:55 AM   
Arjuna


Posts: 17784
Joined: 3/31/2003
From: Canberra, Australia
Status: offline
Re pausing on message of type X. Would it be also worth just slowing the game, rather than pausing?

_____________________________

Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com

(in reply to Joe 98)
Post #: 162
RE: Future Directions - Features - 7/21/2010 8:29:57 AM   
PeterD

 

Posts: 31
Joined: 7/7/2010
Status: offline
I'd like to see the map scrolling limits changed so that the center of the map window can go as far as the map corners. It annoys me when I right click near a unit and try to drag that part of the map to the centre of the window, but because the unit is near the map edge, it's sort of stuck. This will allow any unit to be brought to the centre of the window, which could make jumping to unit location (e.g. for associated messages) more consistent. This might not suit everybody, so it would make sense to have an option to enable/disable it.

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 163
RE: Future Directions - Features - 7/21/2010 8:36:17 AM   
Joe 98


Posts: 4032
Joined: 1/5/2001
From: Wollondilly, Sydney
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna
Re pausing on message of type X. Would it be also worth just slowing the game, rather than pausing?



I love more options: The player has another option that on message type x he can choose that the game be paused or slowed to the slowest speed.

It may be that with more options, that you now need an options page and things boxes are checked so the option is "ON" or "OFF"

-

-


(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 164
Original historic German units icons - 7/21/2010 2:14:32 PM   
Templer


Posts: 951
Joined: 1/5/2009
From: Nürnberg, Germany
Status: offline
I would love to see for German units in place of the NATO symbols the original historic German units icons.
The game is usually so correct!

(in reply to Franklin Nimitz)
Post #: 165
RE: Original historic German units icons - 7/26/2010 3:05:02 PM   
DanO

 

Posts: 125
Joined: 4/4/2010
Status: offline
That'd be nice as an option, but for those of us who'd have no idea but understand NATO symbols, please don't replace them. :P

(in reply to Templer)
Post #: 166
RE: Original historic German units icons - 7/26/2010 4:05:36 PM   
Templer


Posts: 951
Joined: 1/5/2009
From: Nürnberg, Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DanO

That'd be nice as an option, but for those of us who'd have no idea but understand NATO symbols, please don't replace them. :P


Learning is the key to success. Do not be so comfortable.
But a an option it would be also great!

(in reply to DanO)
Post #: 167
RE: Original historic German units icons - 7/26/2010 4:31:52 PM   
DanO

 

Posts: 125
Joined: 4/4/2010
Status: offline
Hmm, I'm not sure how using a different set of icons to the perfectly functional NATO ones would help me be more successful, but I would be interested in seeing what they are.

(in reply to Templer)
Post #: 168
RE: Original historic German units icons - 7/26/2010 5:21:15 PM   
Templer


Posts: 951
Joined: 1/5/2009
From: Nürnberg, Germany
Status: offline
@ DanO,

these icons are from a Advanced Tactics mod.

There was also a good and informative site on the Internet but I can´t find it anymore.

And no, these icons won´t (like many of the proposals to new features in this thread) help you be more successful, but adds more historical, accurate feeling to the game.

Here are some examples:




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Templer -- 7/26/2010 6:09:40 PM >

(in reply to DanO)
Post #: 169
RE: Original historic German units icons - 7/27/2010 12:17:27 AM   
Joe 98


Posts: 4032
Joined: 1/5/2001
From: Wollondilly, Sydney
Status: offline
The Germans invented the concept of such symbols in the first place.

After WW2, NATO embraced the conmcept of symbols and produced the NATO symbols we know.

Using German symbols on German troops would add a bit of flavour.

-

(in reply to Templer)
Post #: 170
RE: Original historic German units icons - 7/27/2010 1:27:44 AM   
Chief Rudiger

 

Posts: 183
Joined: 7/21/2009
From: Scotland
Status: offline
Like this. Crazy.


http://niehorster.orbat.com/011_germany/symbols/_symbols_39.html

< Message edited by Chief Rudiger -- 7/27/2010 1:29:25 AM >

(in reply to Joe 98)
Post #: 171
Chief, you got them - 7/27/2010 2:18:30 AM   
Templer


Posts: 951
Joined: 1/5/2009
From: Nürnberg, Germany
Status: offline
Thanks Chief,

Exactly what I meant.

I'm still fairly new to the game. To fresh to make specific proposals on technical gameplay features.

I would, however, enjoy some graphical additions to the game very much.

By that I mean no Hollywood mature graphic explosions or other eye-catcher.

I would also like to see division patches in the game.






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Templer -- 7/29/2010 4:36:00 AM >

(in reply to Chief Rudiger)
Post #: 172
RE: Future Directions - Features - 7/28/2010 11:47:41 PM   
Pergite!

 

Posts: 448
Joined: 6/7/2006
From: The temperate climate zone
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Franklin Nimitz

A different approach to the Fire command that I think would be more suitable for an operational game is using it as a "set kill zone" order- if you give a unit or formation the Fire command it will either:
(a) If the unit can see the location the fire command is set at, it will face that direction, and will fire if an enemy unit moves into the kill zone, or
(b) If the unit cannot see the fire command location, it will move to a location where it can see, and then defend per (a).

This could be used with the ambush selection quite effectively, or conventionally on defense to ensure the critical approaches to a position are covered.


I have been thinking about a friendly fire option and forcing you to think about where to approach, how and with what. Either you give firezones and/or declare paths for movement that don't interdict anybody else's line of fire.

As of now the unit formation governs the speed, the amount of firepower and the damage a unit can sustain from certain angles. Units tie up roads and hamper each others movements, but that is I understand it all (quite brilliant as it is actually) really.

If a company started to move around between another company and the enemy, either the own volume of fire would go down, or you would suffer of fratricide, lower cohesion and eventually a route.

When I play I regard that this is abstracted enough into the model on a current scale. But if somebody would do something on a more tactical level such a feature would add a lot to the game (while of course draining massive amounts of processor power)




(in reply to Franklin Nimitz)
Post #: 173
Scout/recon button/order - 8/3/2010 5:38:53 AM   
Templer


Posts: 951
Joined: 1/5/2009
From: Nürnberg, Germany
Status: offline
As scout/recon seems certain to raise questions in the forum.

How about an additional scout/reconnaissance button/command on the Orders tab of the sidebar with preset functions and commands?

(in reply to Pergite!)
Post #: 174
RE: Scout/recon button/order - 8/3/2010 6:43:47 AM   
Arjuna


Posts: 17784
Joined: 3/31/2003
From: Canberra, Australia
Status: offline
Templer,

What behaviour do you want to see?

_____________________________

Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com

(in reply to Templer)
Post #: 175
RE: Scout/recon button/order - 8/3/2010 9:32:38 AM   
Haiku

 

Posts: 23
Joined: 6/3/2010
Status: offline
I can't tell for Templer, but as far as I'm concerned, something along the lines:

"Send a few men to the 2 or 3 best sighting spots within our radius, and report what you see. Avoid any shootings"

I don't know how it could be implemented. Maybe just increase LOS capability, decrease chance of being spot, and decrease cohesion status ?

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 176
RE: Scout/recon button/order - 8/3/2010 11:55:10 AM   
Alchenar

 

Posts: 225
Joined: 8/2/2010
Status: offline
When I asked about scouting, what I was actually thinking of at the time was a 'move to contact with screens' type behaviour, where you'd see a road column with a unit or two thrown out in advance and in a more combat-ready stance (with the group as a whole concequently moving slower than a regular move order).  When the lead elements come into contact with the enemy then the group automatically deploys into a combat formation. 

I think scouting parties in general would require a bit of fudging to work in the game engine. Does the game pretend that units have men thrown forward in OPs or are is it more of a case of 'neither side has it so there's no imbalance'.

(in reply to Haiku)
Post #: 177
RE: Scout/recon button/order - 8/3/2010 8:15:51 PM   
johndoesecond


Posts: 964
Joined: 8/3/2010
Status: offline
I'm not a WW2 military expert, but maybe (just maybe), this feature should be abstracted in some way, given the scale of the game.

Again, I don't know what the standard scouting procedures have been used there in the WW2 (and in this campaign in particular) but if we're talking about sending 2-3 (or even 10-20 motorised) guys ahead, then that I believe would not be appropriate to visualise on the Command Ops map, since here 100+ people coy are our atoms, the elementary building blocks given the command level simulated.

But probably the feature could be abstracted in some way, so that we actually get the scouting feature in some way.

Maybe it can be done by putting another set of options in the Order details (like "Scouting", possibly with setting - say - the radius, or zone, together with the stealth level).
Upon setting these things, you wouldn't actually see scouts reaching out out there, but internally they'd be set out for the mission so you would get the information if something gets spotted).

I'm just thinking out loud, and I see how what I just wrote may be too complicated and inelegant in comparison to the rest.

At the end, what I like about this game is it's maniacal adherence to historical military mechanics of WW2 operational commanding, so I think it should be done in a way to be accurate by the standards of historical military tactics, while in the same time naturally fitting to the current game mechanics and spirit. Not an easy task.

However, I agree that is seems to me too limiting if the only way to do it is to dettach a 100+ people motorised company, as I'm quite sure there were other ways of doing this in the real war.

Here, that were my 5 cents ...


< Message edited by johndoesecond -- 8/4/2010 9:40:17 PM >

(in reply to Alchenar)
Post #: 178
RE: Scout/recon button/order - 8/4/2010 1:23:29 AM   
Arjuna


Posts: 17784
Joined: 3/31/2003
From: Canberra, Australia
Status: offline
One option I have considered is using the recon value we currently store with each unit and modifying this based on a task setting or circumstance. Eg. We could have a recon setting for a task (min, normal, max) and use this to modify the unit/force's standard recon value and recon range. If the unit was defending with a max recon and it was deployed or better then we could assume that a greater percentage of its personnel were patrolling and subsequently increase its chance of detection by expanding its detection range. There should be a downside to this too in that there would be fewer personnel available to defend the position if attacked directly. For a Move, with a max recon setting, we could expand the detection range of the vanguard ( ie the unit in the lead ). Similarly it should suffer a reduction in capability should it be attacked directly.



_____________________________

Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com

(in reply to johndoesecond)
Post #: 179
RE: Scout/recon button/order - 8/4/2010 2:23:01 AM   
Swamp_Yankee


Posts: 986
Joined: 5/8/2002
From: Connecticut, U.S.
Status: offline
That sounds pretty good, but one point - in the books I have read often when a unit is deployed or dug in and has OPs and patrols out and they are succesful, when they perceive an oncoming assault force they have the time to recall the OPs and patrols.

I would think that for a unit defending and deployed the recons (OPs LPs & patrols) would be abstracted into their detection ability - however a moving recon of less than company strength with the ability to order them to avoid contact / observe and report would be nice.

_____________________________

"The only way I got to keep them Tigers busy is to let them shoot holes in me!"

(in reply to Arjuna)
Post #: 180
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command Ops Series >> RE: Future Directions - Features Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.117