Future Directions - Features

Command Ops: Battles From The Bulge takes the highly acclaimed Airborne Assault engine back to the West Front for the crucial engagements during the Ardennes Offensive. Test your command skills in the fiery crucible of Airborne Assault’s “pausable continuous time” uber-realistic game engine. It's up to you to develop the strategy, issue the orders, set the pace, and try to win the laurels of victory in the cold, shadowy Ardennes.
Command Ops: Highway to the Reich brings us to the setting of one of the most epic and controversial battles of World War II: Operation Market-Garden, covering every major engagement along Hell’s Highway, from the surprise capture of Joe’s Bridge by the Irish Guards a week before the offensive to the final battles on “The Island” south of Arnhem.

Moderators: Panther Paul, Arjuna

Post Reply
User avatar
Arjuna
Posts: 17768
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 11:18 am
Location: Canberra, Australia
Contact:

Future Directions - Features

Post by Arjuna »

Hi all,

Here is where you can discuss what engine features ( user interface, AI, networking etc ) we should focus on.

Please keep any discussion on price to the designated threads.

We are very much looking forward to your feedback on engine features.


I'll be back to kick start this in a while.
Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com
User avatar
bairdlander2
Posts: 2288
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 9:25 am
Location: Toronto Ontario but living in Edmonton,Alberta

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by bairdlander2 »

Thanks,Im downloading now and will post my feedback soon.
FredSanford3
Posts: 544
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2007 3:22 pm

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by FredSanford3 »

Some of these are were mentioned in COTA threads on the same subject:

1. mount/dismount troops
2. smoke
3. minefields/obstacles
4. patrolling- if a unit is stationary for a certain period it will begin sending out patrols either all around or in player designated areas. Greater intel, arty spotting and possible ambushes
5. longer term operations support- repair/replacements, infrastructure development (use engineers to build roads, fortifications, etc.), strategic movement-road/rail
6. campaign game (you knew that was coming)
7. non-western AI doctrines that can be designated in the estab editor for a side/service
8. build up/breakdown units i.e. dissolve beat up units into a kampfgruppe/TF, detach platoons, etc. (within reason so that one can't dissolve your entire force into one huge super unit or some other distortion).
9. abandon/destroy equipment & vehicles
10. casualty details- # kia/mia/wia/pow, types of vehicles destroyed/captured
11. more detailed air support- aircraft rendered, CAS per country doctrine
12. comms equipment included in estab data, and used in determining orders delay. i.e. if a unit's radio(s) are destroyed, the order delays for that unit are negatively impacted. Stationary units could use field telephones and have a quick response until they move. Also, not just any wandering remant can call in artillery- they actually have to have a working radio.
13. Landing craft/naval gunfire- full model of amphibious assaults


_______________________
I'll think about putting something here one of these days...
User avatar
Llyranor
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Apr 29, 2006 4:33 am
Location: Montreal, Canada

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by Llyranor »

Online co-op! As great as the games are as 1v1 games, I'd find them exponentially more enjoyable if co-op was also an option.
User avatar
Chad Harrison
Posts: 1384
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 9:07 pm
Location: Boise, ID - USA

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by Chad Harrison »

I would also like to see longer operation games. This would need a replacement system to work properly. Actually, I think that a replacement system could be useful even for current length scenarios. Getting replacements within a 14 day period would be more than probable.
GoodGuy
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 5:36 pm
Location: Cologne, Germany

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by GoodGuy »

  • 1.) Dismount Infantry/equipment feature to
  • 2.) a) allow Motorized Inf or Gun units to access rough terrain and woods, and

    b) allow medium tanks to plow through light woods. The Germans used to set up defensive perimeters with StuG IIIs near my grandfathers village (in 1945), an area with DENSE/heavy woods in fact, in the "Bergisches Land", a hilly area east of Cologne (around 80km from Cologne) ... and the tanks didn't fly there. Tanks can access woods, IF the terrain isn't muddy or sticky (so that the tanks sink in.) Only one of those StuGs got stuck, but was still able to keep the US units from crossing the local main river (the minor River "Wisser" I think) for days, as it was sitting on a little hill packed with woods, where the US units could not make out the exact position, let alone reach it (from across the river), until it ran out of ammo.
    The progress in that area allowed the Allies to move to the Ruhrgebiet and surround the Germans in the "Ruhrkessel" (Ruhr-pocket), trapping some 300,000 Germans in the process.
  • 3.) Minefields.
  • 4.) Allow amphibious forces (or tanks with wade equipment) to cross rivers (eg. German tanks crossing rivers in Russia) or to land from off-shore locations/vessels (Normandy landings).
  • 5.) Off-map artillery.
  • 6.) Dedicated Reserve pool and class that allows ...
    a) for automatic commitment of reserves (AI)
    b) for automatic or manual allocation of replacements to battered units
    c) the engine to divide units on the fly:

    means 1) to send out (say platoon sized) combat patrols and 2) to allow building of Kampfgruppen (eg. consisting of returning stragglers or of ad-hoc formations the PLAYER creates)
  • 7.) Aircraft combat patrols (render tactical bombers/fighters screening and patroling battle fields) (necessary for Normandy theater). Rendering them would enable the player to re-direct troops and equipment to safer routes.
  • 8.) Render nightfighter capabilities.
  • 9.) Render off-shore artillery (ships: from destroyers up to battleships).
  • 10.) Allow nations with dedicated tank retrievers to retrieve and repair tanks during the operation (With Germany having the highest retrieval/recover rate, eg. like in North Africa, where they retrieved and repaired 7 of 10 knocked out tanks, sometimes 9 of 10).
  • 11.) Campaign mode (that considers and takes over previous progress/achievements/losses)
  • 12.) At least sort scenarios (by date) so that players are able to see some sort of a timeline, so they can at least play the scenarios in a particular historical correct order. (I suggested that but Dave insisted on keeping "weird" scenario names, although I suggested a good format a while ago). Players have asked for this during the last few days.
  • 13.) Introduce the general map I created a while ago, which shows ALL mission areas and their titles - with dates and duration.
"Aw Nuts"
General Anthony McAuliffe
December 22nd, 1944
Bastogne

---
"I've always felt that the AA (Alied Assault engine) had the potential to be [....] big."
Tim Stone
8th of August, 2006
User avatar
Arjuna
Posts: 17768
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 11:18 am
Location: Canberra, Australia
Contact:

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by Arjuna »

Hey GoodGuy, can you please provide a link to your point 13). My overloaded brain can't recall it.
Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com
GoodGuy
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 5:36 pm
Location: Cologne, Germany

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by GoodGuy »

Sure.

tm.asp?m=2124857


While you're at it, you might also want to review my suggestion regarding the naming (-format + date) of missions, in the same thread, post number 7.
"Aw Nuts"
General Anthony McAuliffe
December 22nd, 1944
Bastogne

---
"I've always felt that the AA (Alied Assault engine) had the potential to be [....] big."
Tim Stone
8th of August, 2006
GoodGuy
Posts: 1506
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 5:36 pm
Location: Cologne, Germany

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by GoodGuy »

  • 14.) Introduce "flexible order delay", to simulate local decision-making processes where a superior's decision (or opinion) is not needed, eg. for detached units and where this function then allows the player say to detach a company and let it proceed to move with the rest of the division, without the COY or the DIV having to reorg' and redo plans. Say the player would then just let the particular Coy take the next exit on a given highway, and let them leave the Division's route and proceed with their secret order/plans [;)], then there should not be ANY delay, as the Coy was given the freedom to act independently .. That would be my take on a "local" flexible order delay.

    Other examples would be occasions where a Coy commander decides to immediately pull out his platoon or his Coy, in order to save resources (men).
  • 15.) Introduce a dedicated Retreat button/function (which should work like a move order) that automatically switches to lowest aggro settings and that OVERRIDES the order delay (either completely or partially), so that the player can pull out troops that are endangered to retreat (means the uncontrollable forced retreat), or endangered to be cut off/surrounded, in time.
  • 16.) Introduce a STOP button/function that makes a detached company stop RIGHT AWAY. Quite some players are misusing the fire-command currently to make their troops stop immediately.
  • 17.) Introduce a "General leads from the front (line)" function, maybe according to historical facts/events, where a General (divisional commander) can LEAVE the HQ (after he issued orders) and JOIN one of the spearheads of his units. Example, a division moving in column formation:

    This function would ensure that the LEADING unit would stop (and take cover if they get under fire) and react to the enemy fire, but where the rest of the division (say the bulk of the middle section and the rear of the column) would slow down immediately and halt eventually, IF the leading general accompanies one of the spearheading units (like Rommel did in France) - reducing the order delay by a vital amount.
    Such a function could also be used to boost morale or combat effectiveness, since the General would be with their spearheads.

    Actually, the German officers corps (involving ranks from Cpt to General) had a very high casualty rate. This was caused by a common belief that an officer had to lead by example (and show dedication/bravery) to motivate the troops, plus the officer could get a first-hand impression on terrain layout and difficulties or advantages for a certain approach. Some officers did not do that, but the majority of German officer corps was more exposed to enemy fire than some of their subordinates had wished for, I'd say.
    Another example: If US officers would have inspected the Kall-trail in Hürtgenwald, they would not have picked it as main supply route, and maybe the whole operation wouldn't have carried out in the first place.

    Rommel's "Vorne-Führung" in France is a vital example of such type of leadership on the General level. There was a saying back then: "Wo Rommel ist, ist vorn" (which means that you can indicate the front or the head of a column by checking where Rommel is. [:)] Rommel's own quote "Geführt wird vorne" (which translates to: the leader should lead his unit from the head position) was exemplary as well.
"Aw Nuts"
General Anthony McAuliffe
December 22nd, 1944
Bastogne

---
"I've always felt that the AA (Alied Assault engine) had the potential to be [....] big."
Tim Stone
8th of August, 2006
User avatar
Andrew Williams
Posts: 3862
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by Andrew Williams »

From all reports this is an outstanding realtime operational level engine.

If it were married to the Close Combat Tactical level engine to determine the result of individual battles I think we would have the makings of the ultimate wargame.

The user could choose wether to resolve the battle results using BFTB or get down and dirty and fight with CC with the Operational level on pause.

Both games feature high levels of detail in weapon modelling etc

Personally I see it as a perfect marriage.
ImageImage
User avatar
ETF
Posts: 1766
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:26 pm
Location: Vancouver, Canada

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by ETF »

ORIGINAL: Llyranor

Online co-op! As great as the games are as 1v1 games, I'd find them exponentially more enjoyable if co-op was also an option.

Here here!
My Top Matrix Games 1) CMO MP?? 2) WITP/AE 3) SOW 4) Combat Mission 5) Armor Brigade

Twitter
https://twitter.com/TacticWargamer
User avatar
Fred98
Posts: 4019
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Wollondilly, Sydney

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by Fred98 »

In the scenario selection screen, that the screen be organized like a screen from Uncommon Valour.

Scenario name
Scenario number
Scenario difficulty level
Scenario date
Nearest major town


The player would click on the title of each column and sort the table as he sees fit - and then choose a scenario.

-
User avatar
Fred98
Posts: 4019
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Wollondilly, Sydney

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by Fred98 »

When a message appears, that you can drill down into the message and the map centered over that action.

-

-

User avatar
Fred98
Posts: 4019
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Wollondilly, Sydney

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by Fred98 »

When you zoom out of the map, that the units shrink an size and remain in scale.

-

User avatar
CriticalMass
Posts: 599
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 9:37 pm
Location: London, UK
Contact:

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by CriticalMass »

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy

Sure.

tm.asp?m=2124857


While you're at it, you might also want to review my suggestion regarding the naming (-format + date) of missions, in the same thread, post number 7.

WOW, this is exactly one year and one day since you originally posted it GG...synchronicity
I decided to ignore my orders and to take command at the front with my own hands as soon as possible
- Lieutenant General Erwin Rommel
OlegHasky
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:32 am
Location: Hamburg

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by OlegHasky »

Some very interesting propositions. (-light woods open for medium/light tanks , engenier capabilities, unit patrol aera.. etc)

I would give highest priority to three things.

-Airforce options expansion. (details, recon option is crucial)
- Also option to cover the specific aera by fighter presence for a peroid of time would be good. (but thats just too far out I gues - I would trade that for recon, or just for any details)

- Multiplayer -Co-op mode

- KIJA MIJA WIJA details
(that could easily be the first on the list)


Time Elapsed.
Lanconic
Posts: 260
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 8:54 pm

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by Lanconic »

I am not interested in playing scenarios, for the express reason that you are locked into historical mistakes.

Case in point in Bulge simulations:

The SS Panzer corps is deployed to attack thru the worst possible terrain against a full strength enemy.
It takes no imagination to postulate the likely outcome.

Now...imagine the same units deployed at the Monschua Gap. (forgive my spelling)

OR....

Bastogne would be unlikely to hold against two SS panzer corp.

Just simple examples
The way of all flesh
OlegHasky
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:32 am
Location: Hamburg

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by OlegHasky »

2. smoke
[X(][:'(]
You ment details on cigarate rates distribution? [8D]

Good Guy with all your points are very intresting ,and have backup. The one (15.) seem that have less potential to convince Panther. Automatic lowest aggro on the retreat button The argument that could decide a rope for this one could be that sometimes it is good to retreat slowly , and with return fire.
Time Elapsed.
User avatar
Fred98
Posts: 4019
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Wollondilly, Sydney

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by Fred98 »

When you click on a scenario, before actually choosing that scenario, you get a preview of the map just like in Close Combat.

-
OlegHasky
Posts: 149
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 9:32 am
Location: Hamburg

RE: Future Directions - Features

Post by OlegHasky »

I am not interested in playing scenarios, for the express reason that you are locked into historical mistakes.

Case in point in Bulge simulations:

The SS Panzer corps is deployed to attack thru the worst possible terrain against a full strength enemy.
It takes no imagination to postulate the likely outcome.

Now...imagine the same units deployed at the Monschua Gap. (forgive my spelling)

OR....

Bastogne would be unlikely to hold against two SS panzer corp.

Just simple examples


Thats a good time to point "manual unit placement" option. Wich seem that could be the blessing fpor ...series like "Decisives Battles of WW2".[:'(]
As BFTB/COTA/HTTR operates on a smaller scale. We know its impossible.

You can always check Yorself how much You can pull out from the "mistake"
Time Elapsed.
Post Reply

Return to “Command Ops Series”