tanks Tank tactics: why the regression?

[sburke]

3 minutes ago, Mord said:

At those odds he was bound to have one...

 

Mord.

Yeah much better than when he was at Cannae and told Consul Gaius Varro that he should charge the enemy center and split them in two.  

[JoMac]

6 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

I think a big part of this problem is that while most players play WeGo, the game mechanics seem to be designed for real-time play where you have very fine-grained control of what happens and when.

In real time, you can:

• Move a recce vehicle forward, then the moment an enemy shell or bullet whizzes past, you can reverse out of danger.
• Immediately move an AT team to safety after firing the bazooka
• Move a tank to a ridge, then wait for the exact moment it spots and fires at an enemy tank before pulling it back
• More easily coordinate teams to assault a building from several sides at the same time
• Fire a Sherman's smoke shells at various spots to make the smoke screen cover a lot of ground, instead of having it fire all of them at the same spot and making one small but very thick cloud
• Suppress a longer hedgerow/couple of buildings by adjusting the machinegun target point continually
• Immediately realise you gave a "bad" fire order and give another that actuially makes the unit fire
• etc.

 

Solution: The developers could start play WeGo themselves, realise the issues and then adjust the mechanics to give us better control of these things  

One idea: Allow the WeGo player to issue several fire orders for the same unit at the same waypoint. The unit would then distribute its fire among alle the aim points equally. So you could split up your machinegun's suppression or fire smoke shells at various points within the same turn.

This,...

Yeah, I have also pondered this same issue ever since I started playing CMx2...

Thou, I feel things already happen too fast in WEGO, and with RT even more so...However, WEGO & RT need to play roughly at the same level if similar Combat Results are to be expected...As it stands, WEGO & RT play almost like two completely different Games. 

So, do you give more Options for WEGO, or less for RT for Balance purposes ?

Edited August 24, 2018 by JoMc67

[A Canadian Cat]

12 minutes ago, JoMc67 said:

As it stands, WEGO & RT play almost like two completely different Games. 

So, do you give more Options for WEGO, or less for RT for Balance purposes ?

Well that is not a legit question in my opinion because your previous statement is not correct. I get it if you look at a handful of units up close and personal and you are fast with the mouse you can tick a bunch of the boxes listed earlier but at the expense of other units in other locations having even less attention than you give them in WEGO. You guys have constructed a straw man - that you can control all units in RT better than WEGO - I just don't buy it. I personally do not play RT because it offers so *little* control over the battlefield. My conclusion is that WEGO offers better control of what is going on. The exact opposite conclusion that you guys have reached.

[sburke]

Well yes an no. In a small battle rt gives more control as you can actually understand and react to the amount of input.  There is a line somewhere though where the amount of input overwhelms your ability to understand and react. Wego has an initial threshold driven by the 60 second turn length, but it is flat relative to the size of the battle. 

For me it doesn’t matter though as I want that rewind and review option regardless of the size of the battle. 

[A Canadian Cat]

1 hour ago, sburke said:

Well yes an no. In a small battle rt gives more control as you can actually understand and react to the amount of input.  There is a line somewhere though where the amount of input overwhelms your ability to understand and react. Wego has an initial threshold driven by the 60 second turn length, but it is flat relative to the size of the battle. 

Who wants to fight such small battles in CM

1 hour ago, sburke said:

For me it doesn’t matter though as I want that rewind and review option regardless of the size of the battle. 

This is the real reason I prefer WEGO!

[MOS:96B2P]

2 hours ago, sburke said:

I want that rewind and review option regardless of the size of the battle. 

Yes, this!!!  

[MOS:96B2P]

8 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

<Snip>  while most players play WeGo, the game mechanics seem to be designed for real-time play <Snip> 

I think there is some truth to this statement. 

I also like the one minute play back phase where you are forced to sit and watch the consequences of your orders without being able to intervene.   It is like a command delay for the human player.  

 

5 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:

War is chaos, you just have to hope that it is worse for the other guy.

Now that is sig. line material................  

[Michael Emrys]

3 hours ago, Mord said:

At those odds he was bound to have one...

Sourpuss. You're just jealous that you don't have one.

Michael

[Mord]

I am only 21,128 posts away!

 

Mord.

[Michael Emrys]

15 hours ago, Mord said:

I am only 21,128 posts away!

Would that you were 21,128 miles away!

Michael

[Bulletpoint]

I think you are contradicting yourself a bit here. You're making a case that we obsess over having more control because of our egos.

20 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:

The real problem I believe lies in we megalomaniac war gamers belief that if only we had perfect control over every action of each of our troops

But then:

20 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:

You know, there is a reason why armies have chains of command. There are fairly strict limits on just how much one man can think about and respond to. Generals do not generally concern themselves with the conduct of platoons, that is the job of lieutenants. You have to be able to trust that they in fact perform those jobs adequately.

The problem is that we actually can't trust our computer troops to do a lot of this stuff. So we need to micromanage them to make them do basic tactical things.

Combat Mission is very heavy on the micromanagement already, and I think at least some of it could be solved by giving the player better interface tools... Not just adding more orders, but making it more user friendly.

For example, simply ordering a tank to fire on three buildings, instead of having to program in a sequence of short movements back and forth, dialling in short target orders on the various generated waypoints.

[Bulletpoint]

20 hours ago, IanL said:

You guys have constructed a straw man - that you can control all units in RT better than WEGO - I just don't buy it.

I never meant to say that you can control all units better in real-time. I just gave a list of examples of some basic tactical things that are possible in RT and not (or only with a lot of extra click-work) in WeGo...

Edited August 25, 2018 by Bulletpoint

[sburke]

20 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

The problem is that we actually can't trust our computer troops to do a lot of this stuff. So we need to micromanage them to make them do basic tactical things.

Combat Mission is very heavy on the micromanagement already, and I think at least some of it could be solved by giving the player better interface tools... Not just adding more orders, but making it more user friendly.

For example, simply ordering a tank to fire on three buildings, instead of having to program in a sequence of short movements back and forth, dialling in short target orders on the various generated waypoints.

Case in point is I almost always split my squads.  It allows me to give much more specific commands than I can give to a squad.  I never use the assault command.  On the other hand I like that during that 60s I lose control of what my pixeltruppen do...to a degree.  The stupid pathing issues however always irk me because they do things that aren't logical but if I understood more I could actually expect what they might do.  For example if a barrel is too close to a doorway they will bunch up and slowly enter the room while running in place.  I don't so much mind the delay as the visual of 4 guys all bunched up running in place trying to squeeze past the barrel. 

I do like the idea of being able to order multiple sequential targets.

 

[Erwin]

29 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Combat Mission is very heavy on the micromanagement already, and I think at least some of it could be solved by giving the player better interface tools... Not just adding more orders, but making it more user friendly.

+1

Have long argued that CM is now very good as a game.  What development should now focus on is a streamlined UI so that less time is wasted trying to accomplish exactly what Bulletpoint outlined.  Just a few other examples that would speed up gameplay and enable player to focus on the fun parts of playing rather than UI:  

• "Shoot and scoot" for AT teams so they can fire and run, not sit around waiting to die after firing. 
• Engineers who blast a wall but do NOT run thru it.  (Currently we have to time it out so they blast right at the end of a turn.) 
• One click 180 degree covered arcs (like we had in CM1!) so one doesn't have to waste so much time performing dozens of clicks just to get a company of turreted armor moving from waypoint to waypoint with guns pointed in different directions. 
• A new ACQUIRE system that allows adjacent units to exchange (reasonable amounts of) ammo (with time penalties).   Right now in order to resupply a platoon or larger efficiently one has to: 1) split teams; 2) order teams to board vehicle; 3) ACQUIRE; 4) Disembark; 5) move to their respective squads for recombination.

There are many other examples that would benefit from a streamlined UI.

Edited August 25, 2018 by Erwin

[General Jack Ripper]

On ‎8‎/‎24‎/‎2018 at 9:01 AM, Bulletpoint said:

the game mechanics seem to be designed for real-time play where you have very fine-grained control of what happens and when.

Indeed. I still remember the consternation I felt when Steve announced Shock Force was going to be a real-time game with an optional "turn based" mode which basically paused the game automatically every 60 seconds. It didn't even have the blue bar pre-processing of it's predecessor.

However, things are not quite as bad as all that, you just need to train yourself to think in 60 second chunks. I.E. "For the next 60 second, this unit will do this:" and then plot your orders accordingly. Need a linear smoke screen? Check the wind speed and direction then fire away. Wait a minute or two for the smoke to spread out, then plot new orders.
Need to shoot and scoot? Move forward, place a cover arc, pause for ten seconds, then reverse.
Are you a scaredy-cat? Okay, just pause for five seconds instead...

Having split-second fine control of your troops is pretty darn unrealistic, despite the fact one believes they can play in a MORE realistic manner by micromanaging excessively.

Honestly, I think one reaches a greater enjoyment of the game by just rolling with the punches when they come, and using your superior "big picture" ability to win the game, rather than fretting over the exact proper placement of smokescreens, or making your tracer bullets fire in pretty patterns.

[General Jack Ripper]

21 hours ago, Erwin said:

• "Shoot and scoot" for AT teams so they can fire and run, not sit around waiting to die after firing. 
• Engineers who blast a wall but do NOT run thru it.  (Currently we have to time it out so they blast right at the end of a turn.) 
• One click 180 degree covered arcs (like we had in CM1!) so one doesn't have to waste so much time performing dozens of clicks just to get a company of turreted armor moving from waypoint to waypoint with guns pointed in different directions. 
• A new ACQUIRE system that allows adjacent units to exchange (reasonable amounts of) ammo (with time penalties).   Right now in order to resupply a platoon or larger efficiently one has to: 1) split teams; 2) order teams to board vehicle; 3) ACQUIRE; 4) Disembark; 5) move to their respective squads for recombination.

• You can do this already with the existing orders. MOVE : 10 Second PAUSE w/ Anti-Armor Cover Arc: MOVE
• You can do this already, just place the BLAST waypoint in the action spot the engineers are already located, they will blast the wall and then stay put.
• Group select all units, place a cover arc. Done. Granted, a Shift-Click combination would be nice, but it's not a critical piece of the puzzle.
• Adjacent units share ammo already. If you need to resupply a squad, split off a scout team and run them over to an ammo source. Acquire ammo and run back. That's how it works in reality too. For machine-gun teams, use the ammo bearers to run and get extra ammo, that's why MG teams use the ammo bearers ammo first, and the native team ammo second.
• OR: You could stop using so much ammunition.
• OR: You could pass out extra ammo at the start of the game, especially for HMG's and SMG's.

I don't want to be a dink about this, but by far the most common complaints I've seen on the forums have long since had answers to them.

[Bulletpoint]

2 hours ago, General Jack Ripper said:

Having split-second fine control of your troops is pretty darn unrealistic, despite the fact one believes they can play in a MORE realistic manner by micromanaging excessively.

All soldiers in war zones make split-second decisions all the time.

If a tank commander wants the tank to go into hull-down, fire one shot and then reverse, that's what he will order the driver and gunner to do. He wouldn't tell the driver to go forward, wait exactly 10 seconds, then reverse.

And yes, I play WeGo exclusively. The problem with the all-knowing player is not a timing/micromanagement problem but rather a perfect situational awareness/coordination problem.

Edited August 26, 2018 by Bulletpoint

[A Canadian Cat]

The general is spot on.

I would conceed that shoot and scoot is missed. The problem is that the unit moving into position needs to spot the target and aim and fire. Given the way spotting works, correctly I would add, the time to get the shot off varies to much to set a pause order and have it work reliably. Too often the unit will not make the spot and withdraw without firing. Or fire quickly and the sit there waiting to die.

I would like a command that would allow holding position until a round is fired and then withdraw immediately.

Personally.

Everything else is covered and them some.

[Oliver_88]

On ‎8‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 4:57 PM, Erwin said:

+1

Have long argued that CM is now very good as a game.  What development should now focus on is a streamlined UI so that less time is wasted trying to accomplish exactly what Bulletpoint outlined.  Just a few other examples that would speed up gameplay and enable player to focus on the fun parts of playing rather than UI:  

• "Shoot and scoot" for AT teams so they can fire and run, not sit around waiting to die after firing. 
• Engineers who blast a wall but do NOT run thru it.  (Currently we have to time it out so they blast right at the end of a turn.) 
• One click 180 degree covered arcs (like we had in CM1!) so one doesn't have to waste so much time performing dozens of clicks just to get a company of turreted armor moving from waypoint to waypoint with guns pointed in different directions. 
• A new ACQUIRE system that allows adjacent units to exchange (reasonable amounts of) ammo (with time penalties).   Right now in order to resupply a platoon or larger efficiently one has to: 1) split teams; 2) order teams to board vehicle; 3) ACQUIRE; 4) Disembark; 5) move to their respective squads for recombination.

There are many other examples that would benefit from a streamlined UI.

 

2 hours ago, General Jack Ripper said:

• You can do this already with the existing orders. MOVE : 10 Second PAUSE w/ Anti-Armor Cover Arc: MOVE
• You can do this already, just place the BLAST waypoint in the action spot the engineers are already located, they will blast the wall and then stay put.
• Group select all units, place a cover arc. Done. Granted, a Shift-Click combination would be nice, but it's not a critical piece of the puzzle.
• Adjacent units share ammo already. If you need to resupply a squad, split off a scout team and run them over to an ammo source. Acquire ammo and run back. That's how it works in reality too. For machine-gun teams, use the ammo bearers to run and get extra ammo, that's why MG teams use the ammo bearers ammo first, and the native team ammo second.
• OR: You could stop using so much ammunition.
• OR: You could pass out extra ammo at the start of the game, especially for HMG's and SMG's.

I don't want to be a dink about this, but by far the most common complaints I've seen on the forums have long since had answers to them.

I could be wrong but is that not maybe missing the point. I do not believe Erwins stating that such things are not possible (other than the engineers blasting through). Rather that such things are possible but the amount in user interface actions required to accomplish those tasks is maybe excessive. They are taking numerous turns/clicks to carry out when with an more streamlined user interface that could be halved.

• An shoot and scoot is kind of possible as you state. But consider how many key presses and clicks you need to do to accomplish the task. And even then that can end up just being an scoot and scoot instead (when unit sees enemy too late during the pause), and leaving you needing to try and repeat the manoeuvre again. Or leaves them waiting to die as Erwin describes (when unit sees an enemy too soon during the pause). But with an command for the purpose and the fixed degree cover arcs that Erwin also mentions consider how much that would cut down your workload to accomplish the task.
   
• The selecting the group then placing the arc is not quite an solution to Erwin's example. As that would set them to the same arc. And he states setting them to different arcs. So take four vehicles moving down an road, and first need to cover front, second left, third right, fourth rear. Again consider how many key presses and clicks are needed to set just four vehicles each their own individual arc. Where as if an arc could be set with an single key press with your cursor on the terrain consider how much that would take to do the same.
   
• Adjacent units from the same group share ammo. Adjacent units from different groups cannot. So 1 Platoon cannot share with 2 Platoon etc.
   
• I use the same method when wanting to resupply my sections also. And I believe from what Erwin states in the quote above he does too. You suggested the same thing as he stated it needs at the moment basically. But again look at how many user actions you need to carry out over how many turns to accomplish that. And you need to do the same procedure when that sections been moved to the reserve and is right next to the ammo source already. And then compare it to if acquire was just an move command, to make the order would only take an single turn and much fewer user actions to accomplish.

I took his post to be able saving time and making actions easier rather than stating such things are not possible in any manner at the moment.

Edited August 26, 2018 by Oliver_88

[Erwin]

Oliver:  Agreed, and thank you for your clarification... 

"...such things are possible but the amount in user interface actions required to accomplish those tasks is maybe excessive. They are taking numerous turns/clicks to carry out when with an more streamlined user interface that could be halved."

Perhaps I wasn't as clear as you have been in your above statement.

Those of us who play CM2 a lot, increasingly find the above UI issues increasingly irritating.

Edited August 26, 2018 by Erwin

[Oliver_88]

We have to micro manage in the game due to the user interface in some manners. The acquire being an example. We have to micro manage in creating an scout team, sending them into an vehicle, acquiring the ammunition, leaving the vehicle, regrouping with their section. Sending someone to resupply is something that I reckon no-one wants to micro manage over (other than what ammunition is acquired) and would prefer to trust. But the user interface means we have to micro manage rather than trust as you cannot just order an move to acquire.

Edited August 26, 2018 by Oliver_88

[sburke]

There is no trust about acquire.  I acquire what I need based on the mission I need to accomplish.  Do I want AT4 rounds, Jav rounds, mortars, small arms, what type and how much, 40 mm rounds.  There is no way the game can know what I want when I go to acquire.  What I would like is the ability to designate smaller loadouts of small arms and unacquire jav launchers.  Beyond that "resupply" isn't a generic option.

[Oliver_88]

1 hour ago, sburke said:

There is no trust about acquire.  I acquire what I need based on the mission I need to accomplish.  Do I want AT4 rounds, Jav rounds, mortars, small arms, what type and how much, 40 mm rounds.  There is no way the game can know what I want when I go to acquire.  What I would like is the ability to designate smaller loadouts of small arms and unacquire jav launchers.  Beyond that "resupply" isn't a generic option.

Not in what you want to resupply with sburke. But having told them what to acquire should be able to be trust them to go and pick up that ammuntition from the ammo source. But instead even that has to be micro managed, because the user interface requires you to do so, not because we want to.

Edited August 26, 2018 by Oliver_88

[General Liederkranz]

1 hour ago, sburke said:

What I would like is the ability to designate smaller loadouts of small arms and unacquire jav launchers. 

A general option to put things back in vehicles/ammo dumps would be great--not just for heavy objects like Javelins but also for when you accidentally click the wrong place so the team with only carbines from a different platoon acquires your last 250 rounds of .30 cal MG ammo . . .

[sburke]

16 minutes ago, Oliver_88 said:

Not in what you want to resupply with sburke. But having told them what to acquire should be able to be trust them to go and pick up that ammuntition from the ammo source. But instead even that has to be micro managed, because the user interface requires you to do so, not because we want to.

Not sure what you mean here. Could you provide an example?  

Say I have  Jav team that just fired off their last round.  I want them to get more.  I also have the A team from that same squad that I want to go grab more 5.56 ammo.some 40 mm and a couple AT 4s.  How would you see that working differently than the current set up?  My impression is you want a single string command set - go to this location, pick up. - select options available from that source.  So they go, hop in, grab the items.  Is that close?