A More Realistic Iron Mode?

[HerrTom]

Thanks Steve. I know they're just dumb ideas that I half baked on my lunch break!

[Bulletpoint]

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

I'd guess the majority of our customers are more interested in control over realism.  Where they draw the line between one or the other is likely very different within that group, but I'm pretty certain Iron Man is not what they are using or looking for being expanded.

Steve, I'd really love to hear your thoughts on what the intended purpose of the Iron Mode is, and if you feel it accomplishes that purpose as it works now?

I'm not being snarky at all here, I'm genuinely interested. I wondered about this since I started playing several years ago.

Because as I understand it, the only real difference between Elite and Iron is that I have to click an extra time with my mouse to return from the selected unit's limited view to get full overview of all my forces. Yes, I understand that my troops have to spot each other, but as far as I know, that means nothing for how the troops actually perform.

As such, it seems like a superfluous mode, and the reason more people don't play Iron is maybe not that they don't like more realism, but that the mode doesn't really offer any more realism.

Am I missing something?

[Battlefront.com]

1 minute ago, HerrTom said:

Thanks Steve. I know they're just dumb ideas that I half baked on my lunch break!

  The problem with these sorts of ideas is they SOUND so good, but in reality they are not possible to implement.  Or would actually be harmful if implemented.

CM1's Command Delays is a cautionary tale.  Sounded great on paper, was not justifiable to players.  Players fell into two groups; the ones that loved it (warts and all) and the ones that hated it (despite some positive points).  It was absolutely impossible for us to "fix" the problems with it so we tossed it.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

2 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Steve, I'd really love to hear your thoughts on what the intended purpose of the Iron Mode is, and if you feel it accomplishes that purpose as it works now?

It was designed to give players an environment where getting information was more difficult, but not precluded.  It was also designed not to suck up resources being used for other aspects of the game.  I think it's accomplished that purpose because people do use it and some prefer to use it exclusively.  If it didn't do what it was supposed to do then few would be using it.

2 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I'm not being snarky at all here, I'm genuinely interested. I wondered about this since I started playing several years ago.

Because as I understand it, the only real difference between Elite and Iron is that I have to click an extra time with my mouse to return from the selected unit's limited view to get full overview of all my forces. Yes, I understand that my troops have to spot each other, but as far as I know, that means nothing for how the troops actually perform.

There is no performance difference. Why should there be?  Elite is as "real as it gets", so we can't make it "more real than it gets".  Only in the movies do things go up to 11

2 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

As such, it seems like a superfluous mode, and the reason more people don't play Iron is maybe not that they don't like more realism, but that the mode doesn't really offer any more realism.

Am I missing something?

No, that's basically it.  As I stated, Iron mode makes it more difficult to get a big picture view of the battlefield, which interferes/retards strategic planning and tactical micromanagement.  What Iron doesn't do us preclude the player from getting information at all.  That, as stated above, Isn't feasible or something that adds realism on balance.

Steve

[Bulletpoint]

1 minute ago, Battlefront.com said:

Quote

Am I missing something?

No, that's basically it.  As I stated, Iron mode makes it more difficult to get a big picture view of the battlefield, which interferes/retards strategic planning and tactical micromanagement.

Thanks for the answer. But I'm still not sure how Iron Mode makes it more difficult to get a big picture view of the battlefield? 

On Iron, information on enemy contacts is still gathered as normal by my units and exchanged through the chain of command. When I click on one of my units, I see only what that unit sees. But when I click once again, I'm back to seeing the big picture? Is that picture in any way clouded compared to Elite mode?

[HerrTom]

5 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Iron mode makes it more difficult to get a big picture view of the battlefield, which interferes/retards strategic planning and tactical micromanagement

I don't really get this because it really doesn't. Maybe I'm missing something but everything appears the same to me except if I select a unit during the replay phase. Everything else looks exactly the same as the other difficulties.

I see your point. Things like command delay work in games like FPCRS or Graviteam Tactics because it's acceptable on that scale in the former and there is a more independent AI in the latter compared to CM's tighter scale and finer control.

[BTR]

I guess it is one of those features that makes battles progressively harder as their scale grows and your inter-unit larger picture fragments more. I haven't tested Iron mode with E-war but I suspect that E-war is also a lot more affecting as a battle setting on Iron. 

[Battlefront.com]

23 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Thanks for the answer. But I'm still not sure how Iron Mode makes it more difficult to get a big picture view of the battlefield? 

On Iron, information on enemy contacts is still gathered as normal by my units and exchanged through the chain of command. When I click on one of my units, I see only what that unit sees. But when I click once again, I'm back to seeing the big picture? Is that picture in any way clouded compared to Elite mode?

Mechanically within the game?  No, C2 information is acquired and spread the same as Elite because Elite is already at "maximum realism".

In Elite when you click on a unit you don't lose the context of what else is going on outside of C2.  In Iron you do.  You don't get the same instant big picture view of the battlefield as you do in Elite.  Over the course of play, especially in Real Time, this disjointed view should make the game more difficult to play.

Yes, in Iron you can deselect and get the big picture like Elite.  That is so you can find units that you know exist without fumbling through artificial UI hoops (especially when in RealTime).  Since this view isn't maintained when you click on a unit, you can't firmly keep the big picture in mind whenever you select a unit.  I just played a tiny battle and I was focused on a Stuart and completely lost track of where some moving infantry was because I didn't have C2 to them.  That can affect my decision making, and that is something that doesn't happen in Elite at all, ever, because I always see the icons and therefore always have the big picture 100% of the time.

The people who claim they want less information can easily avoid this by... not deselecting a unit   Either click on a specific unit or use the previous/next unit feature.

As I said, all we can reasonably do as game designers is interfere with the player's ability to gather too much information too easily.  Interfering with core game mechanics is not advisable in the least.

Steve

[Bulletpoint]

5 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Over the course of play, especially in Real Time, this disjointed view should make the game more difficult to play.

Yes, I imagine it would start to have major effects in real-time play. Thanks for taking the time to explain.

[Battlefront.com]

1 minute ago, Bulletpoint said:

Yes, I imagine it would start to have major effects in real-time play. Thanks for taking the time to explain.

No problem!  It suddenly occurred to me that RealTime players might see Iron as more challenging than WeGoers.  But as I said, the players can avoid the big picture "peaking" by not deselecting units.  And no, we do not think it is smart remove the deselect view from Iron.  In fact, I have a long distant memory that is the way it used to be and people found it unworkable because isolated units with no C2 and LOS can't be located without toggling through unit by unit by unit.  That doesn't add any realism, but it sure as heck is irritating

Steve

[Bootie]

As an aside the Few Good Men club is ticking away nicely and we havent had any drastic reduction in members or less activity on the forum.  Members there flood new tournament recruiting threads as soon as we throw the chum in the water.  CM is still very much alive in my opinion.

[sburke]

As one of those who plays wego in iron mode all the time, no it is not harder per se. In real time maybe but I look through every turn anyway several times just to check out various units etc. what it does do for me when a unit is selected is tell me what that unit’s level of awareness is of everyone around them. 

I don’t see it as iron being a higher level and harder so much as a level that gives me more explicit info.  Now that I am used to being able to get that info, I feel like I am missing info playing elite.  

If you wanted to use that mode as a sort of FOW mechanical tool I guess you could.  I think folks desire for that is probably more stated than reality though. Try playing in that mode a bit and I think you’d just find it tedious. 

Kind of like me and my desire for CM:Vietnam.  I thought I really wanted it. Then I created a passable jungle map using CMFI and played around a bit and well. . . It wasn’t quite as interesting as I’d hoped. 

[A Canadian Cat]

34 minutes ago, Bootie said:

As an aside the Few Good Men club is ticking away nicely and we havent had any drastic reduction in members or less activity on the forum.  Members there flood new tournament recruiting threads as soon as we throw the chum in the water.  CM is still very much alive in my opinion.

Yep, plenty of people are *playing* the game.

[slysniper]

2 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

The people who claim they want less information can easily avoid this by... not deselecting a unit   Either click on a specific unit or use the previous/next unit feature.

As I said, all we can reasonably do as game designers is interfere with the player's ability to gather too much information too easily.  Interfering with core game mechanics is not advisable in the least.

Steve

Steve, I think you just gave the answer to how to get that iron level 2 mode..

Why not provide this one more level of iron mode as a selection in the game that you just described.

Don't allow the game in this mode to go to a deselected view. Thus, a simple change for those that just want to have the added challenge. 

 

Because as you said earlier, most players don't want this, but for a few who do, make it so they cannot cheat. no big picture view in the game at all. maybe it could be added without much effort, which since only a few want it I know you don't want to spend too much resources on it.

 

 

[weapon2010]

3 hours ago, sburke said:

my desire for CM:Vietnam

would kill for that

[sburke]

2 hours ago, slysniper said:

Steve, I think you just gave the answer to how to get that iron level 2 mode..

Why not provide this one more level of iron mode as a selection in the game that you just described.

Don't allow the game in this mode to go to a deselected view. Thus, a simple change for those that just want to have the added challenge. 

 

Because as you said earlier, most players don't want this, but for a few who do, make it so they cannot cheat. no big picture view in the game at all. maybe it could be added without much effort, which since only a few want it I know you don't want to spend too much resources on it

That would kill Iron mode for me.  You can already chose not to deselect, why force people like me to have to have that behavior? The player who wants this level of challenge can already chose to do this. No programming required.  Enjoy.  

 

Edited October 25, 2017 by sburke

[CarlWAW]

18 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

First of all, we sell other products than Combat Mission.  Our sales spike MASSIVELY when a new product is released, then tapers off.  You haven't a clue how to interpret those order numbers even if you had a huge sample of them.  Which you don't.

People with axes to grind and a history of combative behavior even less.

For a person who is hitting hard, you're quite thin skinned, aren't you.

The transaction numbers of your shop are simply a continuos counter of all sales, aren't they. I don't want to go any further into that, but if you don't want that to be able to be analyzed from the outside, I'd recommend to change the numbering nomenclature. Just a nice, free of charge tip, despite your not so nice behaviour. 

 

15 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Over the course of play, especially in Real Time, this disjointed view should make the game more difficult to play.

Do you play realtime only?! Now I begin to understand, why you don't really support wishes that could lift WEGO to a new level. Or why you didn't initially understand my criticism of iron-mode.

That you as realtime player see an advanced iron-mode with a somewhat "fixed" unit view as 1st person-feature and therefore not as something good, I understand now! But you are correct only for realtime. For many WEGO-only players it would offer a very different mode to play, that would offer them many new features they otherwise could only dream about, while no realtime player would touch that mode.

 

I am somehwat surprised, that you do seem to ignore the big differences there are between those two kinds of playing styles.

Realtime players give a f.ck about fine tuning the positions of every tank to the very last meter. Playing H2H and waiting for a PBEM turn? Unacceptable!  Not immediately knowing the result? Unbearable!  Patience is a virtue? A shameless lie! 

Maybe forum members should add a signature, how many percent everyone is playing realtime? It could give you a better picture, too. And it could make it visible how the wishes differ between the two playing styles.

Edited October 25, 2017 by CarlWAW

[slysniper]

10 hours ago, sburke said:

That would kill Iron mode for me.  You can already chose not to deselect, why force people like me to have to have that behavior? The player who wants this level of challenge can already chose to do this. No programming required.  Enjoy.  

 

NO, I did not say change your present iron mode, I said add another level of iron mode with that feature.

Personally , I could care less, I don't play it unless someone I am playing against has selected it.

 

But adding another level that is harder for real is not a issue as long as it does not take a bunch of programming time, that is the sense I am getting from BF.

Presently Iron mode really does not change the challenge much for someone who does not want it too.

 

Having a Iron level 2 with less ability to see the whole situation sounds like a simple way to create that for those that want to compete that way.

 

[Bulletpoint]

One could say there's no real point in having different realism levels at all.

If you want artillery call times to be longer, you can just make yourself wait two minutes in position before calling it in. If you want buddy aid to take longer, keep your guys in position for some minutes after they finish doing the aid.

But personally I like having the computer being the referee of what I can and cannot do, and how long it takes.

[Battlefront.com]

6 hours ago, CarlWAW said:

For a person who is hitting hard, you're quite thin skinned, aren't you.

Nah, if I were thin skinned I'd just ban you   What you fail to understand is that I represent the interests of Battlefront and having someone spreading BS unchallenged in the virtual world tends to make the BS worse.  So not thin skinned, just aware of how social media works.

This whole fight you're picking with us is cover for a fragile ego.  You made a suggestion, it got shot down.  Instead of accepting that you've decided to try to discredit the one who shot it down by "proving" that I'm wrong and you're right.  You're picking a fight you can not possibly win because I've already stated, very clearly, that we're not going to do what you want.  Which makes what you're doing now small, petty, and not a little bit vindictive.  It also makes you look like a right fool.  But hey, free speech and all that lets people dig their own holes and allows them to keep on digging if that's what they need to make themselves feel better.

Quote

The transaction numbers of your shop are simply a continuos counter of all sales, aren't they. I don't want to go any further into that, but if you don't want that to be able to be analyzed from the outside, I'd recommend to change the numbering nomenclature.

Why?  The numbers are meaningless without other data and knowledge.  I've already done what I need to do and that's to point out the obvious which, not surprisingly, you don't understand.

Quote

Just a nice, free of charge tip, despite your not so nice behaviour. 

Trying to sort out fact from fiction definitely makes me a bad guy.  The person spreading disinformation and negativity for his own personal needs is never to blame for anything.  I should know, I've seen this thousands of times.

Quote

Do you play realtime only?! Now I begin to understand, why you don't really support wishes that could lift WEGO to a new level. Or why you didn't initially understand my criticism of iron-mode.

Oh good God... you move from one deadend, flawed argument to another.  If we didn't care about WeGo, guess what we'd do?  Remove it from the game.  But we haven't done that and never will, ergo we support it.

Quote

That you as realtime player see an advanced iron-mode with a somewhat "fixed" unit view as 1st person-feature and therefore not as something good, I understand now! But you are correct only for realtime. For many WEGO-only players it would offer a very different mode to play, that would offer them many new features they otherwise could only dream about, while no realtime player would touch that mode.

You forgot to say "in my opinion".  You seem to forget that a lot.

Quote

I am somehwat surprised, that you do seem to ignore the big differences there are between those two kinds of playing styles.

I'm not surprised you'd think that, what with that huge chip on your shoulder.  OF COURSE we understand there are big differences in play styles.  If we didn't, guess what?  We'd have nobody happy with either.  Sometimes we add features that cater to one form of play more than another, and it's absolutely not always in favor of RealTime.  But we also don't add things that we don't feel are worth our time to add, be it RealTime or WeGo.

Quote

Realtime players give a f.ck about fine tuning the positions of every tank to the very last meter. Playing H2H and waiting for a PBEM turn? Unacceptable!  Not immediately knowing the result? Unbearable!  Patience is a virtue? A shameless lie! 

Maybe forum members should add a signature, how many percent everyone is playing realtime? It could give you a better picture, too. And it could make it visible how the wishes differ between the two playing styles.

I bet as a child you threw some pretty epic tantrums when you didn't get what you want, because as an adult you're still doing a pretty good job of it.

Look, it's this simple.  You made a suggestion and I said "no".  There's thousands of people making suggestions and we can't possibly implement all of them nor should we.  Do you know what would convince me that you're a well adjusted adult?  Accepting that you are but one person and your opinions are not more important than anybody else's and move on.  People might actually think better of you if you did.

Steve

P.S. don't think I didn't notice all the dodging you did when your wildly inaccurate claims were challenged.  I'm sure I'm not the only one that noted you walked away from all the stuff you pulled out of your backside.

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

One could say there's no real point in having different realism levels at all.

Yes, or one could say that we should have a dozen more to tailor to their own specific concept of fun.  The latter is the CarlWAW way of thinking.  Specifically, "I don't care about what is good for the game as a whole, I want what I want so you had better give it to me or I'm going to throw a virtual tantrum until you give in".  This puts us in a difficult position because we can NOT cater to narrow agenda requests, like CarlWAW's, because it interferes with the bigger picture in some way.

Because Modes are a fixed bundle of features we have to be careful about which features we add or subtract.  Put X feature in or take Y feature out of Mode 1 and now a bunch of people don't want to play Mode 1.  sBurke's post above is a perfect example of that.  This means each mode has to keep the majority of that player type in mind, not vocal minorities pushing for something that changes the nature of that mode in a negative way for the majority who use it.  Yet at the same time, we game designers can't add infinite new modes to appeal to every individual player's wants, and that means we have to be very "stingy" with what we do/don't do.

The solution is something we had wanted to implement for CM2 from the start... fully customizeable "realism" settings.  Don't like a particular feature?  Toggle it off or knock down it's effects.  We decided to not go this route for various reasons and so the status quo remains.

Once we (eventually) have a pick-and-choose system the limitation will be on what parts of the game we allow people to change and how they are allowed to change it.  This might mean an individual player gets what he wants, even though the majority don't care about it, or it might mean he doesn't because we don't view it as worth our time to code into the game.  Which means there's a lot more theoretical flexibility from a development standpoint, but still limited by the realities of game development.  In particular limited time.

Steve

[General Jack Ripper]

20 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Because as I understand it, the only real difference between Elite and Iron is that I have to click an extra time with my mouse to return from the selected unit's limited view to get full overview of all my forces. Yes, I understand that my troops have to spot each other, but as far as I know, that means nothing for how the troops actually perform.

As such, it seems like a superfluous mode, and the reason more people don't play Iron is maybe not that they don't like more realism, but that the mode doesn't really offer any more realism.

Am I missing something?

I guess the idea of "immersion" is a foreign concept to you?

[para]

51 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Nah, if I were thin skinned I'd just ban you   What you fail to understand is that I represent the interests of Battlefront and having someone spreading BS unchallenged in the virtual world tends to make the BS worse.  So not thin skinned, just aware of how social media works.

This whole fight you're picking with us is cover for a fragile ego.  You made a suggestion, it got shot down.  Instead of accepting that you've decided to try to discredit the one who shot it down by "proving" that I'm wrong and you're right.  You're picking a fight you can not possibly win because I've already stated, very clearly, that we're not going to do what you want.  Which makes what you're doing now small, petty, and not a little bit vindictive.  It also makes you look like a right fool.  But hey, free speech and all that lets people dig their own holes and allows them to keep on digging if that's what they need to make themselves feel better.

Why?  The numbers are meaningless without other data and knowledge.  I've already done what I need to do and that's to point out the obvious which, not surprisingly, you don't understand.

Trying to sort out fact from fiction definitely makes me a bad guy.  The person spreading disinformation and negativity for his own personal needs is never to blame for anything.  I should know, I've seen this thousands of times.

Oh good God... you move from one deadend, flawed argument to another.  If we didn't care about WeGo, guess what we'd do?  Remove it from the game.  But we haven't done that and never will, ergo we support it.

You forgot to say "in my opinion".  You seem to forget that a lot.

I'm not surprised you'd think that, what with that huge chip on your shoulder.  OF COURSE we understand there are big differences in play styles.  If we didn't, guess what?  We'd have nobody happy with either.  Sometimes we add features that cater to one form of play more than another, and it's absolutely not always in favor of RealTime.  But we also don't add things that we don't feel are worth our time to add, be it RealTime or WeGo.

I bet as a child you threw some pretty epic tantrums when you didn't get what you want, because as an adult you're still doing a pretty good job of it.

Look, it's this simple.  You made a suggestion and I said "no".  There's thousands of people making suggestions and we can't possibly implement all of them nor should we.  Do you know what would convince me that you're a well adjusted adult?  Accepting that you are but one person and your opinions are not more important than anybody else's and move on.  People might actually think better of you if you did.

Steve

P.S. don't think I didn't notice all the dodging you did when your wildly inaccurate claims were challenged.  I'm sure I'm not the only one that noted you walked away from all the stuff you pulled out of your backside.

Bit rough this isn't it???

[CarlWAW]

48 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Nah, if I were thin skinned I'd just ban you  

What you fail to understand

a fragile ego

what you're doing now small, petty, and not a little bit vindictive

look like a right fool

spreading disinformation and negativity

you move from one deadend, flawed argument to another

as a child you threw some pretty epic tantrums

what would convince me that you're a well adjusted adult?

move on

the stuff you pulled out of your backside.

 

But I'm the one with the ego problems...

[para]

5 minutes ago, CarlWAW said:

 

But I'm the one with the ego problems...

Leave it alone now CarlWaW..you have had your questions answered more than once. This serves no purpose now mate..move on