Jump to content
Swant

Company HQ close to action?

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, IanL said:

Change nothing. All is just as it should be. Why must you trouble us with your malcontents? 

Self-preservation / final protective fire  is noted, and there might be ways to allow for that.  

1. But having an omniscient hive mind able to coordinate all actions of all subleaders, going well beyond 'sensible' to rally and redirect an entire battalion plus armour on a dime under fire in a night action to me is *less* realism, not more. Way less.

2. I also don't see full control as a virtue. Most of us grew up playing ASL,  where a turn in a battalion scale game could burn an entire day of youthful nerddom. I don't personally have time and patience for that now. I love CM granularity, and while it's fun to step into the sergeant's pixelboots now and then, I'd actually prefer just to view a war movie of most of that action, not fiddle with micro, squad after squad, each turn.

 

3. Fewer clicks, less mandatory micro,  more of a chess playing command focus (I'd also like world peace and don't expect that either). I mean, this is a battalion scale game right?

... There may be better ways to get at all that than rationing orders, and I'm happy to hear them. 

4. Nirvana would be to be able to set a plan, then designate phase lines and approximate routes at no lower than  platoon level. Then hit start and watch it unfold / all hell break loose, making only minor adjustments.

Scouts move out front, squads detect and follow cover terrain or gullies, or else spread out in skirmish lines. On contact, units seek cover and return fire, then send out a flanking element. 

That's the future (CM3). Imho. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah wth I didn't say what you have in my quote there. Please don't miss quote me - I can be harsh and mean when I want I don't need other people making up stuff.

Edited by IanL
Damn auto correct

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With that out of the way let me be clear. I do not consider you a malcontent. I also do not resist change just cause.

My issue is that nice schemes to simulate command delays while being good for one aspect of realism totally break down in others. If improvements in the TacAI or an SOP feature make that problem go away then I will be all on board with more realistic command modeling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎1‎/‎11‎/‎2019 at 3:57 AM, Swant said:

I don't know, Winters seems pretty engaged in this assault. He is the Company commander if I recall correctly.

Watching TV made stuff is always going to distort your view.  Real life stuff is far less interesting from an action orientation than what gets portrayed on the screen.  Winter's primary role in this action was to organize the teams, plan the attack and keep his men moving forward.  Taking up a rifle and firing it was the least important thing he did that day.  Did he do it, sure.  He kind of had to as part of the reason that attack is talked about so much is it was a ridiculously small force  to accomplish the mission and only succeeded because of the training, elan and leadership of the unit.  To use that as a general use case in a discussion is like saying I got hit by a screw that fell off of Skylab to show how dangerous the space program is.

Regarding command delays.  Any player is free to include them in their own play style.  I actually do it from time to time to create more of a story playing than just gaming it.  It can certainly be fun.  When doing that I also look at the soft factors to decide how long it might take that specific commander to formulate and issue orders and make sure there are C2 links, can the commander meet face to face with sub commanders, do I have runners etc.  Doing that though means every scenario you play then should probably be kicked out to the full 4 hours so you don't get frustrated only playing 50% or less of the scenario.  On the other hand I am with IanL on this.  I absolutely do not want to see them back in the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, IanL said:

Ah wth I didn't say what you have in my quote there. Please don't miss quote me - I can be harsh and mean when I want I don't need other people making up stuff.

Apologies, Ian. But you do have a (not unearned) rep as 'Board Defender of the Faith'. Consider my ribbing strictly good natured and I shall go there no more. 

Back on topic, yeah I hear you on unintended consequences of bloody hacks.

But in my view, the future (it's all about the future) needs to streamline the micro clickfest and bring the commander's chair back into primacy. It's a part (only 1 part) of why CM hasn't pierced the DoD training market.

Consider those great tactical videos and blogs by Armchair General and @Bil Hardenberger laying out the OODA loops for command and control. All that careful observation, scouting and planning is focused on understanding where and when to commit your main effort(s), with reserves held back. Secondarily (think Rommel) it is to mislead and lure the enemy into committing at the wrong places and times.

Once committed, it is an extreme rarity that a subunit in combat can and will alter its course to pursue a new plan not in the original orders or its training manuals, except for limited goals of self preservation or immediate opportunity. Not saying it goes to ground in place and freezes. 

A committed and engaged force can seldom be its own reserve.... 

Anyway, that's where I am going with this line of discussion. Command rationing is an (imperfect) means to that end. 

 

Edited by LongLeftFlank

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Apologies, Ian. But you do have a (not unearned) rep as 'Board Defender of the Faith'. 

Oh man you don't know the half of it.  He strolls around the beta club showing off some bomber jacket with that scrolled across the back.  He even has a tattoo! Doubt that is official, but you'd think so from the way he flaunts it.  He does this really lame casual move edging up to the bar in a way to put the dang thing right in your face and considering where the tattoo is... well it is just quite rude.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, sburke said:

He strolls around the beta club showing off some bomber jacket

Does he demand you call him Maverick? I hope not. Hint: Goose doesn't make it.

 

Mord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Once committed, it is an extreme rarity that a subunit in combat can and will alter its course to pursue a new plan not in the original orders or its training manuals, except for limited goals of self preservation or immediate opportunity. Not saying it goes to ground in place and freezes. 

Apologies for butting in but... Doesn't the planning you speak of (operation?) occur before we setup our troops on the map? Don't we essentially begin engaged? Or, very close to it? I'm struggling to understand what exactly can occur that would fall outside of training.

Edited by Howler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, sburke said:

Oh man you don't know the half of it.  He strolls around the beta club showing off some bomber jacket with that scrolled across the back.  He even has a tattoo! Doubt that is official, but you'd think so from the way he flaunts it.  He does this really lame casual move edging up to the bar in a way to put the dang thing right in your face and considering where the tattoo is... well it is just quite rude.

Come on, you know perfectly well @IanL actually *is* a cat. Bomber jackets and tattoos ruin the night camouflage, and the disconcerting effect of those green eyes glittering at you out of the laundry room.... 

But can we start a GoFundMe campaign for Ian to put 'Defender of the Faith' below his handle? Excess proceeds go to a twofer of Nut Brown or Keiths. 🇨🇦 Or premium kibble.... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Howler said:

Apologies for butting in but... Doesn't the planning you speak of (operation?) occur before we setup our troops on the map? Don't we essentially begin engaged? Or, very close to it? I'm struggling to understand what exactly can occur that would fall outside of training.

Good question. In meeting engagements and ambushes that would certainly be the case, but then the various OODA routines still kick in as the CO gets reports and if he can, scans the emerging situation from a hilltop. For all of which you can find no better sources than Bil and ArmGen as noted.

But at present in the game, he has nearly unlimited ability to telepath his orders to all subunits, giving them and their supporting units an ability to reorient, recommit and re-coordinate that would be the envy of a modern day SEAL detachment.

In RL, that's the job of reserves or reinforcements. The units who are already committed probably can't be asked to change much beyond 'cease advancing and form a perimeter', unless they can withdraw to safety and reform for a bit (probably 30 minutes minimum for non-Elite troops, especially if they've taken casualties?).

Again, let's not pound the strawman of order limits and then say there's no underlying problem. Is there a more elegant option to limit this Borg C3I for those desiring more realistic FoW? and streamline the micro burden while we're at it? 

Edited by LongLeftFlank

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Apologies, Ian. But you do have a (not unearned) rep as 'Board Defender of the Faith'.

Thank you :)

3 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Consider my ribbing strictly good natured and I shall go there no more. 

Ok I didn't take it that way but I'll retroactively consider it good natured ribbing. 👍

3 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

Back on topic, yeah I hear you on unintended consequences of bloody hacks.

It's tricky to design a feature and get it to work well with everything else.

3 hours ago, LongLeftFlank said:

But in my view, the future (it's all about the future) needs to streamline the micro clickfest and bring the commander's chair back into primacy. It's a part (only 1 part) of why CM hasn't pierced the DoD training market.

That would be a way to solve it - have the TacAI do more and so it better and have us be more generic in out orders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The game already gives you an opportunity for command delays. Play in Iron mode, set the trees to on and turn off all the icons. If you want it even tougher, play this way in realtime, without pauses, instead of WEGO. 

Your troops will still have all the spotting and sound contacts info, and relay this information up the C2 chain, the only missing link is you. Since the big complaint seems to be that the player can see or knows too much information all the time, this takes away all of the advantage. Unless you can see the enemy on the map with your own eyeballs, there will be a delay between when you first notice your men firing their weapons or dying and you giving them orders to react.

If you think the CO should be able to have regular status updates, turn the icons back on every 5 or 10 turns. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/12/2019 at 11:58 PM, IanL said:
On 1/12/2019 at 8:10 PM, LongLeftFlank said:

Apologies, Ian. But you do have a (not unearned) rep as 'Board Defender of the Faith'.

Thank you :)

BTW I updated my title to reflect @LongLeftFlank's kind words ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think @IanL has many good rational arguments against command delays etc. But I would still like to see an optional extra level of difficulty that somehow restricts what troops can do if they are leaderless, out of C2, and have no contact icons.

No matter how it would be implemented (there are many different ideas), I think it would be nice to curb "instant over-coordination" a bit, give more rewards for keeping C2 intact, and more tactical penalties for when it breaks down. I hope BF would consider experimenting with adding more stuff like this, going forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×