Jump to content

Gamey Recon?


Recommended Posts

In a Quick Battle yesterday, I was attacking a village. As one of my halftracks approached, it was hit by some unknown AT device. The crew survived and headed for the nearest buildings.

Here's the gamey part: I proceeded to sneak and crawl and run that crew from house to house and tree to tree, gathering valuable recon (the old Cav Scout in me was coming out). The gamey part is that I used an element in an ahistorical fashion (mea culpa, mea culpa). I thought about how that intrepid crew was getting that recon info back to the other elements involved, and came to the conclusion that there was no way for it to happen.

Which leads to a suggestion. That spotting information gathered by crews should not be made available to the player, unless that crew is in command link with an HQ. The crew can be fired upon, and even return fire on its own without giving away any enemy location information.

There should be other units to which this applies, but I haven't thought of a specific list.

Thoughts on this? Is it worth the trouble to code in future updates/versions?

Mark

------------------

Scouts Out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

And why should I be able to give orders to the crew, or even see them? Sounds like something that could be added as an even "foggier" fog of war mode. I'd use it.

------------------

"Oh, German! I'm sorry, I thought there was something wrong with you."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK

You are descibing a feature that has been refered to in the past by Steve as relative spotting. It has been disccused in forum about more fog of war for CM.

It has been stated that this relative spotting info you are refering to would be VERY difficult to program. As it would be hard to model radio communications or lack of radio comunications. So that your forward crew could see those enemy units but you as the commander and player coudl NOT see them, as could none of your other units. Because if you as the commander can see your crew engage those units then you as the commander know where they are and then can direct fire or send in reinforcements to that location. This is a VERY tricky concept indeed.

The way I play the game now is that I assume that every friendly unit I have on the board has a "magical" radio that never fails and tells me, as the over all player and commander, everything it can see and spot. This same "magical" radio tells all my other friendly troops were ALL the enemy units are that have been spotted by any of my friendly units.

If I am mistaken about the theory of the magical radio I hope some will update me as to how relative spotting (if there is any) has been implemented in the Gold version of the game that is shipping.

This was not in any way a criticsm of the game, just my personal interpretation of how I think recon info and spotting info is shared amongst my friendly units. Just an explanation of how I think the game handles this, nothing more

smile.gif

-tom w

------------------

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> "Have you thanked BTS by buying your SECOND copy of CM yet?" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ACTOR

I would have to agree. It could be done in CM2 or a future patch to CM. It is a little gamey to get information from troops that have no line of communication back to an HQ.

The teams cut off from HQ control could be directed to fight there way back, or stand and fight or something...just not providing recon data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom W.

I read your posts about "relative spotting," and what I'm suggesting is nothing so complicated. I would just 'turn off' the recon info for crews, so that the player could not see it.

The magic radio deal doesn't work for me. I don't have a problem with going to an honor system in the meantime, and just running crews back to the rear. However from what I've read here, the spirit of Combat Mission seems to tend toward realism, and this is a realism issue that might be fixed with not too much pain. I just happen to be ignorant about what it would take code-wise to do what I've suggested. If it's a huge deal, then no way, of course. If not so huge, then hopefully it will get done.

Mark

------------------

Scouts Out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok

I'm reading this post and this is not a new issue..

But what are the suggestions for fixing it?

As the player (God like over all commander) should you ONLY be able to know about and see events and terrain and enemy unit information and location that your higest ranking commander can see, or know about via a radio link to his other sub-commmander officers in the field you have an active reb line- line of communication with the friendly unit that can see the enemy unit in question?

What are the rules or guidlines for the lines fo communication and chain of command that lets you as the player see what?

I'm only asking questions here??

I have been on record in this forum supporting MORE fog of War but many here do not want to see this game turn into a Role Playing game where you "play" the role of the highest ranking officer on the board and you can only see and know what he knows.

Many here prefer the omniscient nature of the player as an ALL seeing commander of the whole battlefield.

This is issue has come up before and the actual coding required to implement this level of relative spotting has been reported by Charles to be daunting to say the least.

Do a search for Fog or War or FOW, check the thread that says should we be able to see so much?

this is a BIG issue and is not likely to be addressed with a patch.

Maybe in CM2 the Russian Front there might be some new level of FOW the may approach relative spotting if we are lucky.

-tom w

------------------

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> "Have you thanked BTS by buying your SECOND copy of CM yet?" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Mark

Thats actually a really good idea I had not thought of.

I understand you concern regarding gamey recon, but I figured it was a much larger issue than just "by the honour system" ordering your crews back to safety in the rear.

I was not trying to be controversial just pointing out that I thought you were refering to trying to add the "relative spotting"

feature, as it had previously been discussed here.

I think that Crews are worth something in victory points and players are encouraged to keep them alive to win scenario, but in your example, I think a strong case can be made for considering them expendable recon units and the info they might gather in that role could turn the tide in the battle even if they did get killed and then would not count as victory points when the scenario ended.

And YES, I agree with you completely that every effort should be made to make the game as realistic as possible. smile.gif

just my thoughts....

-tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Shep:

Tom W.

The magic radio deal doesn't work for me. I don't have a problem with going to an honor system in the meantime, and just running crews back to the rear.

Mark

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

------------------

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> "Have you thanked BTS by buying your SECOND copy of CM yet?" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Germanboy

In the first game of CE I ever played I advanced a US squad into the woods on the US left flank. They ran into a platoon of Germans and were duly butchered. They also ran out of C&C a long time before they got into the woods. If your suggestions can be programmed (a big if, IIRC), I would never have known what happened to them, once they go past the treeline. As WWII company commander, I should never have had any idea what happened to them, apart from hearing the gun-fire. Realistic yes, fun to play I don't know.

------------------

Andreas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No Tom, I believe Shep is just trying to say that the game allows using crews which have abandoned their vehicles or guns for reconnaissance, and he finds this gamey. He also suggests that no recon info from bailed crews would be passed to player, which would in his opinion cure the problem. So it's not about what the commander sees, it's about gamey usage of crews and a solution to this.

I think that's what he said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like we're talking about two separate issues here: the general problems of relative spotting, and how crews plug into the FOW equation.

As has been stated it would very difficult to devise a FUN, playable game that so severly limits your command of unit that you are reduced to playing the role of the commander on board, limited to only the knowledge that is realistically conveyed to him. In most cases, this would result in us being little more than bystanders, issuing global orders at the start, with only minimal chances for re-ordering within the span of a single engagement. In the interest of playability, we almost have to assume that what we are doing when commanding a battle is not commanding a single onboard commander, rather we are literally in the heads of each of our units during the orders phase. This has the side effect of providing universal recon, but it is almost unavoidable. Maybe this is what it would feel like for the Borg to go to war?

The issue with crews is a different matter, imo. I agree that to limit gamey use of crews, the ability to control crews should be curtailed. One suggestion I have is to treat them like captured units in that they can only be seen when viewed by friendly troops and we cannot give them orders. Instead of being under our control, could they be pre-programmed to attempt to return in the direction they started? Perhaps if they came into the C&C range of a Company commander, they could then be controlled. Another possible solution may be that the only order they will recognize is withdraw.

I'm sure the obvious problem here is it worth the programming effort to prevent the use of crews in gamey terms? I don't know, since I have no idea how much of a bother it would be to code a workaround.

------------------

"Sometimes you eat the bar and sometimes the bar eats you. Take it easy, Dude." -- The Stranger

The Dude abides.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sergei, Jgdpzr...

You both have the gist of what I was talking about. Relative spotting/universal (borg) recon is not something that is going to get fixed anytime soon. However, the crew problem is something that might be within the range of what is realistically fixable.

Jgdpzr, I think your suggestions are worth consideration.

Mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am just curious as to why this needs to be fixed. I just don't use crews in this way. The guys I play hotseat with don't either...our house rules. The AI seems not to use crews this way either. So, I am just wondering what the problem is.

I just don't "take advantage" of the game in this manner. I don't run one sharpshooter out across an open field to discern enemy positions, or drive a truck over a hill ahead of my lines etc. I guess if you, or the person you are playing against want to play like this that is fine. I don't want to, the guys I play don't want to, and I won't play anyone who uses these kinds of tactics.

Perhaps I am missing the point of a fix to this problem?

Semper Fi

------------------

"You'll die in combat."--DI Sgt. Nixon, Parris Island, SC---Feb. 1990

Link to comment
Share on other sites

venbede...

I'm glad to see you share Gen. Krulak's emphasis on ethics. I hope you saw that I totally agree with your take on the honesty side of this as my personal preference. Again, I don't have a problem just going with the honor system here.

Does it need to be dealt with? Still a good question, but I have the strong impression that BTS has coded out quite a few elements of this game that might be taken advantage of in a gamey sense. In fact, in the opening of the game manual they talk about the simultaneous resolution method as a way to get rid of gamey elements, so arguably the very best features of this game follows my question. Part of my motivation for bringing up the issue was to discuss whether it should be (could be) handled with code, or by a house rule.

I'm very glad to see a guy like you taking the high road. I don't lie, cheat, or steal or tolerate those who do... either.

Semper,

Mark

------------------

Scouts Out!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a house rule is a good idea. There can be situations when a crew has to fight, but usually you move them to the rear.

And this for two good reasons. If you use them in a recon role (far ahead), you risk their lives. And that is:

1. victory points for the enemy

2. the loss of a (veteran, elite) crew for the remainder of an operation! Imagine: a salvaged Tiger, and no crew to drive it...

Fred

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Big Time Software

Bailed crew are also "fragile" morale-wise. Notice the red exclamation mark in the lower right of their info panel. They panic quickly when fired upon, so they're not really the best scouts.

Charles

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Scott Clinton

Hey,

I for one am all in favor of completely REMOVING the player's control from ALL bailed crews!

What do you guys think? Have the TACAI take over completely, and start moving them to the board edge or a nice safe spot far from the bad guys.

That would sure fix the issue of 'gamey tactics' and crews. HELL! You could even give them back thier SMGs!!! biggrin.gif

------------------

Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The simplest solution to the problem is the one BTS took, make it worthwhile to not use them as scouts or front line troops, by...

A. Having them very lightly armed (which is realistic)...

B. Fragile morale...

C. Having them be costly in terms of victory points if they die in battle...

D. In Operations, allowing the possiblity that an abandoned or knocked out (but not brewed up) vehicle can be repaired in between battles, if the crew survives.

So while you might be tempted to use them to gather recon, you will pay a very high price for that info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I lose a crew served weapon, the crews head to the rear- I play as if they are out of the fight as much as I can. I justify this by considering that they are too traumatized by their circumstances to be of any use for the time period covered in the game. The point of trying to preserve specialist units within an operational game is also a valid one, I think. Setting a house rule is a good idea...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Scott Clinton

Then why not just let the TacAI take them over? confused.gif

------------------

Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Mikeydz on this one:

"The simplest solution to the problem is the one BTS took, make it worthwhile to not use

them as scouts or front line troops, by...

A. Having them very lightly armed (which is realistic)...

B. Fragile morale...

C. Having them be costly in terms of victory points if they die in battle...

D. In Operations, allowing the possiblity that an abandoned or knocked out (but not

brewed up) vehicle can be repaired in between battles, if the crew survives.

So while you might be tempted to use them to gather recon, you will pay a very high price for that info. "

PERFECT!

I think that you as the player/commander should be able to risk the lives of your crews for recon info. It may cost you but I prefer to see that decision in the hands of the player not the AI. IS the Tactic Gamey? I'm not sure, I do agree it is not really realistic unless they bailed out with a radio which is highly unlikely.

BUT what if they were the crew of a KO'd recon vehicle like a scout car? Then they would be doing their job, Just on foot still gathering recon info.

I like what Mikeydz has to say about this one, there is a cost for risking their lives and maybe sometimes its worth it?

-tom w

------------------

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> "Have you thanked BTS by buying your SECOND copy of CM yet?" <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is an idea regarding "relative spotting" please keep in mind I am not any sort of expert so I am not completely sure this would be realistic:

Unit have two levels of influence from commanders

1) as modeled in the current version- morale bonus, combat bonus, etc.

2) a "contact level" influence - meaning the commander must be within a certain distance in order allow the player to "see" what the unit sees. For example a crew bails out and is outside this "level 2" command range. All info the bailed crew sees is not reported, however a marker indicating the last know location is given(much like how enemy contact is shown) unless another unit within this level 2 command range has LOS to the bailed crew.

The player in this situation would not be able to command the unit until it is within the "level 2" command range. This could be applied to all units where the range of this level 2 command factor is relative to the units experience, unit type (recon unit is always under level 2 command radius).

Just my $.02 worth. Just wanted to see if this is feasible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Scott Clinton

Fred:

If doing anything with crews other than moving them to exit the battlefield as quickly as possible is 'gamey'. Then either players are simply plotting paths to exit (gee lots of fun there) or using 'gamey' tactics with crews.

If 'gamey' tactics is an issue (and it is or this thread and others would not exist) why not let the AI take over for crews that have lost the will or ability to fight effectively in this engagement...just like the AI ALREADY does for units that "PANIC", "ROUT" or are "BROKEN" statuses?

I value you opinion, but I frankly don't see the logic in your argument. Where is the 'game' in exiting crews after they 'bail out' and where is the historical accuracy when a player does anything other than exit the crews?

The more I think about it the more I like it: have the TacAI takeover 'bailed out' crews.

------------------

Please note: The above is solely the opinion of 'The Grumbling Grognard' and reflects no one else's views but his own.

[This message has been edited by Scott Clinton (edited 06-28-2000).]

Link to comment
Share on other sites


×
×
  • Create New...