Wish List for CM3

[massimorocca]

Higher tile resolution (10x10) so that a Panther cannot turn it's turret because the gun is longer than the village road is large. (occurred frequently in Normandy).

Los reduction by battle's smoke and dust in the air. Imperative for a North afrika game with the sand clouds

[Uedel]

Ammo Dumps/Trucks to reammo Troops in long scenarios

[Nik]

I think those things would be nice :

- more detailed model of leadership with positiv and negativ effects (no one is perfect )

- an order that makes the platoons follow the HQ without giving each one waypoints.So you have to setup the waypoints only for the HQ. Would make things easier for example in large battles.

The folloeing thin might be to fantastic but....

- try to combine airborne assault with CMBB or the following thing. Think about that combination.........

[Voxman]

Hello Nik,

That is an interesting idea, just make a WayPoint for the HQ to move to a target and the AI will plot the best course for the HQ and troopers to follow using the best terrain path.

This would definitely improve the game play. Plotting the infantry moves can be tiresome in large battles.

More input from others on this suggestion would be good !

Originally posted by Nik:

I think those things would be nice :

- more detailed model of leadership with positiv and negativ effects (no one is perfect )

- an order that makes the platoons follow the HQ without giving each one waypoints.So you have to setup the waypoints only for the HQ. Would make things easier for example in large battles.

The folloeing thin might be to fantastic but....

- try to combine airborne assault with CMBB or the following thing. Think about that combination.........

[Fly Pusher]

Originally posted by Nik:

- an order that makes the platoons follow the HQ without giving each one waypoints.So you have to setup the waypoints only for the HQ. Would make things easier for example in large battles.

Yes, but I would suggest that instead of follow, that they retain their position relative to the HQ (ie. if they start ahead on the left flank, they stay there as the HQ moves).

[['nzn]]

1. Agree: all infantry men shown + keeping them in platoon order automatically (an option);

2. All the trees and bushes shown individually;

3. Tracks on the ground (real-time landscape including braking trees and making real holes);

4. More different writings on armor: "Za Rodinu!" on some T-34's for example and tank numbers, otherwise they look cloned and sad;

5. More polygones of course!

Cheers.

[Da Beginna]

I would like to see "fake" minefields - where the soil is just changed in a way that it looks like anti-tank mines. As used in hasty defences (refer to propaganda brochure - "Der Panzerknacker").

Further, I would like to see whole new system of fortifications, e.g. shelters for infantry, complex bunker systems.

And more different types and less abtracted buildings.

...

But what ever there will be, I will buy it!

[ December 03, 2002, 07:45 AM: Message edited by: Da Beginna ]

[Egan]

I think most of it has already been said..

1: Relative spotting

2: I think dynamic lighting would be kinda cool

3: More terrain types and doodads, like more building types, fountains and haystacks, that sort of nonsense.

4: Improved AI (although i'd imagine this is a given anyway,)

and last of all, a campaign system of some sort.

[Panzer Leader]

I would like to see some type of Mod Manager software that is integrated into the game, and ALSO, (this is important) is scenario-specific.

That way things like Clubfoot's excellent Omaha Beach (in CMBO) or that new Reichtstag pack, or anything really (correct unit designations, etc.) could automatically load when a scenario file is loaded. How'd that be for cool, eh?

Couple that with a 5m X 5m terrain tile (with all the great stuff you could do at that level - hay stacks, variety of diferent rubbles, small shacks, wells, streams, paths, log-roads) and I would be happy forevermore.

[Barrold]

Fluourescent pink shockwaves. Big ass mushroom clouds too perhaps.

Giblets, lots of giblets.

Ninjas wailing on guitars before they wail on the enemy.

Ultra hardcore troops that never hit the dirt under machinegun fire, can run 500 meters with a HMG, and fearless tanks without a reverse gear.

On map cheese, health packs, and ammo upgrades.

Experience points with a nifty 'magic' sound when a soldier moves up a level.

Sensurround Sound like 'Midway' had in the theatres.

Plus what everybody else wants.

BDH

[Reichenberg]

- Crews reentering their abandoned tanks

- relative spotting of units (with general advantage of recon-units)

- vehicles (dead or alive) providing cover for infantry

- some kinda campign mode (Two of my friends said about CMI, that it looks quite nice and realistic, but without a campiagn mode it has no long time potential to them)

- smaller ground tiles

- give us more of the WYSIWYG-feeling.....I want to see the hull down position of a tank, every men should be shown in squad, show all men of gun crews AND their work)

- and better graphics (take a look at WWII RTS of 1C, that will probably be a serious competitor) and more use of effects (light and shadows, like sun, muzzle blasts ......)

- more neat little gimmicks (crews actually leaving their tanks thru the hatches, infantry jumping/crawling over the sides of the SdKfz 251...)

- have an option to play like an RTS-game where you can pause the game at any point, give orders and have them executed again or play with the 60sec turn system (eg multiplayer)

- the forementioned movie-replay function

- the rooster screen (and the ability to pick each squad from this screen)

And by the way: Whatever you will do...... PLEASE STAY WITH WWII

Thanx and keep the outstanding work coming

Uwe B

[MrNoobie]

PLEASE STAY WITH WWII

YES PLEASE!

basically i want CM3 to look like this but turn based. i absolutely love the CM gameplay

for those who dont know the screenshots are from WWII RTS.

[ December 03, 2002, 11:55 AM: Message edited by: MrNoobie ]

[Col Deadmarsh]

I think it's safe to say that their doodads look better than ours...

[aka_tom_w]

That Game looks GREAT!!!

Like holy cow that looks GOOD

Can CMII look that good??? I sure hope so

Does anyone play WWII RTS?

is it any good?

:confused:

-tom w

[MikeyD]

Y'know, I rather prefer how CMBB looks for the most part! What kind of a platform would we require to do a 'huge' battle with those graphics?

----

Here's my own wish list for CM3:

A cranial implant for a 'total emersion' experience just like in the Matrix.

When your virtual soldier dies in the game you die in real life.

Civilian women in the game... whose cloths go transparent when you get close just like building walls do now.

When you open the game box you get a whif of 'new car smell.'

The random appearance on the board of a civilian sedan filled with drunken cossack (if in Russia) careening down the roads accompanied by the bluegrass banjo tune 'foggy mountain breakdown'.

Steal the soundfile from "Postal" of a woman screaming "My eyes! my eyes!"

[tar]

I'll add my two cents:

1) Relative spotting.

2) Small arms weapon danger zones.

3) Command and control hierarchy.

1. Is well known.

2. I saw Michael Emrys writing about a bit. This would make small arms a bit more effective, since the would affect a corridor up to (and beyond) the target. This means one would need, for example, to keep assaulting troops clear of the fire lanes of the support weapons. Again, this is a real concern of tactical commanders, and the reason you don't want to attack a single squad from two directly opposite directions. Your gunfire could cause friendly casualties. This is also why mortars are so good as short range support weapons, because they can loft their shells over the assaulting troops, as opposed to direct fire guns which might need to shoot through them (oops!)

3. Having some sort of hierarchical command and control would make company and especially battalion headquarters useful as something other than "super platoon leaders". I posted one, IMHO simple way to get some hierarchical command structure working: Any HQ with a higher HQ on the map gets a much, much bigger movement command delay if it is outside the higher commander's command radius. This still allows them to be moved by the TacAI, and to control their local forces, but having the platoon move its base of operations works better if the platoon leader is in Command. To realize this, one would probably want to have two command radii for higher HQ: One that works like the Platoon HQ, and a longer one that affects only subordinate HQs.

Some other command functions that would be nice to have would be the ability to attach and detach units, especially support units. This would also solve the mortar spotting issue when another HQ moves too close to the mortar and "captures" the mortar in its command radius. Another nice command feature would be the ability to either appoint new leaders for platoons that had their HQ wiped out, or at least to assign surviving squads to another platoon HQ.

MAP:

If it were possible, it would be nice if the basic terrain model could be modified so that the fundamental terrain type were separate from things like roads, fences, etc. By making things composable, the map editor interface could be simplified a bit, and it should be possible to do this without impacting the AI too much. Having roads, fences and possibly buildings be overlays on the terrain just seems to be a more natural way to do things, rather than to require separate tiles for each combination of road orientation and background terrain.

It is a testament to the wonderful design and existing gameplay that I don't have any really radical suggestions for the next version. These all seem to me much more like minor changes to an already outstanding product.

[MikeyD]

I think tar's item 2: small arms weapon danger zones would be really difficult to implement. Weapons lethality isn't binary in the game. You can't draw a circle around an infantry unit and say 'danger within this zone'. Not only is there a wide weapons mix for units up to squad mgs, even a single rifle will have some lethality value at a significant range.

[Reichenberg]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

That Game looks GREAT!!!

Like holy cow that looks GOOD

Can CMII look that good??? I sure hope so

Does anyone play WWII RTS?

is it any good?

:confused:

-tom w

WWII RTS is scheduled for release in spring 2004, developed by 1C Maddox from Russia and will be published by Codemasters. The game will be done with the upgraded engine of Il2 Sturmovik.

Knowing that a small company like BTS can not produce these insanely impressive graphics in such short a time, I still hope to see something similar hopefully in the spring of 2005

Uwe B

[Engel]

Originally posted by Wassermann:

developed by 1C Maddox from Russia and will be published by Codemasters.

Development costs in Russia (and other East European countries) are quite a bit lower than elsewhere, so they can both take more time and generate better results (on the average) than a US-based company that has much more pressure to meet sometimes absurdly early deadlines to recover higher development costs. Hence quite many great games published in recent years have had Russians or Czechs involved.

Graphics-intensive games like this tend to require (expensive) top-edge hardware to even resemble playable, and also tend to be somewhat unstable. But when some top Intel person refers to a 2.4GHz Pentium4 as "old-fashioned basic PC", I guess the argument is moot.

[ December 04, 2002, 06:31 AM: Message edited by: Engel ]

[Martin Rapier]

Lots of good suggestions but to add my 2p:

1) column movement on roads

2) relative spotting

3) beaten zones for tripod MGs so that they can operate as area denial weapons

4) more realistic combat engineering functions esp obstacle clearance (mainly wire) via artillery, explosives, direct fire large calibre HE etc

5) mine rollers, vehicle launched bridges etc

6) multi-turreted AFVs

7) more detailed artillery model, specifying number of rounds per mission, rate of fire, dispersion, round type, rate of drift etc. Tigers on the Prowl was doing this ten years ago (along with 4,5 & 6) so I don't see why a modern game can't.

8) paradrops & glider landings

9) simple campaign structure - linked battles, replacements etc similar to the campaigns provided by Steel Panthers, East Front, Close Combat & Tigers on the Prowl.

10) formation movement and/or setting multiple waypoints for group moves

11) embedding pauses within waypoints so units could advance, wait for 30 seconds to provide covering fire, advance again etc

Cheers

Martin

[Dschugaschwili]

- Get rid of the overtime at the end of turns (read: Add the ability to stop projectiles in flight). I think this is almost necessary if a full movie playback should be implemented.

Dschugaschwili

[Firefly]

Originally posted by Martin Rapier:

Lots of good suggestions but to add my 2p:

6) multi-turreted AFVs

Nice to see you here Martin, couldn't resist the Ostfront eh .

I agree with the multi-turreted vehicles and they need to work out a way of modelling the Grant/Lee, if as planned we're all off to the Med for the next one.

[Vanir Ausf B]

BTW, Steve said in a previous thread that CM3 will look as good as WWII RTS, maybe better.

A big advantage of WEGO is that most of the processor intensive stuff (physics, AI) is pre-calculated, so when the graphics are in motion you don't need as much CPU horsepower as you would if it were done on-the-fly, as in a RTS.

[Barleyman]

How about some single-player improvements?

I think most people would agree it's sort of boring against the AI as it is.

So.

</font>

• Chaining scenarios to mini-campaigns with pre-defined reinforcements in-between. Maybe relative to victory level?</font>
• Allow date to change in above. Personally upgrading dinky Pz-IVFs to Pz-IVGs was always damn nice in Steel Panthers. </font>
• Allow scenario designer some simple scripting for AI. Think "attack vectors", "target area" and maybe "defense zone". This would tell the poor AI where to set up for a fight. Fallback/regroup-area would be nice, too.
  </font>

Anyone?

[Barleyman]

bumpski