hoolaman

I don't know, I never really played it. Whether it is a radius or a corridor is probably not really the point. The point is whether it models and challenges the player to use realistic C&C while still being fun.

Originally, my concept was a lot simpler, if people care to browse the depths of this and the "what do we want in the new CM game part deux" threads. I subsequently came up with some new ideas based on other peoples suggestions and critisicms, which may not have improved the concept. If you have ever played a higher level war game where platoons or companies are the smallest units you have to command, you would know that each "tile" you command is an abstraction of a whole company. Of course in CM the squad is the smallest "tile". My command zone concept is a way to play CM as a company level, platoon level and squad level game all at once. You click on battalion HQ and tell your companies where they need to go as if they were a "tile" with a zone of control. Then you click on the company HQ and tell your platoons where they need to go as a "tile". Then you click on your squads and tell them where to go within this platoon "tile" zone of control. As long as they are all confined to the last orders they recieved they are all behaving realistically. I originally only suggested command zones or command radii around a unit. This area would be broad enough to allow initiative movement of each element based on where the orders came from. So a squad could move anywhere within the platoon ordered area, platoon could move wherever it liked in the company level area, the company could move wherever it liked within the batallion ordered area. All this does is limit the player from moving stuff unrealistically. Why should the units not continue marching forward as they were orderd to do if they do not hear or see the MG open up behind them. To get the units back, the ranking HQ must know about the MG and send an order to get the units back. Nor are the units robotic, they have a 200m wide corridor they are bound to, but they can stop and dance a jig every turn if they like. If we are talking about a company in this situation, the player will have plotted paths for each platoon in accordance with whatever grand plan he came up with. Lets say each platoon is 500m apart marching in a column formation down the road. Fist platoon passes the house and gets down the road a ways. Second platoon also marches down the road a way. Third platoon is then fired on by the MG from the house that no one bothered to clear yet. Third platoon now can move a squad around the back of the house, and execute platoon level manouvres within their 200m wide zone. A little icon appears above second platoon to indicate that they got a sound contact. If you click on the HQ for second platoon, you can plot a company level waypoint back to the house. Second platoon HQ hears gunfire, he would probably go back to check it out. First platoon way up the front and out of contact with everybody, blissfully marches on. And I might add that if you keep higher HQs close to the action, keep all units in contact with each other, and have good communictaion options, then turning the whole advance around would be realistically simple. As for reinforcements, that is interesting. Simply stated, the player could plot an order for them as soon as they enter the map. Or the ranking HQ in the reinforcement group gets to take command. It would be cool if, as an option, a unit in the middle of nowhere with no radio could be randomly assigned a command-zone direction by the AI to simulate being "lost". Only when they stumble on friendlies can the player take full tactical control of them!

Mr. Tittles. So basically, the disposition of your units automatically changes based on some AI variables. This in turn limits the orders you can give to a unit. I have a few questions about this. Why can a unit defending not make advance or fast movement orders. Counterattack and initiative and even running away are all just as vital tools on the defense as on the offense. If a platoon can change its "SOP" at will, what value does this give higher commanders? If it cannot change its SOP at will, why not? Wouldn't a platoon or squad have enough intelligence to work this out for itself. Does this mean units like a lone squad out of C&C are useless? Isn't it a little arbitrary to prevent one unit advancing but allowing another to do so? As I said, I like the idea of sometimes limiting the orders in the menu, and also of higher command level orders and dispositions, but I still don't see how this simulates real C&C.

It would be correct under the current game, but a realistic C&C requires 2IC and 3IC commanders. If a HQ is killed a squad is designated HQ (after a delay where confusion may reign) etc. or the next junior HQ is "promoted". Also, the HQ is only require to reroute all your forces. I think to simulate the initiative of squads or platoons, the player should be able to replot the orders for only the squad that spots the halftrack to simulate the NCO coming up with a new plan as the situation dictates. At the same time, the player cannot use the HQ to change the path of all units. He can only change the path of that one squad. So to make a coordinated change of plans, you need to use the HQ. Squads can still react independantly to threats, but the player cannot change them all at once, but only in a reactive way. The only thing this should limit a player from doing is reacting with total coordination to a localized threat. When the threat is reported up the chain of command, then the player can react with total coordination.

Yes, it is rather odd, I am slightly turned on after seeing those sailor-moon-ish dolls in weird poitions with a bipod machinegun!

As I explained before, this can be done. It would certainly work on a small scale, but games with many enemy contacts in a simgle turn would be tricky. I have tried to explain that being able to change HQ level orders is dependant on spotting enemy units. In game terms, My comand-zone idea has three types of movement. 1- Orders from a HQ. These orders change the command zone. This is an area waypoint, 50-150m in width. To order a squad to advance through the woods using this type of movement the sequence would run as follows: Click on platoon HQ. Select "assign orders". Plot a path for the squad to follow through the woods, taking in any good area of cover. On the map this appears as a 50m wide corridor. 2- Tactical manouvres of the squad. After the HQ has plotted its orders to the squad, the player can move the squad anywhere within this area, eg from house to house or short dashes to get into a better tactical position. 3- Initiative orders. If the squad spots an enemy, it may be possible for the player to replot the HQ ordered command zone for that squad only. So you may see, using these types of orders, in the example above, the player comes up with a plan. This plan is: send the single squad ahead to scout the area beyond the woods. Leave the Sherman and the rest of the platoon in the village. Then the player plots the general path he wants the squad to take. He clicks on the HQ and plots a command area waypoint that takes in a few buildings and the thickest woods. The squad then advances through this area up to the far edge of the woods. It can move anywhere in this area with no command delay. Until the squad spots an enemy unit, the player cannot move the Sherman or the HQ back in the town except for a 50m radius to take into account tactical manouvres. If the player had originally conceived the plan to involve the sherman moving forward, he could have done so at the start. When the squad spots the enemy halftrack, it appears on the map and is identified exactly as it is now . There is then a delay proportional to the level of communications between the squad and HQ before the Sherman can be ordered to do anything. Once the HQ has been "told" of the halftrack, the player can plot orders for the Sherman. The key here is that the command delay and the ability to even change orders at HQ level is dependant on spotting , and no plan can or would be altered unless enemy units are sighted. If you wanted to send your units across the map on a whim or a hunch, that would have to be planned in the initial planning phase. The command zone concept means that a squad or tank can still move on any turn with no delay, but only in the immediate area it has been ordered to be in by a HQ. So to reroute all your forces requires the HQ to be notified of enemy contact.

All sorts of dynamic lighting would be cool, especially tracers at night!

I hope to see at least see aircraft represented in 3D way up in the sky, or making an attack run. It would be awesome to put yourself in gunsight view of a quad 20mm AA gun and watch a typhoon come swooping down.

What I was trying to address with a comand zone or command radius is desrcibed in the post from that very old thread above. The only workable solution to this problem I have seen comes from my command zone idea. Solution: The squad is sent forward through heavy woods using a platoon HQ ordered waypoint, giving the squad a 50m wide corrdidor that it may advance through. The squad spots the halftrack. When it spots the enemy unit (not before), the NCO may (on initiative) change the path of the platoon ordered waypoint to take some effective action against the halftrack. OR the radius around the squad instantly extends out to 100 m radius to allow manouvering. Inside these zones, the squad can act free of command influence ie. no command delay at all. Because they are in the area they were ordered to be. There is then a delay before the presence of the halftrack is reported to the platoon commander. When it is reported, the player can use the platoon HQ to give an order to the Sherman to move forward, and/or give a new platoon level waypoint to the squad, and another squad, which will have a large command delay as appropriate. For those who think a command radius would limit what you can do with a platoon or squad, check out this picture. A 150m radius around a whole platoon allows you to send it up a corridor that takes in all the likely cover you might want. If you send it into an area with no cover that is your own fault. Preventing it from leaving this area is intended to only provide limitations at a higher command level, not for your squads on the ground. Remember using this model the squad can do anything inside the zone at any time. Command radius pic (135 Kb) Remember the initial plan, as well as the lower level orders and the tactical movement at squad level are all planned out by you the player. If you initial plan is flawed, or the plan is perfect but executed poorly, you can't blame either the sarge or the major.

Then again you get into the territory of preventing a squad from moving simply because a company HQ has not told it to. Squads must be able to move at will to get their job done. Even if told to defend, a squad would have the option of moving to a more secure position, or doing some attacking. I confess I don't really understand your concept. Under your plan when can a squad change or set its SOP/dispostition and get access to all commands? Does a company HQ have to order them to attack or something. Perhaps you could explain again running through a few turns of CM action with your idea.

Id like to dredge up some of aka_tom_w's stuff from the depths. I have tried to incorporate all this into a command system. I think all these factors must be taken into account in a true C&C simulation. 1) This is easy. Individual per-unit calculation for spotting. I think the game map should remain "all-seeing" for the player, displaying the "most-spotted" version of every enemy contact. I see maybe a little icon appearing above the head of a unit that has spotted something new during the turn. When the player clicks on him, the LOS and units spotted by this unit are displayed. Enemy sightings a unit has been "told" about could also be marked for HQ units. 2,3&4) As I have said before, the communication options could be very simply abstracted. LOS, radios, field telephones, and distance between units translates into: A time delay for orders to be acted upon by a unit. Orders must come from a particular HQ eg. click on HQ, assign orders to platoons. A time delay for reports of enemy contact to be recieved and marked on the HQ's maps, also quality of the reports could play a factor. Like now, incorrect ID's could be made by bad reports. Clicking on a HQ could bring up the LOS of that unit, but also plots the units on the map that it has been "told" about with a ?tank? or ?infantry? marker.

But (correct me if I'm wrong), there is nothing to stop you creating a "Borg-like swarm" of units to respond to a threat over on your flank.

You are right, more control within the 60 sec turn can only come from expanded orders and SOPs. However I do want more human control of exactly where squads move. Everything I have posted in this thread is aimed at having no command delay over squads. Every orders phase, the player should be able to send squads anywhere and respond as they should as if the player was the NCO. So as I said (and meant)I would like to see more control, not less, within the 60 sec turn for squads. To prevent unrealistic instant Psychic changes of focus coming from freeing the squads from command delay, I feel that confining them to a zone of operations as set by the last recieved order from the company HQ would be realistic. TacAI targeting is a completely separate issue. I am concerned with where the units are allowed to be, not what they shoot at.

I agree that one part of a C&C model could be to only have the option to give units orders at the end of certain turns. My take on it is to bind units to "the plan" unless they spot an enemy unit in that turn. At the orders phase they can then change "the plan" with an appropriate command delay, but all the while squads can run around in circles all they like. The 60 second turn (or at very least the "we-go" system) looks like staying, but hopefully options can be put in to give more fine control within the turn. The fact is that the current order delay system isn't neccesarily unrealistic, because although the player can give orders every 60 sec. the orders are only recieved and acted upon after an appropriate command delay. I would like to see more control, not less, within the 60 sec turn for squads, because most of the short dashes into cover, or from one house to the next, haven't been ordered by battalion HQ, or even the platoon HQ, but decided by the NCO right there on the ground. The only problem with having no control over a unit out of c&c is that they might be stuck sitting in a field waiting for orders from an officer, thus producing unrealistic behaviour. Then you get to the argument that most of the time you will not be playing the game, but only watching the AI play it for you.

The principle is the same on defense. Cordinating sending reserbes to weak points on the line, or moving support and AT weapons, could be accomplished just the same with command zones and C&C delays. Radios field telephones, runners etc. can all be simulated or abstracted into the system for order delays at certain HQ levels.

A simple idea that was already suggested: Having side specific objectives. I'm sure often IRL the objectives of both sides coincided, but in CM you always both have to go for the same flag. I think each side seeing different objectives, victory locations and landmark labels on the same map would add to the excitement, FOW and reduce the predictability of the AI.

Thanks indeed. Any words from the mouth of the horse are valued, even if they are a little dated. I am shocked that they think it is impossible to provide command limitations without removing the player from the game. I think it can be done. So, to provide so answers to these two-and-a-half year old posts! There is a way to achieve this without limiting any of what the player actually sees on the map. This could be done with my HQ command zones idea, (which I am sure no-one will have trouble finding if they require more info. In the example above, the player clicks on the major on the map, and orders a company to go to area x on the map, in this case, a strait corridor taking in the area of the north side of Hill 345. He plots a zone for the company to follow, which they cannot go out of. This simulates the Major's orders: Where to go and (roughly) how to get there. The captain then plots a zone for his platoon to follow, hich they cannot go out of, and which end in their required setup area; 1st Platoon go to that stand of trees, 2nd Platoon down thee road a click, 3rd Platoon deploy to 2nd's right. This simulates the Captain's orders: Organisation, where to set up, how to get there (somewhat precisely). The platoons advance down these zones and when they get to the general area they are told to go to, the squads are free to setup where the player sees fit, eg "1st Squad, take that wall over there, 2nd Squad see if that house has a good field of fire on that gully over there, 3rd Squad go over there and see what you can do about covering that road junction" This simultes the Lt. orders: setup right there, look out that way. At each level the player can only give the orders realistic for the rank of the HQ. What will this solve? If all units are bound to their last known orders, realistic C&C is already there. No "Borg-like swarm" is possible, because to adjust the orders requires the HQ to actually get out orders. Of course there is more to it, but a link to the discussion of same is provided above. As I explained above, it is not neccesary to obscure anything from the player. They can still play at squad level, but only if they are bound to chain of command by being forced to follow the orders of the major. Naturally a purely realistic game is a contradiction in terms. There will be abstractions in this model, and the player will still have a god like awareness. The initial plan is conceived by the player as it is now, but to adjust to a threat with a "borg like swarm" would be difficult unless it is simulated that new orders are handed down.

Don't mourn the old anthology, find it here web page

Platoons form the smallest element for the HQ rules. Teams and Guns may also be treated in a similar way. There is a (platoon waypoint/corridor of advance/command-zone) which platoons as a whole are bound to in some way. Squads and platoon HQs have little/no command delay within their (platoon waypoint/corridor of advance/command-zone). Company HQs (or higher) are the only units that can change all the (platoon waypoints/corridors of advance/command-zones) for all the elements under their command. And hence, the only units that can change a cohesive plan into another cohesive plan. Platoon HQ's can change the (platoon waypoints/corridors of advance/command-zones) for only their platoon based on their own initiative. The ability for (platoon waypoints/corridors of advance/command-zones) to be changed, whether by the company HQ or platoon HQ depends on a change in the battle situation that they become aware of. If there is no change, or if they are unaware of a change, no change to the (platoon waypoints/corridors of advance/command-zones) can be made. In addition HQ units can get reports on enemy positions down the C&C chain and not have to spot them directly. Therefore, units which are unaware of something over a hill or out of LOS cannot respond to it with a change of (platoon waypoints/corridors of advance/command-zones). As for the mechanics of what constitutes a stimulus to allow a change in orders, I don't know. But I think the rest of the plan would work and work well. You can fairly easily change a plan, but when you have a plan, you should be expected to stick to it. That is all, I think I am flogging a dead horse here.

The idea of having HQ level commands only as an interface, as Tarkus suggested, would be quite a small adjustment which would add some great possibilities to the game. This allows easier control, and more realistic command delays, SOPs etc. But it is not really a fix to the problem I was trying to address. Borg spotting comes in two parts. 1- One unit spots an enemy, and all units instantly can see and fire at it if in LOS. This is easy fixed by individual calculations of spotting, and may not be unrealistic anyway as evidenced by DG's story of instantly knowing the location of the enemy based on what your fellow units do and where they fire. 2- The all knowing commander. The hard part, and what I am trying to solve, is to work out how to limit players to realistic changes in plan. I am hoping to prevent the player changing the whole plan of a battalion because his radioless sharpshooter 500m ahead up a tree sees the whole german army coming down the road. Unless the HQ gets the report, his original plan may see all his forces blunder into the ambush. This sort of thing cannot happen now, because when the sharpshooter ahead spots enemies, the HQ instantly knows it via psychic waves and instantly responds. There must be a way that prevents a player from making unrealistic responses that still allows units to move with initiative, and still allows changing the initial plan within realistic limits. My plan is explained above (badly as usual). Help me out here.

The only problem is that it is not a real fix of the borg spotting problem. Only the first unit of the first turn would give true relative awareness to the player. The next unit would give the player the info about what the first unit sees and what the second unit sees. The last unit would allow the player to have seen the whole battlefield at one point or another. Next turn, the player would again know where all enemy units are. It would not be any different to now, except it would make it tedious to keep track of enemies instead of easy. If you only use this option for targetting, that is a different story. Individual per-unit LOS and spotting calculations for targeting by the TacAI and the player would be a great idea and I would be surprised if it was not included.

I don't know if anyone saw a documentary called "ancient builders" or something, where a bunch of arcaeologists got together with engineers etc, and tried to build some classical structures such as a famous roman bridge or an easter island statue, using ancient technology. Some they found very difficult to do even with some modern know-how. Or a show called "battlefield detectives" where they get out on old battlefields with military tacticians and recreate battles using both physical evidence and literary accounts. Such practical demonstrations can be very useful. I think some academics cling tightly to their doctrines, and are nervous of people proving that their interpretation of ancient texts has come to a conclusion that is impractical in the real world. Why shouldn't the practicality of Roman formations be relevant if experiments are done somewhat scientifically. Every other branch of academia must prove their theories beyond doubt by experiment, why not historians.

Also if I am not mistaken, armor units attack much better if they have a "run-up" ie. a stationary or entrenched armour unit will be much less effective than one that moves then attacks.

Hello again everyone. Firstly I should say that I look at threads like these as a big brainstorming session. I know some of my ideas are a bit out there, but BFC will of course do what they think is best, and if they get some ideas from the forums, all the better. Yes! The only way to limit the actions of a unit to what it really would know is to tie the ability to change higher level planning waypoints to certain events. The sequence runs as follows: 1. Player plots planning orders in the form of zones or company waypoints with a radius as I mentioned before. Then the paths of each squad and team are plotted, or a formation option allows the platoon to move forward as one. 2. Player presses GO and watches the video. On the map no enemy units have been spotted by anybody. 3. Next orders phase. Player can adjust waypoints of squads within the command radius, but cannot adjust the company plan waypoints. Why? Because no spotted units means no stimulus has changed the plan. 4. Player presses GO and watches the video. On this turn, an advance platoon spots an enemy unit. It is out of immediate contact with HQ and the other squads. 5. On this orders phase, the company level waypoints can be adjusted only for the platoon that spots the enemy unit. Why? To simulate the initiative of the platoon commander to change the plan. Why can't the other units change plans? Because they don't know about the enemy contact (yet). As far as they are aware, the plan is still as originally set. 6. Player presses GO and watches the video. If the player clicks on the company CO, the spotted unit ahead will not yet be seen. After maybe 30sec or 10sec if radio is involved, the spotted unit ahead becomes visible to the company HQ as it is simulated that a report has reached him. Now the overall plan can be changed on the next turn instead of just for the one platoon at the front . Why? Because the HQ becoming aware of enemy contact allows the stimulus to alter the plan. If he was totally ignorant, the plan would have to stand. 7. The HQ Replots the orders of all platoons to deal with the new threat. However, if the comms options are poor, it may take up to 1-2 minutes to change the plan, and a command delay similar to that currently present would apply to the platoons for their company level waypoints. Why? Beacuse just as it takes 30sec to report enemies to the HQ, so it takes 30sec to get orders back to all the squads. Although the platoons have a command delay on changing course altogether, at the front, within their 200m radius, they are still able to run from cover to cover, in and out of houses, execute small scale flanking and other manouvres. They are where they were told to be by the company CO, and can manouvre on platoon level orders with no command delay at all. So only on turns where something changes can the orders get changed. If it changes for only one unit, that unit can change the plan for itself and only itself. If reports reach the HQ then the plans for all units can be changed. In this simplistic situation, it is assumed that the player inhabits the minds of the platoon HQs and the company HQ. However the player is only allowed to replot orders individually for each unit when something changes in game terms. This idea means individual spotting and tracking of units is essential. It also takes into account a communications delay. This is abstracted based on distance, radios and LOS. Say the communications delay is 40 seconds. This means to get a report to HQ about a sighting takes 40sec. To adjust orders gives a 40 sec delay. If both sections had radios, it might be 10 sec. If both units are in LOS maybe 15. and so on. If all units are in close proximity, LOS or radio contact, you may be able to execute a flawless C&C borg-like battle. I think all these options could be seamlessly put into CM. Imagine CM exactly as it is now, but with an added command delay at the company level, and none at the platoon level.

Tarkus: Your overall concept as you have stated it would work very well in a new game. But it seems like what you have described is more of an interface change than anything. As you probably know I think I was proposing a stricter idea, where the player is not the overall commander, but can only command based on the abilities of the troops on the board. At one level of command, say company level, the CM player comes up with a tactical idea to change the course of a platoon. These change in plans are not instantly transmitted to every level. If this were to happen IRL, either the platoon commander must have a bolt of inspiration, or the company commander must have a bolt of inspiration and then tell the platoon commander about it. He can do this either on the initiative of the platoon leader or by the initiative of the company CO. To implement his new plan the CM player is limited by: a) What the unit in question sees and knows ie. the platoon commander cannot respond to something he cannot see. b)What orders can be gotten to the unit, and what the commander sees and knows ie. the company commander cannot respond to something he cannot see. It may be better to think of it in a slightly different way. Imagine a command zone as a compnay level waypoint. As the platoon moves forward, a radius around it moves forward as well. This circle may be 200m in diameter. The circle must be on the company level waypoint. If enemy contact is made, the radius of the circle may increase, but the platoon elements must stay within the circle. Under certain circumstances, a platoon commander may abandon the original planned company waypoint and plot his own company waypoint. If the company commander wants to plot new waypoints, he must get out the orders to the platoons. That is the bare bones of the idea, exactly the same as the command zone concept but maybe with a better explanation...... Or maybe not. x =squad o= platoon HQ