Pixman

Steve/Charles, as I said in another thread, bravo for getting this in. It is more than I expected at this stage of development. Looks like the way you designed it will make for plenty of suspense for both sides. At the risk of looking a gift horse in the mouth, I am still not sure this design approach will properly handle Hitler Jugend fighting alongside other unit types. The settings seem too global for that. I am sure you did this for a reason, I am just not sure what it is. Is it a programming issue, or that historically the Hitler Jugend did not fight alongside other unit types at the battalion level? Thus, the German force in CM would be all Jugend or no Jugend? If so, then this approach looks like it will work. However, if we want mixed formations, then I suggest you look at making fanaticism unit type specific (I say this having no clue how difficult it would be programatically). Case in point -- the Fionn/Martin battle (AARs from which seem to be stalled by the way! ). It would be very interesting to have the German defenders of the town be fanatical Hitler Jugend while the relief force stays just as it is. With the settings you have offered, I do not think this would be possible. In order to make the town defenders fanatical, you would have to make some or all of the relief force fanatical too. My ignorant mind tells me that two approaches might work: 1.) Fanaticism levels set by unit type in the scenario design. 2.) Fanaticism levels set by set-up area in the scenario design. Food for thought. If what you have offered up is the best we can get for now due to all of the constraints you are facing, I will not complain. However, if the tweaking I have suggested is not too difficult, then I believe it would be worth the effort. Again, I applaud you guys for getting fanaticism in at all at this late juncture. Pixman ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

Oh, well I expected something of the sort was up since you were conspicuously absent. No problem, but don't let it happen again, lol. Seriously, I hope you got a little R&R while you were out. It's well deserved. Charles deserves it too but we are not compassionate enough to give him any time off until the game is done. See what happens when you create such rabid fans? ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

Thanks for the clarification Fionn. Makes sense. By the way, how many times in one 60 second turn do you think one of those Pak88s can fire on average (assuming all targets are in the initial covered arc)? I know this was talked about in theory in another thread, but I figured your little demo gave you an opportunity to see the game specifically model it. Thanks. ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

Fionn, great job on the article. It really showed of the LOS, tactical AI, rate of fire and other aspects of the game. It also showed why infantry is so valuable when advancing! Question: What happens to AT Gun crews when their piece is knocked out? I noticed that the Stuart crew took on a bailed out identity with pistol armament and the like. But in the first screen shot where you show the AT gunner taking off, the unit detail display just gives a status for the gun, i.e. "knocked out", but nothing about the crew. Is this because, once the crew runs away, they are a separate entity from the gun and you would have to specifically select them? Thanks again for all the great work. Pixman ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

Steve/Charles -- bravo to you for getting the "fanaticism" into this release. I do not know about anyone else, but I was not expecting it until the east front and then maybe a patch back into CM1. Once again you go above and beyond the call of duty for your men. <salute> Pixman ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

Hey guys, I thought Steve said Charles was banned from this board so he could finish the game. While we love his style and expert opinions, we value him much more for his programming skill!! Stick him back in the closet and throw beer and raw meat in every few hours. No showers, no shaving, just coding. He should come out looking like Grizzly Adams with a hangover and a shiny new CD in his hand addressed directly to me. My needs are simple. ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

Fionn, Fo4, etal, with all due respect, I will never stop putting forth ideas I think have merit. I am the customer. My job is not project management and scope control. That is Steve's and Charles' responsibility and, from what I can tell, they do a damn fine job of it. Ideas are ideas. In and of themselves, they do no harm. A lot of what we talk about here has merit. If something does not make it into CM1 because of wanting to meet a certain release schedule, then so be it. That doesn't mean it was a bad idea or that it was wrong to push for it. It may just go into a later module or future enhancement, or not at all. Scope or feature creep is not caused by presenting ideas. It is caused by design teams (or those with authority over design teams)that do not have proper discipline in determining which ideas fit the stated scope, theme and timeframe of the project. Consequently, they program things that do not have sufficient return for the investment and they invariably miss deadlines. I know I have only been monitoring this board for 6 or 8 months but, as far as I can tell, BTS has not pushed back a date since I showed up. That says a lot. Bottom line -- all of our collective ideas, combined with BTS' vision, excellent focus and discipline, will result in a game many of us never imagined possible. Praise the lord and pass the white phosphorous!! ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

Mike, thank you for making me laugh VERY HARD! I like your writing style (not the length mind you, don't want the posse after me) and am beginning to like your style in general. Yes, I'm for the scenario designer having this tool (WP) at his disposal -- big surprise. Still not sure why BTS is so against it. It's not a huge issue, but it is historic and it would enhance the game if used properly. I tried to get Steve to come back out of his shell on this, but he did not bite. Maybe he was laughing too hard, or too busy dodging anvils. C'mon Steve, just say you'll do it if you can work it in. Don't make me work my fingers to the nubs too on "research". Fionn, relax, Steve told us they are only Marauders. SSnake, have you ever read the casualty statistics of Londoners, the RAF or the US 8th airforce? ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

Great stuff!! Give 'em hell Moon. ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

To add my two cents in support of Mike here (gulp, did I say that?), I think the key use of variable arrival probabilities for me in designing a scenario would be when tweaking a bit of "what if?" into a historical battle. For example, in a purely historical battle, if the designer has good enough info., he can totally prescribe the arrival of forces using 100% throughout. However, I might want the historical to be the worst case scenario, with a chance that some forces arrived a little early. In that case, I might use some 20%, 30%, 40%, etc. on earlier turns and plunk down the 100% on the historical turn. No great shakes, just trying to point a good use for this flexibility, without which we cannot do what I am suggesting. ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

No way Mikey boy. I just knew you could not resist getting your $.02 in!! And YELLING no less, lol. I guess there are just enough of us out here who care about having WP in that it won't go away. While any one of us is not up to the Herculean diatribes you can generate to wear down our beloved design team (although I can give it a good try on occasion), our strategy is to collectively pepper this board from multiple angles until we get satisfaction. We prefer the straws on the camel's back approach over the anvil to the head that you seem to have mastered. Important note: in deference to your firey temper, all of the above is said in good fun. How about it Steve, have you given this any further thought or just tried to block it out like Mikester? ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

Always thinking of yourself (and your men) Fionn!! ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

Hi Sefchick. As I was the one pushing hardest for white phosphorous' inclusion in the game, I will quickly summarize where the discussion stands. Steve and Charles (BTS) acknowledge the presence and use of WP in WWII. However, all evidence presented on this forum to date suggests that it was used in a very limited capacity: 1.) In 4.2" mortars, mainly in Italy which is outside the scope of CM1. 2.) In the bocage to flush machine gunners and AT gunners out of hedgerows. This obviously fits into the scope of CM1. But from BTS' perspective, this is still a very limited use and they feel that HE shells can pretty much simulate the effect of WP rounds. Of course, WP was used as smoke as well, but CM already has smoke shells. The other concern BTS expressed was that WP would be abused as a weapons load for AFVs in scenarios outside of the bocage which would violate the historic reality of the game. The trade offs of putting in WP are pretty basic. Downside: More development time, a slightly more cumbersome interface, potential for nonhistoric scenarios (this last, I countered, could be controlled by the scenario designer). Upside: More realistic flavor of battle in bocage fighting, thus increasing historic realism. The discussion was left with BTS sitting on the fence, but leaning toward leaving WP out. The only thing that will induce them to put it in, is more evidence of prevalent use of WP in the bocage. So if you, like I, want WP in the game, then I recommend you help find sources that support its importance to the game design. Otherwise, I fear CM will be delivered sans WP. Steve, if I have misrepresented your position here in any way, please set the record straight. It is obviously difficult to boil a 30+ post thread down to a few paragraphs. Pixman ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

I like it. Good job sticking to your guns Mikester. I admire you because you are the only one here who makes my posts seem brief and to the point, lol. Steve, I have to chime in with Mike and Doug on the variable arrival probabilities, with all of the caveats that Doug put in at the end of his post. To hit on one of Mike's biggest themes to date -- don't slow down the project for scope creap (paraphrasing) -- how much of a release date hit are we going to have because of these enhancements? Don't get me wrong, I think they are worth doing. Just curious as to the trade-off. Once again, great job of listening to your public and keeping their best interests at the forefront. ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

Thanks Steve. The dynamic stereo panning sounds like it will achieve the effect I had in mind, i.e. a sound getting louder or softer according to distance from the camera. I had no illusions about the Doppler effect -- it was a silly question from a silly man. Waiting for this game to come out while having to watch a battle is making me silly. However, there was a secret reward for you and Charles -- a case of your favorite beer each if you had said yes to the Doppler. Oh well, at least you are close to Molson Bradour (the real stuff) country up there, so I am sure you aren't dying of thirst. ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

I believe the term is muzzle "brake" not muzzle "break". Both exist but are very differnt animals. A muzzle "break" is whay happened to the Jumbo after the StuGIII hit it -- note the droop. Hi Ron, as a follow up, I saw you correct your own spelling. Was not "razing over the coals", just having a little fun. Plays on words are my favorite form of humor. ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime. [This message has been edited by Pixman (edited 09-02-99).]

Not that much. I bet 20 mph is plenty. ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

I'm with BTS on "no human control". These battles -- even the campaigns -- take place on a postage stamp relative to the front as a whole. The time frame is the twinkling of an eye -- even Market Garden, which is a bad example to begin with because those commanders could have called for help all they wanted -- no dice. Just as Fionn and Martin look at the situations on the various sections of their battle and determine where to send troops, a higher authority is, in an abstracted sense, looking at their little postage stamp and assessing its situation relative to other stamps. I have to believe that every little stamp is screaming for more assets -- I know I would be. "Hello sir. What? 5 more Shermans? Appreciate the offer sir, but I just talked it over with the men and we figured we'd just press on ahead without them. Go ahead and give them to 6th batallion, I hear they are in quite a pickle." Are you kidding me? The point penalty thing does not hold water for me either. Someone brought up the Sid's Getty analogy. While I too like that feature of SMG, it is very different from this game. The FOW in SMG is very minimal compared to CM. You can see the size and location of the troops you are deciding to activate or not. You can also select the precise moment you want to activate them. No way this would happen in CM. My main concern about the point penalty is that it simulates a higher level command decision, i.e. the point penalty abstractly represents the opportunity cost of the units you call in because now they are not available to another sector that may need them. This trade off decision would not be made by the commander of the CM battle. Nope, the commander in CM has specific orders and objectives. He needs to achieve them with the forces made available to him, when they are made available, by his superior officers. Those officers would be making those decisions whether it is a one hour skirmish or a 5 day campaign. However, I do believe that CM could use some fuzzy logic to occasionally reinforce between battles based on the results of the previous battle, i.e. simulate a high level decision that this particular postage stamp is of extreme relative importance, but not every time the campaign is fought. The more realistic relationship between the higher ups and the commander of a CM battle is just the opposite from that proposed by Mike. Instead of the higher ups being influenced by the commander's pleas for help, the commander might get from his boss some soft, mid-battle information on reinforcement arrivals and adjust his tactics and battle plan accordingly. This seems much more realistic. It would also take some of the less realistic surprise element out of the arrivals -- like Martin's "edge of the earth" arrivals in the south woods. There is no reason why, a turn or two before, Martin should not know that there might be friendlies arriving through those woods. It is certainly realistic for him to know before Fionn does. SMG does a good job with this. It gives you soft info on when and where troops might reinforce you. This helps you manage the battle at hand more realistically in my opinion. ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

Does what the player hears vary based on where he has the camera placed? For example, in Fionn and Martin's battle, if I were in the middle of town during an arty shelling, I assume I would strongly hear the boom boom boom of HE explosions and my screen would shake. If I then started to move my camera east over the river and past the wall line, would the booms begin to fade, the screen shake less and the rat a tat of the machine gun fire out on the plain start to grow louder? If so, cool. Now for the clincher -- any doppler effect based on the change in perspective? If the answer to this is "yes", I can only conclude that, in the words of Heinlein, "Thou art God". ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

Fionn and Steve: A couple of times, when Fionn wrote about needing to pause to reorganize, the spontaneous battle ending (based on situation/activity) built into the AI crossed my mind. I didn't figure it would happen because the town was still being heavily fought over. But, if Martin had already taken full control of the town (i.e. no more fighting there) and Fionn paused at the wall line for a few turns to regroup, would the AI start to consider ending the battle? Just curious as to how much pressure is on Fionn to keep advancing with the relief force. ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

Boy, I cannot believe that I promised not to write any more in this thread!! I've bitten holes in my tongue. ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

Buddy, I believe "AAR" stands for After Action Report, i.e. the write-ups that Martin and Fionn are doing and that Pat is posting at the TGN site. ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

Take a tip from AOL. They ship all those millions of disks to us in just the cardboard sleeve. Has anyone received a broken one yet?? G--damned things are indestructible!! I have not bought coasters in 5 years. Just get me the disk and a little documentation. I'll figure out where to shoot. ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

Hi NCrawler. Playing the devil's advocate (once again), I just have to chime in on the behalf of Sierra. I do this for a few reasons: 1) Steve produced a Sierra product, and a damned good one, in Civil War Generals 2; 2) The same Sierra that disappointed you with FP99 is the one that brought you (and me) FP 98, which many believe to be the best football game to date; 3) Sierra has developed strong partnerships with some pretty good development shops (like Dynamix and Impressions) without totally squelching their individualism (at least from this outsider's perspective -- Steve may have another opinion, having been on the inside); 4) "Never" is as strong as a word gets. Sierra is too strong a player in the arena to rule out their producing a quality game with a theme that interests you in the future. It would be a shame for you to miss out when they do; 5) If we were all summarily judged by our weakest moment or worst decision, none of us would have a chance. FP99 was clearly one of the weak points in Sierra's history. Food for thought. My wife just stole my soap box, so I have to go. ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.

I know many of you out there are excited about the eastern front. I am too. But I have to say that North Africa excites me just as much, if not more -- especially if the supply issues can be properly modeled (i.e. trucking fuel across the Libyan desert). And the tactics were just so different out there. Imagine night battles using high powered search lights. And don't forget, in the desert, the towed 88 reigned supreme, while infantry played a greater role than many realize. After reading The Rommel Papers, I cannot wait to see CM hit the sand!! Don't even get me started on Italy. Kesselring was a genius. I am sure that BTS is up to the task of modeling that defensive genius in the hell that is the spine of Italy. What worries me though, is that I will not have exhausted my enjoyment of CM 1 before the sequels come out. I will have to choose between fighting a defensive battle in the Ardennes and an offensive one in the Steppes. This is too much for one man to handle!! Do I take the lobster or the filet mignon, the blonde or the brunette? Oh well, I have never faltered in the face of such choices in the past. Bring it on BTS!! ------------------ The enchanter may confuse the outcome, but the effort remains sublime.