Sten

Steve, I was talking about units in C&C all the time. I was differntiating between units under different HQs. John, the idea was to hamper the player somewhat to avoid an unrealistic amount of coordination. Agreed, the suggested method is arbitrary and cumbersome, but at least it's something. Ah, well. Maybe it was a bad idea from the beginning. -Sigh- Sten

Heh! Hindsight is a mother... Is there any suggestion in this matter that we can agree on? How about this: All units, regardless of HQ, run a X% risk of not getting to change its orders this turn (unless 'no-change' was in effect last turn). When a unit spots an enemy then that X goes to 0 for all units under the same HQ. Would that be OK? Sten [This message has been edited by Sten (edited 05-04-99).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> How can you be certain that an action a squad is taking is related to something on the other side of the map. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I can't. But if it's unrelated then the player had the opprtunity to give those orders one turn before. Why would he change the orders for the unit at this precise moment if it is totally unrelated? This forces the player to think ahead TWO turns instead of one. Intervening in those orders should be for when you get enemy contact. Sten [This message has been edited by Sten (edited 05-04-99).]

I apologize for going WIDE off-topic. Sorry I love Star-wars and I thought this was damn funny. Dave Barry is a columnist for the Miami Herald. Watch where you stick that light saber, pal By DAVE BARRY Cartoon by Jeff MacNelly It's coming! Put your ear to the page and listen... BOM-bom! Bom bom bom BOM-bom! Bom bom bom BOM bom! Bom bom bom bom . . . . That's right: It's the theme from Star Wars, the movie series that gave the world a whole new lexicon, including such phrases as ``the Force,'' ``Death Star,'' ``light saber,'' ``lexicon'' and ``licensed merchandise.'' Star Wars has become an important and cherished part of our shared cultural heritage, like Starbucks and Pez. And soon another chapter will be added to the Star Wars legend with the release of the long-awaited new installment in the series, entitled Episode One: The Empire Gets a Building Permit. On the day this movie is released, millions of Americans will flock to movie theaters to share in the excitement and wonder of being told that the theater is sold out through October because all the tickets have been snapped up by crazed drooling Star Wars geeks wearing officially licensed Han Solo underwear. What explains the powerful appeal of the Star Wars series? Speaking as one who saw Return of the Jedi on video at least 14,000 times when my son was four and refused to watch anything else but also refused to be left alone with Jabba the Hutt, I would say that the key element is the theme of Good vs. Evil. Good is of course represented by Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), who has the Force, a mystical, universal power that causes him to be attracted to his sister. Fortunately, Luke gets over that and meets a wise Jedi master named Yoda (Raymond Burr) who trains Luke to harness the awesome power of the Force so that he can speak lines of really bad dialogue without laughing. Along the way, Luke meets many memorable characters, including Han Solo (Indiana Jones), Chewbacca (Sonny Bono), Princess Leia (Prince) and two quirky, lovable robots, C-3PO (Tony Danza) and R2-D2 (F7-Z9). After many hair-raising adventures, Luke finally goes to the Death Star (Marlon Brando) where he confronts Evil in the form of his father, Darth Vader (voice by Perry Como) and, in a heartwarming scene of reconciliation, beats him up. The dramatic climax comes when Luke removes the helmet from the dying Vader and gazes, at last, into the eyes of the person beneath the harsh, forbidding mask (Martha Stewart). In the end, Good triumphs over Evil, and Luke and his friends celebrate on the planet of the Ewoks, a race of fun-loving, short, hairy creatures (Robin Williams). As humans, we relate to this timeless story because we all go through the same kind of moral struggle in our own lives. We have a Force within us, and sometimes we use it for Good, as when we decide to have a salad instead of a cheeseburger and fries; but sometimes we turn toward the Dark Side, as when we load up our salad with a fatty ranch dressing, or we take all the remaining artichoke segments from the salad bar, leaving none for the next person in line (Nick Nolte). These timeless themes explain why we are all so excited that director George Lucas (Inc.) has decided, despite the very real risk that he will make billions of dollars, to come out with a new episode of Star Wars. Until recently, specific information about the new episode was ``Top Secret'' -- nobody knew the plot except Lucas, the actors, and of course the government of China. Fortunately, however, I have obtained, from high-level sources who asked not to be identified (Al and Tipper Gore) specific details on the plot. If you don't want me to spoil the shocking surprise ending (Liam Neeson gets killed), stop reading right now, because here is . . . THE PLOT: There is big trouble brewing in the universe (California). The evil and greedy Trade Federation (Microsoft) is planning to invade the tiny planet of Naboo (Naboo), which is inhabited by a race of strange frog-like beings (the House Judiciary Committee). Two Jedi knights, Obi-Wan and Qui-Gon Jinn (Siegfried and Roy) go to Naboo, where, after overcoming numerous special effects, they are joined by the Naboo queen (Dennis Rodman). They escape in a space ship, but when the D'-cell batteries in their light sabers run low, they are forced to land on the evil, Hutt-controlled planet of Tatooine (New Jersey). There they meet 9-year-old Anakin Skywalker (Danny DeVito), and they realize that he has the Force when he is able, without physically touching it, to raise and lower a garage door. After a meeting with the ancient Jedi Council (the Rolling Stones), Anakin and the others return to Naboo for a climactic finale in which Siegfried (Roy) battles with the evil warlord Darth Maul (Marv Albert) to determine who will ultimately control the tie-in rights for Star Wars collectibles (Pepsi). As the movie ends, we see the young Anakin preparing to face an uncertain future consisting of at least 14 more sequels, and we hear the stirring sound of . . . BOM-bom! Bom bom bom BOM-bom! Bom bom bom BOM bom! Bom bom bom bom . . . ... . . . and we feel the Force welling up from deep inside ourselves. And so we burp.

Well, the words 'penalty' or 'penalized' are ill-chosen. The squad isn't 'penalized' in any way. Neither is the player. Although it stings in my wargaming soul to even consider having units 'out of order(s) ' like this. The squad in your example could: A) React to an event on the other side of the map (i.e. start moving). This is clearly a case of 'God-view' or 'total intelligence'. Continue to cover the valley with no change in orders. My suggestion will SOMETIMES stop you from using A for one turn (we could outrule consectutive turns). Since B is by far more realistic this doesn't seem unreasonable to me. This also forces the player to consider that the order he gives his units MIGHT, however unlikely, stand for 2 minutes. You got a point when two units sees different enemies, but that would only bring us back to the 'God-view' we have now. (Not even on the most selfrighteous of days would I claim to solve the whole problem. ) Regarding what a HQs 'know'; Is it realistic for different units within a HQ to react immediately to something some unit within the same HQ has seen? If the answer to this is 'Yes' then maybe this suggestion should be modified so that it only applies to units from different HQs. This goes along the same lines as the last part of your post. But it seems harsh to disallow the changing of orders for all units within the same HQ, just because another HQ made contact. So maybe the units under the 'unknowing' HQ should have a 4% risk of being disallowed a change of orders and the units under the 'knowing' HQ should have 0% risk? Sten [This message has been edited by Sten (edited 05-04-99).] [This message has been edited by Sten (edited 05-04-99).]

You're right, CM simulates this, to a degree. What this suggestion would change is the feeling of total control. Players should 'know' more than the individual troops 'know'. The lack of info on their part should come with a penalty that is unrelated to experience. Therefore: A troop with no enemy units in sight should be less responsive than a troop with several enemies in sight. The % should be very low (or 0) for troops in contact with the enemy, but the point is to prevent the player from manipulating the still unknowing units on what to do. Not all of the time, but just irritating enough so that you are forced to make plans that stretch at least two turns ahead, just in case. Sten [This message has been edited by Sten (edited 05-04-99).]

In the flank-discussion Steve mentions the problem with 'total intelligence' or 'God-view' over the battlefield. The difference between reality and all wargames I've seen is precisely that. On the real battlefield the commander has no chance whatsoever of making his troops respond immediately and correctly to all the info he has. ("Hey, guys! Our sniper on the hill 900m SW of us spotted the enemy tank going into the valley 1000m NW of us just 2 seconds ago. That means it can't see us! Let's stop this 'crawling around in the mud business' and double-time to the edge of the forest so we can set up a perimeter.") CMs one-minute 'movie' turns fixes this somewhat, but it's still not perfect. Could this be remedied by putting a probability, say 2%/turn, that a unit will be unable to recieve changes in its orders? The unit will continue to execute the same orders it had last turn, or just stop and hold still depending on the tactical situation. This would mean that once every 50:th turn the unit would not 'highlight' when I select it and I would be unable to change its orders. Is this a good idea? Sten [This message has been edited by Sten (edited 05-04-99).] [This message has been edited by Sten (edited 05-04-99).]

Wonderful idea! Maybe even assaign some probability to each VL. Say 50% of the time we play a particular scenario the attacker will go for the BFH(Big F**** Hill), 30% of the timne the SGV(Small Godforsaken Village) and 20% for the smallish bridge just outside of the village. It would do wonders for replayability and would quite decently simulate the 'orders' coming from above. Improvise, adapt and overcome. Sten

Can you intentionally go for a capture instead of a kill? I'll answer this one myself: No, because if it happend it was extremely rare and it is NOT standard procedure for any kind of troop. (More spy-fare than warfare) Not to mention the amount of recoding it would require. Why I bother to ask is beyond me. Sten

This is a VERY good idea. It's really annoying that in CC3 there is no 'hide' command, only the 'ambush' command. Allowing the player to control WHEN a hidden unit should open fire is paramount to any ambush. I'm behind Moons suggestion all the way. Sten

Maybe you could have it as an option? Some players might be willing to sacrifice some of the UI for a slightly better AI. Sten

Will the (strategical) AI use the time I spend thinking rethinking/refining his moves, or will it decide once and for all. I can see why it would need a minute or two to decide, but if I use 20min on one turn, will it put the extra time to good use? Sten [This message has been edited by Sten (edited 04-26-99).]

That's been the standard excuse for lousy commanders since the invention of the wooden club. The other ones realized the value of good battlefield intelligence and scouted ahead. That reminds me of a stupid guy I played CC3 against the other day. We had the timer set to 20min (just enough to keep me from being slow)and I was on the attack. I set up my force divided into one major and a minor portion, both consisting mainly of armor and a single commander. Both my forces were waiting behind some ridges while my light infantry scouted ahead. A minute went by, and the crawling infantry had yet to discover anything. Then this guy starts messaging me and asking me to hurry up, urging me to do something. I told him I was scouting (now 2mins had passed by). Then he says that he has to quit and doesn't have time for this scouting crap. He goes on to insult me for being a &%#/ moron for waisting his time and that scouting was for [insert demeaning vernacular for female genitalia here]. Then he broke the connection. I don't know how old he was but he'll get stomped every time with an attitude like that. Maybe your friend was of the same opinion? Sten [This message has been edited by Sten (edited 04-26-99).]

Good points, BTS. It sounds like you've got more than a great game, you've also got a fairly accurate marketing slogan. On the issue of typos, I assume that the sentence ".... [the US] democracy Sure, it is probably the best on Earth..." was supposed to read something like ".... [the US] democracy Sure, it is probably AMONG the best on Earth...". This post could go on and on and on about definitions of democracy and the pros and cons of different approaches to it. Let's not. The US has a fine system, but so do scores of other countries. Proclaiming yourself 'above' them, democracy-wise, is probably not only unfair, but also shows a very unbecoming lack of humility (or knowledge in other democracies). Since you never before have come across as either self-righteous or ignorant, I assume that it was a typo. Regards, Sten

You mean I _can't_ get two full divisions to snap simultaneously to attention like on a parade ground?!?! How then, can _anyone_ be expected to plan anything?? Not to mention _executing_ anything. That would mean that, that... that this war-business would include some modicum of risk and unpredictability!! I think I'll stay in this closet with my nice hexagons and little colored squares of cardboard. Much safer and more controllable. Sten (tongue firmly in cheek all the way)

Makes sense. Very much so, in fact. I guess my old grognardy, boardgamey self will have to adapt to the 'real' thing, eh? On a totally different topic, (I hope this is not in the FAQ, I haven't read it in a long time) will there be an option to have time limits on turns? To avoid ten minute waiting periods just because the other player is a micromanagement freak.... Sten

Will there be a way to synchronise actions between different units? I wouldn't want my tanks just blundering ahead alone just because the infantry went to ground to avoid that gracing MG42.... Sten

If you ever find youself out of monopolistic bastards, just let me know, we have plenty where I come from. And being the generous soul that I am, I'd gladly give you some. Sten

The ISP's aren't the real problem, most of them offer unlimited hours. The problem is that in Europe there is no such thing as free local calls. At least I haven't heard of any country 'cept US that has this. During evenings and weekends I can have a local call for slightly less than $1/hour, but that's as low as it gets. (In Sweden, that is. I think most other countries are more expensive.) Sten

Hear, hear! Chris, please do. I agree that this would greatly enhance the 'feel' of the game. After all, having 100 units under your doesn't mean you don't know the name of ANY of the leaders. If BTS got a list of 150(200?) * 6 'typical' names I hardly think the programming effort to use them properly would be very big. I know it's mostly eye-candy but during a long Close Combat campaign it's very satisfying to look at the individual soldiers statistics. Individual soldiers would be too much detail, but reading the aftermath and remembering how Sgt. Jones's Squad took out BOTH the German HMGs does wonders for game-immersion. Sten

They just didn't notice when the house VL-flag switched to 'witch'-colored. Ignorant of them.

One thing I always found irritating is how several games show Victory Locations (VL) in a 'God'-manner. My point is that if none of my troops can see the (still) neutral VL on the other side of the hill, then I, as their commander, should not know when(if) the enemy takes that position. If I get that information, i.e. the neutral flag changes color to enemy flag, then the VL's will work like sparsely scattered sono-bouys all over the map. I hope CM will only show the status of the VL's the troops can actually see. Maybe shade the the others in the last know color, if you move out of sight. How will CM take care of this? Sten

One thing I always found irritating is how several games show Victory Locations (VL) in a 'God'way. What I mean is that if none of my troops can see the (still) neutral VL on the other side of the hill, then I, as their commander, should not know when(if) the enemy takes the position. If I get that information, i.e. the neutral flag changes color to enemy flag, then the VL's will work like sono-bouys all over the map. I hope CM will only show the status of the VL's the troops can actually see. Maybe shade them in the last know color, if you move out of sight. How will CM take care of this? Sten

****A minute goes by**** Thanks. I'll check it out. Sten

The problems are still persisting. Although yesterday I managed to play a full game without a crash (hallelujah!). That was from my T3-line at work, but nontheless. Does anyone know if Microsoft is working on the problem? Sten