Halberdiers

my english is too bad to explain. Sorry guys and thanks for readme. I try to say that the player can have a lot of action in the battles. "FUN" must to arrive with realistic situations. Maybe you could be a bad "commander". But as "player" you must to have a lot of fun: action. The battle is a dynamic situation and you have a lot of HQs. Every one with their particularities. The player (as Battalion commander) select what information of their HQs is good and what is bad.The player without the HQ intelligence have more FEAR in the play , more thriller ,more action. But less trues in the battlefield. In the example , You can help to the platoon HQ with a near company HQ. Then you have a more TRUE vision of the battlefield. Each turn changes the facts . A key is that isolated SQUADS overestimated the battle. And the HQ present as combat unit , is not activated ever as intelligence unit . Your squads gives you the fun for your eyes (this remember me "Don Quijote" fighting against mills ) and your HQ gives you the TRUE for your mind. [ March 01, 2005, 08:13 AM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

Definition of information: The vision of all elements of the battlefield.Include:units,terrain elements,bridges,roads,elevation...ALL,etc. KEYS: 1-Player's unified vision in the movie phase. 2-Player's elective vision of the battefield in the orders phase. 3-Pulse of true information in orders phase. 4-Borg,uncertainy,C-2,friction of war,realistic,FUN. Commander's estimate: The SETUP PHASE must to be for the vision of player all the noise of the vision of the squad. The vision of the squad see in excess and overestimate the enemy forces (the player first impression :"I CAN'T DO THIS"). In the order phase of TURN ONE , The commander's estimation is automatically activated (the player can deactivate). Then HQ filtered all information and change the vision of the player of the battlefield in the ORDER PHASE. The better or worse intelligence of the HQ will be discovered by the player along the battle. MOVIE PHASE will be unified and a mix of vision of squads , ones with a filter activated and others with deactivated filter . 0-Setup phase: Noise of all squads.The worst vision of my life. False or Unknown information of mobile elements and inmobile elements (terrain). 1-Turn 1 Orders Phase: -HQ activated. -Noise of the vision of squads without filtered information by the HQ. -The vision of the player is corrected for all elements of the battlefield:units,terrain,etc. -Timer 1 min 30 sec (variable,chance,etc) to the next filter correction:time delay of information. -AI CALCULATE. Movie Phase: vision of squads are unified and mix with and without HQfilter (units,elements and terrain). 2-Turn 2 Orders Phase: -Overestimation by the new information of the squads without correction.False information. -The HQ filter is deactivated!!! -AI CALCULATE. Movie phase: Vision of squads without correction. (see picture) Attention: you do not have the Commander's estimate . Are False the Minifield , False the enemy infantry , False the Flag. Is false that the infantry do not have LOS . The HQ have LOF , but if HQ shoot then discover their position!!. You see false wounded enemies .But you , as player , have the Turn as a thriller!! . 3-Turn 3 Orders phase: -Filter of HQ activated (danger of underestimation!!!). -The vision of the player is Corrected for all elements of the battlefield. -the automatic Timer set 3 min to the next correction. -AI CALCULATE. Movie phase: Unified movie. (see picture) Notes: 1-In the SETUP PHASE, the vision of the player must to be the vision of squads without HQ filters. A spectacular representation but OVERESTIMATED and FALSE beyond of some meters. 2-The HQ is a filter and modifier of information. The HQ gives the TRUE vision to the player. Automatic activation by timer. Elective deactivation by player. Timer of silence or Latency is different between HQs and between the same HQ turn by turn. The HQ can generate UNDERESTIMATION. 3-Levels of filter:(from overestimated to underestimated):Team,Squad,PlatoonHQ,CompanyHQ.In theory at greater level of activated filter, the information of the battlefield is truer.The HQ company is the more TRUE filter.But with more timer of silence and with more risk to extend the UNDERESTIMATION along the battlefield. 4-The player can deactivate each level of HQ (platoon, company) if he wishes the vision without filters or with smaller filters . Elective in the orders phase. But ever the game will give to the player a VISION UNIFIED of the battlefield in the orders phase and in the movie phase. [ March 01, 2005, 09:19 AM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

yes , the HQ is the filter , the intelligence. Not only their vision is modified by the units. The HQ can change the vision of the battlefield of the units under his command. But it is pulses of information. Not the continuous flow of information as now. [ February 28, 2005, 04:53 PM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

example: 1-Orders phase: HQ unit: click on the order:"Commander's estimation" battlefield vision under influence of the HQ is CORRECTED(with delay and time limit). Next units: next orders,etc 2-Movie phase (with corrected vision) note that you can stop the order ( to reject the message ) and return to the SQUADS VISION in the next turn.But you can not send another order until the last order is ended (it depend of the delay of messages: radio,runners,etc). [ February 28, 2005, 04:00 PM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

yes , orders phase. Moreover, your next decision in the next orders phase will be influenced by the effects of your "commander's estimate" order of the last turn.

Commander's estimate: I agree on that CMX2 must stay in squad vision, but I have an idea on how to add the "commanders vision" to the "squad vision" and have finally the "player vision": In the picture , one squad can not send information to the HQ platoon, and the HQ platoon have an imperfect estimation about the battle, but this information is better than any isolated squad.The player's vision of the battle will change on the orders phase and the movie phase of the current and next turns, but the effects of commander's estimation have time delays and a time limit. Commander's estimate could be a order to the HQ to make a modification of the vision all subjects of the battlefield under their command in function of their own intelligence. Not only how the player see the enemy troops, their own troops too , the terrain,the roads , the friend troops,etc. This order could have a delay and a time limit in their effects over the battlefield (and return to the squads vision alone) and the modification is not equal for all those HQ. It is different between HQ-Battalion ,HQ-Company or HQ platoon. The first turn must to be for the player all the noise of the vision of own squads who see in excess and overestimate the enemy forces. The order of commander's estimation can be activated and change the vision of the battlefield. The better or worse intelligence of their HQs will be discovered by the player along the battle. The multiple effects of the Commander's estimate order must to be understand as all the messages with the information (or dissinformation ) of all the HQs to the Battlefield commander (the player).The messages as pulses of information can make their effects on the vision of the Commander (the player). [ February 28, 2005, 03:21 PM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

Developers , it could be possible to transfer individual soldiers from unit to another unit? I do not talk to join units , nor to transfer weapons , nor to change the rol of the unit or create new units "ad hoc". For example when the bazooka team is wounded , the players can to transfer 2 soldier from a near squad to the bazooka team, to recover the weapon. Or the contrary , when the bazooka team do not have more weapons , the soldiers can go to any squad as riflemen. I repeat,to transfer individual soldiers from one unit to another unit. Soldiers , not weapons. Then you not change the number of units of the Turn. You have the same number of units. I talk about bazooka team, but the same could be for others support units as machine guns,flamethowers,mortars,etc . possible ? [ February 24, 2005, 03:13 PM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

I think could... IMO, although the single Squad can be one target every minute, as they have 12 soldiers it can be shot in 12 different places throughout sixty seconds. Also the Squad can also shoot against a single Target every minute but from different sites throughout sixty seconds. That is to say,in the same squad the Machinegun team shoots in the first 30 seconds and rifle team the 30 seconds rest. Machinegun team can be a objective the first 30 seconds and rifle team the last the 30 seconds. Depend of the type of order you could have more or less teams. But ever in the same squad. Possible it is. Because, the 12 soldiers are not shot or exposed during all 60 seconds at the same second. But who knows. [ February 18, 2005, 03:23 PM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

Developers, you can to take advantage of 1:1 representation in order to separate what is the Leadership and what is command-control. I understand HQ-units like special units of intelligence and information,a species of the cement so that the rest of units, like bricks, can be organized in an effective wall. But those HQ-units also need their own leader.They also need leadership. Therefore I propose you: every "order" done by the player will put in high risk their "leaders" (in HQ,squads,sections,teams,AFV,etc) that could be wounded by the enemy fire during some seconds of the turn. To greater number of orders and counter-orders,targets,next targets,etc, more interventions of the "leaders", greater risk. This moment of high risk could be modeled ,for example, emphasizing the leaders with the hand signals to send orders. This leaders could be put with their name but unknown capacities and if he is wounded , changes for other with other capacities. Maybe a better leader ,fanatic, who knows. Remember Dike’s last command "the Battle of Foy" from Band of Brothers: http://www.wargamesjournal.com/wwii/foy.asp Furthermore , this one can be a form to bind emotionally the players with the "leaders" by means of its own orders. Totally different from the fact of the command and control. [ February 18, 2005, 02:41 PM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

I have a lot interest in how developers will think to make a revolution in the victory conditions. IMHO this could be a key in the philosophy of "model warfare, don't model wargames" too ,because the victory conditions could have a critical influence in the rest of improvements in the game and how the players will play. In a same way as the hexes , I expect that the old victory flags (dynamic or not ) disappear finally in the game. Or say it in another form,for example the strategical AI (not the scenario designer) will put the flags during the turns under certain rules , and then the victory conditions (not the "Mission") will be defined during the play. Is a part of the decisions of the battle in warfare , Isn't it ?. Moreover in the warfare do not exist the certainty of the victory, furthermore the definition of what is a victorious battle, once appears when the strategical conditions decided later what was a win and what was a loss. But not by the result of the battle it self as suggest the results in CMX1. "Accomplished Mission" could be a better definition for CMX1.For example, it is possible a battle defeated with an accomplished Mission of 90% ? . Yes , as Montmogery say about Market-Garden operation. In the same way tactical and strategically with a level of battalion could be defined the accomplished mission and the result of the battle for CMX2.

I'm confusing about what is "think big" too . Is it to think out of the box of WW2 era?.. for example , think in a "new game system" that can run for the conquest of Persia by Alexander and Operation Iraqi Freedom too? , in other words a system that could be the basis for the Persian chariots and the Apache Helicopters?.

agree

1:1 representation in CMX2: -From the "support teams" to the "task teams"- In CMX1 today , bazooka and machineguns(BAR,M1919) are teams that can be added to the scenario as individual element. This could be good for certain battles at platoon level , but in battles at Battalion level the number of units increase a lot and gets to make tedious the move of units with the same purpose. Developers could be possible to integrate "support teams" to squads during the game?. With a certain limits (any),as the number of soldiers of the Squads (12 soldiers).For example: a split rifle squad (6 men)+ Bazooka team (2 men)as a "task unit" during certain number of turns. This unit have 8 men, then can be added and split later.In this way the purpose of the unit make the form and size of the unit (under certain limits). This can decrease a lot the time lost to look the support teams to integrate them in the purpose of the maneuver and prevent the excess of tedious moves during the big battles at battalion level. Could be used for this purpose a order "embark" that exist now in CMX1 and the order "split" that exist now in CMX1 too. IMHO, the definition of GAMEY can not to be applied here because "task teams" can be limited by certain rules. [ February 07, 2005, 06:45 AM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

aka_tom_w ,junk2drive ,thanks for readme guys, I'm feel as the lawyer of the devil because I see all your points and Im with you. Tarkus, yes in any case this as could be optional as "show unit basis" or "grid lines". I think the players no need this option after a weeks of play. here it is: a mechanism: -select the movement order with their color line. -click the terrain and the color change : black line under one minute,color line the rest. Best regards. [ February 05, 2005, 09:02 AM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

I tell it before. I'm strongly sure that the main reason is that for the "hexes" player the first encounter with the CM system is a shock. I was a player of "Panzer general 1,2,3" for years ,a weeks after I take the decision of change my old "Panzer general", I ask to a friends about the Combat Mission game and they tell me ,with the same reasoning: is too complicated. Yes , maybe you as "ASL" player or Veteran "CM" player look the rules normal and easy. But it is no easy for green players. The main problem is the control of the Time-Velocity-Tempo. I say it before, and I'm sure about this. Yes , by the pass of the time your mind no need a help for understand the game. I know it after a weeks. But the DEMO needs to win the heart of the player in the FIRST battle. I understand the reasons of Michael Emrys about a risk of an artificial dependence but I strongly suggest to the developer: make a TEST , maybe adding an optional patch for the DEMO of CMAK?, but see by self. I want apologise if I'm repeated. Sorry: Black line would be the "theoretical " movement over the "one minute" turn (of course theoretical without the combat penalties of the next 60 seconds). See the pictures. Or the inverse , the "black line" could be the movement under the next 60 seconds , and the color line the rest. Totally realistic with the uncertainty of the next 60 seconds in the movement turn. (Not see in the pictures but I will try to put in another post). Listen me ,I'm not say that the player can not send orders over "one minute". I say that Turn by turn, minute by minute, the black line of the order of movement changes automatic to the color for the next 60 sec. Then , you no need send new orders of movement turn by turn, it's clear. But the green player understand , the first time when play CM , the first order that he send .Because the black line (the "theoretical " movement over the "one minute" turn) tell us where your units will be in theory this first turn the first time that the green player plays CM. This tactical knowledge is critical for the hexes player as you can see. Today on 2005 , and after a years , Combat Mission continues being a revolutionary game in the world of Wargames . You not must be complacence. Combat Mission could be the standar in the world of wargames. Dont misunderstand me , I say too: Developers goes far !! , but please , give us those breadcrumbs so that hexes players can follow you on this fantastic game. I think . [ February 05, 2005, 05:25 AM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

Justification of my posts: I see Combat Mission totally different from Chess Mission(with aseptical combat), but why?: (1) In the WWII Mediterranean and European theaters, the average incidence of combat fatigue casualties was one case requiring medical holding and treatment for every four wounded in action (WIA) (a 1:4 ratio). In really intense or prolonged fighting, the ratio rose to 1:2. On the Gothic line in Italy, the 1st Armored Division suffered 137 combat exhaustion casualties for 250 WIA (a 1:1.8 ratio). Overall, with the correct treatment, 50 to 70 percent of combat exhaustion casualties returned to combat within 3 days, and most of the remainder returned to useful duty within a few weeks. (2) During WWII the 6th Marine Division was involved in the Battle of Okinawa. They fought day after day and were up against a determined, dug-in Japanese resistance, rain and mud, and heavy artillery. The division suffered 2,662 WIA and had 1,289 combat fatigue casualties (a ratio to WIA of 1:2). Many of the combat exhaustion cases were evacuated to Navy ships offshore and few of those cases ever returned to duty. (3) In the Pacific theater in WWII, there was about one combat fatigue casualty evacuated from the theater for every one WIA (a 1:1 ratio). [ January 31, 2005, 12:52 PM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

I know dalem, it is a crazy idea maybe . But ...maybe , maybe...

Nop No sorry guys Im not suggesting this. Because I do not think that morale or experience must to be asked every minute. Neither with faces nor colors. I think that BEFORE the first turn, IN THE SETUP PHASE, the leader can ask to their troops about morale and experience.But NEVER every minute DURING THE BATTLE. O.K. , you can put words or colors. Yes, it is simple and efficient. Its good to me too...But: I have a idea that sure you like it . Try To Imagine this dialogs in the SETUP PHASE. You SELECT a units (to make everything or change the disposition,etc), then the player ear a voice in off: example:Select squad. -You can ear the HQ-platoon ask "eyy how are you guys?" -The squad respond "better than your sister sergeant".(sincere laughter!!!**good signal). example:select HQ plattoon -Hi harry. How are your troops? (ask the HQ-company). -ready Captain.(distrust murmur!!!**bad signal) Good, Isn't it?. But,because it is impossible understand all the languages ,japanese or Russian,etc. We need a Help. Of course , Write words and Colors are good to me too, but why not a face expression in the SETUP PHASE directly in the units (or in an emergent little screen)during the dialogs ?. Developers, the player could have a full inmersion in the first second of the game !!. Knock out to the FPS :cool: Think about this little idea please. (Note: another point are the voices that have another role during every minute during the combat as now occur , for example when they happen to be face down because they are crawling). [ January 30, 2005, 02:34 PM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

People, I read that during World War 2 the veterans were more skilled in the art of surviving on the battlefield and therefore tended to be more willing than nonveterans to go into combat.But I read too that this soldiers reached their peak of effectiveness after the first 3 months of combat.Every battle imposes a strain so great that a man will be affected in direct relation to the intensity and duration of their exposure. do you think that could be possible an inverse correlation between "experience" and "morale" when they excess 90 days of combat?. Then an "experienced" would have more effectiveness than "veteran" by the effect of morale. And "green" more effectiveness than "conscript" by the effect of training. But by better morale a slow "green" could have equal effectiveness than a quick "veteran" who have better training but could be panicked more easily.(From the green "this can not occur to me" to the veteran "I will die in the next corner"). In this way it could be an equilibrated units too. Isn't it? And talking about , what about use the "facial expression" as "experience" and "morale" instead of write words in the main bar ?. Must be repetitive in each squad ,and it does not seem difficult (in my ignorance of the programming). "facial expression from green to veteran" "facial expression of morale" [ January 30, 2005, 08:58 AM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

Sergei, Take in mind that those 60 seconds of action movie in CM are RETROSPECTIVE !!! In other words: the turn based game made the movie when the AI know all your orders and make all the calculations. Then , the RTS animation never will be better in realism and accuracy than a Turn based animation. [ January 23, 2005, 02:52 PM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

Aspects: 1:1 Graphical 1:1 Modeling 1:1 Control that’s totally right. Yes sir. Developers, we see only words in the Main bar actually: 1-Experience:(conscript,elite,etc) 2-Movement orders:(advance,assault,fast,etc) 3-Morale:(broken,panic,etc) 4-Fatigue:(tired carrying heavy weapons,etc) 5-Casualties/number of soldiers 6-Special ammunition (Flamethrowers,Bazooka,demo charges,grenades,etc) 7-specific conditions:(Fanatic,etc) And that is the graphical/modeling improvement what personally I expect in CMX2: 1-the representation of the status of the unit. 2-the moment of change of the status of the unit !!!. I think that a form of help in most of the graphical/modeling problems could be that in the "action phase" the soldier(s) who have the main role could have their specific animation. Then , could be possible to explain whatever status or change in the status in the Squad that you want to explain. EXAMPLE 1: "order advance": -Soldier animation:hand signal of the squad leader -Soldier animation:machinegun support as "base fire" -Squad animation: specific movement EXAMPLE 2: change status to "Pinned" -Soldier animation:wounded -Soldier animation:help the wounded -Squad animation:specific movement why we need the wounded soldier after the action in the terrain?. I think it is not necessary . Maybe the last soldier of the squad or the bazooka or Flamethrower as today. Developers you could add little animations in the "Orders phase". When the player select movements and targets. The "squad leaders" and animation of the "experience" of the troops could take the main role here. Finally ,a good guideline of where is needed animations are the sounds and voices in the game. [ January 22, 2005, 02:30 PM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

Today other games try an representation 1:1. why not Combat Mission ?. In fact I read that the BF developers promise a huge improvements in the infantry graphics. Crew (from Wartime command,squad assault) [ January 20, 2005, 02:20 PM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

I hope that developers add an animation of the moment when the squad is panicked by take losses. This is equal as the animation of the tank explosion. Wounded (from call of duty) [ January 20, 2005, 02:05 PM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]

Thanks Michael. Of course, I tell me: be patient. The people say that the AI is stupid. Trust. But you do not think that the guys who wanna 30 seconds per turn, do not call for the same ,but inverse problem? .Under or over one-minute turn. Is not the same question ?: precision?

LOL! Dirtweasle thanks for read me. With the pass of the months I know that I will take the mechanism of the game. I hope . But , instead of to think to change the "Turn" for 30 sec, or 3,4 or 5 min ,etc. What about a Hotkey that at selected time limit can change the color of the "movement lines" to black or disappear. I say in the "Orders phase" a Hotkey similar as the Hotkey of Tree coverage "moderate ", "full",etc. In this case you "know" as a "veteran player" where expect put your unit at 30 seconds or 3 minutes , etc. without any change in the Turn limit of "one minute". As a Hotkey , could be optional. Too much borg ?. [ January 19, 2005, 10:50 AM: Message edited by: Halberdiers ]