Glubokii Boy

I have also been longing to try something simular...that is formation orders. But I belive that for it to be of all that much use other then simply a move to contact function then the AI will need to perform at a fairly high level. Especially in a competetive multiplayer game....If one of the players chose NOT to use the group commands and the other player do indeed use them...he will probably be at a notable disadvantage...maybe forcing him to also 'skip' the group commands if he want to win the battle. Group command is indeed an intresting idea but if it is implemented i belive it will need to be implemented VERY WELL !

Yes...and that is indeed the biggest shortcomming of the AI... The ONE WAY FORWARD OR NON AT ALL..limitation. The AI needs a way the evaluate the battlefield situation and act accordingly...something it currently does not have.

Maybe not...but a 122mm or 152mm might... And everyone may not have a .50 cal...

No it wouldn't

Obviously we as CM players as well as RL soldiers need to use some common sence.. If we have no or very limited amount of ammo we can't waste it on maybees... But if we do have that ammo...why not use it ? And simply because you CAN use it does not mean that you HAVE TO use it...

Having officers being flexible and using their own initiative when it comes to solving a problem as opposed to being locked to ONE WAY to do things...as stipulated in some manual... Is apprisiated in most armies today i belive.. Using MGs to suppres an enemy might work well in some cases...using HE might very well be preferable in others. Why limit youself to one option ? Using infantry to find unsuppresed enemies might work in some situations....In others using preemptive fire against suspected enemy locations might be better. Why limit yourself to one option ?

SALUTE or no SALUTE... If i'm tasked with taking a village for example and my force includes some AFVs with a decent amount of HE... I would much rather use that HE (ROE permitting) to find, kill, wound, suppres, force to relocate etc... an unseen (potential) enemy before they are able to fire their first shots at my advancing infantry. If the enemy is hiding they tend to be able to get the first shot off...before being spotted....even ONE single round fired could cause you one casualty ! Why not try to avoid that If you have the resources acaliable ?

I can... To reduce friendly casulties !

This could bring alot of flavour and new tactical situations...i'm in !

No they would not....as different people suspect different things.... That would be an awful lot of contact marker to cover them all

Works against a single target i guess...but what if you have 2, 3 enemy incons identified in a forrest for example spred further appart than the size of a TRP. Now you would need to call in 3 seperate bombarments from 3 seperate assets to be able to target them all...as opposed to one larger bombadment. Not ideal...

Next problem...how large should that areafire target-zone be allowed to be ?

Editor UI improvements... - more AI groups - reinforcement by trigger - timed objectives - improved AI artillery programing Etc, etc...

It's a bit of a shame that many of the youtubers that have shown off the game after the steam release are playing it in RT... It really does BFC no favours... Many of them seem to have a very imited understanding of the game and they play it like some kind off click-fest game in RT...In a simular fashion that they likely are playing other games...consequently it does not look all that great unfortunatelly... CM shines in WEGO and what makes CM...CM...is thoughtful play in WEGO

Thats ok. RL is more important and a pause in designing every now and then can be a good thing...

Any further updates on this one ?

I seem to recall that BFC changed the tankcomander behavior a few years back. Previously the used to start the scenarios unbuttoned but that was not all that well liked by the community back then... And no....i don't think the designer has any way of controlling this button up/unbutton when designing a scenario.

That was my initial thought also and I still agree that that probably is the reason.... But its still kind of strange.... as that would imply that NO waypoint (AI-orders) should be placed on restricted terrain either. Not on any terraintype of map (including wooded ones) as the same things aply to orders (waypoints) as they do to objectives... An AI group with randomely assigned armour CAN'T reach a waypoint in heavy Woods for example. The manual makes no mention of this as far as I can find. And also...If the OCCUPY objectives still remain (as stated in the manual on pg 119 )...why ? Vehichles can't reach that either.... If the fact stated by sgt Squarehead above is indeed the reason for excluding some of the avaliable terrain options in QBs...it might be better to ADVICE designers as how they place their objectives on the map...taking in the considderation of eventual armour in the AI groups...and not remove those options completally. .

I wounder why that is ? Afterall the AI plans for QBs are made by the designers...simular to scenarìos. The AI doesn't do anything on its own...all the movements and what not are scripted just like in scenarios...If a terrain objective is a touch, occupy or terraintrigger shouldn't reallt be a problem. It's the designer that guides the AI in QBs as well as in scenarios. Strange ! Thanks for testing though...

Thanks for telling...

Thanks guys, will try... @MarkEzra Hello... Some of us have a question regarding QB maps. The manual is somewhat unclear on this point... - Is it possible to use TERRAIN OBJECTIVE triggers on QB-maps or do those also get changed to the OCCUPY type ? Any help will be apprisiated, thanks !

I don't know how to ping people on this forum...pinging Marc Ezra might be the best solution (to get his attention) After all...he's the big daddy of QBs ....

Oohh,welll....I've heard worse

Isn't it the set-up of the battle that is ment to be 'quick'....not neccessrely the actuall fight...?

According to the manual... - In QBs all terrainobjectives are changed to OCCUPY. Could this be the reason perhaps ? Preventing triggers from being used... I don't know ...I have never messed with QB maps...only scenarios.