Wouldn't it be cool if...

[Albe Pavo]

King Tiger- Invulnerable to any allied ATG from the front, but screwed if the allies take it from the flank(although it might take a couple shots, the crew still won't react fast enough to save the vehicle). Can kill any allied vehicle with one shot.

Panther- Invulnerable to any allied ATG from the front(except the 76 mm at close range). Screwed if the allies take it from the flank. Can kill most allied vehicles with one shot, sometimes it takes two.

Indeed i lost both of them for direct front fire from Allied tanks!

I wonder if they're not too weak comparing to reality..

What do you think?

Is it possible that they are so easlily destroyed with frontal fire because of special ammunitions (HEAT for example)?

[SquidvT]

Medics teams, I am tired of using my XO team as such, lets have a dedicated unit (adds a time bonus to giving buddy aid, everyone takes a moral hit if it is destroyed, but it can heal both sides for a VP increase across the board).

[polarticus]

Ok here it is,

I'd like to see an expanded AAR or post battle statistics.

Most common mechanism of injury.

Most common mechanism of death

Average engage range

Number of rounds fired.

Easily understandable colored overlays over the map would be able to show the most commonly taken avenues of approach, the most contested areas of the map (where troops where commonly taken under fire). As well as other variables that would further encourage a full understanding.

Possibly having the ability to compile this against separate game sessions of the same map would be neat to see commonalities of a wide scope of "commanders" in battle.

These same tools are used during beta testing to ensure map creation is fun, balanced and not encouraging repetitive choke points or funneling players into inappropriate areas.

There was actual photographs of map overlays for the PS3 game "MAG" during it's developement which depicted individuals kills, average engagement ranges, hot spots on the map, common routes of infil and exfil and all that good stuff.

[sburke]

From Today's Dilbert in the Herald tribune

Dilbert: I added all the product features that each of you demanded. Now our product is a worthless hodegepodge of complexity. I appreciate your input. I couldn't have failed without you.

Pointy headed boss: team-work!!

I think that strip should be the banner on the forum.

[JonS]

Medics teams, I am tired of using my XO team as such, lets have a dedicated unit (adds a time bonus to giving buddy aid, everyone takes a moral hit if it is destroyed, but it can heal both sides for a VP increase across the board).

Let's not forget that a fairly important, although secondary (in terms of feature design), function of buddy aid is retrieving weapons. Do you REALLY want a gunned-up medic team that eventually possesses most of your company's MGs and AT weapons, as well as a massive reserve of ammo?

[Erwin]

That brings back the issue of whether units should be able to CHOOSE what to recover or acquire from buddy aid - or even from other adjacent units. That would solve a lot of issues.

[Ithikial_AU]

Let's not forget that a fairly important, although secondary (in terms of feature design), function of buddy aid is retrieving weapons. Do you REALLY want a gunned-up medic team that eventually possesses most of your company's MGs and AT weapons, as well as a massive reserve of ammo?

No. But it would be nice if my guys didn't mind picking up the opposing side's weapons and ammo if they're own was low/depleted. Been a few times when I've had say a US Infantry squad all cowering with next to no ammo to shoot back and laying among them is a dead German HMG42 team and working weapon.

I'm guessing it's a coding nightmare though.

[JonS]

Sure, and now you're getting nested and dependent "wouldn't it be cool"s

[StkNRdr]

Still getting to know CM but one thing that I think would be fairly simple to implement and would add to the immersion of the game is civilians and animals. Every mission I play, the towns and fields are empty, just me and the enemy. Unfortunately, things weren't that tidy. Civilians were in buildings you might shell, animals were in fields you may lay fire across. I am not looking for gore. It is just another aspect of a battle, especially the civilian populations, that could actually come into mission objectives. Too many civilian casualties and maybe it could count against you in the results.

If this has been discussed ad nauseum already, my apologies.

[JonS]

@ StkNRdr:

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03071848708522822

[StkNRdr]

JonS, thanks for the response. This article seems like a great article about casualty rates going down among combat units over time. Can't see the whole article however. I'm talking about civilian populations. Now I understand many fled towns as armies advanced but not all. There were civilians in Europeans towns and cities when the armies went through.

[JonS]

I know. The same thing applies to civilians - as a first order approximation, they all buggger off and leave the battlefield empty.

There'd be very little value, I think, in adding civs to WWII CM. I can see a better argument for adding them to modern CM, but I think it's still a weak argument. You can, however, use 'Preserve' objectives (in any current incarnation of CM) to sim the need to go easy on the trigger finger in some situations.

Animals are a little different, as they don't have the intelligence to upsticks, and are anyway often physically prevented from leaving by fences and whatnot. But I don't really see what having animals loafing about would add either (some immersion, maybe, but that's about it) and I'm hard pressed to imagine a situation where they'd ever be a plausible 'Destroy' or 'Preserve' objective. Adding animals would be a significant effort with little benefit.

Oh, and my favourite "animals in a wargame" story:

http://www.snopes.com/humor/nonsense/kangaroo.asp

[Broadsword56]

I'm hard pressed to imagine a situation where they'd ever be a plausible 'Destroy' or 'Preserve' objective. Adding animals would be a significant effort with little benefit.

Soviet mine dogs?

[JonS]

Soviet mine dogs?

rofl

{padding}

[StkNRdr]

Well, the civilians didn't bugger off at Normandy. They were there, in their homes, etc. Their presence was a factor. And yes, it would add to the immersion. Main reason I brought it up. Whether they are waiving cloth from buildings, panicking, hiding in buildings occupied by enemy troops, or blocking your advance as they stream away on roads from a city. Can't be too difficult to model as the basic figures, along with movement and reactions are already present. Just change their appearance. It could also lead to some partisans units. Like anything else, maybe it could be an option to have them On or Off, allowing each player to decide for themselves.

[JonS]

Well, the civilians didn't bugger off at Normandy. They were there, in their homes, etc.

That's the thing, though: by and large, they weren't. They self-evacuated to get out of the way of the bullets and 'splody things. Wisely, I might add.

Can't be too difficult

rofl

model as the basic figures, along with movement and reactions are already present. Just change their appearance.

Uh, not quite. Most of the military animations currently in CM would have absolutely no utility for civilians. For starters, look at the way the soldiers are holding their arms.

Secondly, how do you propose that civilians move - as a herd, as a cluster, like water, what? What are their stimuli and motivations, and how do those things interact, canel, and reinforce each other?

Can players give them orders? Which orders? Which player has control, why?

It could also lead to some partisans units.

Now you're talking about a completely different thing altogether. Do you find that scope creep is often a problem in your projects?

Like anything else, maybe it could be an option to have them On or Off, allowing each player to decide for themselves.

Ah yes. The old throw-away "just make it an option" line. You do realise that makes it even more complex, and harder to implement?

[StkNRdr]

If there were no civilians in Normandy how was it that 50,000 were killed there? The Germans did not relocate them except back from the shoreline. They did not relocate themselves as the Germans weren't to keen on having civilians moving around in mass. The ones killed and all the survivors were indeed located there, in the cities, towns and villages.

As stated earlier, the game would have more immersion with civilians in it.

More importantly, wouldn't it be nice if when you made a post in a "Wouldn't it be cool if..." thread, that you would not be belittled for bringing up something that is simply an idea of something you would like to see. I guess it is your job here JonS to make make fun of ideas and have people feel uncomfortable about posting their thoughts in such an important and serious thread. Maybe some others won't even bother posting their thoughts here seeing how they'll be treated. Way to go. I hope you and your arrogant attitude are not representative the Battlefront community.

[JonS]

If there were no civilians in Normandy how was it that 50,000 were killed there?

Bombing? Artillery? NGS? Executions? Starvation? Disease?

There were, of course, civilians "in Normandy", but by and large (first order approximation, remember?) they weren't in the bits that were actively being fought over. The bits being actively fought over is, of course, the only bits that CMBN covers.

As stated earlier, the game would have more immersion with civilians in it.

I disagree, but that's not really important. Your opinion is that it'd increase immersion, and that's fine. I think it'd be a-historical, which is something that can be proven or disproven.

More importantly, wouldn't it be nice if when you made a post in a "Wouldn't it be cool if..." thread, that you would not be belittled for bringing up something that is simply an idea of something you would like to see.

Um ... I wasn't belittling you. I was engaging in discussion. If you just want to put together a My Little Pony wishlist, it's probably worth noting that. If, on the other hand, you want to examine pros, cons, impacts, consequences, and other interesting things, then don't pretend to be butthurt when people disagree.

[Broadsword56]

There's a place where the civilians were not only present but one could argue had a real and direct effect on military operations, and that was in Market-Garden. The throngs that came out to welcome the Allies clogged the streets and slowed the advance. Other Dutch civilians influenced the course of events by, for example, lying to the Germans about whether a bridge could support tanks, or misdirecting them to get them lost, etc.

Much easier to simulate such things in a board wargame than in CMBN. (Where Eagles Dare, for example, actually has counters representing the crowds and the individual heroic Dutch farmer, which can appear due to "event" triggers.) An operational layer using a boardgame can apply the **effects** of such things, at least partly, to CMBN battle situations. So there is at least something one can do besides merely dream about features that will never be in CM.

In the "Streets of Stalingrad" boardgame there are counters for Soviet mine dogs, too! :-)

[JonS]

There's a place where the civilians were not only present but one could argue had a real and direct effect on military operations, and that was in Market-Garden. The throngs that came out to welcome the Allies clogged the streets and slowed the advance. Other Dutch civilians influenced the course of events by, for example, lying to the Germans about whether a bridge could support tanks, or misdirecting them to get them lost, etc.

True, but aren't those all operational level effects *outside* the shoots 'splody bit that CM covers?

So there is at least something one can do besides merely dream about features that will never be in CM.

Preserve is an objective type in CM, right now, that can be used to partially sim the effect of civvies (it was used for that a lot in CMSF)

[JonS]

In the "Streets of Stalingrad" boardgame there are counters for Soviet mine dogs, too! :-)

I suspect the game designers were just having a laff ...

[Broadsword56]

True, but aren't those all operational level effects *outside* the shoots 'splody bit that CM covers?

Preserve is an objective type in CM, right now, that can be used to partially sim the effect of civvies (it was used for that a lot in CMSF)

Yes, but in my example, those higher level effects of civilian pheonomena could potentially show up at the CMBN tac level in these ways:

A little bridge that's on the CMBN map is now changed in the scenario editor to be blocked (using, say, a roadblock) to represent the fact that the Germans don't believe it's crossable by vehicles -- because they were misled by the Dutch

if civilian crowds got triggered in an area that becomes part of a CMBN battle map, a certain route out of town could be blocked off, the area is labeled "Liberation Party" and a few units are stuck there.

Just some wild and problematic examples, but I like to see players be as creative as possible and make things with the game we actually have.

[Wodin]

I suspect the game designers were just having a laff ...

Streets of Stalingrad is a boardgame I desperately want but secondhand copies are well too expensive. Love to see a PC conversion. Also mine dogs where used in Stalingrad.

[Broadsword56]

Streets of Stalingrad is a boardgame I desperately want but secondhand copies are well too expensive. Love to see a PC conversion. Also mine dogs where used in Stalingrad.

Same here -- I can't see the day where I'd ever be able to afford (or justify for myself) $300 for a used copy of a board wargame. Too bad, since VASSAL makes it more possible than ever to set up and play this monster game (Stalingrad at company level) without having to set up the physical game, and even to find human opponents for it.

My consolation (or it is sour grapes?) is that we know CMx2 doesn't really do combat in cities very well (yet), so S-grad probably wouldn't be a great operational layer for CM East Front anyway -- even once we have that game.

I've staked my money on Panzer Command (Victory Games, 1984), which takes place on the steppes W of S-grad around the Chir River, circa Dec 42-spring '43. That's company scale, a great system, and seems well suited to work with CM Eastern Front in battles of the early '43 time period. Used copies of Panzer Command are going for much more reasonable prices ($40s to $50s) especially if you're willing to have a copy that's got punched counters. Since I'd play only the electonic VASSAL version, it's not an issue for me.

[Bil Hardenberger]

I never understood the need or want to game the slog of a battle that was Stalingrad.

The Soviet counter-attack that surrounded the 6th Army in the first place, or Manstein's attempt to relieve the garrison yes.. but Stalingrad itself? <shudder>