TangoYankee Posted August 3, 1999 Share Posted August 3, 1999 BTS, I've been playing WWII strategy games for almost 20 years now, but I'm no expert on WWII details. As a wannabe Field Marshal, the one thing that I haven't found a lot of discussion about here is the documentation that will accompany the game. Obviously BTS would love to sell 1M+ copies of CM, become rich and retire in Tahiti by next summer As an amateur gamer, one thing that really appeals to me is detailed unit descriptions. By this I mean a hiearchacal reference chart/guide of unit strengths, weapons and capacities from squad to division level. Example: US Inf 44 (or whatever) Squad: 8 Soldiers, 1 NCOIC, 1 .30 Cal, 1 BAR, 6 M1's, 32 frags Platoon: 4 squads Plus - 1 Officer, 4 Soldiers w/ 1 Bazooka and 1 .50 Cal Batallion: 3 Platoons with 1 Officer (Major), 1 105mm battery, 1 SP Gun, etc...... Yes, I know the examples I gave aren't even close to actuals, but you get the idea. Like I said I'm no expert, BUT (big BUT), it's people like me that will buy those 1M+ copies. The more documented information you include with the game, the easier it will be for the average player to understand what units they're using and what the strengths and weakness' of those units are. Most of your customers won't be experts, but if you add some unit documentation, (on paper, not just while playing the game) this game will be an even bigger hit. TangoYankee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted August 3, 1999 Share Posted August 3, 1999 Inside the game itself you can see exactly what you "purchase". You can buy Battalions, Companies, Platoons, Teams, and individual weapons. They are all historically correct TO&E, so no need to fudge with it. When you buy formation, like a Battalion, all its attachments are shown right there in front of you. You don't have to figure this stuff out for yourself. You can also delete what you don't want and purchase oddball things you do want. We have included every basic formation, from every branch, that is relevant. Some aren't included, like a German Füsilier Companie, because it was basically a standard "rifle" company. Other formations, like an AT company, aren't included because they were not deployed as a full formation at CM's scale (or rarely so). I mean, I have seen some German formations like this with 72 Panzerschreck teams!! Good lord! We will have some general tips about outfitting units with vehicles though. In other words x platoon usually has y vehciles of z. In addition to you not needing to know more than what is in the game, we really can't reprint most of the research material we are using. Since a great chunk of it comes from a single source, obviously with little to no modification, this means us paying royalties for reprinting. We will cite our sources, but that is all we can do Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pak40 Posted August 4, 1999 Share Posted August 4, 1999 Steve, I've created Unit of Organization tables for some U.S. Divisions (nice graphics too!). They're pretty well researched and from a variety of sources. If you have a fax # I'll fax them to you. If you like them I wouldn't mind if you used them. Jeff Roland jroland2@home.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted August 4, 1999 Share Posted August 4, 1999 Hi Jeff, Thanks for the offer. We might just take you up on it. Problem is that if we include stuff from one nation, and not another... well, you know how gamers are Seriously, since a fairly good sized battle is based around a Battalion, there is not much call for TO&E beyond that. Regimental and Divisional units were allocated in small quantities. So if you want to have an infantry battalion backed up by some elements of the divisional AT company/battalion, just toss a couple of AT guns or platoons in. No need to know what is in the rest of the formation. Uhm... I hope this is all making sense Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Posted August 4, 1999 Share Posted August 4, 1999 72 panzerschreck teams! LOL! Who comes up with this stuff? That would certainly be a unit for U.S. tankers to avoid. Hey Steve, how large of a U.S. armored (typical '44 equipment) formation do you think it would take to beat such an AT unit in fairly close combat inducing terrain in CM (assuming a *giant* map that could handle that large of a battle)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted August 4, 1999 Share Posted August 4, 1999 I would say two armored Regiments Seriously, the German formation I mentioned (VG AT Battalion? I forget) was due to lack of fuel, transport, and other logistics for SP and towed AT guns. The Platoons would be divided up and sent to various sections of the front, and not concentrated. This is one of the great misconceptions about organic support elements such as an AT Company. They rarely fought as a whole unit. One platoon would be with one battalion in most cases. Perhaps two platoons for a battalion in a critical spot. That translates to a couple of guns or a sizeable number of PS (18 if I recall). So no Allied divsion would have hit all 72 in one spot. If they did, they could just drive around them... Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted August 4, 1999 Share Posted August 4, 1999 BTS, You mentioned that we players could drop some elements of a formation and pick up other, not-usually-attached units to replace them. Is there any "cost" difference to reflect this breaking of established TOEs and the inclusion of "centrally-controlled" elements? (e.g. the allocation of, say, divisional AT guns, which would need special efforts to get them to a certain place at a certain time on the asking of a company/batallion commander) What I'm trying to reflect here is that IMHO, unlike the portrayal of CC3, it is darned hard in real life to build a unit of "dream machines" (I had half KingTigers, half Jagdpanthers at the end of that game). Therefore, will there be something in CM that will try to reflect that it was difficult to construct "maxed-out" forces, i.e. purchase an armored batallion with half Panthers/half PIVs and dump the PIVs to get more Panthers? I just don't want to see everybody using units constructed entirely of the absolute best vehicles (I call it the "CC3/SP Condition") since such vehicles were produced in very small numbers, and units made entirely of them were rare. I realize that I just admitted to doing something in a game that I think is historically rare (using only the best vehicles in very large concentrations) I promise not to do the same thing in CM. especially since, when handled properly (probably better than I can do) StugIIIs and JagdpanzerIVs are just as deadly as KingTigers. DjB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lokesa Posted August 4, 1999 Share Posted August 4, 1999 hmmmm, is DjB just baiting us with his self handicapping? He's probably just trying to sucker us, watch out. I was thinking Maus, flamethrowers and snipers should do the job maybe a few hmg's and arty too but let's not get crazy mixing things up. BTW, my time will be severly curtailed for the next 7 months, maybe you guys could delay the release so I can be part of it ok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted August 4, 1999 Share Posted August 4, 1999 Doug, unlike other games, CM punishes you for having unballanced forces. You can take your 5 King Tigers and measly infantry support and I will crush you with numbers. Hopefully The thing here is that Steel Panthers had terrible modeling so it favored the big tanks. CC has horrible game mechanics which allow you to fill "slots" unrealistically. CM doesn't have these problems. Purchasing formations means a discount on sub elements. When you toss them aside you have to fill the gaps with proportinally more expensive replacements. (warning... made up numbers!) Say a Rifle Platoon costs 100pts, but only 80pts when you buy a Battalion. Now I want to toss one platoon aside and replace it with an Engineer Platoon which costs 120 points. Not only do I not get some sort of discount on the Engineer Platoon, but I only have a credit of 80pts. This means the swap is 20 more expensive than if the Rifle Platoon had been bought seperately. Uhm... hope that makes some sense Vehicles are ALWAYS purchased seperately, so there is no benefit/penalty for buying in bulk. This is a good thing because buying 5 King Tigers gives you NO break. And since they are expensive it means even more. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pak40 Posted August 5, 1999 Share Posted August 5, 1999 Steve: "Seriously, since a fairly good sized battle is based around a Battalion, there is not much call for TO&E beyond that." The graphics I've created are for an entire division, however, the battalions have details all the way down to squad size units. And it all fit onto an 8.5 x 11 page. You could just cut out the batallions and discard the rest. E-mail me and we'll talk more. I wouldn't mind doing a few German Batallions, it would only take a few days to do. Jeff Roland Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted August 5, 1999 Share Posted August 5, 1999 Hi Jeff, Thanks again for the offer for doing up the TO&E graphics. However, we have a LOT of stuff that we want to put in the manual, so we are trying to be choosy. We don't have unlimited pages to use We would need about 10-15 5.5x8.5 pages to do all the US, UK, and German TO&E. Don't forget, each nation has paras, armored infantry, infantry, engineers, etc. The Germans also have Volkssturm, Sicherungs, Gebirgs, three infantry formations, etc. We either include it all (not likely) or none at all (most likely). Having TO&E stuff in the manual is really not necessary from a game standpoint because the relevant TO&E is all in the game itself and the rest is irrelevant (i.e. above Battalion level). Because of this, and the large number of pages we would need, TO&E in the manual is a low priority. The pages could use for something else more necessary Still, I am not ruling it out, but at this moment I don't think we will use the stuff. Thanks! Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harold Jones Posted August 5, 1999 Share Posted August 5, 1999 How about putting the TO&E stuff on the CD? I mostly could care less about TO&E so long as the formations that I can buy are accurate, but if you have the room it would be a nice thing to have. What I really want to see is a manual that clearly explains how to play the game. If there is any room left after that, then maybe a few pages describing basic tactics and then a page or two of designer's notes for the benefit of those who haven't been reading this board for the past year or so. ------------------ If something cannot be fixed by hitting it or by swearing at it, it wasn't worth saving anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted August 5, 1999 Share Posted August 5, 1999 Harold, there will be more than just basic documentation for sure. Like I said, the game's TO&Es are very accurate and very visible from within the game. When you buy a platoon, company, or battalion all the attachments are right there in front of you. There is no need for it to also be in the manual or on the CD. If for some reason you MUST have it in printed format, we are citing our sources and you can spend a couple hundred bucks like we did to get the stuff yourself Seriously, I've personally spent at least $600 on OB/TO&E just for German and Soviet units. That ought to give you some idea about how MUCH stuff there is and why it isn't going into the manual or CD... What we will have in the manual is stuff like how to create realistic Kampfgruppen/Task Forces. This is something that isn't in the game and IS good for people to know. It will also outline things like SOP for depoloyment and other good game tips. So instead of spending our time and resources (i.e. pages) on duplicate and unnecessary info, we intend to provide unique stuff that you can't readily get from the game as statistical data. As far as designer notes go... MANY of my postings have been set aside just for that purpose. Figure I wrote all the stuff once, might as well use it twice Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harold Jones Posted August 10, 1999 Share Posted August 10, 1999 Sounds good, I'm really looking forward to the guide to creating realistic kampfgruppen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Rock Posted August 10, 1999 Share Posted August 10, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Purchasing formations means a discount on sub elements... Say a Rifle Platoon costs 100pts, but only 80pts when you buy a Battalion. Now I want to toss one platoon aside and replace it with an Engineer Platoon which costs 120 points. Not only do I not get some sort of discount on the Engineer Platoon, but I only have a credit of 80pts. This means the swap is 20 more expensive than if the Rifle Platoon had been bought seperately. Uhm... hope that makes some sense. Vehicles are ALWAYS purchased seperately, so there is no benefit/penalty for buying in bulk. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This makes perfect sense, and I am *delighted* with the method. There was a long thread on this sometime back, and I don't recall seeing this solution floated. This seems to be a be an approriate game mechanism to encourage historically sensible force structures. As for Lee's question: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>72 panzerschreck teams! LOL! Who comes up with this stuff? That would certainly be a unit for U.S. tankers to avoid. Hey Steve, how large of a U.S. armored (typical '44 equipment) formation do you think it would take to beat such an AT unit...?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> A very small one would do, just as long as it has a radio to the battalion artillery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts