Jarmo Posted November 28, 1999 Share Posted November 28, 1999 I dislike RT strategy because it becomes impossible (for me) to give orders to each unit as well as I'd like to, (clickfest). This could be avoided, though. And by the very same method that is used in real life, the chain of command. In the scale of CM, it would mean only giving orders to platoon leaders, they would carry them out by their best ability. It would make a game with a faster pace and more realism. Allowing gamers to concentrate on strategy and tactics, instead of micromanaging. This might not be terribly difficult to do either, CM has almost all the needed elements: strong AI, graphics, units, stuff.. That game would not, or should not be CM, or CM2, I like this just the way it is, but I'd sure like to see that other game as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted November 28, 1999 Share Posted November 28, 1999 I dislike RT strategy because it becomes impossible (for me) to give orders to each unit as well as I'd like to, (clickfest). This could be avoided, though. And by the very same method that is used in real life, the chain of command. In the scale of CM, it would mean only giving orders to platoon leaders, they would carry them out by their best ability. It would make a game with a faster pace and more realism. Allowing gamers to concentrate on strategy and tactics, instead of micromanaging. This might not be terribly difficult to do either, CM has almost all the needed elements: strong AI, graphics, units, stuff.. That game would not, or should not be CM, or CM2, I like this just the way it is, but I'd sure like to see that other game as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
howardb Posted November 28, 1999 Share Posted November 28, 1999 Jarmo: Cound't agreed more with you. What I hate is micro arranging the guys to go out to their deployment zones. If I could move them quickly to where I want them deployed and then micro arrange them in action positions it would be much quicker flow of play Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eichmann2 Posted November 29, 1999 Share Posted November 29, 1999 Eichmann2 I totally agree with you Jarmo,a future incarnation should include (in my opinion) full RTS with the sort of realistic orders process necessary, ie: '1st Platoon, assault western edge of town, LOE: church.' Possibly on a drop down menu setup. This would allow the AI to remove the micro-management nightmare whilst allowing large-scale and involving operations. We live in hope, in the meantime, THANK YOU, BTS, I can't wait for the final version, I love the demo! ------------------ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KwazyDog Posted November 29, 1999 Share Posted November 29, 1999 I too think that would be a great idea, *but* can you imagine the incredable AI that would be needed to get everything to work how it should, and preform to you expectations? For example, keep in mind how much people complained at the units being to free in selecting their targets, imagine how they would be if they went the wrong way about taking that objective and got themselves wiped out. I think this is why at the moment wargames force the micro management, because it is the only way for you to be sure that your guys are doing what you want them too Maybe one day this sort of thing will be possible, fingures crossed It would be very cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarmo Posted November 29, 1999 Share Posted November 29, 1999 Dunno, the AI seems to be doing pretty good job against me. If it can decide where to move it's troops and then do it, why wouldn't it be able to do so under my command? It's not like I would know anything whatsoever about AI programming, so I may very well be wrong. Of course it wouldn't perform to my expectations, but hey, that's life of a commander. And it's not like the troops would perform like I want them to even now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
howardb Posted November 29, 1999 Share Posted November 29, 1999 I don't mean that the AI should place my men only that the guys following this perticular HQ unit (or the units i've dragged a box around) should move forward in exactly the same distance that they were in to begin with. Something like in Close Combat. When I'm getting close to where I want them I can move them more precisely to this and that tree or house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Los Posted November 29, 1999 Share Posted November 29, 1999 To make rts feasible (personally I don't like RTS as they are now), you need several things: 1. A detailed planning screen like you have in CM but with more detail to allow you to plan the various aspects of your mission to include various things like contingenices, fire support etc. Most important off all these will be somehow transferring your "intent" to bits and bites. The intent is important so that when thigs pop up that require changes in the plan or scrapping parts of the plan, the AI can bounce what it needs to do off your intent so that it'll try and do the right thing. Note that this is how real subordinate commanders are supposed to act, with variations depending on nationality training/experience level, etc. 2. Some sort of SOP sub menu sort of similar to what the Major does in TACOPS. This helps guide platoon level or lower AI to deal with set situations. 3. Very intelligent AI. A lot smarted than you've seen anywhere before. The AI would need to understand your intent, your mission plan and orders, and then apply what it's supposed to do with the current situation, and act. It uses SOPs and understanding of intent to act in the absence of clear direction from you. Now if you could do all that properly you'd have a new program called "Battalion Commander Simulator". Los Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killmore Posted November 29, 1999 Share Posted November 29, 1999 If you guys want realism so much why are you against real time battles? I just don't get it! Battles are thought in real time! No one freezes every minute until both commanders finish giving their orders. This is the least realistic part of CM! I believe it is a worth while feature. In real battle you cannot give commands to everyone every minute. Too many things are happening. Will the game become somewhat a click fest? Well maybe... But if we could unrealistically slow down time then it will be OK. Besides why not? I am sure there can be 2 modes in the game. Stop every minute and run continuosly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Hough Posted November 29, 1999 Share Posted November 29, 1999 The problem with real-time is that currently, we aren't able to put the tools neccessary to run this scale battle effectively real-time (i.e. competent subordinates) in a game. Battles are thought in real time, general orders are given out in real time, and subordinates scurry to carry out those orders in real time. So you can say 'Company A, hold them at those woods and that wall. Arty, pound those other woods for a while. Company B, wait a few minutes, then rush those woods. And, oh, Company C, fall back, but set up an anti-tank ambush in an appropriate spot.' With what we're capable of now, you need to not only give the generic strategic orders, but also micromanage tactical positioning. Which is too much to do in real time. So the choice is to have unrealistically micromanaged troops on the entire battlefield without real time, while preserving the forces' behaving much like a well-managed army, or to have unrealistically micromanaged troops on one small portion of the battlefield, in real time, while completely, and unrealistically, screwing up the general coordination of your troops. I know which one I'd pick. Take a look at the real time games out there. How many manage to actually have any tactical complexity whatsoever? I can think of two, Gettysburg! and Myth. They both do it by using formations to reduce the number of maneuver elements to no more that 5-6. (And for multi-person teams in Myth, most people organize it so no one is using more than 1-2 maneuver elements..) But the fantasy and Civil War battlefields of Myth and SMG! are very structured places, and rigid formations work. The WW2 battlefield is a lot more fluid, and taking advantage of available cover and getting the best fields of fire are the primary tactical concerns, and remaning in nice, pretty lines is not a concern at all. So at the very least to have a game on this scale work well, we'd need the ability to move a platoon, or company, and have it seek approprite covered firing positions in the general area you want it to go. And it would have to be able to appropriately respond to surprise threats along the way. This is quite hard to do. I would love to see the game that does that some time in the future, but it will not be the near future, and cm will not be that game. -John Hough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
W583 Posted November 29, 1999 Share Posted November 29, 1999 Hey!!! how come ppl kept using my words as quote!!! It is just a suggestion..... you ppl got too crazy about which one is better.... I like RT and CM style both..... RT is more real and harder to play (for ppl who is not good at using mouse j/k) CM Style is easier for the producer to make and better for commanding unit all at once but if you are all fast enough you will have no problem with Real time fighting..... Steve, the only thing I would not want to see how CM would become is how Front Mission / Gundam Wars look like the style of those game play sucks (I hope you know what game they are..... jap game..... if you want to try it... I will give my real copy to you,since i don't touch it anymore) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lokesa Posted November 30, 1999 Share Posted November 30, 1999 Although I do enjoy several real time games, I much prefer the pace of CM. Although intense, CM is not frantic and I appreciate that. I fear the chesslike play of CM would be lost if it were real time, we wouldn't have the time to micromanage our units into good positions and would be forced to use select all commands and move our platoons around in mobs. IMO it's best left as is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Captain Foobar Posted November 30, 1999 Share Posted November 30, 1999 What it comes down to imho is this. While trying to simulate the control of 8 different squads and 3 tanks, it is nearly impossible in *real time* for a player to take in all the information that would be coming in to 100 people in one minute, and then process it intelligently. The substitution given to us, for having to process all of this with a single consciousness, is time. To make CM real-time would be equivalent to playing Speed Chess. While Speed Chess is a valid form of competition, the level of strategy used is at a reduced level, you tend to make easy mistakes. But CM is billed as a Combat Simulator, and a pretty realistic one. And the turn based system allows *realistic* responsiveness to happen. As it stands, if you miss something crucial, you were probably drinking while giving your orders. Blunders in realtime CM would be the norm. Don't get me wrong, it would probably be fun, but it would need to have a lesser claim of realism than it has now. Here ends my sermon. ------------------ "when in doubt, run in circles" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JonS Posted November 30, 1999 Share Posted November 30, 1999 ... and what about all the cool replays and screenshots you can get with it? Kiss them goodbye with RTS ... > Jon ------------------ Quo Fas et Vino du Femme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted November 30, 1999 Share Posted November 30, 1999 For the record, Combat Mission will *never* be realtime. That would be akin to building a tank and wanting it to be able to parallel park in a 10 foot space in under 10 seconds. Sorry, but RT has sever limitations on planning and coordination. And contrary to Blackhorse's stance, makes a game at CM's level totally unrealistic and completely unmanageable. Think of how difficult it would be to play Close Combat with a map ten times as big and with ten times as many units. If you think you can get realism out of that, I would say you are living in dream land Sorry, but RT does not equal Realism. Nothing wrong with it, but nothing inhrenetly right about it either. You would also have to kiss CM's entire core of realism and playability goodbye too. All of this would have to get chucked out the window to make sure the game actually could crunch numbers well enough in real time. So you would be left with crappy enemy AI, little to no Tactical AI, simplified treatment of armor, overly simplistic ballistics, etc. So once again... it is never going to happen. Not because we hate RT (not true), but because it can't work for a game like CM. Open and shut case. Steve [This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited 11-29-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike D Posted November 30, 1999 Share Posted November 30, 1999 All I want for Christmas is my two front teeth My two front teeth My two front teeth All I want for Christmas is my two front teeth And I'll wish you a Merry Christmas _______________________________________ And now that the song is over... My one and only wish right now is for the final release itself. Anyone wishing for this, that, and the other to be added at this point, is, for the most part, doing just that IMHO. Let's get this thing out before Christmas, eh? Mike D aka Mikester Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killmore Posted November 30, 1999 Share Posted November 30, 1999 I think that some of the reasons shown above by BTS (like simplified balistics) are only due to CPU speed. Common guys as a software engineers you know it will be possible in 2 years! As for frantically clicking on units. How about being able to slow game down. I don't like playing chess. (I used to be a champion at under 7 year-old level) I would like a smooth (maybe be slow) flowing game but I hate planing every move. Replays are not a problem if game is designed properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erich Posted November 30, 1999 Share Posted November 30, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>You would also have to kiss CM's entire core of realism and playability goodbye too. All of this would have to get chucked out the window to make sure the game actually could crunch numbers well enough in real time. So you would be left with crappy enemy AI, little to no Tactical AI, simplified treatment of armor, overly simplistic ballistics, etc.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Gee, what game that we all know and love does this sound like? Seriously, I think this illustrates the major problems associayed with an effective rt game on this level. It's clear that Atomic has been unable (possibly unwilling, too, but that's a separate issue) to overcome these obstacles. ------------------ Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Posted November 30, 1999 Share Posted November 30, 1999 I think, in addition to what Steve said, one of the limitations of rt is the interface itself. Yes, battles are conducted in rt but the people involved are there, physically and mentally, actually living it. They are aware of the situation in a way that isn't possible from playing a game. There is no getting around the fact that we, playing the game, are sitting in front of a flat screen, taking a moment(or more) from our regular life. IMO, simultaneous/turn based allows the involvement of the player, albeit with more control than an actual commander had. I can live with that. ------------------ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erich Posted November 30, 1999 Share Posted November 30, 1999 Killmore wrote: [QOUTE]As for frantically clicking on units. How about being able to slow game down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted November 30, 1999 Share Posted November 30, 1999 I think Ron has hit the nail on the head as far as the problems with real time. Just having to deal with the computer rather than yelling at the people in your platoon, slows down the process a great deal. IMO, this necessitates a system exactly like CM currently has for an enjoyable game. Is this the best system for recreating the real situation of a commander in battle? No, but then again I don't think that kind of game would be that much fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted November 30, 1999 Share Posted November 30, 1999 "O" he was soooo oooo close to getting that UBB code right! Perhaps U should take another look at it! Madmatt out, aint I a stinker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erich Posted November 30, 1999 Share Posted November 30, 1999 sU sOe me! ------------------ Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sturmtruppen Posted December 9, 1999 Share Posted December 9, 1999 A key to see from a units point of view would be very nice indeed. Possible implementation select unit, <hot_key>, when done with that view, pressing <hot_key> again returns to the previous view... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts