Ironman difficulty?

[JorgenCAB]

Must first say that this game is just an awesome game and I was a huge fan of the original Combat Mission games when they came out. Played those to death...

Now, I just started to play this game. Bought it a little over a week ago and been playing to non stop since then. Even called in sick a day to play, not done that since I went to school like ages ago...

Anyway... I basically jumped in playing the game at Ironman level, for me that is the only way to play this fantastic game. I now wondered if anyone gone even further than that, in the last two scenarios I started to restrict my movement and ordering of my troops even further to adhere to the fog of war and chain of command.

Squads or team will have to report any changes to their platoon HQ by actually being within voice and close proximity, only rudimentary information can be delivered by far visibility and only very limited movement orders.

Scout teams must return and deliver enemy position before the platoon HQ can make any decision on new information and only act in accordance to what he currently actually knows.

No team or vehicle may area fire on anything unless they either see something, have previously seen something or is ordered by their platoon commander (or currently assigned one) to shoot at a specific target.

vehicles and other heavy weapon assets can be ordered by other platoon commanders than their own if they are in communication with them. These assets can and will often be attached to infantry platoon commanders during battle but can be pulled away by their own commander at any time.

Vehicles and straggling teams/squads will attach themselves to platoon leaders close by if their own commanders are dead or they have no idea where they are.

complex orders for movement and engagements can only be given throgh radio or close visual and voice contact.

I even deem some orders too complex to be given over radio, especially from battalion to company or company to platoon level that it will require close proximity to convey a new complex plan that was not part of the original plan (or just a minor correction).

The most important thing is that any commander may only devise combat plans based on what they know. They can not take into consideration of what a small scout team just detected that has yet to be relayed back through proper channels.

Squads and teams will always try to carry out their last order as best they can but will make orderly retreats or small tactical repositioning as they see fit but may only operate on what they actually know.

I also give new complex orders at least one minute to be conveyed before they can be executed and communicated to the next level.

Squad leaders may still lead smaller teams of their squad or other minor assets (anti-tank teams, HMG, leaderless teams from other squads etc..) in tactical maneuvering if they are close enough to do so.

My question are if anyone else play the game like that?

I find that it gives me a real challenge even against the random battle AI.

[c3k]

What some will do (not I), is use the TAB function and lock the camera down to their units. Use the -/= keys to cycle from one unit to another. Keep the camera at the lowest level. Full foliage...always. Only zoom if the unit has a binocular or other magnified optic.

You seem masochistic...in a good way.

Enjoy,

Ken

[JorgenCAB]

I am not doing only that, I get sort of confused placing way-points. But I will do that for squads in general when deciding what they want to do. HQ units usually have detailed maps so they can orient themselves a little easier from a top down view when planning maneuvering their troops or themselves.

[$Pec5]

I don't personally play that way, but I have heard of people who play real-time without pauses regardless of battle size to up the difficulty. You seem to be determined to maximize reality and I am not sure how playing real-time regardless of battle size would do that. It just makes things more difficult.

Me? I take it to the next level. For every pixeltrooper I lose, I require myself to write a letter that I send to his pixelwife and pixelparents describing his heroics as well as the circumstances of his departure. I find it really keeps me patient when attacking and prevents gamey play such as sending jeep drivers or vehicle crews on "recon by death" missions. JK of course

[JorgenCAB]

playing real-time without pauses just make the game harder to play (as you pointed out), but would probably not make me feel like it plays out in a realistic manner.

In a real war situation there are many people with situation awareness and able to make independent decisions, I'm just a slow witted single person and will not be able to play coherently that way.

I must say that playing the WEGO is preferable in my case, because then I have more time and ability to view the actions from each of my commanders viewpoint and put myself in their shoes and try and act as they would in that situation. It is also harder to micromanage everything in the WEGO system I think, but on the whole it is probably harder to get the whole picture in real-time play.

I must also say that I usually try and put great effort into making buddy aid. At least I think it should boost the morale of my troops in a strategic sense even if it has a marginal effect on a tactical scale.

I take great pride in reducing the number of KIA in any game, not just in this game.

[A Canadian Cat]

I must also say that I usually try and put great effort into making buddy aid. At least I think it should boost the morale of my troops in a strategic sense even if it has a marginal effect on a tactical scale.

Yes, I think that is a good idea too. In real life soldiers would be very reluctant to just leave their buddies unattended but in this game it is just easy to press on.

[JorgenCAB]

For the next version of combat mission I wouldn't mind this part of the game fleshed out a bit more.

Such as moral loss if you leave you wounded comrades behind and things like that. Picking up wounded and carry them with you. Able to split of medic teams to take care of the wounded etc.

Dedicated field medics to take care of wounded that increase the chance of them surviving and so on.

[Bulletpoint]

I always try to tend to the wounded, usually by sending back a bazooka team or split off a scout team (from the unit that took the losses usually) to go back and help out. It feels like the right thing to do, and, well, it also helps to have more men fit for fight in future maps I suppose.

[Pak40]

Jorgen, I have to say that your dedication is admirable but for me playing like this would drive me nuts. It would take forever and it's very tedious to track and check all of the things that need to be checked in order to adhere to this.

This reminds me of the unofficial hardcore rules that were implemented back in the CMx1 days: You had to stay at view level 1 and had to be "locked" onto a unit(via tab key). You could rotate your view around the unit but could not raise the camera. To switch between units you had to use the + and - keys in order to maintain the lock on the units.

[JorgenCAB]

I have only played two scenarios with this mindset so far, one tiny and one small engagement.

I will start a new campaign now and will try to adhere to these rules quite strictly. I don't mind if it takes allot of time to finish a battle. It just mean I will be able to enjoy all the scenarios "more"...

[easytarget]

Heck, I'd be happy if Battlefront just implemented an option you could check or un-check in the difficulty setting for iron man the way most games conceive of the meaning by which you only have one save for the entire battle and/or campaign.

No save scumming your way through. When all decisions are final, even just that one additional piece to the puzzle makes the engagement harder.

And of course you can do this yourself, the setting is for the weak willed like me.