CoolColJ Posted November 22, 1999 Share Posted November 22, 1999 Hi BTS - do tanks platoons fall under the same CC effects as infantry? I don't seem to notice this in the Beta demo, they pretty much roam around fearlessly ------------------ CCJ aka BLITZ_Force My Homepage - Just updated, check out my MP3 www.geocities.com/coolcolj/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted November 22, 1999 Share Posted November 22, 1999 Actually this was a pretty hot topic of contention among testers. Some felt tank C&C should go in while others, myself and a few others felt that tank co-ordination often goes to hell in a handbasket in battle. Personally, based on all the accounts I read I felt that the current representation is a more accurate representation of what really happened as soon as a unit departed from its march order etc. Steve, Charles and an ex-tanker also take this position although some of the testers still aren't convinced . It's one of these cases where you could do it both ways and be equally right probably but I think the current way is marginally better and works easier in code too ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Talley Posted November 22, 1999 Share Posted November 22, 1999 Fionn, no offense, but I have to ask what degree of control do you feel tank platoon and company tank commanders had over individual tanks w/i their command? I can understand CM's portrayal w/i game constraints but I find it hard to accept that individual tanks roamed all over on their own initiative. the effectiveness of a tank platoon was as heavily dependent on the platoon commander as an infantry squad was dependent on their squad leader. Platoon and even company commanders w/i any organization w/radios had pretty significant control even in WWII. Again no offense but your statement is difficult to accept. Ken [This message has been edited by Ken Talley (edited 11-22-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted November 22, 1999 Share Posted November 22, 1999 Ken, the role the platoon has to play is larger than just being on the battlefield. They kept propper march order, coordinated march routes, etc. in non combat situations. When in battle there was a marginal degree of coordination between tanks. One of our testers is a modern M1A1 tanker and he says that even though they have all sorts of doodads and gizmos, the likes of which no WWII tanker could have dreamed of having, once the hatches go down and action starts it is largely every tank for itself. Yes, there are attempts at control, and these are sometimes more or less effective, but he didn't sound like he thought too much of it. Then the problem comes in... how do we penalize out of C&C units in CM? By time delays. This makes sense when trying to coordinate a number of individuals, but it doesn't when you are talking an AFV under the sole command of one man. So time delays are not only unrealistic, but they are ultra unrealistic and would result in lots of dead tanks that shouldn't be. The coordination that you seek to reduce is achieved not through the game system, but the game player. So basically the player *is* the platoon, company, or battalion commander. Since there is no reasonable way to curb user orders, other than delay penalties (which as stated above are not realistic and extra deadly) there is no way to make C&C more or less effective than it already is. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonFox Posted November 22, 1999 Share Posted November 22, 1999 I agree Steve (just balancing out my other posts ) armoured command and control is reasonably simulated by the mere fact that you the player exert it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted November 22, 1999 Share Posted November 22, 1999 Ken, Well, I've known quite a few tankers including a few who converted from leg infantry. I've known US officers and I know one M1 guy very well who was on PzC and PE and now CM with me and he and I share virtually the same outlook on what the reality of the situation was . I think one key thing when reading the posts of actual combat vets like Los and others is to realise thaat these guys are cynical about command and control in battle for a reason . If I had to say anything about battle it'd be that it's only 1/4 as planned as you think, 4 times as confusing and the officer in command has much less control than you think. That is true today but was even more true in WW2. I wouldn't like to see command radii etc since I think they would be more unrealistic than the current representation. The current representation isn't perfect BUT the alternative is far worse IMO . Remember that when testers discuss options etc we discuss A vs B. Just cause we might support A doesn't mean we think A is the best possible solution BUT we recognise A is better than B but wish we could do C (we just can't figure a way to do it ). I hope that clears things up.. I do think people have an unrealistic expectation of the kind of command and control platoon and company tank commanders exercised. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts