Game suggestion - 'Acquire' from other units

[Squeaker]

As the title says, just like you can currently acquire ammo and supplies from trucks, could it be introduced that you can command a unit to 'acquire' supplies from units in the same location or possibly within 5m from them?

This would mainly be things like recon teams pinching more 9mm ammo from another section, or anti-tank teams taking rockets or one-shot weapons from another squad.

If this is considered unlikely (after all, what unit would want to give up their own stuff, who knows how close the ruskies are!!!) how about from dead or incapacitated soldiers in the same location?

This would also get around a problem I am sure I'm not alone in facing when an anti-tank team comes under fire, and one bloke is hit. Now you have a single soldier with either the launcher, or the rockets, but not both, and you try and make the little bleeder grab the other half of the gear he needs to get him back in the action. But ooh no, he'll just sit there, watching a tank roll along past the window, and get annoyed at the empty tube that keeps rolling off his shoulder and knocking his coffee over.

This could be implemented further, grabbing an extra MG42 from the remains of a soldier propped up against a wall. And look, there some slightly gooey ammo on his mate next to him.

[Erwin]

Yes, this has been raised many times b4. Hopefully, BF will get around to it in due course.

There are several other interface-type and similar items that would greatly help speed up play, or make play easier. Selectable waypoint/lines for example - so one could select units by clicking on a line or waypoint. It was an invaluable feature of CM1 and really helped speed up gameplay especially on large maps.

[womble]

As the title says, just like you can currently acquire ammo and supplies from trucks, could it be introduced that you can command a unit to 'acquire' supplies from units in the same location or possibly within 5m from them?

This would mainly be things like recon teams pinching more 9mm ammo from another section, or anti-tank teams taking rockets or one-shot weapons from another squad.

If this is considered unlikely (after all, what unit would want to give up their own stuff, who knows how close the ruskies are!!!)

...how about from dead or incapacitated soldiers in the same location?

This would also get around a problem I am sure I'm not alone in facing when an anti-tank team comes under fire, and one bloke is hit. Now you have a single soldier with either the launcher, or the rockets, but not both, and you try and make the little bleeder grab the other half of the gear he needs to get him back in the action. But ooh no, he'll just sit there, watching a tank roll along past the window, and get annoyed at the empty tube that keeps rolling off his shoulder and knocking his coffee over.

He's not grabbing for the choob because there's a frickin' tank that will see him if he uncurls from behind his rock to reach out and grab his dead mate's weapon. Giving

us, the players, more control over "buddy aid" is not a desirable game change; frankly we already have too much control.

This could be implemented further, grabbing an extra MG42 from the remains of a soldier propped up against a wall. And look, there some slightly gooey ammo on his mate next to him.

If the circumstances permit, your troops will already do this. If the loot bags are dead it'll be done in under a minute.

[YankeeDog]

how about from dead or incapacitated soldiers in the same location?

This is already in the game. The "Buddy Aid" function will automatically acquire some ammo and also usually important weapons (like MGs) from WIA/KIA soldiers. The player is deliberately prevented from directly controlling this process -- you can move a unit up to a WIA/KIA to perform Buddy Aid, but you can't control what ammo and/or weapons they will take. Yes, it's sometimes frustrating when your Buddy-Aiding pixeltruppen don't take the MG and/or ammo you wanted them to, but this is an intentional game feature, both to reflect the idea that the weapon/ammo might be damaged or lost, and also that soldiers might not necessarily be inclined to swap weapons or load up with bloody cartridges off of a corpse.

This would also get around a problem I am sure I'm not alone in facing when an anti-tank team comes under fire, and one bloke is hit. Now you have a single soldier with either the launcher, or the rockets, but not both, and you try and make the little bleeder grab the other half of the gear he needs to get him back in the action. But ooh no, he'll just sit there, watching a tank roll along past the window, and get annoyed at the empty tube that keeps rolling off his shoulder and knocking his coffee over.

As per above, if you give an opportunity for the survivor to Buddy Aid the guy who's been hit, and he'll usually pick up the tube and/or at least some of the rockets. This does take some time, but I think this is realistic -- if his buddy just got hit, the first thought of the survivor is not necessarily going to be to grab the rockets/tube and keep fighting. If he's not simply cowering in the dirt, his next priority would probably be to save his buddy's life, if possible. After that's done, maybe he picks up a rocket or two and tries to keep fighting.

Overall, I think there is some logic to expanding the current Acquire/Ammo Sharing/Buddy Aid system and giving the player *some* additional control over ammo and & weapons sharing/acquire. In particular, I'd like to see some sort of cross-leveling function so that at least units within the same platoon could level out their ammo loads -- I often find myself in situations where one squad had been heavily engaged and is low on ammo, but the other squads in the same platoon are not. The ammo sharing function in the game now helps this situation somewhat, but is not perfect because units must be within 2 action squares of each other for it to function.

However, I also its important that any liberalization of the acquire & ammo sharing functions not be taken too far; it would not be realistic to allow a player to shift ammo and weapons around his force without restriction.

[MikeyD]

There is no 'acquiring' from adjacent units but there is 'borrowing'. For example in CMBN if you have two bazooka teams in close proximity and one has LOF. The first zook will keep firing til he's out, then continue firing as the ammo count of the adjacent zook team clicks down. I think I've seen a zook 'borrowing' from a nearby jeep with stowed acquireable zook ammo too. Its been awhile since I've bothered to look at this. I think certain rules may apply, and perhaps different (more restrictive) rules from when I first noticed it.

[MikeyD]

Something else, has anyone noticed 'ammo leveling'? If you put two infantry units (full and depleted) side-by-side and keep them there for an amount of time you will find some ammo has migrated to the depleted unit so they return to some fighting utility. Again, this is something I haven't looked at in a long long time.

[Pelican Pal]

The buddy-aid feature is one of those things can get really annoying depending on the context in which it occurs.

You have those moments where the Russian infantry is bearing down on your squad and one of the two LMGs gets hit. The assistant gunner then proceeds to carefully try to save the gunner's life while a bunch of PPSh toting russians are minutes away from killing everyone.

Personally I think that it would make more sense to salvage weapons and ammo first and then treat the wounded man second. In most circumstances there will be no noticeable difference, but it covers those weird cases better than the current system.

[YankeeDog]

Personally I think that it would make more sense to salvage weapons and ammo first and then treat the wounded man second.

This might be what you think "makes sense", but if you read combat accounts, you'll find that frequently soldiers choose to attempt to save their buddy who is bleeding out, rather than keep up the fight. Not always, but frequently.

[Holman]

I think this points up one of the most basic design principles of CM: the player's role is that of "command" abstracted across all levels, but the player never directly controls any individual soldier.

Seen this way, many of the "Why can't I do this?" questions drop away (or at least make more sense as-is).

[poesel]

What PP said: when under fire and running out of ammo/no gun and a dead/injured friendly close by a soldier should/would rather try to just grab the gun/ammo instead of helping his mate.

However I would NOT want to have this player controlled. Just something the AI does automatically. This would be similar to the ammo levelling we recently got.

[Squeaker]

I can appreciate what some have said about too much level of control at low level, but as a compromise, what about a "Scavenge weapons and Ammo" command? That way, most of the decision is taken out of the players hands, as YankeeDog said, some weapons or ammo may be unusable for various reasons, so the soldiers would not get them.

[YankeeDog]

I can appreciate what some have said about too much level of control at low level, but as a compromise, what about a "Scavenge weapons and Ammo" command? That way, most of the decision is taken out of the players hands, as YankeeDog said, some weapons or ammo may be unusable for various reasons, so the soldiers would not get them.

What do you envision this command doing that the current Buddy Aid function doesn't already do?

[poesel]

For buddy aid the soldier has to be kneeling and it takes some time. Grabbing a gun or prying some ammo from a body may be done prone (and it is faster).

The decision should be done by the AI but currently it can only do the former and the latter is not an option.

[Pelican Pal]

This might be what you think "makes sense", but if you read combat accounts, you'll find that frequently soldiers choose to attempt to save their buddy who is bleeding out, rather than keep up the fight. Not always, but frequently.

Of course sometimes Max would be worried because Hans got shot and would not think about grabbing his gun. On the other hand, if Max is the assistant automatic riflemen and Hans, the squad machine gunner, was just shot it would make sense for Max to grab the LMG. At a minimum one of the seven active members of the squad would try to get the squad LMG active again. HMG and other crewed weapons currently do this, and a squad level LMG, especially for the Germans, is equivalent to a deployed HMG as far as importance in keeping it firing.

Now maybe conscript or green troops would be less likely to do this, but as your men get more experienced then the importance of keeping powerful squad level weapons in play would be more apparent to them. I also think it is important to remember that in most situations it is not a two man situation. You don't have the guy who got shot and his buddy. You have the guy who got shot and the rest of his squad. So while Max is trying to stop Hans from bleeding to death Squad Leader Dietrich still has the presence of mind to grab the LMG or yell at someone to do so.

Edit:

Thinking on it I;ve seen in game situations where a whole HMG team is wiped out on the gun. One would go down and another would take his place and this happened until everyman was dead or wounded. For a Grenadier squad keeping their LMG operational is as important as it is for the HMG crew so I don't see why the difference exists.

[YankeeDog]

Again, I think you're assuming far too much selfless initiative on the part of soldiers who are (a) under fire and ( have just seen one or more of their buddies get shot/fragged.

Yes, soldiers may eventually pick up an important weapon like an MG to keep in in the fight. But to assume that this process would usually be quick is, frankly, "Hollywood" thinking.

Consider a possible internal monologue:

"Sh*t, that one was close..."

"Oh my god, Joe/Tommy/Hans/Ivan got hit..."

"Is he still alive?"

"Damn, another close one... better keep my head down."

"Crap; there's a lot of blood. But maybe still a pulse?"

"No... I'm pretty sure he's dead. Better take his dog tags."

"Does the MG still work? Hmmm... it's all covered in blood, but it looks OK. I should remove the belt because it's got a lot of blood on it, but it should work again if I get a clean belt into it. If I and just pull that ammo can out from under the body..."

Etc. Unless you expect your pixeltruppen to all act like little Rambos, what happens in the game right now is pretty good, IMHO.

[Erwin]

The main reason to overhaul the ACQUIRE function is to speed up gameplay.

It is a timewasting PITA to have to 1) split squads in order to have a team 2) embark, then 3) acquire, then 4) disembark, and then 5) recombine, just to resupply a squad - esp in WEGO. The other silly feature to avoid is a crowd of squads waiting at a vehicle so each can do the above in turn.

Of course you can have a time delay during the proposed adjacent ACQUIRE process, and you can limit how much ammo or what weapons are able to be ACQUIRED or TRANSFERRED between units. But, there is no reason to force players into a clickfest for no reason.

CM appropriately abstracts capturing POW's and attending to the WIA. But, the current ACQUIRE process is ultra granular for no gameplay advantage.

[YankeeDog]

The main reason to overhaul the ACQUIRE function is to speed up gameplay...

This I definitely agree with. Particularly WEGO mid-game (as opposed to during setup), resupplying a single platoon from e.g., a truck can take for freakin' ever because of how you have to embark and disembark each unit sequentially. In this area and some others, the Acquire command could definitely be streamlined and improved.

But I don't particularly see the need to have pixel-Rambos catching MGs mid-air as they fall from their comrades' hands and blazing away with barely a pause.

[Pelican Pal]

Again, I think you're assuming far too much selfless initiative on the part of soldiers who are (a) under fire and ( have just seen one or more of their buddies get shot/fragged.

Selfless initiative is crawling over to the shot man and then kneeling in open ground to try to save his life. To grab the squad's only LMG and keep it firing is anything but selfless.

I'm not at all convinced that out of a squad of seven effective men, armed with a single smg, and six K98s (maybe a G43 or two) no one has the presence of mind to get the LMG operational again. While it makes sense that maybe a few men or stunned and worried about the now wounded man someone in the squad would have the presence of mind to get the gun operational again. Especially in experienced combat units. A veteran squad has seen casualties and has fought in a number of engagements. The importance of keeping that gun operational will be apparent to them, and while the internal monologue of soldier 1 might be that "I wonder if he is dead" the yelling of the Squad Leader to get the gun operational or the motivation of soldier 2 who knows that they are all hosed if that gun doesn't start firing also plays into it.

In fact, the game already handles the situation in which someone wouldn't attempt to grab the gun. If the squad has taken heavy casualties or is heavily pinned the men will be "cowering" and generally won't move to buddy aid at all.

I'm not expecting it to take seconds to grab the gun, but there is a definite difference between buddy aiding a wounded man and a dead man. A wounded soldier can take minutes+ to buddy aid while a dead one is maybe 30 seconds. So using the "dead man" time to recover the weapon isn't instantaneous however, it is significantly faster.

And once again the precedent for going gun first aid second already exists in crew served weapons.

Edit:

I also agree with the acquire overhaul. WeGo getting ammo for a squad can easily take up to six minutes or more. I would also like to be able to type the amount of ammo acquired, or at least always provide the ability to grab just 50 rounds at a time. This would allow the player to add a small amount of ammo repeatedly until the soldiers have an adequate amount. Currently if you have a single soldier with an SMG trying to grab ammo from a resupply point the smallest amount he can generally grab is 250-500, which is way too much for him especially if you have multiple squads with only a single smg.

[Erwin]

"I would also like to be able to type the amount of ammo acquired, or at least always provide the ability to grab just 50 rounds at a time."

Yes, definitely this.

[John Kettler]

Squeaker,

The feature you seek is something I've wanted clear back to the CMBO scenario Hellcat Ridge.

SPOILER ALERT!

SPOILER ALERT!

In that scenario, there is an initial defending force, and it must hang on by its fingernails waiting for relief. So ferocious was the fighting that practically every one of my surviving squads was in Low ammo state. Am sure you know, but for the benefit of the CMx2/3 only players, that meant (since ammo status wasn't explicitly modeled by individual rounds, as seen by the player) that my units could fire, but only feebly. Not really knowing the system, I excitedly and anxiously awaited urgently needed reinforcements. Great was my dismay when they finally showed up, yet I couldn't solve my acute ammo problem. I thought the reinforcments (a platoon?) could share some ammo so my guys could get back into the fight, but it didn't work that way.

In real combat, the arriving units would've provided some ammo to their tapped out brothers in arms, so they could return to the fight, but because of the way the game was coded, I instead had many potential shooters, only a small number of whom were really combat effective.

Yet here we are, almost 15 years later, and we still haven't resolved the matter. Am presuming it's still a coding issue. I hope BFC will find a way to sort out this militarily incorrect and maddening matter. We do have limited cross leveling of ammo, but I believe it doesn't go far enough or high enough up the command chain. As it is, we keep winding up with unrealistic combat situations because the game doesn't allow what was standard combat practice.

Regards,

John Kettler

[JoMac]

IMHO, I think the 'Acquire' feature should only be used at beginning of game ( setup ), or when 'Reinforcments' arrive, and not during mid-game as stated above...Great for multi-Scenario's in a Campaign.

I think the current 'Buddy-Aid' system seams to work fairly well. I would amagine that the Moral & Motivation levels play an important role in wither or not a squad uses 'Buddy-Aid' or how effective.

I do find some situations 'Odd'. One example is when a 2-man LMG team is running, and the LMG'er gets hit, then instatanously the Rifleman automatically has the LMG in mid-stride...Thought I was seeing a 'Bug' ( I couldn't believe my eyes, and had to re-run the turn just to make sure ), but now it seems it's built-in the 'Buddy-Aid' system...Sigh.

Joe

[JonS]

The main reason to overhaul the ACQUIRE function is to speed up gameplay.

As long as you view it firmly as a gameplay thing, which consciously pitches reality out the window.

Stocking up on ammo takes time. Quite a lot of time. Not least because soldiers aren't hyper enthusiastic killing machines who can't wait to get back in the fight. Given the option of sprinting back into the storm, or taking a little longer over loading the magazines and having a smoke ... yeah, you know what you'd be doing.

[Pelican Pal]

JoMc67, I've not seen that ever happen to a normal combat unit. I've only see that occur to crew served weapons.

Right now the basic solution to the acquire problem, let men do it from nearby and not just in a vehicle, exists.

[Erwin]

Jon: I keep saying: "...you can have a TIME DELAY during the proposed adjacent ACQUIRE process, and you can limit how much ammo or what weapons are able to be ACQUIRED or TRANSFERRED between units. But, there is no reason to force players into a clickfest for no reason."

[YankeeDog]

^^^ Agreed.

I don't necessarily want ACQUIRING to be faster in terms of game time, I just want the UI to be more intuitive, and for the whole process to require less micromanaging.

For example I'd be totally OK with giving the ACQUIRE process a completion duration (much like setup for heavy weapons), so long as I can (a) tell a unit to initiate an ACQUIRE process in the future, once it reaches a waypoint, and ( I can tell multiple units to ACQUIRE from the same vehicle/cache and not have to worry about micromanaging to prevent the units from getting in each others' way, so you do now when ACQUIRING from a single vehicle with multiple units.

I do recognize that these changes would not be simple or quick to implement -- I can see the potential pitfalls (ex: what happens if two units try to acquire the same ammo from the vehicle/cache simultaneously?), so there would certainly need to be some careful thought but into design, coding, and debugging.

Nevertheless, I do hope l that the Acquire command will get some attention and love, someday...