Does CMBS (Modern) Require shorter turn timers?

[VasFURY]

Hey All,

 

So, Ive been playing CMBS single-player and WeGo multiplayer a lot more frequently for the past two or so months, and have been greatly enjoying it (probably more than all previous CM titles - I have been a Fan since the first one!)

 

However, due to the fast nature of the modern battlefield (targets pop up and disappear quickly/ targets pop up at much longer ranges/ combat is fast and brutal, etc), it seems to me that sometimes, the 1:00 minute (60 second) turns are a bit too long, and the AI too slow/stupid to react to some of the developing combat situations that happen within that minute.

 

I am of the opinion (and this is what is up for discussion), that a turn length of 30 seconds would be more suitable to the modern battlefield of CMBS, specifically because of the pace at which the battleground events take place.This is probably even more important for Multiplayer.

 

Does anyone else agree? Or not? 

 

Also, a question more for the development team/modders - is it theoretically possible to reduce the turn timer allocations to 30 seconds? 

Edited May 12, 2015 by VasFURY

[Chudacabra]

I wouldn't mind it as an option, but I think that in most games the 60 second turn works quite well. I've always felt that the "OH ****!" moments in CM games are part of what makes them so much fun.

[whitehot78]

For every CM title getting released, I normally play out all the single player content, both missions and campaigns.

I can say that, after the introduction of the real time mode in CMx2, I basically switched over to that mode and never got back to turn based - at least in SP.

 

So normally, if the game was limited to turn based, 60 seconds action phases, I would gladly welcome an option where other turn durations would be available - one could even conceive an option by which you select the phase length that actually suits you better (like a dropdown with several options, 15 secs, 30 secs, 45 secs, 60 secs, custom: input your turn duration).

 

But having the real time option makes that redundant imho - in that case you can pause the game whenever you like and adjust your orders. So my suggestion would be to give real-time a try.

 

As for the "readiness" of the AI, from what I know about the tacai, it's not really related to time - if you're playing a sp scenario that kind of behaviours are pretty much based on how the scenario designer implemented the construction of the AI combat mission

[Blazing 88's]

WEGO only for this cat in all CM titles and my answer for the OP would be a big NO.

[VasFURY]

I think WEGO is the best way to play this game especially against a human opponent, but Blazing88 - why NO? Tell us a little more regarding this opinion.

@Chudacabra - i know what you mean about those moments, but for me lately, especially in MP matches, the OH SNAP moments have been happening really early into the turn. Like, 15 seconds in, an enemy tank is spotted by my recon. But i have to wait whole 45 secs more to move my tank out of cover to engage that target, by which time it has already probably moved away. Having shorter turn sequences means you can react to the fast paced battlefield alot faster.

I like WhiteHots suggestion for selectable timers - you could agree with opponent pre-match on what turn timer sequence to use, and lock it in during battle creation.

Is it possible to mod the game to include such a feature, or the engine wouldnt allow it?

Edited May 12, 2015 by VasFURY

[Muzzleflash1990]

Before the release of the game I gave this matter quite a bit of thought, thinking that if 1 minute is used for WW2, then surely the pace of modern combat demands shorter turn times (boyd cycle and what not). Playing the game after release I have not found it be that much of an issue that I though. When i've needed a 'timeout', it has most often been because my infantry got caught in ambush in MOUT, and without intervention the team would not survive.

 

Don't know whether it is possible to mod the game to allow such a thing. I doubt you can go much longer than a minute; seem to recall that the sizes of turns was the reason there is no TCP WEGO. The other question is would we want to? Given your example with your recon spotting an enemy vehicle, and you want your tank to engage it. From a competitive multiplayer perspective I can see the point in wanting to exploit any opportunity to hurt your opponent. From a realism perspective, is it likely the the recon unit would be able to communicate the position of the enemy vehicle up the chain of command (or unto some digital map), and then down again in 45s to the tank commander, which then immediately finds and decides which position to move to in order to engage?

Edited May 12, 2015 by Muzzleflash1990

[sburke]

WEGO only for this cat in all CM titles and my answer for the OP would be a big NO.

Same here, honestly can you see doubling or tripling the number of turns? It already takes a long time to play a scenario what with all the action reviews

[Londoner]

Noooo, quite the opposite. CM tends to compress tactical battles, would much rather the option for a two or three minute round, in all the titles, old and new, would in a way....add a whole new dimension to the orders phase. 

[cool breeze]

Noooo, quite the opposite. CM tends to compress tactical battles, would much rather the option for a two or three minute round, in all the titles, old and new, would in a way....add a whole new dimension to the orders phase. 

you can do that easily with house rules, although I agree a 3 minute long replay would be nice.  Just agree not to change the orders for 2 turns in a row.

Edited May 12, 2015 by cool breeze

[VasFURY]

Noooo, quite the opposite. CM tends to compress tactical battles, would much rather the option for a two or three minute round, in all the titles, old and new, would in a way....add a whole new dimension to the orders phase.

For this, would need considerably better/smarter AI behaviour, as it does some really silly things sometimes in its current state.

[Londoner]

True Cool Breeze, wonder if anyone has tried it. 

 

Was thinking versus a human opponent Vas - the tac AI would be fine, after all it would just sit doing nothing/cowering/observing etc after the last waypoint/order was completed, just like now but for longer, arguably what men do for the most part in battle anyway. 

Edited May 12, 2015 by Londoner

[firelock]

For this, would need considerably better/smarter AI behaviour, as it does some really silly things sometimes in its current state.

I tend to agree. 

[A Canadian Cat]

WEGO only for this cat in all CM titles and my answer for the OP would be a big NO.

 

I feel the same.  No thank you to shorter turn times. 

 

I think WEGO is the best way to play this game especially against a human opponent, but Blazing88 - why NO? Tell us a little more regarding this opinion.

Just like @sburke said a PBEM game against a human opponent takes a large number of calendar days to play and that would get longer and be less satisfying (I cannot imagine finding watching a 15 or 30s play back very satisfying) with shorter turns.

 

Is it possible to mod the game to include such a feature, or the engine wouldnt allow it?

Not officially. There are no official mod points to change that kind of thing. We can really only skin the existing models not really change anything.

 

As @Muzzleflash1990 indicated our ability to react to what is happening on the battle field as if information flowed perfectly and instantly is not really very realistic if the 1 minute turn time tamps that down a bit then we are all better off for it. IMHO

[GAZ NZ]

leave the time as is - 60 seconds

no shorter

cheers

[VasFURY]

Okey! Thanks to all for their opinions and reasons!

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

I'd like the option for it to be shorter at least.  I'm a bit turned off of wego because some of the stuff that's very much battle drill/small unit leader choices within a few seconds of contact is still beyond the AI.

 

This is not a complaint about the AI, I think that sort of virtual Corporal/Sergeant/2LT is pretty far outside of reasonable, but the ability to better replicate that leadership by allowing the player more frequent control periods as an option (emphasis on option!) would be a nice compromise until Battlefront invents Skynet.   

[Fade2Gray]

30 second turns would be a lot better IMO.  Especially when facing US forces, you pretty much have to make sure your tanks pop out, fire, and then get back into cover within a 30 second time frame.  Otherwise?  A couple of Javelins will ruin said tank's day.  I've been playing "Ukraine separatist" (ie only using old stuff, no Oplots) against a buddy a lot, and old T-64BVs need to be babied more than what wego allows.

 

Anyways, an option that could allow for 30 second, 1 minute, 2 minute, etc, would be great.

[delliejonut]

How about just one turn for the battle? You input your orders, make them as detailed as possible, and then when everything is played out you hit ceasefire and see where you stand?

[db_zero]

I think the 30 second turn for WEGO has merit.

 

Real time is fun, but I love watching replays. If it were possible to watch replays on RT, I'd probably play RT more.

[VasFURY]

How about just one turn for the battle? You input your orders, make them as detailed as possible, and then when everything is played out you hit ceasefire and see where you stand?

Oooof. Now this would be "interesting"! Highly impractical, but definitely interesting.

Edited May 17, 2015 by VasFURY

[poesel]

How about just one turn for the battle? You input your orders, make them as detailed as possible, and then when everything is played out you hit ceasefire and see where you stand?

 

If we could set up AI vs. AI as a scenario we had just that.

 

Never made an AI plan but that feature would drag me into it.

[slysniper]

Practical is the real word for this decision. making it less than a minute just makes it impractical.

Just be grateful you have RT for those of you that cannot stand a minute of time without complete control.

As a leader of real units, you hardly have any control. So a minute time frame to give new orders is still way to much god like power in truth.

But a minute adds just enough out of control situations to make it fun.

Leave a good thing alone

[John Kettler]

VasFURY,

 

Having had a rather harrowing OB experience with the game clock, I find myself deeply conflicted. On the one hand, I appreciate your desire for more time granularity, thus, control in a fast breaking situation while facing highly lethal, high accuracy weapons. I get that. On the other hand, having come off a truly grueling QB in which I was very hard pressed as defender (had mostly infantry left, facing a swarm of Abrams and Bradleys on the outskirts of and in a town I was seeking to hold), the thought of playing 80 turns to cover the same grueling 40 minutes I wound up playing in the original QB (30 minutes + the full 10 minutes of OT) makes me feel decidedly queasy. As it was, I was wrung out by game's end.

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

[VasFURY]

Yeah, i guess in larger scale battles with medium to large force sizes, it can become very mind boggling to issue and reissue commands at frequent intervals.

I just prefer playing head to head company size or smaller, thats why I raised the question.

Having it as an option for different length intervals would definitely be cool.

[delliejonut]

If we could set up AI vs. AI as a scenario we had just that.

 

Never made an AI plan but that feature would drag me into it.

 

You mean during setup creating an AI plan to go against someone elses AI plan? That would definitely be cool. You couldn't accuse the other player of gamey tactics