Features Requests/Corrections

[RMM]

1. Pls, for the love of all that's holy can one at least have the ability to disable the function of of issuing the same command to multiple units? Am not asking for it to be removed, since others, obviously like it, but it also has the ability to completely bugger up and instantly ruin the realism of a really good battle. Then one has to go back, first of all find, then undo all the superfluous commands, or just exit and reload a previous save altogether. Not very enjoyable.
2. Similarly, since some terrain like hedges may not be as traversable as they, initially appear, surely the game can trace out what path it will have the unit actually take when the order is issued, particularly if we place a destination some distance away? Obviously, the game does this plotting when it has the unit start to move, so why not depict that plot when the order is given? It's intensely annoying to order a vehicle across a hedge (for instance), apparently a short move, only to then have the game make the vehicle do a 180 and take off on some route that we have no idea where it's going! Given such a fix, then also possible to be able insert waypoints in such a plotted route, so we could, then tweak that route to exactly the way we want it? Surely this wouldn't be a major fix?
3. Make it much more clear which 'hedges' vehicles can plow thru and which they can't. Maybe a different terrain depiction? Even in the limited time I've been playing, I've found that there are some hedges that can be traversed and others that can't, but there seems no way to, visually discern which is which.
4. Split Snipers/Marksman into their own team

[Lethaface]

Although I've learned to live with 1-3, there are sometimes when they still give me an issue.

With regards to 4: actual snipers always come as a separate team. Designated marksman are part of a squad and should imo, stick with it. Depending on squad layout it's often already possible to split of a small(er) team with the marksman inside it.

 

[RMM]

8 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

Although I've learned to live with 1-3, there are sometimes when they still give me an issue.

With regards to 4: actual snipers always come as a separate team. Designated marksman are part of a squad and should imo, stick with it. Depending on squad layout it's often already possible to split of a small(er) team with the marksman inside it.

 

Interesting observation re Marksman; I hadn't really thought of it like that (that they're not, actually designated snipers per se). Yes, there are actual sniper teams, and you're right we can split the teams accordingly, but I would still think, in reality, commanders would often order such people, particularly when in defense, to operate as de facto snipers nonetheless.

Regarding 1-3, I'm sure I'm not the only one to ask about these but couldn't find any previous threads focused about them as feature requests. Have there been previous responses from Battlefront to shed light on the thinking why these are what they are, or have they already been accepted as possible suggestions?

[John1966]

I get quite excited if, at game end, my sniper got a single kill.

Mind you, I'm doing Road to Nijmegen at the moment and if you lose your FO (who is the only person who can call in CAS or the stuff that makes really loud bangs), he's out for the rest of the campaign. Playing last night and I heard "End of mission" after a single spotting round. Puzzled, I looked at the FO unit and all the arty was "DENIED". Somebody had got the team leader! As he was over 600m from the nearest enemy unit, I assume it must have been a sniper.

So they do have a point but they only seem the luck out for the AI. 

[RMM]

26 minutes ago, John1966 said:

I get quite excited if, at game end, my sniper got a single kill.

Mind you, I'm doing Road to Nijmegen at the moment and if you lose your FO (who is the only person who can call in CAS or the stuff that makes really loud bangs), he's out for the rest of the campaign. Playing last night and I heard "End of mission" after a single spotting round. Puzzled, I looked at the FO unit and all the arty was "DENIED". Somebody had got the team leader! As he was over 600m from the nearest enemy unit, I assume it must have been a sniper.

So they do have a point but they only seem the luck out for the AI. 

Yeh, that's the thing about snipers: they may be, often dormant, but when they do strike, it's usually with pretty profound affect! Imagine when they take out a tank commander. Can ruin that vehicle's performance for the rest of the fight!

[RMM]

As much as there is huge enthusiasm for this game (and I've certainly drunk the cool aid to the dregs!), I would hope to hear from any of the game's development team about these points: why's or why-not's.

[StieliAlpha]

27 minutes ago, RMM said:Imagine when they take out a tank commander. Can ruin that vehicle's performance for the rest of the fight!

Interesting, I found the loss of a TC in CM1 quite devastating (and tried to „hunt“ them with snipers), but I don‘t find a TC loss in CM2 too important.

[John1966]

1 minute ago, StieliAlpha said:

Interesting, I found the loss of a TC in CM1 quite devastating (and tried to „hunt“ them with snipers), but I don‘t find a TC loss in CM2 too important.

I would concur on that. The biggest problem with crew loss seems to be when a 5-man crew gets down to 3 and the guns get greyed out even though someone is listed as "gunner".

[transporter]

Interesting.  I agree with the challenges mentioned above.  Others would be:

1.  If you have both smoke and WP rounds, be able to pick which ones you want to use.  Smoke is just smoke while WP especially fired into a building can cause much damage.

2. Noticed that a smoke round fired from a 51 mm mortar does not seem to have the same range as a HE round.

3.   It would be nice to separate squads while on board a vehicle.  There by you could drop a few off, drive farther, drop some off etc. 

4. And this is just for the sake of fun.  In CM1 you could add any vehicle or weapon system to a scenario. 

5.  In CM1 (if I remember correctly) you could display all gun target lines at once.  Kinda like displaying all vehicle movement routes now.  If you are in a large game it is not easy to remember who you have firing at whom unless you go to each unit individually.  I have had units run out of ammo because i forgot they were firing.

But, despite everything, I enjoy playing the games even if I get my butt kicked now and them.  (Of course I can always replay the scenario with one I have modified lol)

[John1966]

3 minutes ago, transporter said:

3.   It would be nice to separate squads while on board a vehicle.  There by you could drop a few off, drive farther, drop some off etc. 

Something that occurred to me the other day is that you can't buddy aid a casualty in a vehicle. Didn't notice whether the ammo still gets shared but you lose their weapon.

[Lethaface]

 

1 hour ago, RMM said:

Interesting observation re Marksman; I hadn't really thought of it like that (that they're not, actually designated snipers per se). Yes, there are actual sniper teams, and you're right we can split the teams accordingly, but I would still think, in reality, commanders would often order such people, particularly when in defense, to operate as de facto snipers nonetheless.

Regarding 1-3, I'm sure I'm not the only one to ask about these but couldn't find any previous threads focused about them as feature requests. Have there been previous responses from Battlefront to shed light on the thinking why these are what they are, or have they already been accepted as possible suggestions?

There probably were over quite the number of years since CMBN was released (~2011). Tbh I think 1 is working as designed; just don't double click without noticing  And yes sometimes this costs many time if it happens lol.

Number 2 (and 3) would probably have been done a long time ago if it was easy to implement. Usually impassable terrain shows under mouse over, but for the hedgerows it doesn't and there is probably a reason why. I would really appreciate it too, it doesn't often happen but sometimes I forget that a BMP-2 can't drive over a low wall or some low hedge looks like one which they can drive through but than it turns out if you look better at it isn't one of those. 

Tbh I wouldn't expect these things to receive updates in CMx2, as IIRC they haven't changed since the introduction of CMBN. Since then quite a number of engine upgrades have been released, but these weren't part of the changes.

[Lethaface]

14 minutes ago, StieliAlpha said:

Interesting, I found the loss of a TC in CM1 quite devastating (and tried to „hunt“ them with snipers), but I don‘t find a TC loss in CM2 too important.

No TC makes quite the difference in spotting and situational awareness. Although I never played CM1 and the tank in question will indeed continue to operate without issue, especially if not in tank duels.

[RMM]

7 minutes ago, Lethaface said:

 

There probably were over quite the number of years since CMBN was released (~2011). Tbh I think 1 is working as designed; just don't double click without noticing  And yes sometimes this costs many time if it happens lol.

Number 2 (and 3) would probably have been done a long time ago if it was easy to implement. Usually impassable terrain shows under mouse over, but for the hedgerows it doesn't and there is probably a reason why. I would really appreciate it too, it doesn't often happen but sometimes I forget that a BMP-2 can't drive over a low wall or some low hedge looks like one which they can drive through but than it turns out if you look better at it isn't one of those. 

Tbh I wouldn't expect these things to receive updates in CMx2, as IIRC they haven't changed since the introduction of CMBN. Since then quite a number of engine upgrades have been released, but these weren't part of the changes.

Seems strange that they wouldn't do something about 2 & 3, since the game has to do the calculation at some point anyway.

My biggest frustration with this has not been hedgerows, but normal hedges. I trace a move command just to cross one (with a tank mind you!), but when the action plays, the tank attempts a 180 and takes off...who knows where, to get to the final destination. It's absurd.

[Warts 'n' all]

21 minutes ago, RMM said:

Seems strange that they wouldn't do something about 2 & 3, since the game has to do the calculation at some point anyway.

My biggest frustration with this has not been hedgerows, but normal hedges. I trace a move command just to cross one (with a tank mind you!), but when the action plays, the tank attempts a 180 and takes off...who knows where, to get to the final destination. It's absurd.

I've never known a tank NOT drive straight through a hedge, unless there is some other kind of impassable terrain.

[RMM]

Just now, Warts 'n' all said:

I've never known a tank NOT drive straight through a hedge, unless there is some other kind of impassable terrain.

That's what I found strange. It was in the scenario 'The Copse', and a Sherman wouldn't plow through what seemed pretty clearly to be a hedge. That was the most egregious irritation I've had, but I've had some less so with other units, because for whatever reason, the game took them a (slightly) different route than what I'd thought they would do.

[mjkerner]

20 minutes ago, RMM said:

That's what I found strange. It was in the scenario 'The Copse', and a Sherman wouldn't plow through what seemed pretty clearly to be a hedge. That was the most egregious irritation I've had, but I've had some less so with other units, because for whatever reason, the game took them a (slightly) different route than what I'd thought they would do.

Depending on how far away you put your waypoint, that tank might just have figured it's easier to get to it by another route. That happens all the time with longer distances between WPs.  How is the game to know you want to go through, not around, that clump of trees, or around the left side of the house, not the right, unless you direct it more carefully to do so?  Short WPs in close terrain are your friends!  (Btw, could it have been low bocage?  Run the tank's Movement cursor over it to to check. Solves the second problem.)

As to your No. 1 complaint, can be a pain when done by mistake, but easy to double check before pushing the Big Red Button by double clicking a unit of each command (HQs are easiest to find so easiest to use).  I often double click an HQ to move longer distances, then while all units under that command are highlighted, click on a/the WP of one element and you can move just that one element's WP for better positioning.

Regarding #2, the game engine calculates the moves for a turn when you click the Big Red Button, so as it was developed, the engine simply can't show the paths your moving units will take. I supposed they could have a system where you do a pre-final BRB click to show you the pathing, but that would just be more annoying to have to essentially wait for each turn to calculate twice each time.

[Erwin]

4 hours ago, RMM said:

Pls, for the love of all that's holy can one at least have the ability to disable the function of of issuing the same command to multiple units? Am not asking for it to be removed, since others, obviously like it, but it also has the ability to completely bugger up and instantly ruin the realism of a really good battle. Then one has to go back, first of all find, then undo all the superfluous commands, or just exit and reload a previous save altogether. Not very enjoyable.

Am confused by this.  You mean that if one accidentally double clicks on a unit one accidentally issues orders to the whole formation?  Yes, one has to be careful.  But, it's not a default order - it's just the player being careless.  If you do the same thing again, you simply press delete and all orders are deleted.  Am wondering if you are trying to play RT???

[RMM]

1 hour ago, Erwin said:

Am confused by this.  You mean that if one accidentally double clicks on a unit one accidentally issues orders to the whole formation?  Yes, one has to be careful.  But, it's not a default order - it's just the player being careless.  If you do the same thing again, you simply press delete and all orders are deleted.  Am wondering if you are trying to play RT???

Hi Erwin, no not RT. It doesn't happen very often, but sometimes, particularly in larger battles, one is focused om other things, and don't notice that you've accidentally issued a multi-unit order. Once the action is calculated, the only redo is to delete that turn. I've certainly taken to saving every turn before clicking the Red button!

Edited December 22, 2020 by RMM

[RMM]

1 hour ago, mjkerner said:

Depending on how far away you put your waypoint, that tank might just have figured it's easier to get to it by another route. That happens all the time with longer distances between WPs.  How is the game to know you want to go through, not around, that clump of trees, or around the left side of the house, not the right, unless you direct it more carefully to do so?  Short WPs in close terrain are your friends!  (Btw, could it have been low bocage?  Run the tank's Movement cursor over it to to check. Solves the second problem.)

As to your No. 1 complaint, can be a pain when done by mistake, but easy to double check before pushing the Big Red Button by double clicking a unit of each command (HQs are easiest to find so easiest to use).  I often double click an HQ to move longer distances, then while all units under that command are highlighted, click on a/the WP of one element and you can move just that one element's WP for better positioning.

Regarding #2, the game engine calculates the moves for a turn when you click the Big Red Button, so as it was developed, the engine simply can't show the paths your moving units will take. I supposed they could have a system where you do a pre-final BRB click to show you the pathing, but that would just be more annoying to have to essentially wait for each turn to calculate twice each time.

Well, in this particular example, it was no distance at all, barely the length of the tank, to have it just cross the 'hedge', but it turned around and headed off, like I say who knows where. At the very least, one has lost the unit for a turn. At worst, it could completely ruin the situation and not because of any incompetence on the part of the player. I think one can select the unit during the action replay phase and see the path it's going to actually follow, but that's all after-the-fact at that point! I appreciate your suggestion about checking the path with the mouse before finalizing the order, and I'll certainly be employing that technique. You're right, maybe it was low bocage, but that also refers to my point 4.

Your suggestion about editing individual-unit commands after issuing an HQ command to all, is also a good one. Hadn't thought about that, but I can certainly appreciate its uses!

On the last point, I wasn't aware that it wasn't calculating the path until the Red button was pressed, but on the other hand, action calculates pretty quickly, even in larger battles, so I wouldn't have thought it would be a significant hangup, certainly not half as much as seeing one's unit(s) head off in bizarre directions and thence having to contemplate running the entire turn all over again. Particularly in the case of PBEM, one would also have to, then get the consent of the other player. It would seem a much simpler solution to have the game show what it intends to do, just in case one is trying to make a movement that they think is ok, but in fact, isn't.

[c3k]

5 hours ago, RMM said:

1. Pls, for the love of all that's holy can one at least have the ability to disable the function of of issuing the same command to multiple units? Am not asking for it to be removed, since others, obviously like it, but it also has the ability to completely bugger up and instantly ruin the realism of a really good battle. Then one has to go back, first of all find, then undo all the superfluous commands, or just exit and reload a previous save altogether. Not very enjoyable.

By splitting up your post, the numbering scheme you used has been thrown into disarray.

I've found that if I select "Show All Movement Paths" (one of the various hotkey selections), it is pretty obvious when I do this. Yes, I have done this. Yes, many of my men died before I learned that lesson. They were grateful that their sacrifice was able to help me.

Otherwise, be very aware of how many of your units are orange (selected). 

5 hours ago, RMM said:

1. Similarly, since some terrain like hedges may not be as traversable as they, initially appear, surely the game can trace out what path it will have the unit actually take when the order is issued, particularly if we place a destination some distance away? Obviously, the game does this plotting when it has the unit start to move, so why not depict that plot when the order is given? It's intensely annoying to order a vehicle across a hedge (for instance), apparently a short move, only to then have the game make the vehicle do a 180 and take off on some route that we have no idea where it's going! Given such a fix, then also possible to be able insert waypoints in such a plotted route, so we could, then tweak that route to exactly the way we want it? Surely this wouldn't be a major fix?

 

First, I agree.   However, after a LOT of experience, I've gradually discovered what hedges, bushes, walls, fences, and hedgerows are passable and by what units. 

Yes, it still takes some re-calibration if I've been gone for awhile, or if I'm playing a new theater.

Why doesn't the game do this "on the fly"? Because the PATHING calculations are NOT calculated until AFTER you hit "go". 

But, there are still issues. For example, I just had a team at a gate in a wall behind a house. I ordered them to run to the back of the house, look inside (face + pause), then enter. Instead, they ran around to the front of the house...and all died. (I consider that a bug, so I've posted it as such. If you get a solid example of mis-pathing, pictures and a save are very helpful to squash them.)

 

 

5 hours ago, RMM said:

1. Make it much more clear which 'hedges' vehicles can plow thru and which they can't. Maybe a different terrain depiction? Even in the limited time I've been playing, I've found that there are some hedges that can be traversed and others that can't, but there seems no way to, visually discern which is which.

 

See my answer above. Yes, it'd be helpful to have a red underline or some other obvious toggle to see what walls/hedges are impassable to vehicles.

 

5 hours ago, RMM said:

1. Split Snipers/Marksman into their own team

 

Hmm....I don't see that as much of an issue. Is there a specific squad type to which you're referring? (And that they would historically split their sniper/marksman out to operate on their own?)

 

Ken

[RMM]

Hi Ken, yeh the original items have gotten rather jumbled at this point, but thank you for sifting through to make the good points that you did:

As you say, many have died from the multi-unit move command. I agree that one has to be careful, and I've quickly learnt to be cautious when ordering moves and review; however, I still think it would be a good feature for the game to have, to be able to disable that function, but there we are.

I definitely like your suggestion of such barriers having a red line or some such to show that they're impassable; that would be a really good addition imo, and I have learnt in this thread that move commands aren't calculated until the red button is pressed, but I still think that should be corrected. Having units take off completely ruins the realism and everything else about the game in that moment, even though there's much, much more to enjoy. This is a 'fix' I would strongly recommend, and I can only imagine the effect it would have on a tournament or some other such competition!

Regarding your move into the house, I quickly realised that some things are very literal - such as the fact that infantry are going to use whatever door is made available and nothing else! I have learnt, as you did to plan accordingly! In fact, it gets worse - even with one wall blown out by a charge, even the engineering unit, still went around to the door afterwards! That last part is definitely a bug; otherwise, not so sure.

Re the sniper suggestion, am setting up UK airborne in M-G and, sometimes would like to peel off the Marksman to a separate location where they can do their Marksman 'thing'.

[John1966]

13 minutes ago, c3k said:

See my answer above. Yes, it'd be helpful to have a red underline or some other obvious toggle to see what walls/hedges are impassable to vehicles.

That would be sensible. After all these years I'm still not 100% on what a tank can/cannot drive through.

[John1966]

1 hour ago, RMM said:

It doesn't happen very often, but sometimes, particularly in larger battles, one is focused om other things, and don't notice that you've accidentally issued a multi-unit order.

Curiously, I'm the other way around. I often think I've ordered a whole platoon to do a thing, only to see the lieutenant and his HQ run off on their own.

Only use the group command when the enemy is distant so not normally a big deal.

My favourite error on my part is dismounting the passengers off on a walk when I meant to send the vehicle itself.

[RMM]

Just now, John1966 said:

Curiously, I'm the other way around. I often think I've ordered a whole platoon to do a thing, only to see the lieutenant and his HQ run off on their own.

Only use the group command when the enemy is distant so not normally a big deal.

My favourite error on my part is dismounting the passengers off on a walk when I meant to send the vehicle itself.

That one I haven't come across (yet!), probably because I don't think I've veer used the multi-unit command, but yes, that would definitely sour one's optimism!

...and no doubt the vehicle took off leaving its former pax in infuriated dust, right!  

[John1966]

2 minutes ago, RMM said:

...and no doubt the vehicle took off leaving its former pax in infuriated dust, right!  

No, it usually just sits there because I thought I'd given it the move order I gave the passengers.