Engine 5 Wishlist

[Jabble]

The ability to coordinate ATGM launches.

Problem: 2 ATGM teams are beside each other and in contact.  2 enemy tanks appear, one in front of the other, and both teams fire at the first tank almost simultaneously.  The first missile kills it, so the second is wasted.  The second tank kills both teams before they can reload.

Solution: Allow an option that limits the number of teams engaging any one target.

The game logic should 'know' how many ATGM teams are capable of engaging any one target, so it only allows the first to do so.  The second is then free to engage any other target.  It makes sense that this limitation only applies to teams in contact with each other or a common commander.

If the target survives the first strike, then the next team becomes free to engage it if it's not already engaging a different one.

If you've ever played Command: Modern Operations, there's a default option where only one aircraft will engage any one target at a time.  If there are multiple targets, different aircraft will each pick a different one.  Only if a missile fails to kill may another aircraft then engage that target, if it's best placed to do so.  Something similar here would be useful.

[chuckdyke]

28 minutes ago, Jabble said:

Solution: Allow an option that limits the number of teams engaging any one target.

Target Arcs. We must real bide our time when plotting the next turn. Even using the face command makes a difference, 

[Jabble]

58 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

Target Arcs. We must real bide our time when plotting the next turn. Even using the face command makes a difference, 

Target arcs won't do it if the tanks appear in roughly the same place.  ATGM teams are most useful when covering choke points, so it's not practical to divide them up into tiny arcs.  It would require guessing precisely where each tank is by the time the trigger is pressed, so that each tank is in a separate arc.

What would happen in real life?  A commander would say "Team A take out the first tank, Team B the second".  Hence I reckon that's what should happen in the game too.

[chuckdyke]

2 minutes ago, Jabble said:

What would happen in real life?  A commander would say "Team A take out the first tank, Team B the second".  Hence I reckon that's what should happen in the game too.

If you have two full contacts than you plot direct fire with your LOS tool. The TacAI has the awareness of a fly it is one the things you put up with playing on WeGo. Remember ATGM teams are pretty much invisible at their optimal range is 1km-3km. I would plot one and let the other to the TacAI. 

[Jabble]

Ah but if they're covering a choke point, the targets only appear during that WEGO minute and it all happens very quickly.  The moment they fire they give away their position, so survival becomes much less likely.  By the time I get a chance to direct fire during the next command phase, they're already dead because they left the second tank alive.

[Erwin]

Perhaps look at doctrine?  Maybe two ATGM's would never be placed that close together (neither would any number of units) as a single (un)lucky shot could KIA both.

[Jabble]

20 minutes ago, Erwin said:

Perhaps look at doctrine?  Maybe two ATGM's would never be placed that close together (neither would any number of units) as a single (un)lucky shot could KIA both.

Not so close that they'd get caught in one blast, but close enough to watch the same area.  It seems unlikely that in real life they'd not have some sort of plan for dealing with multiple targets without wasting a limited supply of missiles.

But hey - it's our game - we get to decide the doctrine!

[chuckdyke]

Javelins on special about the same price as a T55 tank. Use two Javelins and the Russians are way ahead. But here comes the pitch, an updated T55 tank is also equipped with ATGMs shooting through the gun barrel nowadays. I agree with @Erwin in this case. Better have them at different firing positions. 

[Jabble]

3 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

Javelins on special about the same price as a T55 tank. Use two Javelins and the Russians are way ahead. But here comes the pitch, an updated T55 tank is also equipped with ATGMs shooting through the gun barrel nowadays. I agree with @Erwin in this case. Better have them at different firing positions. 

Different positions still make them vulnerable if they're both within sight of the surviving tank.  Mostly they just die from coax or HE fire, one after the other before either can reload - or the WEGO minute finishes.  And there's currently no shoot-and-scoot (though that's part of my earlier 'react' request) so killing both quickly is the only way to survive.

[A Canadian Cat]

20 hours ago, RMM said:

I believe that's true for pickup; although when I first posted about this, I believe there were those who commented that it might not always work.

You can set the pause as too short and miss the pickup.

20 hours ago, RMM said:

However, for disembarking, pause is treated by the game as the vehicle moving, so the inf. don't get off.

Correct

20 hours ago, RMM said:

This is most common when acquiring ammo. The vehicle has to remain motionless, without pause or movement orders for he turn the infantry disembarks, or it takes off with them!

On the turn you acquire ammo you can acquire what you want the then give the passengers a dismount command and move them on their merry way. Then you can give the vehicle move orders and it will wait for the passengers to disembark before venturing forth.

[A Canadian Cat]

20 hours ago, RMM said:

Otherwise, I can't agree at all with the reasoning here. It has been very common practice <examples snipped>

People more learned than me have said this was not normally done during combat. CM does in fact have Germans equipped with Russian weapons and visa versa when it was done on an official scale.

20 hours ago, RMM said:

Please reconsider.

It's not my call - I don't have a say in how the game gets designed other than voicing my opinion - just like you. I do test for them so perhaps I am heard more but I can assure you Steve makes these calls and he doesn't change his mind cause I said so.

[A Canadian Cat]

20 hours ago, RMM said:

Even highly experienced players mentioned to me previously about being caught out by this feature, and consequently having a battle utterly ruined by having a whole command's units enact orders only meant for the HQ unit. I can understand it may be more programming trouble than it's worth, but would still make the request, because it would just improve game play that much more but not having to roll back the action to a previous minute or having to contact your PBEM opponent to embarrassingly ask for a do-over!

I have a feeling that we might not be talking about the same thing. I think you are talking about the quick commands Pause, Cancel and Withdraw. I have literally never hit one of them accidentally such that I felt like a game was ruined.

Are you talking about something else?

If not can you explain how such an event would take place?

[RMM]

7 minutes ago, IanL said:

Correct

On the turn you acquire ammo you can acquire what you want the then give the passengers a dismount command and move them on their merry way. Then you can give the vehicle move orders and it will wait for the passengers to disembark before venturing forth.

Well no, per your 'Correct' response: the vehicle cannot be given any move command until after the infantry disembark; otherwise, they won't. Any pause command followed by a move order is treated by the game as the vehicle being in motion, and the infantry will stay on board.

[A Canadian Cat]

20 hours ago, RMM said:

This was in conjunction to a post I put in the Tech support as a 'bug'. I had British howitzers firing off their HEAT ammo, iso their HE when using area fire.

Indeed that would be a bug.

20 hours ago, RMM said:

<snip>Again, I can understand there might well be significant programming challenges, but I don't think it would make the game harder. Quite the contrary, not having to second guess what one's unit might do in such situations would surely make it easier? 

See you like to micro manage. That's your style and that's great. Some players find the number choices in the orders panel to be intimidating. Those players would not like more layers or choices added.

Steve make design decisions about how much choice we get. He typically tries to find a balance. Not everyone is satisfied either way. The important thing is for us to understand where his choices come from. Or not. I'm just trying to provide some insight.

[RMM]

5 minutes ago, IanL said:

I have a feeling that we might not be talking about the same thing. I think you are talking about the quick commands Pause, Cancel and Withdraw. I have literally never hit one of them accidentally such that I felt like a game was ruined.

Are you talking about something else?

If not can you explain how such an event would take place?

Sometimes, mostly with newer players (which I was just at the end of last year), one may have highlighted an HQ unit (double-clicking) in order to see who it controlled only to then issue it a move command before deselecting the highlight, with the consequence that all that HQ's units receive the same command meant only for it, with inevitable consequences in many cases!

Edited April 2, 2021 by RMM

[RMM]

Just now, IanL said:

Indeed that would be a bug.

See you like to micro manage. That's your style and that's great. Some players find the number choices in the orders panel to be intimidating. Those players would not like more layers or choices added.

Steve make design decisions about how much choice we get. He typically tries to find a balance. Not everyone is satisfied either way. The important thing is for us to understand where his choices come from. Or not. I'm just trying to provide some insight.

And I do appreciate it that

[RMM]

9 minutes ago, IanL said:

People more learned than me have said this was not normally done during combat. CM does in fact have Germans equipped with Russian weapons and visa versa when it was done on an official scale.

It's not my call - I don't have a say in how the game gets designed other than voicing my opinion - just like you. I do test for them so perhaps I am heard more but I can assure you Steve makes these calls and he doesn't change his mind cause I said so.

Interesting. I do also appreciate your being willing to listen to people on such issues and provide the insight and feedback that you can. We all hope that some of it may filter back to Steve

[A Canadian Cat]

3 minutes ago, RMM said:

Sometimes, mostly with newer players (which I was just at the end of last year), one may have highlighted an HQ unit (double-clicking) in order to see who it controlled only to then issue it a move command before deselecting the highlight, with the consequence that all that HQ's units receive the same command meant only for it, with inevitable consequences in many cases!

Ah, yes accidentally giving orders to a whole formation when you just wanted to give them to one unit. Yeah, that can suck. I have done that occasionally. I am now trained to be careful about that but as you said that's not the case for new players.

OK now that I get what you are talking about what was your proposed solution?

[RMM]

Just now, IanL said:

Ah, yes accidentally giving orders to a whole formation when you just wanted to give them to one unit. Yeah, that can suck. I have done that occasionally. I am now trained to be careful about that but as you said that's not the case for new players.

OK now that I get what you are talking about what was your proposed solution?

To have a selection in the Options that could turn that feature off; ie. with the feature turned off, only one unit will ever receive an order, but being an option would allow those who do use that feature to retain it as they wish.

[A Canadian Cat]

8 minutes ago, RMM said:

Well no, per your 'Correct' response: the vehicle cannot be given any move command until after the infantry disembark; otherwise, they won't. Any pause command followed by a move order is treated by the game as the vehicle being in motion, and the infantry will stay on board.

Let me try again.

You have a stationary vehicle and an infantry unit near by that you want to aquire ammo from said vehicle.

On turn #1:

Give the infantry an move order into the vehicle to embark into it.

During play back the mount up.

On turn #2:

Give the infantry an acquire order and load up. Then give them a dismount order. Then give them movement orders to where you want them to go. Then give the vehicle orders to where you want it to go.

During play back watch your newly loaded infantry disembark from the vehicle while it waits for them and glory in watching the two units move off separately.

[RMM]

3 minutes ago, IanL said:

Let me try again.

You have a stationary vehicle and an infantry unit near by that you want to aquire ammo from said vehicle.

On turn #1:

Give the infantry an move order into the vehicle to embark into it.

During play back the mount up.

On turn #2:

Give the infantry an acquire order and load up. Then give them a dismount order. Then give them movement orders to where you want them to go. Then give the vehicle orders to where you want it to go.

During play back watch your newly loaded infantry disembark from the vehicle while it waits for them and glory in watching the two units move off separately.

Hmm, I'll try it out to confirm, but pretty sure that's what I had done in the past, only to watch the vehicle takeoff with the pax still on board. Unless...usually, I just issue the infantry a move command which is then labelled as 'Dismount' at the of the path. Does the Dismount have to separately, initially ordered before a move command is added on?

[A Canadian Cat]

4 minutes ago, RMM said:

Does the Dismount have to separately, initially ordered before a move command is added on?

Yes. With no orders on the vehicle select the passengers and issue a Special | Dismount order. Then issue normal move orders for the passengers followed by orders for the vehicle.

[RMM]

4 minutes ago, IanL said:

Yes. With no orders on the vehicle select the passengers and issue a Special | Dismount order. Then issue normal move orders for the passengers followed by orders for the vehicle.

Ah hah. Interesting. I will certainly try that out. Thanks

[Jabble]

4 hours ago, IanL said:

Yes. With no orders on the vehicle select the passengers and issue a Special | Dismount order. Then issue normal move orders for the passengers followed by orders for the vehicle.

Hey it works, thanks!  I suspect like most people, I'd previously only dismounted by choosing a waypoint.

[chuckdyke]

10 hours ago, Jabble said:

And there's currently no shoot-and-scoot (though that's part of my earlier 'react' request) so killing both quickly is the only way to survive.

It comes down to tactics. A Javelin was not meant to 'shoot and scoot' it takes about 15 seconds to aim and lock on target then up it goes and says: "Here I am". If you can lock on to something, something else can lock on you. I have no personal experience with the Javelin and see it as an expensive precision mortar. Once it is off and flying it is up to the operator to get out of the situation. That is also basic he should think of his tactical deployment before. You can shoot from buildings and foxholes with this weapon distance 1km-3km. Looks a lot better to shoot from hard cover. The tank sees a block of apartments a mile away but is very unlikely to spot the operator. Another idea use it to support your own armor during a melee. Like they say in Australia on its own they stand out like dog balls.