Jump to content

Engine 5 Wishlist


Recommended Posts

Thanks. 10 years as a US Army Field Artillery Officer. I was a FIST Chief, Fire Direction Officer (FDO), Inf Brigade Fire Support Officer, and FA Bn Asst S-3/Bn FDO. Late 70s and 80s so the period covered by CW. 


Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2021 at 4:41 PM, BornGinger said:

I'm sure that is the case in real life. But in the WW2 games only the cannons give the players the choice to use either shells that explode on inpact, or close to inpact, which are the general shells, and shells that explode above the soldiers, preferably in the treetops, which are the infantry shells.

Whether a shell explodes in treetops depends on whether it hits a tree. Not the type of fire mission.

And it's not true that only cannons give the option for airbursts. For example, the small stubby German 75mm howitzer also has the option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

 

I don't have a problem with the animation. I have a problem with their reaction when coming under fire. They don't drop to the ground immediately. There's usually a couple of moments where they're still walking around. I guess this could simulate confusion but somewhat frustrating anyway. Perhaps this is scaled in regards to the unit's experience... I haven't done any tests.

Edited by Anonymous_Jonze
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They only stop when they receive a contact icon, bullets go whistling by and blissfully ignore them. It works both ways, the enemy snipes away at infantry and blissfully ignore the five AFVs covering him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, Anonymous_Jonze said:

I don't have a problem with the animation. I have a problem with their reaction when coming under fire. They don't drop to the ground immediately. There's usually a couple of moments where they're still walking around. I guess this could simulate confusion but somewhat frustrating anyway. Perhaps this is scaled in regards to the unit's experience... I haven't done any tests.

I agree they should drop when under fire, and I've done some tests.. It doesn't seem to be about confusion or a unit's experience.

The thing that makes them drop is spotting an enemy unit, or taking so much fire that their suppression meter fills up. I've had troops walking on for a full minute while under sporadic rifle fire.

A couple of people have posted videos that seem to show troops actually stopping and going prone just because of a couple of incoming bullets, claiming this shows the system works, but I believe what's actually happening in these cases is that the HUNTing troops spot the shooter for a split second, too brief for the enemy unit to appear on the screen visually, but still enough to trigger the stopping.

A bit like sometimes your troops will shoot at targets you can't see on screen, because they are just outside the range of what counts as "actively spotted".

Edited by Bulletpoint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you guys using covered arcs?   Unless a patch has changed the routine, if the enemy is outside the unit's covered arc, the unit will (usually) ignore them. 

Am wondering if this is may also be true for shots - or perhaps the AI can determine the difference between actual threat shots vs shots that are not much of a threat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No - it's happening without a cover arc. Units taking fire (but not actually having a solid contact) will continue "Hunting" until they get enough suppression - typically until a man gets hit.

This makes it impossible to advance cautiously in an area with short visibility. I would like to have an option for the unit to stop the moment they take fire - any fire at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Drifter Man said:

I would like to have an option for the unit to stop the moment they take fire - any fire at all.

Well, that the way it used to happen.  Didn't realize BF changed that.  It used to be that one used a short arc so that the unit would mostly ignore enemy outside of that arc.

I agree, you'd expect men to stop and drop if shot at.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

And since I am in here... I would like to have an LOS tool that is independent of the Target tool, please. Something like the "L" command in CMx1. Otherwise it could work like the one we already have. Two reasons:

  • you can misclick on the ground while checking LOS with the target tool... your unit will area fire the whole turn
  • unarmed units (e.g. trucks, vehicles with damaged weapons) cannot check LOS - and so you can't check if you parked them safely out of sight

Both have happened to me in a recent battle, with consequences ranging from bad to disastrous.

Edited by Drifter Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Erwin said:

Well, that the way it used to happen.  Didn't realize BF changed that.  It used to be that one used a short arc so that the unit would mostly ignore enemy outside of that arc.

I agree, you'd expect men to stop and drop if shot at.

I imagine it is mainly about setting the suppression threshold meter that will make the unit stop. Need to turn it down again :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Drifter Man said:
  • you can misclick on the ground while checking LOS with the target tool... your unit will area fire the whole turn
  • unarmed units (e.g. trucks, vehicles with damaged weapons) cannot check LOS - and so you can't check if you parked them safely out of sight

CM1 did have a LOS tool, but the powers that be decided to eliminate quite a few useful CM1 features for CM2.  (Eg: I also miss the "one click" 180 degree arc we had in CM1.  Now it takes 3 or 4 times as much time to create such an arc - useful for turreted vehicles.)

The way to get around the transport LOS issue, is to place waypoint for a fighting vehicle (that can TARGET) where the truck may go and look at LOS from that waypoint.

Edited by Erwin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Erwin said:

CM1 did have a LOS tool, but the powers that be decided to eliminate quite a few useful CM1 features for CM2.  (Eg: I also miss the "one click" 180 degree arc we had in CM1.  Now it takes 3 or 4 times as much time to create such an arc - useful for turreted vehicles.)

The way to get around the transport LOS issue, is to place waypoint for a fighting vehicle (that can TARGET) where the truck may go and look at LOS from that waypoint.

I miss the easy 180-degree arc, too!

I normally use this workaround you mentioned but just got lazy this time. It would be so much easier and more natural if I could just press "L".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Drifter Man said:

It would be so much easier and more natural if I could just press "L".

Yes, that would miss the entire point of the CM2 system - to make a lot of work for users and minimize entertainment cos the military hates anything that smells "entertaining" in their sims.  B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Drifter Man said:

No - it's happening without a cover arc. Units taking fire (but not actually having a solid contact) will continue "Hunting" until they get enough suppression - typically until a man gets hit.

This makes it impossible to advance cautiously in an area with short visibility. I would like to have an option for the unit to stop the moment they take fire - any fire at all.

[img]http://wavehh.dyndns.org/sop.jpg[/img]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Probus said:

I really liked the LoS tools in the Graviteam Tactics games. Sort of a colored arc what you could and couldn't see. 

That would save so much time. Great idea.

I spend 2/3 of all time in checking LOS. And it is not exactly the most fun part of the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I would like to see some improvements made to the LOS system.

1. When LOS is measured from a waypoint, show the LOS line from the waypoint and not the unit's location.

2. Allow units to area target buildings if they can clearly see the building even if they don't have LOS to the center of the ground level action space the building is on.

3. LOS should always be reciprocal. If location 1 can be seen from location 2, than location 2 can be seen from location 1. This is not always the case in game. Spotting might be harder from one location to another, but reciprocal visibility (baring some special equipment not available on the battlefield in any CM title) is always there in reality. It might be almost impossible to get a hit on a unit that is firing through a small opening for example, but the location the opening is in can always be targeted.

4. If LOS can be drawn from a waypoint to a location, then a unit that moves to that waypoint should always be able to see that location. It's all too common to check LOS, move a unit to that position and then find out that it can't see the location it could with the LOS tool.

5. I know this problem was present in the early days on CMx2, and the Devs "solved" it by making sure trees didn't move after setup, but I still find it common to check LOS during setup only to find a unit can't actually see those locations when the game starts.

6. Allow LOS to be measured from different observer heights: Prone, kneeling, standing, bow vehicle level, turret vehicle level, couple vehicle level. Or just allow a height to be specified: 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 meters.

6. Fix the LOS line that shows where the terrain blocks the LOS. It in not consistent in showing the actual location where the LOS is blocked.

7. A pie in the sky suggestion I know won't be implemented: Shade all the locations that can't be seen from a location darker and the ones that can be seen lighter. I know this is computationally expensive, but it would improve speed of gameplay enormously.

 

Edited by Rocket-Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rocket-Man said:

2. Allow units to area target buildings if they can clearly see the building even if they don't have LOS to the center of the ground level action space the building is on.

3. LOS should always be reciprocal. If location 1 can be seen from location 2, than location 2 can be seen from location 1. This is not always the case in game. 

Yes, this has been a very annoying and time-wasting issue with the CM2 system since it arrived in 2007.

1 hour ago, Rocket-Man said:

4. If LOS can be drawn from a waypoint to a location, then a unit that moves to that waypoint should always be able to see that location. It's all too common to check LOS, move a unit to that position and then find out that it can't see the location it could with the LOS tool.

Yes this is also frustrating.  But, the player already has so much unrealistic "god's eye view" and control, that it seems that this is one area where some FOW is appropriate.  One cannot always guarantee what a unit can see until it gets to that spot.  So, more a feature of FOW rather than a problem imo.

 

1 hour ago, Rocket-Man said:

6. Allow LOS to be measured from different observer heights: Prone, kneeling, standing, bow vehicle level, turret vehicle level, couple vehicle level. Or just allow a height to be specified: 0, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2 meters.

Yeah, maybe...  but again we already have an unrealistic amount of control, and these issues are solved by playing enuff to build up experience. Experience helps a lot.

1 hour ago, Rocket-Man said:

6. Fix the LOS line that shows where the terrain blocks the LOS. It in not consistent in showing the actual location where the LOS is blocked.

Again, this ability comes from experience.  Part of the challenge and fun of this game is that experience is rewarded.  Seems like newbies want to jump in and be as good as those who have been playing for years.

1 hour ago, Rocket-Man said:

7. A pie in the sky suggestion I know won't be implemented: Shade all the locations that can't be seen from a location darker and the ones that can be seen lighter. I know this is computationally expensive, but it would improve speed of gameplay enormously.

Yes, but it would also make CM2 much more of an unrealistic game, rather than a simulation that attempts to be more realistic than other games that possess just such a feature.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Erwin said:

Yes this is also frustrating.  But, the player already has so much unrealistic "god's eye view" and control, that it seems that this is one area where some FOW is appropriate.  One cannot always guarantee what a unit can see until it gets to that spot.  So, more a feature of FOW rather than a problem imo.

The game UI should never "lie" to the user. Either remove the feature or fix it. It's silly to claim the UI showing one thing while it's actually another is a "feature" and not a "problem".

1 hour ago, Erwin said:

Yeah, maybe...  but again we already have an unrealistic amount of control, and these issues are solved by playing enuff to build up experience. Experience helps a lot.

 

1 hour ago, Erwin said:

Again, this ability comes from experience.  Part of the challenge and fun of this game is that experience is rewarded.  Seems like newbies want to jump in and be as good as those who have been playing for years.

I've been playing CM for almost 20 years. I have experience. Telling people to "play more" to overcome obvious deficiencies in the UI keeps the game as a niche market. You might want the UI to be difficult to understand and use, but the vast majority of people who play games don't.

1 hour ago, Erwin said:

Yes, but it would also make CM2 much more of an unrealistic game, rather than a simulation that attempts to be more realistic than other games that possess just such a feature.

This is a common argument when people make suggestions to improve a game's UI: "It would make the game less realistic".

Games by their very nature are unrealistic. You want to make CM more realistic? Remove the LOS feature completely and only show the parts of the map that units can see. Or just show what the Commander can see and make him try to figure out the situation from runners, shouting, and radios (if he has one). That's realism. But who would play a game like that? Even less than currently play CM.

If a commercial game is not fun, it's not going to be a success. Improving the LOS feature would go a long way to improving the CM experience for players and make the game more fun, which would translate into more sales.

Edited by Rocket-Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Erwin, don't you think the 'gods eye' view can be both a blessing and a curse because LoS can be very misleading from that view. I would at least like a button I could press that gave me LoS with the terrain features blacked/grayed out I can't see from my unit's position. Having to drag the cursor around is time consuming. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...