Jump to content

Engine 5 Wishlist


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Rocket-Man said:

I've been playing CM for almost 20 years. I have experience.

Lol.  Apologies...

2 hours ago, Rocket-Man said:

Remove the LOS feature completely

Yeah, ok.  Agreed.  One should be able to eyeball a situation from ground level. 

The problem wit CM2 is despite claims to the contrary, it is NOT WYSIWYG.  As an experience player you know that there are uncountable examples where one cannot see what the AI sees, and/or one cannot get a unit to have LOS to something that one's  eyeballs tell you should be easy to see.  

1 hour ago, Probus said:

Having to drag the cursor around is time consuming. 

Agreed..  There are so many irritating, time-consuming, make work things one has to do with the CM2 system, like the ACQUIRE routine, or the lack of a convoy routine, a one-click 180 degree arc (like we had in CM1) etc etc. 

We can only start chanting for CM3 and pray that is a game that finally addresses the issues we all complain about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

41. The assault command should have troops go to ground every few seconds to draw less fire, as longs as this is in line with doctrine.

 

42. Infantry movement speed seems too slow, or at least without enough difference between slow and fast.

Edited by fireship4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone suggested this before? The ability to select a quick battle, choose the forces, set up a fiendish defense full of ambushes, target arcs, and keyholed armour-killing guns, save the game, then when you open up again to play (after a long interval so you forget what the forces are) the ability to choose to play as the attacker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Bartokomus said:

-specify how many and what type of rounds in an arty call

Nice, but it's not really how things are done. The observer making the call for fire specifies the target description and the fire direction center decides how many rounds of what type. At least in the US Army. Can't speak for others.

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Erwin said:

Yeah, ok.  Agreed.  One should be able to eyeball a situation from ground level. 

The problem wit CM2 is despite claims to the contrary, it is NOT WYSIWYG.  As an experience player you know that there are uncountable examples where one cannot see what the AI sees, and/or one cannot get a unit to have LOS to something that one's  eyeballs tell you should be easy to see.  

Thus the need to spend some effort working on the LOS system for game engine 5.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a suggestion/wish that I'll bet hasn't been seen yet. When selecting a QB battle, after selecting one side's force, have an option to save the game at that point. This would allow PBEM users to do QB's but still select their own forces (each). That could open up a whole new avenue of battles for people. Anyway, just a thought.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Canuck21 said:

Here's a suggestion/wish that I'll bet hasn't been seen yet. When selecting a QB battle, after selecting one side's force, have an option to save the game at that point. This would allow PBEM users to do QB's but still select their own forces (each). That could open up a whole new avenue of battles for people. Anyway, just a thought.

This is already how the game works... One player starts the QB and chooses a password. The game is saved and sent to the other guy, who also chooses a password and then goes to the screen to purchase forces. Game is saved again, goes back to the first guy who selects his forces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:
6 hours ago, Canuck21 said:

Here's a suggestion/wish that I'll bet hasn't been seen yet. When selecting a QB battle, after selecting one side's force, have an option to save the game at that point. This would allow PBEM users to do QB's but still select their own forces (each). That could open up a whole new avenue of battles for people. Anyway, just a thought.

This is already how the game works... One player starts the QB and chooses a password. The game is saved and sent to the other guy, who also chooses a password and then goes to the screen to purchase forces. Game is saved again, goes back to the first guy who selects his forces.

I think he is referring to single player. In that case you can only save once both sides' forces have been selected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:

This is already how the game works... One player starts the QB and chooses a password. The game is saved and sent to the other guy, who also chooses a password and then goes to the screen to purchase forces. Game is saved again, goes back to the first guy who selects his forces.

 

38 minutes ago, IanL said:

I think he is referring to single player. In that case you can only save once both sides' forces have been selected.

Nuts! I never even thought to try that for some reason (I just gotta start getting some sleep at night instead of playing these games :D  :D  :D ) . Thanks for clueing me in on this. Sheesh 🙄

Edited by Canuck21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
  • At QB start, export the roster of your side as a text file (indented for unit hierarchy), possibly also listing their key equipment (as seen in the "special equipment" slot).
  • Ability to define fixed camera positions that can be called with a shortcut.
  • Use system fonts instead of the tiny pixelish fonts we see today.
  • Ability to run app in a window (as opposed to full screen). This would enable me to see the battlefield while doing my admin in external apps (like map.army).
  • Ability to re-name units or leaders. This would solve the problem that the QB random unit roster gives me 3 "Recon Platoons" (i. e. all with the same name) or multiple leaders with the same name. Of course, the AI could simply avoid that problem by itself. Not a high priority.

Some things that have been mentioned before:

  • Co-op support, i. e. splitting the force of one side between at least 2 players.
  • Contour lines or better terrain shading to see elevations better.
  • LOS check improvement, as asked for by RocketMan.

That said, I am mostly happy with the game as it is. I come from boardgaming and consider CM as a replacement for admin-intensive games like ASL, so graphics etc. do not have a high priority for me.

Edited by LutzP
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/1/2021 at 11:12 PM, fireship4 said:

42. Infantry movement speed seems too slow, or at least without enough difference between slow and fast.

When you choose "slow", they are crawling and searching for mushrooms and are mostly unaware of what's going on around them. When you choose "fast" they run and are not very aware of what's happening around them although they sometimes stop running to shoot after which they carry on running. So there is a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/1/2021 at 11:43 PM, Anson Pelmet said:

set up a fiendish defense full of ambushes, target arcs, and keyholed armour-killing guns

You can kind of do that when you do the AI-movements for one of the sides when you make a quick battle. If you choose to place an AI-group on a spot with the order ambush 500 meter, or what it's called, you give that AI-group a target arc of 500 meters. The only thing you can't do is to decide which AI-group gets the AT-guns. But you could try to paint small squares on certain keyhole places on the 2D quick battle map and give them the order "ambush armour 1000 meters". And then when you choose the enemy's troops you pick a bunch of FO formations from which you remove most of the men  and to which you give an AT-gun. That might work. 

You could try that and play the quick battle in Scenario Author Mode and you will be able to see how the AI placed those small FO formations with AT-guns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LutzP said:

Contour lines or better terrain shading to see elevations better.

Something like this? It is called the cover-arc tool. 

shade.jpg

This makes it easier. Blank bits inside the arc are elevated. Any unit can apply it. 

shadeB.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LutzP said:

I come from boardgaming and consider CM as a replacement for admin-intensive games like ASL, so graphics etc. do not have a high priority for me.

As do may/most of us.  Yes, CM basically killed off my board wargaming as it combined a form of 3D miniatures and an end of reading and memorizing increasingly complex rulebooks.

3 hours ago, BornGinger said:

When you choose "fast" they run and are not very aware of what's happening around them although they sometimes stop running to shoot after which they carry on running.

Unless it's been changed by one of the many updates and patches, units moving QUICK may stop and fire back, an AT team may stop and shoot at tank etc.  Units moving FAST should not stop for anything (unless they are suppressed of course).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/5/2021 at 3:55 AM, chuckdyke said:

Something like this? It is called the cover-arc tool. 

shade.jpg

This makes it easier. Blank bits inside the arc are elevated. Any unit can apply it. 

shadeB.jpg

This works if the height difference in terrain is a drastic change. Otherwise I've found this method unreliable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instead of automating these micromanagements, I think because should focus on making CM coop-friendly. We are playing a coop game (2vs2) right now and are having a total blast. 

Bfc blessed us with being able to micromanage our units with ridiculous detail. Why do you guys want to remove this? ;)

I vote for loving your pixeltruppen more, and instead of renoving the load, divide it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Artkin said:

Instead of automating these micromanagements, I think because should focus on making CM coop-friendly. We are playing a coop game (2vs2) right now and are having a total blast. 

Bfc blessed us with being able to micromanage our units with ridiculous detail. Why do you guys want to remove this? ;)

I vote for loving your pixeltruppen more, and instead of renoving the load, divide it!

More is definitely better

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Artkin said:

Why do you guys want to remove this? ;)

Exactly the camera mode I experimented with RTS mode in the settings and went back to standard. Camera1 should be POV like you see in shooter games. Squad POV of the leader, an AFV driver, gunner, and commander. Camera 2-3-4 only accessible when you select a unit. I didn't buy the game to play for Zeus. 5-9 well they are maps accessible for HQ with C2 updates. I am not holding my breath and using it on Hotseat and playing the AI.  AFV is simulated by Camera1 and the mouse wheel is 1segment for gunner and 2 for unbuttoned. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When in set-up mode I would like to be able to choose to group multiple units so when acquiring their load outs, they are the same, without having to choose acquire for each unit individually.

Map Generator by percentage for each type.

Force generator by percentage for each type.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like there's a real need to be able to better restrict LATW units from using their LATW's, while still allowing them complete freedom with their regular small-arms. Currently, the armoured covered arc restricts all attacks, and while I see the ambush value in that, having the current, all-or-nothing choice doesn't seem particularly realistic. As it currently stands, it seems like we can set an armoured covered arc, in which case they'll never fire at anything else unless the enemy is, literally in the same room...and even then(!), or we don't, in which case they fire off all their limited and precious LATW ammo at the first thing, usually infantry, that pops its head up. Consequently, when actual AFV's show up, they've got nothing left :(

Granted, it may be hard to model for the AI, and certainly morale state should play a role in this (the more upset they are, the more likely they are to just fire off whatever is to hand!), but in general terms, could there not be a way to set a  general, armoured-targets restriction while still leaving them free to normally engage with small arms? Maybe be able to set both armoured and normal target arcs?

Either that, or please loosen up the present, seemingly overly strict limits on their firing at non-AFV targets. Maybe a 10 or 15mtr range, or make that a variable, allowing the player to set their small-arms engagement range, assuming they're in good order of course?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point. I'd like to see a similar choice of targets/rules of engagement for the snipers … but maybe they have more intelligence built-in than I give them credit for. But it would be nice to be able to tell them, for example, "go for tank crews only".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RMM said:

Seems like there's a real need to be able to better restrict LATW units from using their LATW's, while still allowing them complete freedom with their regular small-arms. Currently, the armoured covered arc restricts all attacks, and while I see the ambush value in that, having the current, all-or-nothing choice doesn't seem particularly realistic. As it currently stands, it seems like we can set an armoured covered arc, in which case they'll never fire at anything else unless the enemy is, literally in the same room...and even then(!), or we don't, in which case they fire off all their limited and precious LATW ammo at the first thing, usually infantry, that pops its head up. Consequently, when actual AFV's show up, they've got nothing left :(

Ideally the entire "combat" panel needs to be copied for each weapon the unit has. One copy (with target, target arc, armor target arc) each for main gun, TOW, MG respectively one each for smallarms, dragon, LAW etc.

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...