Platoon movement orders

[LRC]

Is there a plan to have Platoon or Vehicle column movement orders or at least a basic "follow this team/vehicle" .

For 10 groups, repeating 10x time the same path with N waypoints is killing me.

In CM3 (4?5?) maybe ? With a final order for "deploy along this line" would be perfect ? (CM12?)

[Erwin]

No.  This has been an often mentioned "wanna have" since 2007.  So, it must be coming soon, right?

[chuckdyke]

3 hours ago, LRC said:

follow this team/vehicle" .

Try this one in Red Thunder or Final Blitzkrieg Give an infantry unit an embark order on an AFV. You will see they follow the AFV if the AFV is moving. In the other games it works with any transport vehicle but not with tanks.

[Ultradave]

Yes, we know that trick , but that's not really what @LRCwas talking about. Column movement for vehicles in line, following a road, so you don't have to micromanage waypoints for each vehicle in line, or say for an infantry platoon using a traveling overwatch movement style. What would be nice is to give an order with waypoints to the first unit in line, then select each other unit and click a button that says "Follow" and then click on who to follow. Basically it would automatically duplicate the first unit's waypoints.

This was tried and extensively tested, however, it didn't work consistently enough to make it into release. It's a highly desired feature so maybe someday. We can hope. I think that final order part might be a step too far but, hey, you can always ask, right?  Seems like for that there would be so many variables like wanting to deploy in an irregular treeline or behind a meandering wall.

Dave

[George MC]

11 hours ago, LRC said:

Is there a plan to have Platoon or Vehicle column movement orders or at least a basic "follow this team/vehicle" .

For 10 groups, repeating 10x time the same path with N waypoints is killing me.

In CM3 (4?5?) maybe ? With a final order for "deploy along this line" would be perfect ? (CM12?)

My workaround to save my wrist is plot movement orders in platoon packets with 15s min time gaps. This fits into a one minute time slot. Also if something buggers up your carefully crafted plan you don't lose fifteen minutes careful plotting...

[chuckdyke]

The quickest way is Alt+P to show all move paths and click to copy the path of the first vehicle. Not nice if you must do a battalion that way. These 3 vehicles took me a minute. 

Edited June 2, 2021 by chuckdyke

[Howler]

25 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

The quickest way is Alt+P to show all move paths and click to copy the path of the first vehicle. Not nice if you must do a battalion that way. These 3 vehicles took me a minute.

The issue remains in the execution and not the plotting itself. Formations can be selected and then the waypoints can be moved accordingly. You've shown this can be accomplished fairly quickly. The challenge is in who needs 'X' second of pause so as to not break the formation (eg wedge or column). For example with vehicles, which one and where in the formation will it bog? If the lead vehicle slows/bogs, the follow-ons will start to route around it.

That 'route around' behavior is likely something we all want to retain. So, when/which use cases do we want troops *not* to move around obstructions?

Troops are already not as dispersed during movement as we would like. How much "bunching" are we willing to tolerate when the lead element encounters a wall/hedge/forest/etc.?

For these reason and a few more - it's never been incorporated in game.

[Erwin]

56 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

The quickest way is Alt+P to show all move paths and click to copy the path of the first vehicle. Not nice if you must do a battalion that way. These 3 vehicles took me a minute. 

Yes, this is the only way I have found in all these years.  A great example of needless and very time-consuming "make work" which is dull and not entertaining.  Have long said that the game itself is very good.  But, the UI and the effort it takes for "convoy" missions and ACQUIRE needs to be addressed.  All hail CM3.

[chuckdyke]

We need 10 action hexes between vehicles which travel in convoy. That means roughly a pause of 10 sec-15 sec between vehicles going fast. After a minute you should be able to adjust your convoy. 

[chuckdyke]

1 minute ago, Erwin said:

All hail CM3.

Yes, if you click on a road and your last waypoint is on the road the program should move your vehicles on the road from A to B. There shouldn't be a requirement to click 12 times for each vehicle. 

[Bulletpoint]

4 hours ago, Ultradave said:

What would be nice is to give an order with waypoints to the first unit in line, then select each other unit and click a button that says "Follow" and then click on who to follow. Basically it would automatically duplicate the first unit's waypoints.

This was tried and extensively tested, however, it didn't work consistently enough to make it into release.

This is also the method I thought would work, so I'm wondering what it was that made it unworkable.

As long as the game added an extra initial waypoint to direct the follower to the starting point of the lead vehicle, omitted copying the last waypoint ( to avoid sending all vehicles to the exact same spot) and added an automatic 15 second pause to let the first vehicle move ahead first, I don't see why it wouldn't work.

The only thing I could see happening would be that if the first vehicle bogged, the following vehicles would end up in a tangle, but that also sometimes happens when plotting all the waypoints manually.

Edited June 2, 2021 by Bulletpoint

[womble]

If you make a unit which has been given a "follow" command simply stop at the same time (not in the same place) as the element it is following, you shouldn't get much tangle, if each following unit is told to follow the unit in front of it (rather than the lead unit)... It wouldn't be unreasonable for an out-of-combat evolution to have most-of-a-minute wait to see whether the lead vehicle unbogged, and would stop the rest of the convoy driving obliviously into the fire lane, if a lead vehicle suddenly had a dreadful deliberate.

[Bulletpoint]

16 hours ago, womble said:

If you make a unit which has been given a "follow" command simply stop at the same time (not in the same place) as the element it is following, you shouldn't get much tangle, if each following unit is told to follow the unit in front of it (rather than the lead unit)... It wouldn't be unreasonable for an out-of-combat evolution to have most-of-a-minute wait to see whether the lead vehicle unbogged, and would stop the rest of the convoy driving obliviously into the fire lane, if a lead vehicle suddenly had a dreadful deliberate.

Yes, that's also a way to get around this. But it would need additional coding to make the follow on vehicle aware that it was in a special mode that relates to the lead vehicle. The beauty of just copying movement node data from one unit to another is that it's a very simple solution and that the following vehicle doesn't even know it's doing convoy movement. It's just following a waypoint route like normal.

But in any case, they tried to do it, and they couldn't for some reason.

[Howler]

5 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

Yes, that's also a way to get around this. But it would need additional coding to make the follow on vehicle aware that it was in a special mode that relates to the lead vehicle. The beauty of just copying movement node data from one unit to another is that it's a very simple solution and that the following vehicle doesn't even know it's doing convoy movement. It's just following a waypoint route like normal.

But in any case, they tried to do it, and they couldn't for some reason.

Possible reasons:

1) what distance to maintain between 'travelling' elements? 15m, 25m, 50m, etc.. We already know that maintaining spacing within an element is an issue (too bunched up).

2) path finding - while much improved - still rears it ugly head depending on the quality/condition of the map. Older maps not refined/updated to incorporate current terrain objects resulting to make this more apparent.

3) Magic! How would individual elements upon having lost LOS to their 'lead' know when to stop?

4) when the 'lead' element is destroyed, engaged in an ambush, or otherwise unable to continue (immobilized/bogged) - what happens?

5) Any new command introduced needs to be absolutely bulletproof. You need to look no further than the 'Hull Down' to see how that was initially accepted. We can be a critical crowd...

I can go on but let's not pretend the beta testers and BFC didn't give it their all. I can roll off a few other reasons as you like...

[Bulletpoint]

33 minutes ago, Howler said:

Possible reasons:

1) what distance to maintain between 'travelling' elements? 15m, 25m, 50m, etc.. We already know that maintaining spacing within an element is an issue (too bunched up).

2) path finding - while much improved - still rears it ugly head depending on the quality/condition of the map. Older maps not refined/updated to incorporate current terrain objects resulting to make this more apparent.

3) Magic! How would individual elements upon having lost LOS to their 'lead' know when to stop?

4) when the 'lead' element is destroyed, engaged in an ambush, or otherwise unable to continue (immobilized/bogged) - what happens?

5) Any new command introduced needs to be absolutely bulletproof. You need to look no further than the 'Hull Down' to see how that was initially accepted. We can be a critical crowd...

I can go on but let's not pretend the beta testers and BFC didn't give it their all. I can roll off a few other reasons as you like...

I'm not pretending anything. Just puzzled why they couldn't make it work.

 

1: Decided by the player using pauses just like current system.

2: Pathfinding along the road is done by the player, but only once.

3: They wouldn't - that's the point. The command would only copy/paste the waypoints of one vehicle to another, so no extra AI coding would be necessary.

4: Same as when the lead element is ambushed or bogged in the current system.

5: I think the hull down command works just fine.

Edited June 3, 2021 by Bulletpoint

[Bulletpoint]

Double post.
 

Edited June 3, 2021 by Bulletpoint

[Howler]

4 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I' not pretending anything. Just puzzled wh they couldn't make it work.

 

1: Decided by the player using pauses just like current system

2: Pathfinding along the road is done by the player, but only once

3: They wouldn't - that's the point. The command would only copy/paste the waypoints of one vehicle to another, so no extra AI coding would be necessary

4: Same as when the lead element is ambused or bogged in the current system

5: I think the hull down command works just fine

The problem might be with my comprehension of the feature being discussed. Are we looking at a command to allow movement in column exclusively? If so, why introduce a command with limited use to an already crowded panel? Can't we already copy/paste movement now by selecting the parent command (aka double-click)? Then move/pause waypoints around as desired?

I thought the feature being requested included moving commands in wedge/line/column formation across any terrain (not limited to roads) with a defined spacing appropriate for the desired formation. My apologies.

I don't mind responding to your points if you were envisaging something other than a copy/paste of both waypoints and pause which the current available mechanics don't do (eg pauses aren't copied over). I assume it would be expected of the feature to sort elements belonging to different organizations on the fly...

Otherwise, given the fact we still can't cross bridges or road intersections (the latter being CMCW Fleeing Altdorf) with 100% certainty; I understand why this feature has failed to appear. Surely, I can't be only one noticing 'quirks' in the path finding as it is now. Asking this to be mirrored to every element can only lead to more frustration (new players more so). A wise vendor seeks to minimize such things... making their decision to not implement it perfectly understandable and rational. Assuming a design consideration is improving ease of use while avoiding additional frustration.

Anyhow, apologies for not fully grasping what is being sought. I'll go back into the background.

 

[Bulletpoint]

1 hour ago, Howler said:

I thought the feature being requested included moving commands in wedge/line/column formation across any terrain (not limited to roads) with a defined spacing appropriate for the desired formation. My apologies.

No problem. I can see that we were talking about two different things.

The thing I was hoping to see was not some elaborate formation movement system - just a way to copy waypoints from a lead vehicle to the vehicle following it.

On big maps with winding roads, it's a real joy kill to have to plot so many waypoints for each vehicle. It can easily be 40-50 waypoints for each vehicle, and there can easily be 30 vehicles that need to be sent from the deployment zone and up to the front.

With infantry, it's much easier, because you can just doubleclick to select a whole platoon, and then give them a few basic waypoints, and they will find their own way through the actual terrain. If the area is clear this is no problem. But vehicles have to stay on the exact centre of the roads to not get bogged in muddy conditions, or throw a track from going through too many fences/walls etc.

Edited June 3, 2021 by Bulletpoint

[Erwin]

+1   All good points.  And they have all been made for many years now.  

[Freyberg]

On 6/2/2021 at 11:55 AM, LRC said:

Is there a plan to have Platoon or Vehicle column movement orders or at least a basic "follow this team/vehicle" .

...

For some reason there are certain mathematical problems, like the 'travelling salesman problem' and the 'three body problem', that seem like they should be easy, but for some reason are insoluble by a mathematical algorithm.

BF have found the 'follow the leader' problem to be similarly not worth the effort of solving. Mathematics is funny like that...

[chuckdyke]

9 minutes ago, Freyberg said:

BF have found the 'follow the leader' problem to be similarly not worth the effort of solving. Mathematics is funny like that...

We have a squad which can be split but us long they are not split they can move on the same path to unite them again in one squad is easy but not as easy as splitting them up.  Vehicles could be the same, a platoon which could be split up like we can with an infantry squad. It is a wish-list for the next engine. I think we go the wrong path of 'Follow'. Split and combine is what we should be looking at. 

[Howler]

2 hours ago, chuckdyke said:

We have a squad which can be split but us long they are not split they can move on the same path to unite them again in one squad is easy but not as easy as splitting them up.  Vehicles could be the same, a platoon which could be split up like we can with an infantry squad. It is a wish-list for the next engine. I think we go the wrong path of 'Follow'. Split and combine is what we should be looking at. 

It isn't easy and results in stragglers not to mention the spacing is too close while on the move. Why everyone seems to think this is easy all of a sudden must have not experienced the path finding issues only recently alleviated (not corrected) with "withdraw" and movement generally in close terrain.

How would this magical 'follow' command work exactly? All I've seen mentioned is a 'replicate' function which would also include pause(s). You'd still need to tweak it as vehicles differ in speed. Infantry differ in both number of men and wounded men in a given element. How far could the last element be from it's lead to be included? What happens when there's impassable terrain between the lead and follow unit?

I've never been involved in devising/testing this feature but can readily understand the desire to not include/clutter the  UI panel with a player command that would rarely function as intended.

Please do continue to believe BFC is being mean by holding this back from us.

Oh, and explain to me how 'Hunt' would behave when a mixed formation of (light/heavy/tracked/wheeled/transport/etc.) vehicles? And, again with a mix of vehicles and infantry? We can repeat with a mix of Fast/Quick/Move/Slow...

I'd rather they fix 'Hunt' and then move on to next quirk (eg infantry dispersal/spacing).

 

EDIT: I micro manage and know full well the tedium of tweaking individual elements. It's brutal, but adding a 'cheat' key that wouldn't work reliably would only force me to continue to use 'double-click', shift way point, add pause, repeat...

Edited June 4, 2021 by Howler

[chuckdyke]

6 minutes ago, Howler said:

not experienced the path finding issues

A squad consist of 2 or 3 teams. They move on the same path unless you split them up. Instead of making a follow order have them moving in concert until split up decided by the player. The feature already exists in infantry units on a squad level why not on a platoon level with other units? An armoured platoon has depending on the country let us say 5 tanks. Make their movement orders on platoon level as one unit until split up by the player.

Edited June 4, 2021 by chuckdyke

[Howler]

9 minutes ago, chuckdyke said:

A squad consist of 2 or 3 teams. They move on the same path unless you split them up. Instead of making a follow order have them moving in concert until split up decided by the player. The feature already exists in infantry units on a squad level why not on a platoon level with other units? 

It doesn't already exist. Spotting updates continuously over the course of a 60 second slice and teams have varied movement rates depending on status (number of KIA/Wounded). I'm not sure what feature you're alluding to. When I displace a squad, I alter waypoint movement rates (eg Fast/Quick) of the individual elements accordingly.

 

EDIT: Again, it might be my not understanding what is being requested.

Edited June 4, 2021 by Howler

[chuckdyke]

8 hours ago, Howler said:

Again, it might be my not understanding what is being requested.

When we select a group they should be treated as one unit and when we plot a route they all should share the same route. But it keeps splitting up in three different directions.