What would be the best level of control?

[Scott C]

I got to thinking recently that there are several interesting things going on in the current CM interface, and I wondered what the ideal interface might be like. Let me preface by saying that I am in no way dissatisfied with the current interface, nor are these in any way requests of BTS - it's more a philosophical discussion. To illustrate the sort of question I want to ask, consider the problem of a "combat drill," which I am basically using to mean (I might not be totally right, but bear with me) a form of SOP for a single battle. Somewhat along the lines of, "Okay, guys. We've got heavy fire support available, so if you get ambushed, take cover and don't worry about shooting back. The support fire will get the enemy well suppressed, and then we can attack." This might be implemented in, for example, some form of scripting language. There are some nicely conflicting imperatives here. First, this would be good because it gives greater control and is more realistic (such general orders were in fact given in war). On the other hand, it would tend to reduce immersion. Complicating the issue is the fact that this could actually be used to reduce control if such scripts replaced, instead of added to, current commands.

Overall, I see two extremes: one where all units carry out their commands exactly, and one where such scripts as I mentioned are the only way the player can give commands. The latter has the advantages that it gives the units much more "personality" and is much closer to reality, in that a real WWII company commander couldn't micromanage his forces anywhere near as much as we can in CM - unfortunately it also makes the player rather a REMF. As this moves to CM's system of making you the platoon, company, and battalion commanders and on to the "total control" mentality, immersion is increased, since you basically get "down in the dirt" at a greater and greater level of detail.

I'll illustrate with a recent example from the board - Lewis recently wrote (in the "TD survivability" thread) that he would like a "shoot-n-scoot" command. This would move towards more control, obviously. The advantages are that you're more in the TC's pocket (increasing immersion) and have better control. But, there is a certain thrill to desperately watching your last precious Sherman and wondering if it's going to make the right choice.

Sorry for the long post, I was just wondering what people thought the best balance would be. Personally, I think it is pretty good as is, though I would move somewhat towards more control.

------------------

Questions, comments, arguments, refutations, criticisms, and/or sea stories?

[This message has been edited by Scott C (edited 04-15-2000).]

[Username]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Scott C:

...latter has the advantages that it gives the units much more "personality" and is much closer to reality, in that a real WWII company commander couldn't micromanage his forces anywhere near as much as we can in CM -

I'll illustrate with a recent example from the board - Lewis recently wrote (in the "TD survivability" thread) that he would like a "shoot-n-scoot" command. This would move towards more control, obviously. The advantages are that you're more in the TC's pocket (increasing immersion) and have better control. But, there is a certain thrill to desperately watching your last precious Sherman and wondering if it's going to make the right choice.

Sorry for the long post<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well .. since you are sorry.. then its OK.

Believe it or not, no company commander micromanages his units. Thats what the XO or senior staff NCO does .. he puts the shoe leather in the government owned asses.

Given certain terrain, working walky talkies/radios, properly trained personnel, you could micromanage just like in CM. Actually better in WWII than Vietnam! WWII NCOs that served in nam were aghast at how hard it was to control platoons and companies. One, the jungle was a bitch, two, the automatic M16s are so damn loud. Add all the other weapons, screaming, choppers, jets, It was hard on the hearing to say the least.

As far as "shoot'n'scoot", I will have to quote BTS. "Forget all you know about previous wargames,etc". "Start using what would work". I want to use what would work (and did work). Not command a bunch of automatons about.

Personally I want to see the command menus correspond to a units abilitys. This way rookie M10s might not HAVE this shootnscoot ability. I posted that under the tanks vs or TD thread recently.

Lewis