Redleg Posted August 9, 2000 Share Posted August 9, 2000 this thread is about infantry platoon movement, not vehicles. Lets get back to ideas about making infantry platoon movement easier. And it is not intentionaly designed to be tedious, thats silly. It was a design choice to focus on other features or the idea of infantry platoon movement waypoints was not considered. No one designs things to be tedious except the Army and Krieg (Kreig sp?) Rifles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Posted August 10, 2000 Share Posted August 10, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by OberGrupenStompinFeuhrer!: If I have a load of vehicles which need to be moved down a road to the front line before thay can be brought into action, there are potential tactical opportunities for my opponenet due to my logistical challenges. If I have some nifty command which ensures my vehicles don't bunch up, get congested, stop and wait etc, and I use it, I am denying my opponent those tactical opportunities. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, all I can say is that in order to beat me you are going to have to exploit how well or how badly my units move in convoys, you are gonna be in BIG trouble . I would add that contrary to some here, I find this much more of a problem for vehicles than for infantry, and only when the vehicles are forced to stay on roads like in the "All or Nothing" scenario. I agree that infantry movement as it is in the game, although it might be possible to improve it with say, SOPs, is OK as it is. Even if there WERE a "follow me" movement for infantry, I probably wouldn't use it much if at all, because infantry doesn't usually move in column in terrain such as that fund in CM (thjis ain't the jungle of Vietnam...). Henri Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted August 10, 2000 Share Posted August 10, 2000 I agree there should be some way to have vehicles follow each other. I don't think it's needed for infantry. ------------------ And if we abandon any platform, I can assure you it will not be the Macintosh. -Steve My website! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redleg Posted August 10, 2000 Share Posted August 10, 2000 I was not envisioning 'follow me' column formations for infantry, but rather moving and facing infantry platoons in a 'wedge' formation with one command rather than several mouse clicks. The original poster was talking about waypoints for entire platoons to make more complex manuvers easier. As it stands, moving platoons arround and facing them takes several mouse clicks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OberGrupenStompinFeuhrer! Posted August 10, 2000 Share Posted August 10, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Henri: Well, all I can say is that in order to beat me you are going to have to exploit how well or how badly my units move in convoys, you are gonna be in BIG trouble . I would add that contrary to some here, I find this much more of a problem for vehicles than for infantry, and only when the vehicles are forced to stay on roads like in the "All or Nothing" scenario Henri<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> On your first point, I would agree with you (assuming there is an "if" in that sentence somewhere). When I play I try to use all assets available to me, units, terrain, weather, my opponents logistical problems in certain scenarios. I think I agree with most folks on this thread that moving vehicles down a road in convoy is time consuming, frustrating and cumbersome. I would be happy to see a feature included which removed these non-enjoyable aspects of the interface. What I don't want is a feature which does that at the cost of negatively impacting the tactical implications of trying to move a strong armour / vehicle force down a confined route. Obviously I don't rely on this aspect of the game to win, any more than I soley rely on trees, fords, bridges, fog or anything else which affects the tactics employed by both players. If I win or lose it's because of my own ineptitude or my opponents dazzling skill. What I have not really seen in this thread is a sugggestion of how a "follow" command for vehicles woud not impact the tactical realism. We know it would make a few scenarios easier and less frustrating to play. Yet on the one hand the player gets bags of armour to use, on the other there are difficulties in bringing the armour to bear on the enemy in a timely manner. That is an important tactical element IMO. It is also a realistic one. An example of this can be found in George Forty's book, "Road to Berlin". On page 47 there is a photo of a mess of British Bren Carriers in a lane, not moving. The caption reads: "With British forces south of Caumont, 31 July 1944. They even had traffic jams in the front line! This lane is very congested with infantry-filled carriers, all trying to get forward. (IWM - B 8308)". I reckon these guys would have liked a "follow" command, and the Germans were glad they didn't have one! Another example would be the German Ardenne Offensive in December 1944, or 1940 for that matter. The Allies did not think the Germans could get a significant amount of armour through the Ardenne forest with it's confined roads. In this case, the lack of a real life "follow" command affected not only tactical, but strategic thinking. That the German's were able to mount the offensive does not remove the fact that Allied thinking was affected to their initial detriment. A player who can manage their untis more effectively than someone else will have an advantage. If everyone has a "follow" command available, that advantage is nullified. Would it be a leap of logic to ultimately then give everyone the same type of tank? If the actual game play could be made less frustrating in those situations, without affecting that tactical element then fine. I personally can't see how a "follow" command would achieve that. I'd obviously support a feature that could. As someone pointed out earlier, perhaps it's already there as the "move" command. OGSF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hundminen Posted August 10, 2000 Share Posted August 10, 2000 Crumply: IIRC, accepted GI tactic was to not have platoon leaders in front, they were too valuable for that. Rather, the squads would lead, sometimes with scouts out in the front, or going parallel, to flush out any ambush situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crumply Posted August 10, 2000 Author Share Posted August 10, 2000 hund--i hear ya, and i agree. just to state the obvious, it is tedious to have to input the same set of moves(run, crawl, hide) six times. And there is no good reason for it to be like this. The current "group move" is obviously half assed. (and yes, i think CM is far and away the best PC game ever) Maybe I am missing something--can you input multiple commands with the group move? Alt click or something? In which case, i never should have posted this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henri Posted August 10, 2000 Share Posted August 10, 2000 Originally posted by OberGrupenStompinFeuhrer!: What I have not really seen in this thread is a sugggestion of how a "follow" command for vehicles woud not impact the tactical realism. We know it would make a few scenarios easier and less frustrating to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juardis Posted August 10, 2000 Share Posted August 10, 2000 just to throw my hat into the ring... I agree with the need for a follow command or a convoy command. You can code it anyway you want (such as having a HQ unit give an additional command or having each vehicle have an additional command). In real life, if you put a bunch of vehicles on a road, the trailing vehicles will not run up the ass of the lead vehicle, will not try to pass the lead vehicle, and will try to maintain some interval. In CM the task is made painful given the delays involved before executing said command, the rate of speed each unit travels (I understand move is the same rate for each vehicle), and what the AI does when a vehicle does run up the ass of a lead vehicle (i.e., reverse, replot around offending unit, then cause all hell to occur behind it). Once in a line on a road, traffic jams should NOT be a problem, period. ------------------ Jeff Abbott Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts