Chupacabra Posted December 21, 2000 Share Posted December 21, 2000 I was just doing some thinking regarding command delays, and something struck me. The command delay for extremely complex orders is no greater than that for extremely simple ones. This came out of a recent thread in which I gave the example of an American batallion CO ordering one of his companies to capture a ridgeline. As far as I can tell, this is a 4-step process. 1)Batallion CO gives the order to Company CO. 2) Company CO gives more detailed orders to 1-4 Platoon COs. 3) Platoon COs give even more detailed orders to 1-3 squad leaders. 4) Squad leaders disseminate orders to the grunts. Even assuming that all the links in the chain have unbroken radio contact with each other, I'd imagine this process would take anywhere from a minute to 10 or more minutes. On the other hand, imagine that a little while later, as 1st platoon climbs the hill, one of its squads is pinned down by machinegun fire. One of the other squad leaders sees the machinegun's position, and orders the BAR gunner to provide a base of fire while the rest of the squad charges the machinegun. This order probably isn't going to take any longer to give than it took me to type. But in CM, quite complex orders involving moving multiple companies coordinated with armor and artillery support don't take any more time to issue than extremely simple "Follow me!"-type orders. There seems to be a disparity here. My suggestion therefore is to have command delays partially dependent upon either the distance moved or the number of waypoints issued, or a combination of both. I believe this would force players to think ahead even more than now, which IMO is a good thing. I think that the current command delays are a good start and are quite realistic for squad-level movement, but it doesn't feel right to me to be able to coordinate grand maneuvers in ten seconds time. As always, feedback is appreciated. ------------------ Soy super bien soy super super bien soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin Posted December 21, 2000 Share Posted December 21, 2000 I agree. However simulating this would be rather difficult. It would also discourage casual wargamers from playing. ------------------ And if we abandon any platform, I can assure you it will not be the Macintosh. -Steve My website! A major source of Wild Bill scenarios! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Brian Posted December 21, 2000 Share Posted December 21, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chupacabra: I think that the current command delays are a good start and are quite realistic for squad-level movement, but it doesn't feel right to me to be able to coordinate grand maneuvers in ten seconds time. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Okay, I'll nibble on this one. Although I appreciate your logic, which I agree with, by the way, I'm against it for purposes of CM. For me, that would be losing too much control over my game pieces. Moreover, I prefer the challenge of subduing my opponent with the current game engine. Currently, the control I posses over my game pieces with the level of command and control is just right for a most enjoyable game that challenges game mechanics and tactics. What you are proposing would also require a much better expert system. When the unexpected happens to your game pieces, they will need to act in a logical way. Given the current expert systems in the game industry, we're not going to see decent "AI" for a long time. By allowing me some control, the game can account for the unexpected by the current command delay. Merry Christmas! ------------------ Doc God Bless Chesty Puller, Wherever He Is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olle Petersson Posted December 21, 2000 Share Posted December 21, 2000 My guess is that issues like this are being handled a lot better in CM2, since it has changes in the C&C process... Cheers Olle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croda Posted December 21, 2000 Share Posted December 21, 2000 Gotta disagree, Chuppie. My impression has always been that the orders from Bn and Coy have already been given. Everyone already knows the goal of the attack, the routes they are going to take, and what kind of role they are to play in that attack. The only real orders being given are at the squad and platoon level. C&C of Bn and Coy commanders has been discussed before, and since they have no command impact on platoon HQs, I am of the opinion that a command delay from them shoud not be taken into effect. In a structure where Bn commanders could apply their command modifiers to Coy commanders who were withing C&C and where Platoon HQs could receive command bonuses from Coy HQs when they were in C&C, then the type of order delay you are proposing would make more sense. As it stands now, the BN and Coy are just on the field picking up stragglers and commanding mortar teams. They have little impact on the game, and as such, should have little impact on command delay. My 2 cents ------------------ WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! - THIS SIG FILE BELONGS TO A COMPLETE FOO. MR T WOULDN'T BE SO KIND AS TO WRINKLE AN EYEBROW AT THIS UNFORTUNATE BEING. PLEASE OFFER HIS PARENTS AND COHABITANTS ALL SYMPATHY POSSIBLE. MAY BE CONTAGIOUS. CONTAINS ARTIFICIAL SWEETNER, INTELLIGENCE AND WIT. STAND WELL CLEAR AND LIGHT WICK. BY ORDER PETERNZ Damn Croda. That is one funny sig!!! must suck to be you - Hiram Sedai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
engy Posted December 21, 2000 Share Posted December 21, 2000 I completely agree with your first six paragraphs, but I can't bring myself around to agree to your solution (about making command delays dependent on number of waypoints or distance traveled). To keep things short, I'll fire off two "counterexamples" that hopefully will illustrate. 1. I have a squad in woods that I want to get to a building at the other end, but the treeline between me and the building is curved (so that a straight line to the building would cross over open ground). So, in CM, I issue a series of waypoints to keep the squad in the woods on the way to the building. In real life, "Advance to that building along the edge of the treeline" would be the order. So, even though the real order is very simple and would entail little command delay, it needs several CM waypoints to execute. 2. Beginning of game. Low visibility. Meeting engagement. I have a squad I want to run across a *large* open field to get to a patch of woods near the VP. The movement crosses a great distance, but, again, in real life, the order would be, "Get your men to those woods now and don't stop for anything!". There would be little command delay in the real thing, but the proposed solution would unfairly penalize the order. Maybe something more along the lines of your opening paragraphs would be to add command delay for each squad to which a Platoon Leader issues orders. (ie...it's going to take him x seconds to tell squad 1 to take the building, then y more seconds to coordinate squad 2's dash across the street). However, now that I've written it, I'm not sure that's feasible to do. I'm sure someone will come along with an idea. engy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Brian Posted December 21, 2000 Share Posted December 21, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Croda: As it stands now, the BN and Coy are just on the field picking up stragglers and commanding mortar teams. They have little impact on the game, and as such, should have little impact on command delay. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I was under the impression that they had an effect on squads and teams. Aren't the bonus effects of Pltn HQs and Coy HQs cumulative? For example, a squad within C&C of its designated Pltn HQ receives the +1 morale bonus of the HQ. It is also within the command radius of the Coy HQ and is receiving its +2 attack bonus. Is this true or not? (I've actually seen squads to far from their Pltn HQs, and show the red C&C to a close by Coy HQ.) ------------------ Doc God Bless Chesty Puller, Wherever He Is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Galanti Posted December 21, 2000 Share Posted December 21, 2000 I think a squad only gets the bonuses from the leader that it is under direct control from (the one the red line leads too). So, if a squad is closer to a company commander, he gets his bonuses, _instead_ of the platoon commanders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croda Posted December 21, 2000 Share Posted December 21, 2000 Doc B. A unit can only be C&C of one command unit at a time. If the squad is out of C&C of the platoon HQ, but close enough to the Coy or Bn HQ, then they will receive the command bonus from that unit, yet lose their platoon HQ's bonus. ------------------ WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! - THIS SIG FILE BELONGS TO A COMPLETE FOO. MR T WOULDN'T BE SO KIND AS TO WRINKLE AN EYEBROW AT THIS UNFORTUNATE BEING. PLEASE OFFER HIS PARENTS AND COHABITANTS ALL SYMPATHY POSSIBLE. MAY BE CONTAGIOUS. CONTAINS ARTIFICIAL SWEETNER, INTELLIGENCE AND WIT. STAND WELL CLEAR AND LIGHT WICK. BY ORDER PETERNZ Damn Croda. That is one funny sig!!! must suck to be you - Hiram Sedai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Brian Posted December 21, 2000 Share Posted December 21, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Croda: Doc B. A unit can only be C&C of one command unit at a time. If the squad is out of C&C of the platoon HQ, but close enough to the Coy or Bn HQ, then they will receive the command bonus from that unit, yet lose their platoon HQ's bonus. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hmm, some Pltn HQs are stinky... and the Coy HQs are better. May have to change my tactics here and lose some of the Pltn HQs to get the better mods then. Seems kind of ahistorical. Wouldn't both be added, in your opinion? Makes sense to me. ------------------ Doc God Bless Chesty Puller, Wherever He Is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croda Posted December 21, 2000 Share Posted December 21, 2000 I agree with you Brian. Check out this thread below. There was a good deal of discussion on this topic. I think it would be a good idea. Some argued that the Coy and Bn COs had little impact in the field, and thus shouldn't pass their modifiers on. http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/012201.html ------------------ WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! - THIS SIG FILE BELONGS TO A COMPLETE FOO. MR T WOULDN'T BE SO KIND AS TO WRINKLE AN EYEBROW AT THIS UNFORTUNATE BEING. PLEASE OFFER HIS PARENTS AND COHABITANTS ALL SYMPATHY POSSIBLE. MAY BE CONTAGIOUS. CONTAINS ARTIFICIAL SWEETNER, INTELLIGENCE AND WIT. STAND WELL CLEAR AND LIGHT WICK. BY ORDER PETERNZ Damn Croda. That is one funny sig!!! must suck to be you - Hiram Sedai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ciks Posted December 21, 2000 Share Posted December 21, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>A unit can only be C&C of one command unit at a time. If the squad is out of C&C of the platoon HQ, but close enough to the Coy or Bn HQ, then they will receive the command bonus from that unit, yet lose their platoon HQ's bonus.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I don't think it's completely right. SQUADS can get bonuses ONLY from respective Pltn HQ. Teams (mortar, MG, FT etc) get C&C bonus from closest commanding unit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ciks Posted December 21, 2000 Share Posted December 21, 2000 Hehee, i was wrong, squads can be commanded by Company and Battalion commanders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Brian Posted December 21, 2000 Share Posted December 21, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Croda: I agree with you Brian. Check out this thread below. http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/012201.html <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Croda, that was a great discussion. Thanks for the link. However, did anything come out of that? ------------------ Doc God Bless Chesty Puller, Wherever He Is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Croda Posted December 21, 2000 Share Posted December 21, 2000 Not that I'm aware of, if by "anything" you mean was there ever any official BTS statement regarding it. I think there's good rationale on both sides. This may be some of the "advanced C&C" that they are talking about adding to CM2. ------------------ WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! WARNING! - THIS SIG FILE BELONGS TO A COMPLETE FOO. MR T WOULDN'T BE SO KIND AS TO WRINKLE AN EYEBROW AT THIS UNFORTUNATE BEING. PLEASE OFFER HIS PARENTS AND COHABITANTS ALL SYMPATHY POSSIBLE. MAY BE CONTAGIOUS. CONTAINS ARTIFICIAL SWEETNER, INTELLIGENCE AND WIT. STAND WELL CLEAR AND LIGHT WICK. BY ORDER PETERNZ Damn Croda. That is one funny sig!!! must suck to be you - Hiram Sedai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chupacabra Posted December 22, 2000 Author Share Posted December 22, 2000 Just a wee Christmas bump. ------------------ Soy super bien soy super super bien soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Huang Posted December 22, 2000 Share Posted December 22, 2000 This is just a war game, not a real war. The BTS has to design it in this way !! Some do exist in the real world and don't exist here. ------------------ Sgt. Huang I LOVE my country, but my government sucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow 1st Hussars Posted December 22, 2000 Share Posted December 22, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chupacabra: 4) I'd imagine this process would take anywhere from a minute to 10 or more minutes <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Would you seriously want your troops to just sit under a tree drinking tea and waiting for orders while 300mm rockets fell on their positions for that long? If it took 10 minutes for 1 order to go through, a quick battle would be 1000 turns Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts