iggi Posted May 8, 2000 Share Posted May 8, 2000 Has it ever happenned to you that a group of your squads that are very near each other come under fire? Of course it has. Sometimes, due to 3D terrain, only one squad actually gets fired upon while the LOS from the enemy to your other squads is blocked. The result is that only one of your squads returns fire while the other two 'wait' until the minute is up for you the player to tell them to go and help thier buddies. Wouldn't an extra order be of help here? One that links the 3 squads to work together. Example: You have squads A,B and C. You select squad A and press space bar. The list of orders appears. One of the orders is coop. You click on coop. Now you click on squad B and C. This would mean that you have linked the 3 squads together. Note: For linking to work there probably should be a maximum distance limit between squads. Now, if the three squads are stationary and one of the three(say A) comes under fire, the other two will move over closer if thier LOS is blocked from the unit that is firing on squad A. Squad B and C will therefore support Squad A within a turn in coop mode without waiting for the minute turn to elapse so that the player can update the decision cycle. [This message has been edited by iggi (edited 05-08-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tom w Posted May 8, 2000 Share Posted May 8, 2000 I could be wrong but I think this has been covered. We'll see in the Gold Demo shortly I hope There will be the ability to group units I could be wrong but I suspect we can group them for the purpose of targeting as well. The grouping feature when all your units target the same enemy unit might work like your co-op suggestion. As I understand it LIVE units do not block LOS so they should all be able to see and shoot through each other, even when tightly packed. Live Tanks do not block LOS or LOF. Knocked out tanks that are not flaming and smoking also DO NOT, and will not, block LOS and LOF. I suspect you will not have the same problem or situation in the release version... thats just IMHO... -tom w <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by iggi: Has it ever happenned to you that a group of your squads that are very near each other come under fire? Of course it has. Sometimes, due to 3D terrain, only one squad actually gets fired upon while the LOS from the enemy to your other squads is blocked. The result is that only one of your squads returns fire while the other two 'wait' until the minute is up for you the player to tell them to go and help thier buddies. Wouldn't an extra order be of help here? One that links the 3 squads to work together. Example: You have squads A,B and C. You select squad A and press space bar. The list of orders appears. One of the orders is coop. You click on coop. Now you click on squad B and C. This would mean that you have linked the 3 squads together. Note: For linking to work there probably should be a maximum distance limit between squads. [This message has been edited by iggi (edited 05-08-2000).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iggi Posted May 8, 2000 Author Share Posted May 8, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I suspect we can group them for the purpose of targeting as well.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Note the difference in what I am suggesting. My coop order is more like an if then order. Iknow units do not block LOS. Terrain does. Grouping squads close together does not guarantee that all the squads will have LOS to a threat to anyone of them. The LOS block is caused by the terrain. Initially only one squad will come under fire. I think that by grouping the squads with a coop order and selecting which squads coop, the squads not under fire that are out of LOS should move over to attack the threat that is attacking the other squad in that group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ol' Blood & Guts Posted May 8, 2000 Share Posted May 8, 2000 Now that, iggi, is a feature I like. And I don't think that would be hard to code. Which is my basis of my arguments on a lot of these features. I think that feature may also tie into the AI calculations somehow. But as for the group move feature, I don't really think that it "bounds" units to "help" one another as iggi mentions. What I really think, the command iggi is referring to is more like "cover" rather than "co-op". Again, I think this has been covered before, but I can't remember what the final decision was on this. Maybe this feature is already in the AI calculations. But you know, it seems like the infantry kinda already do this to some extent with the Tac-AI. It seems I've seen a situation in LD as where my infantry root out the enemy infantry from a foxhole/scattered tree tile and they advance into it without the direct order to do so. I could be mistaken though, but I'm pretty sure I saw that happen. But when I think about it, in the situation you descibed, the way I see this happening, if the AI has improved since the Beta, is if all squads were advancing and one squad came under fire, that the other squads would stop and support the fire fight. But I can only see this happening using the "sneak" command. There was some thread a WHILE back where Fionn descibed his take on the AI levels of the current build of that time. Have no idea where that thread is though. ------------------ "Why don't we say that we took this one chance, and fought!" "Stupid humans. Hahahahahahaha!" --from the film Battlefield Earth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iggi Posted May 8, 2000 Author Share Posted May 8, 2000 Well mabye it's a question of the tac AI in the beta not being strong enough. We'll see what is in the gold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tom w Posted May 8, 2000 Share Posted May 8, 2000 iggi: Thanks for clearing up your suggestion. Now that I understand your co-operation order I do like it as well. I like the way you say, If this, then that, sort of like an alliance of squads, if anyone of them takes fire, all in the co-op will move to a clear LOS and return fire, now I think that would be realistic within a certain distance if they all had clear communication with a HQ unit, sure why not.... Great suggestion, too bad its too late for CM1 -tom w ------------------ <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"Remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country." G. S. Patton <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> [This message has been edited by tom w (edited 05-08-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iggi Posted May 8, 2000 Author Share Posted May 8, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>sort of like an alliance of squads, if anyone of them takes fire, all in the co-op will move to a clear LOS and return fire,<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes Tom, that's what I meant. I can imagine a Sgt or capt screaming at the squads telling them to move up and put fire ito that treeline. Point being that squads very close to each other should try to support each other even if they are out of LOS from the threat. Instead on trying to force this reaction accross the board, I thought it would be easier to impliment using a coop order so that this feature would not kick in when the player wants to avoid it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iggi Posted May 8, 2000 Author Share Posted May 8, 2000 If there are others that like the idea but are too shy, stand up man and speak up. Even you don't like it speak up. Steve might like the idea but if he thinks that people are not interested he'll think it's not worth the effort. So if you like the idea, don't be shy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tom w Posted May 8, 2000 Share Posted May 8, 2000 I LIKE the IDEA It (I'm guessing here) should not be that hard to code. I like iggi's Co-op command Idea But Then again I'm the radical that likes Terrain FOW, inaccuracies on the map you "think" you see before you, and an enhanced role for Recon units (to determine where the inaccuraicies really are) and the idea that live units should block LOS and LOF so perhaps I should just shut-up and wait for the Gold Demo. I have pre-ordered and I am one of the faithful, who love this game, so I hope my support for iggi's co-op idea is not discounted.... its a GREAT Idea, its like tac AI that you can order to Co-operate to return fire, no problem -tom w (not shy as you can see) <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by iggi: So if you like the idea, don't be shy. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ------------------ <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"Remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country." G. S. Patton <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tom w Posted May 8, 2000 Share Posted May 8, 2000 oops sorry how Can I delete this post? its a duplicate [This message has been edited by tom w (edited 05-08-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted May 8, 2000 Share Posted May 8, 2000 I HATE the idea! What you are doing is reverting control over your units to the AI throughout the turn. This game isn't about how the AI controls my units but about how I control my units. A good and competent battle plan will already have all the support that poor Squad A will ever need. If I want one unit to cover another I will just placed it in a position to overwatch and allow it to enagage any threats that pop up, which it will! Overwatch, suppressive fire, proper scouting, these are YOUR tools to use and I feel that an artifical 'support' order is redundant. Also, a point must be made that the AI has evolved by huge leaps since the days of the demo. Units are more logical in their engagements and target selection yet still will occasionaly get target fixiated or blind enough to convince you that they are grunts in the heat of combat. And I laugh when someone says 'Shouldnt be too hard to code' when it comes to ANY feature in CM. Hey, at this point, if it was easy to code it would have already been in the damn game! You are asking for a command that will MONUMENTALLY change how a unit perceives the battlefied. It will now need to be (at your discretion) more globably involved in the action around it, yet also have the ability to suddenly FORGET these things when you turn off the command. What you are asking for is for a unit to now not only be concerned about its own well being but the well being of any or all squads which it is assigned to CO-OP! Now this is already done to some extent by the StratAI (or maybe the other AI, I dont know I get them all confused) but to artificially give command of my units actions fully to the AI isnt very wise, IMO. Lets take your idea a step forward. I tell Squad B to 'CO-OP' Squad A and they both move out. Squad A gets jumped and now Squad B's CO-OP order kicks in. Well who is to say HOW its going to react? Perhaps it should charge, maybe flank, maybe hit the ground as it assertains that it doesnt have enough firepower to make a difference. What if its plan needs several turns to accomplish? Oh great I get to sit back and watch as the AI fights my battles for me! Oh yea..FUN! How is the Co-OP ordered unit going to react and for how long? Who is the CO-Oped unit going to attack if Squad A is attacked by more than one enemy unit? What If someone is co-oping B, how will they respond? Troops in combat are at their core selfish and self preserving individuals, if they werent there would be no need for NCO's. In CM, you represent the soul or presence of the entire command structure in your force. By giving a CO-OP command you are effectivly relinquishing this type of command to the AI which BTS has already said will NOT happen. If you plan your moves and orders wisely you wont NEED this sort of command. You want squad A to be supported? Well hold a squad and an MG with good fields of fire back and the AI will be more than happy to support them for you. To tell you the truth, I wouldnt WANT my units to neccesarily know what the other units are going through! It's that 'Poor Bastard' mentality, as in "Poor Bastard, oh well, better him than me!". While there are SOME commands I would like to see added, this isn't one of them and I feel totally redundant if you think ahead and plan your orders well. From personal experience, I have never had a problem getting my MG teams to engage enemy units that were firing on exposed troops of mine when assaulting a treeline for example, and that was without the use of any artificial command to do so. They did it because I positioned them in a way to do so. The AI will behave in the manner that you are requesting without you having to create a new command to do so and the command you want will be more a detriment to command than an addition. I would highly recoomend that you put on hold all game suggestions to at least you have PLAYED the real thing! It really is a completely new experience and you won't be disapointed. If after all that, you play the game and you still think a Co-Op command is needed than I would hazard to guess that your command style just plain SUCKS and you have no business being a leader of men! But then your repeawted loses to players and AI will attest to that! Madmatt...Cry Havoc! ------------------ If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ! And if it's NOT on CMHQ then its just GOT to be on CMHQ-ANNEX... CMHQ http://combathq.thegamers.net CMHQ-Annex http://cmhq.tzo.com Both now proud members of the Combat Mission WebRing [This message has been edited by Madmatt (edited 05-08-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tom w Posted May 8, 2000 Share Posted May 8, 2000 UNCLE! uncle uncle uncle..... -tom w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tom w Posted May 8, 2000 Share Posted May 8, 2000 Hey iggi... I'm not going to fight with MadMatt's logic you're on your own, I just decided to turn off my own co-op orders, its a self preservation thing you know. -tom w ------------------ <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"Remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country." G. S. Patton <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> [This message has been edited by tom w (edited 05-08-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted May 8, 2000 Share Posted May 8, 2000 And here a few more objections to the propsed Co-Op command. It seems that you want this heavily dependant on LOS both to the unit being CO-OPED and the Enemy. Well how would one unit know WHERE the enemy fire is coming from if they cant see it themselves? And what if the CO-OPED unit is under fire from several different directions, where does the unit with the CO-OP order move to? This whole situation becomes more and more intangled and if you had just ensured that the lead squad was under friendly cover in the first place this would never have happened. Mistakes happen, and by allowing units to get mauled because they are poorly lead is part of it. At the core of your suggstion you seem to take issue with the fact that your units don't seem to help each other out when the going gets rough. By proper placement of support elements (i.e. smoke, MG's, covering squads) you can ensure that a unit will have the support that your Co-OP command would un-neccesarily enforce. Just trying to make some of my points above a little clearer. The AI is far better than in the demo and if you send a platoon across a field and one squad gets engaged they others will lend a hand, unless of course their own situations are more pressing... Its not a bad idea, its just not needed anymore... Madmatt ------------------ If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ! And if it's NOT on CMHQ then its just GOT to be on CMHQ-ANNEX... CMHQ http://combathq.thegamers.net CMHQ-Annex http://cmhq.tzo.com Both now proud members of the Combat Mission WebRing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iggi Posted May 8, 2000 Author Share Posted May 8, 2000 Well I start work in 3 hours so I should have time to respond to Madmatt. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>What you are doing is reverting control over your units to the AI throughout the turn. This game isn't about how the AI controls my units but about how I control my units.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>The turn represents one minute.It is unrealistic to expect that a squad that comes underfire cannot expect to have a squad that is ten meters away from it crawl over, get LOS to it's threat and help out. My idea was intended for stationary units, not units on the move. Example I have three squads stationary in a ditch. A threat appears from an angle that offers LOS to only one squad. Don't you think that the other two squads should shuffle over to help the squad under fire even if thier LOS to the threat was originaly blocked? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>A good and competent battle plan will already have all the support that poor Squad A will ever need. If I want one unit to cover another I will just placed it in a position to overwatch and allow it to enagage any threats that pop up, which it will!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Expect the unexpected. You need standard operating procedures. A coop order is such a procedure. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>an artifical 'support' order is redundant.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Why is it artificial? Supporting each other is the most natural thing squads can do. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Also, a point must be made that the AI has evolved by huge leaps since the days of the demo. Units are more logical in their engagements and target selection yet still will occasionaly get target fixiated or blind enough to convince you that they are grunts in the heat of combat.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Well I hope so. I'll have to wait until the demo for that. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>And I laugh when someone says 'Shouldnt be too hard to code' when it comes to ANY feature in CM.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Well I never said that, and I know you don't think I said that. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> You are asking for a command that will MONUMENTALLY change how a unit perceives the battlefied.I would hope so, in a good way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted May 8, 2000 Share Posted May 8, 2000 So what you want is really a shuffle over and see what this noise is all about command as opposed to a HELP AT ALL COST command? Hmm... I still think this may already be happening without any direct intervention. Tell you what, I will test this out tonight. I will try and create a little mockup with say a platoon of US against a fixed German defense of a MG and maybe a sole squad. I will try and make it so that only one squad can me seen by the germans but with valid LOS VERY close to the other US troops. I will see what happens. Who knows, maybe they WILL lend a hand. Even if they don't your comment above said it best. We are only talking about 60 seconds here at MOST (more likely around 30 seconds unless the first squad gets attacked in the very first second of the turn) that a supporting unit would sit idle. I would think that it would take a few seconds (say mmmm 30?) for the NCO of squad B to get a handle on the situation (WHERE the fire is coming from and HOW MUCH is incoming) before he goes and exposes his men to this same fire. But I will test it out and see what happens Again, I understand where your coming from but I just don't think from a coding and gameplay perspective it will be worthwhile. Madmatt ------------------ If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ! And if it's NOT on CMHQ then its just GOT to be on CMHQ-ANNEX... CMHQ http://combathq.thegamers.net CMHQ-Annex http://cmhq.tzo.com Both now proud members of the Combat Mission WebRing [This message has been edited by Madmatt (edited 05-08-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iggi Posted May 8, 2000 Author Share Posted May 8, 2000 Great. I'll look for your results tonight after work. True that the time we are talking about is 60 seconds at max and less than that on average. It would look cool, like they were alive if you saw them humping it over a few meters to lay on the fire that was raking thier buddies. [This message has been edited by iggi (edited 05-08-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ol' Blood & Guts Posted May 8, 2000 Share Posted May 8, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tom w: But Then again I'm the radical that likes Terrain FOW, inaccuracies on the map you "think" you see before you<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sounds like seeing oasis in the North African desert. We'll have to wait till CM3 for that one, eh? Ha! I'm staying out of this one between Madmatt and iggi, for fear of putting my foot in my mouth again. [This message has been edited by Ol' Blood & Guts (edited 05-08-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted May 8, 2000 Share Posted May 8, 2000 Something kept nagging me on my drive home from work and I finally figured it out. HOW would a unit know how far to move? What I mean is, they have this 'cover' order right? And they see alpha squad get nailed 50 meters ahead. Ok, well they dont know WHERE the enemy is, so how would they know WHERE to shuffle too? SOP would say NOT to group too many men in one spot so I doubt they would go to the same spot as the A squad. Isn't this breaking the FOW that is so critical to the game? Once the turn is resolved you regain control and can send them over to support yourself. I just really dont think that we as players want to relinquish this sort of control to the AI. It just seems like this command is giving a little too much autonomy to the squads. If they were truley that self motivated to act would there be a command delay? Why else would C&C be such a vital aspect of the game unless the true scale of the game was meant to be platoon and higher? I think the level of thinking that you want is too specific to what CM is going for. The individual actions of squad are abstracted somewhat (as are their positions in a tile) and for all we know maybe a GI or two from squad B DOES peak his head over and see what all the noise is about. I guess what you are really asking for is a HUNT style command for infantry to be activated only when a fellow unit is attacked. Once Squad gets shoot at squad B would move until contact is made. Ok, I have no problem with the idea. No we factor in time penalties for FOW and spotting, Command Delay and natural hesitancy to walk into a firefight, which in effect you are ordering and WHOOPS, turn is over! See what I am getting at? I think this is too much to expect the AI to handle in a 60 second turn. Like I said before, while I think this sort of 'Lets get them' menatality may be cool, I think it would be VERY hard to code and much more complex than just giving the move out order yourself the following turn. It just seems like this order, unlike every existing order is too conditional. How often are you adjacent to a friendly unit which is getting shot but which in turn you can not trace a LOS to the enemy? No other order that can be issued has such limitations applied to its usage. I would think that for a new command to be added to the exiting suite it will have to have a much more broad usage than that. Abstractions are neccesary to a game like this and unfortunately this command may be a little too specific... Madmatt... ------------------ If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ! And if it's NOT on CMHQ then its just GOT to be on CMHQ-ANNEX... CMHQ http://combathq.thegamers.net CMHQ-Annex http://cmhq.tzo.com Both now proud members of the Combat Mission WebRing [This message has been edited by Madmatt (edited 05-08-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted May 9, 2000 Share Posted May 9, 2000 Well, I am in favour of the addition of SOPs to squads. E.g. we could tell them to ambush and then select tanks as their no 1 target so that they'd ignore infantry who walk into the ambush zone and wait for tanks. I'm also in favour for allowing people to "LINK" units and actions together (again useful for ambush, hide or, if then do this type orders). However, the coding of all that kind of stuff is a MAJOR job. Just recently some AI changes went in which make the AI react much more smartly to events mid-movie. I think that the beta demo AI was much poorer than the Gold AI and that the need for these commands is minimal in the Gold version. On the other hand I do still see room for improvement and have some ideas written down for SOPs in CM2 if that becomes possible. My idea is to replicate "doctrine" by allowing players to select their unit's doctrinal training before beginning a game . Whether or not you'd allow that doctrinal setting to be changed mid-game would be another issue entirely. Probably Sovforces wouldn't be able to change it but good quality German forces could adapt to the situations as they encounter them. Anyways, that's for about 12 months from now and not now . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tom w Posted May 9, 2000 Share Posted May 9, 2000 Ok I like the idea of SOP's and the settings for doctrine for troops, granted its a year down the road but this SOP and doctrinal concept based on training makes sense to me. I see Fionn's point and MadMatt's point. I think this issue of the "hunt" order or the Co-op order or the SOP based an a setting for doctrine could have a place in CM 2 for the Eastern front. -tom w ------------------ <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"Remember that no bastard ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country." G. S. Patton <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iggi Posted May 9, 2000 Author Share Posted May 9, 2000 Ok thanks guys. I see you have given it alot of thought. I really have to wait to see the improvements in the gold demo.Until then, this subject is moot. To CM and beyond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts