Them's is bodies...

[Kevin Peltz]

Is this a selectable feature, like the level of vegetation or disappearing roofs? I am wondering about CPU hits, not the philosophical aspect. Other games have used bodies in a similar way to reasonable effect (SM's Gettysburg, for instance).

[This message has been edited by Kevin Peltz (edited 05-02-2000).]

[medlinke]

so when will brains and guts be splattered all over the place again? Just kidding...

I think the current incarnation of dead bodies is a good idea. Sometimes you can't see the entire battlefield and to see where people died is a good reference.

Do the dead bodies provide any cover? Hey! Dead Cows were used as cover...

Keith

[Guest KwazyDog]

Kevin, it shouldnt be an issue. If a squad represented by 3 men is removed and replaced by one eliminated soldier, they you are already up two.

Basically, if your system can run the scenario, then the bodies wont be a problem.

[Kevin Peltz]

KwazyDog:

Thanks, I just read the other thread and found out about the non-toggle. Didn't do too good in math at school...

By the way, I ordered that tape about the Scheldt from the Canadian War Amps, it proved to be very useful and informative...

[This message has been edited by Kevin Peltz (edited 05-02-2000).]

[This message has been edited by Kevin Peltz (edited 05-02-2000).]

[Guest Big Time Software]

The level of info you get from clicking on an eliminated enemy unit is the same as what you had for it when it was still in action. In fact, if your intel is poor you might not even know it is actually eliminated.

Like knocked out vehicles, eliminated units continue to give off intel info to you. So if you run up to an eliminated unit you previously had identify as "Infantry?", the info level will change based on standard spotting and identification proceedures (i.e. as if the unit were still functional).

Steve

[Darryl]

For what it's worth...I was a Paramedic in California for 10 years. I had to deal with lots of things that would make the average person scream, and faint. I've seen enough trauma, and I do not wish to see anymore. Yet I do believe it's desireable to denote that battle has a human cost. I think it's a feature that needed to be in, and I'm glad BTS chose to do it in this way.

Just my two cents......

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

Darryl

[Mostro]

Great. That's what I want:

- Know "where all my units go?"

- Obtain information about enemy casualties caused by units after its destruction

Thanks

[Fionn]

Personally speaking I find that the dead bodies as enacted in the game serve a useful log-keeping purpose.

It allows one to keep track of where particularly hard fighting is occuring and to spot your "hero" units at the end of a fight even if they die.

I have, on several occasions had a single cut off squad hold off a platoon or two of enemy troops, inflicting massive casualties on them and earning themselves the "hero" appelation. Without dead bodies there'd be no way for me to see that that unit had killed 50 or 60 enemy before being wiped out but since the dead bodies are in I can hit enter and take a picture of my dead unit and the enemy dead in front of its position and send it to Matt as a really dramatic shot which speaks a thousand exciting words.

The dead bodies as enacted don't enable gore or encourage blood-thirstiness. They merely allow one to keep track of what is happening a little easier.

Check out my POTD on CMHQ to see what I mean.. Who, looking at that, could deny that I had just taken a picture of a titanic struggle (dead tanks, dead bodies, a few Germans and scattering tank crews all around)...

Remove the dead bodies and that picture is much more sterile from both an informational and immersion point of view.

Major Tom,

Steve and Charles have major issues with gore in games so I don't think you have anything to worry about in CM with respect to that. The dead bodies are enacted as tastefully as could be expected given their content.

[Harold Jones]

I very nearly canceled my preorder after reading this thread, but after re-reading the posts from BTS I decided to let my order stand. If I find that I really don't like the bodies scattered around the battlefield I'll just put the game on the shelf and move on. Since the final code is set, my hope is that BTS will include the ability to toggle the marker on or off and/or provide an alternate marker either as a seperate patch or when they make network play available.

[Bil Hardenberger]

I would wait until I saw this feature in action before I ran out and cancelled my order. Wait until you see it in Fionn's newest AAR, you will really get a taste for how it works.

I was an early opponent of the dead body feature, but after playing with it for months, it really is absolutely necessary, and it is not disgusting or morbid either. In fact, in less you are really looking, it is tough sometimes to even see the bodies, especially if you always play at realistic zoom, like I do (with bases on)... the dead bodies will not have bases (just like KOed tanks)so they will not clutter the battlefield.

[CrapGame]

In a word, "Whoa......"

Steve and Charles, you have done it again. I think you have come up with a good, workable solution to a difficult issue. That POTD puts a whole new light and sense of the sacrifices made on that battlefield.

My question to you is this: What happens to the bodies during an operation? More clearly, if you are fighting for a piece of terrain already fought over in the prior battle, have the bodies been cleared between battles by the burial teams?

The reason I am in favor of the bodies is that it seems to give a semblance of an idea of where fighting was particularly heavy. With respect to the multiple battles of an operation, this may give a clue to where the AI believes the most important terrain may be, or hint at favored avenues of advance.

That is why I ask about the permanence of the bodies, not because of bloodlust. I have SPR on DVD if I want to see that.

CrapGame out...

(looking to sneak in one more turn of CE before the boss arrives...)

[Guest tom w]

One Dead body per unit, lieing on the ground, no blood....

Perfect!

The way bodies are modeled in the game the way they will now be, is, in my opinion, simply IDEAL!

Great Work BTS !

-tom w

[All American]

I have another question. When an infantry unit is destroyed, does the representation of the unit switch to a body on the ground or is there transition betwee the switch and do you see the body falling down before it finally rests in it's final pose?

All American

[kmead]

I agree that a marker is needed, 1 body is a good compromise and no gore is very desireable. Consider that although a grave marker (rifle with helmet or other representation) may be a somewhat more palatable graphic representation of an awful reality, in the time span of a game 30-40 min of realtime, Graves and Registration would not have time to go around and bury all of the dead. So in the context of the game and timespan a body is probably the best compromise without adding gory details. Which I don't care to see either, and in the interests of ensuring that gore did not get easily introduced, not enabling another marker to be toggled in its place was a very good decision.

JMHO

Many thanks, Karl Mead

[Hakko Ichiu]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:

OK, the official poop...

The marker is in the form of a soldier on his back with one leg up, arms to either side... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What, no 'x's through the eyes and tongue sticking out??

I guess we'll have to wait for CM2 to get the soldier angel floating up to heaven playing a harp.

Ethan

PS -- but seriously, I would have preferred the "helmet on rifle" marker, but I can understand that having the graphic non-modifiable serves a purpose.

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

Ethan

-----------

Das also war des Pudels Kern! -- Goethe

[Zamo]

Thanks for the bodies, and thanks for omiting further gore. Your rational is exactly what was needed. I think Maj. Tom's arguments against are actually the arguments for I would have used. He stated something like how hard it would be to look back after a game at all your fallen men. Whether it's a game simulation or the real thing, I think that is exactly what a commander must do. Whether they're cyber lives or the real thing, they're snuffed out and it's YOUR fault. In reality it is a horror beyond my ability to comment, but in a game, when handled tastefully, it can be a great learning tool to help an armchair commander do better next time, and husband his strength accordingly. Each of those markers is 12 unlived lives and 12 letters home that nobody wants to write and nobody wants to read. I think not having an indicator of losses such as a body might overly glorify the horror of war. Let's remember what we are simulating here. There's no need for arms and guts, but if an entire unit is erradicated it SHOULD be presented somehow. Just as when we were kids you'd simulate casualties by knocking your plastic soldiers over. No gore...but loss.

Thanks for adding this feature BTS. Hope I didn't drone on too long.

"The only thing worse than loosing a battle, is winning one."

[Fionn]

Harold,

Why on earth would you cancel a pre-order (or contemplate cancelling) over such a trivial addition (in the greater scheme of things it is a trivial addition) ?

Are people just going into histrionics for fun or are people really so utterly sensitive and shockable?

[CrapGame]

So I pose the question again. As someone else has stated, it is unlikely that Graves & Registration (a grim MOS) would be able to follow close enough to the front to bury the dead between battles of an operation. Therefore, I ask, will the dead be there in subsequent battles fought on the same terrain? This is what happens with knocked out vehicles, is it not?

By no means a complaint, just wondering about what other surprises await us...

CrapGame out...

[Guest Madmatt]

Well Crapgame, if we tell you, it WON'T be a surprise waiting for you now will it. I think enough has been said on this matter already. Just wait until you get the game and see for yourselves.

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

[CrapGame]

Ahhh MadMatt, I see you did not fall victim to my jedi mind trick....

Hmmmm, seriously though, I am curious about the ko'd vehicles (and now bodies as well) lingering between multiple battles of an operation. I do believe there was a thread on this (where's Guachi when you need him?) but I can't locate it. Do they stick around? Yes / No?

Annex is coming along nicely by the way.

[Compassion]

I see dead people.

[Harold Jones]

All,

I apologize for the overly dramatic nature of my post. Had I been more awake I probably would have just e-mailed my concerns to BTS and been done with it. I actually had no real aversion to bodies or gore in the game until I saw some of the lame reasons people wanted them in, my personal favorites were "so we can see that war is hell" or "so we can appreciate the sacrifice of the brave veterans". The more that I saw posts demanding bodies the more opposed to their inclusion I became. After months of "no reason for bodies" posts by BTS, one fine morning I see them saying yep there are bodies in the game but they are tastefully done. It was a bit of a shock especially since I was only halfway concentrating on the thread when I was reading it (I had been on an obscenly early conference call since 0230.) My initial thought was "screw it I don't want any part of this" Then I re-read the various posts and I realized that I had allowed the gloating tone of the posts by those who must have dead bodies on the map to influence my interpretation of BTS' explanation. Although I still would prefer the option to use something other than bodies to mark the demise of a squad, BTS has provided a valid reason for including the feature. It isn't really a rational thing with me at this point. Had I been more awake I probably would have just e-mailed my concerns to BTS and been done with it.

(Fixed a spelling error)

[This message has been edited by Harold Jones (edited 05-02-2000).]

[Fionn]

Harold,

NP. Early morning posting is something I've become wary of also. The mind simply isn't up to full speed enough at that time most mornings .

Just to be clear on this. Steve and Charles didn't put in dead bodies because of all the various reasons (mostly crappy reasons) people had. They put them in because they felt they'd add to the game in an informational way (gore and homage to veterans etc is immaterial).

When I first learned they were in I had pretty much 100% joined the "no bodies" camp but after I played my first scenario I realised that the way they were added avoided the various slippery slopes I was wary of AND did add something of informational and immersion value to the game.

Check out my AAR to see how dead bodies do increase immersion and information gathering during the game. In fact, I know the only time I ever took pictures of dead bodies for gloating purposes was once when I wanted to show a rubbled building which had the "dead bodies" of roughly 3 companies of infantry within its walls and within a few metres of it. I sent it to Steve and Charles as an example of just how intense the fighting in the scenario had been . IMO that says a lot for how well the bodies issue has been handled.

There is no gorefest at all. I think Steve Charles and many others would object if it was a gorefest. In short, wait till you see the Gold Demo. It'll all make a lot more sense then. Dead Bodies has to be seen within the context of the overall game to be fully appreciated IMO. ( It does make for more dramatic POTDs though ).

[Zamo]

To those of you who oppose dead bodies on the battlefield, do you also oppose dead vehicles? Especially the brewed up kind? What's the difference? A burning tank is more likely than not filled with bodies. Burning bodies. Does that make you sick? It should. Why not complain about BTS including them? What sort of sanitized war game is it that you want? One without killing?

Perhaps I'm missing something. What is it that you object to? The depiction of human beings slaughtering one another in general? Or is it the much more pragmatic desire to not see BTS's wonderful offering degenerate into Doom '44?

[Guest Big Time Software]

Zamo, I think it is the Doom44 concern. It certainly was ours. This has been one of our strongest arguments against the "horror of war" line of thinking. Cartoon like, totally artificial and fake looking carnage will do NOTHING to bring home the horror of war. In fact, scientific studies and a quick look at the gaming offerings at your local software store, show that it is in fact the opposite. Death and dismemberment is "cool", in the finest Beavis and Butthead traditions. How we go from that to "horror of war" is a mystery to me.

And the argument of "honor our fighting men" is WAY out there. I think that if you asked a WWII vet which way they would have the game look, they would be in favor of not cheapening their sacrifices with comic book gore. So this line of argument holds as much water as a bucket shot up by an MG42.

Harold, no problem

Steve