Rank the fixes for the 1.04 patch :)

[David Aitken]

Daveman, Claymore:

I know that the best programmers always take the opinions of their fans into account when doing fixes or modifications to software. However, the Combat Mission forum is not the kind of forum where fans' "top tens" are much use.

Most of the discussion on this forum is about the accuracy of the game, and possible tweaks that could be made - there is no need for BTS to ask, because everyone is already making their opinions known. This discussion is grouped under appropriate headings - you'll get a thread about .50 cal accuracy, a thread about rosters etcetera. This works very well.

A thread which has lots of people asking for lots of different things is not a useful summary - it's more of an incoherent mess. What we get are suggestions which - as I've said - have either been discussed previously, or have not yet been discussed. In the former case, the discussion can be found in the appropriate threads, and BTS will have already taken note. In the latter case, simply making suggestions is of no use.

I'm not saying this thread is stupid - I just wanted to point out, for those who might not be aware, that this is not best way to get your suggestions over to BTS. If you have a specific quibble, first do a search, and see if it has been discussed before. If it has, that's great - no need to bring it up again (and even if you still want to, best not).

If you can't find anything about it, start a new thread on the subject, and politely ask if anyone else has noticed what you have. In most cases where there really is a problem, it will have been noticed. Flamewars are borne out of people coming in and announcing "This is wrong!!".

This way, all the topics and discussions are nicely organised, and will get the notice they deserve. You don't need to bring up old subjects, because BTS are well aware of them already. "Top tens" should not and will not be taken seriously - not because they aren't serious, but because this is simply not the way to lobby for tweaks to the game.

David

[RMC]

M.E.,

Not sure what you are driving at about the indirect fire weapons not being able to fire once they've moved. I don't see why they shouldn't be able to fire. US light Infantry companies haul around 60mm mortars in the hopes of being able to use them. CM doesn't model the emplacement of mortar sections with firing stakes and all. There is a set up delay when moving the mortars. For the 2" it is short. The heavier mortars take more time to set up.

To really do it right you'd need a platoon leader unit to emplace the mortars, and a FDC unit to relay data to the tubes. Medium and larger mortars shouldn't be able to move around independently.

[This message has been edited by RMC (edited 08-10-2000).]

[DanE]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pascal DI FOLCO:

New features

2. TCP/IP play

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In all fairness, TCP/IP should not be listed as a "new" feature. This was put up to a vote many months ago and it was decided to release the game without TCP/IP, which would be added, via a patch, shortly after the release.

BTS has their own "List" that they are working on. While it is good that people can express what things that they would like to see added or tweaked in the game, we must remember that BTS has proven (to most people ) that they are very capable of raising their baby. I will gladly let them do what they feel is best.

Also, for the inclusion of an option for FOW in View 1 only: it is already in the game. Just play a game using View 1 only. There you go. If you want to play this way in email, just find somebody that also wants to play this way. Can't trust your opponent to only use View 1, then don't play them. Can't trust yourself to use only View 1, then why do you want to play that way?

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

Dan

[Shep]

1. TCP/IP

2. Full game movies

3. Significant issues of gameplay accuracy

4. Allied AA vehicles.

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

Scouts Out!

[Sgt Steiner]

Hi David et al

Originally posted by David Aitken:

I don't see the point in this. Call me a >spoilsport (I am) =)

Ok Your a spoilsport

>, but simply listing things that have >already been discussed is not going to >achieve anything.

Discussed by you and others maybe but not nessecarily those in this thread (I for one am only on forum a week or so and its so vast its hard to track down old stuff)

>Most requested changes are not definite >problems - they are just opinionated >requests.

No more opinionated or less valuable than anything thats gone before surely ?

And whats wrong with making a request much better than demanding.

>Anything you suggest needs to be discussed,

Says you and I have no doubt anything of value requested will indeed go through the grinder

>so either (1) it's already been discussed, >BTS have taken notice, and that's that,

Do you work for BTS to be able to cast these pearls before us swine ?

> or (2) it hasn't been discussed, in which >case simply listing it is not enough.

But a start surely !?

>So please don't come up with your lists and >expect them to have any effect.

Please 'list' what are acceptable things to list/discuss as I am at a loss, should we all send our forum posts to you for apprval first !!

> The only two things that matter are >subjects which have been discussed, and the >list which is drawn up by BTS. No list of >requests on this forum is going to make any >difference whatsoever.

And you called us opinionated !!

Again I ask are you a BTS employee/webmaster/playtester or ??

Sorry if the 'tone' of my post/s is not to your liking but your attitude frankly rankles with this Ulsterman (not known for our forebearance I will grant you) and you a fellow Celt too !

Over and out

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

Sgt Steiner

Belfast

NI UK

[coe]

Howbout a mortar compromise? reducing the

gaminess?

When you are out of mortar ammo, crews can

abandon their weapon and the following

applies?

If they wish to abandon their weapon when

it still has ammo they can do so, but (pick

which is preferrable) a. it is assumed that

they spike their weapon and it is no longer

usable during the scenario (or maybe if they

come back to it they'll have it for the next scenario in an operation.

If the mortar is abandoned it can be captured if an enemy squad moves within X

meters of it - when captured it is assumed

the enemy tosses a grenade on it, kicks it

around, uses a sledge hammer, etc. and

essentially that mortar is destroyed for the

remainder of that scenario and operation and

counts as points!

Abandoned mortars can also be fired on and destroyed (and are easier to destroy in that

case)....a nice extension would be if you hit it and it is abandoned there is a chance all the abandoned ammo will go up with it too.

In the voluntary abandonment, mortar crews have a bit more rifle ammo, and firepower but when they panic (direct hit on them etc, they are like all other crews?)

One wishlist would be, that you can reduce

your rate of fire and send one guy to give

ammo to another mortar unit (however much

the guy can carry - maybe he can't run and

also panicks easier?

(might be able to do this with

machine guns too - in the case of the german HMG you can do (in a voluntary abandonment a one time reduction of an HMG to an MMG or LMG) but it takes a turn and you can't

re-increase it back up)).

[Tyro]

David Aitken: I'm curious, I am fairly new to this forum and am wondering if you are one of the moderators? you speak in absolute terms,should not, will not, if you have the authority then close the discussions, if not, then I suggest you lighten up, these discussions are just that, discussions among fellow gamers and as such are fairly harmless to everyone, so relax, if you don't want to be a part of any particular thread, then don't participate.

[Malmvig]

If by 'including a roster' mean including an easy way to see all your units and quick selecting one of those for the purpose of setup or ordering commands I'am in

Henrik Malmvig

[Purple4Ever]

I agree with Sgt. Steiner and Tyro - in most posts that I've read from David Aitken, they are in the vein "you should not discuss this or that" or "you should not request this or that". I am at a loss as to what are "acceptable" posts (as defined by David) in this forum

FWIW and risking the ire of David Aitken, here are my top 5:

1. 50cal fix

2. Tweaks for TacAI targeting for AFV's (targeting of low-threat targets - ie., bailed crews).

3. Roster

4. FOW improvement/fix

5. Replay of movies for entire scenario

Cheers

PS. And even if no one from BTS is listening, I have at least found common ground with others who love this game

[ambush66]

I would like:

1: Full movie option

2: Quick battles replay option

3: Being able to save quick battle maps...

and maybe also the maps of games already in the progress of play....to get a map with craters etc.

[David Aitken]

Tyro -

I do not hold any official position of authority, but I do like to keep people right.

What I have posted here has to be taken in context. This forum has been around for a long time (much longer than I've been here), and for all that time, there has been constant and in-depth discussion by very knowledgeable people.

As I have attempted to make clear, I have nothing against threads like this. My purpose in posting - as I have said - is to make it clear, for those who might post here with serious requests, that this is not the best way to make such requests.

Every aspect of the game has been discussed exhaustively from every angle, and against that background, simple "top ten" requests are inadequate. They're fine as an opinion poll, but they invariably become more serious.

I have done my best not to step on anyone's toes - my posts are simply designed to inform. I have no purpose in picking fights. If what I say is of no value to you, you're quite within your rights to ignore me.

David

[Claymore]

I have reviewed my list and would like to ammend it as follows:

1. Fix the 50cal accuracy/FP

2. Fix the mortar vs armor accuracy/FP

3. FOW upgrade (I shouldn't know a unit's training level)

4. Creation of maps with Craters (simulate a trench! - Good idea Ambush66!)

5. Tweak TacAI slightly (covered ad nauseum)

The rest seems a little like eye candy for me. For example rosters or bases might make my life a little easier but they don't affect realistic simulation of small unit actions.

[ianc]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Flamewars are borne out of people coming in and announcing "This is wrong!!"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

David,

Seems to me that's pretty much what you're doing here. Back off and stop telling people what to post. The board is for discussion purposes only and doesn't need to be policed in this fashion. I for one am interested in reading people's opinions on various facets of the game. Thanks for your consideration on this in future,

ianc

[This message has been edited by ianc (edited 08-10-2000).]

[David Aitken]

ianc wrote:

> Back off and stop telling people what to post.

Back off and stop accusing me of saying things I never have.

[Von Brizee]

Theres only 4 things I want, and 2 of them seem to be in the works:

1:TCICP

2:Tiger armor fix

3:Less accuracy/effectiveness for 50cal

4:Possibly sidearms for PzSchreck, Bazooka, PIAT's, so they are not useless when they are empty nor helpless from a rush. I still see vehicle crews rushing the bazookas and taking them out. If they had some pistols or an SMG or something they could stand a chance. I think it can be coded, since regular troops have Panzerfaust, which they fire at vehicles only or bunched up troops. Perhaps Schreck can be modified like this?

[Claymore]

Wooo Hooo!

Charles posted to the 50cal thread that he will look into this for the next patch!

Don't I feel like the gods on Mount Olympus have stopped throwing thunderbolts and heard the voices of their minions down below?

[XPav]

I'd like a roster. I just want to see all my units and click on them to select them. I can already just +/- through them all, but that's time consuming and error prone.

But that's not a CM1 feature, because thats not easy to tweak.

I want the Voodoo5 minimize/restore texture corruption fixed. That one annoys me, because I can't Esc back to the desktop and send a PBEM file, then quickly jump back into the game. I know I can turn off the anti-aliasing on the Voodoo5, but then CM looks like crap compared to when its on.

I would like the tanks to be better about targeting things, and not wiggle the turret around after targets that pop in and out of LOS, but I can't figure out a good algorithm (and I'm a programmer) that would make sense, so I suppose I'll live with that.

Watching the entire movie at once would be great. Again, not a tweak, but a new feature, so I don't expect that.

And TCP/IP of course.

[David Aitken]

Purple4Ever wrote:

> in most posts that I've read from David Aitken, they are in the vein "you should not discuss this or that" or "you should not request this or that".

Sorry, my grasp of the English language must be far poorer than I've been led to believe. It even seems that, when I specifically say "I am not saying X or Y", it still doesn't click with people that I am not saying X or Y.

The key to what I have said here, is not that you should not post, but that you should not post if you have certain purposes in doing so. Post what you like - see if I can stop you. But I see a lot of people here making statements "the game should X" or "I should be able to Y". These people should be reading the relevant threads, instead of firing out their wish list here, clearly in the hope that BTS will take notice.

If the above does not apply to you, congratulations. If you have a problem with me seeking to put people right, I'm terribly sorry, but you'll just have to live with it. The fact is, I'm not some blinkered megalomaniac - I wouldn't be posting if there was no need, or if I just wanted to boss people around. So do yourself a favour, and stop being so paranoid.

David

[Neutral Party]

I have thought long and hard about this subject (for the best part of 30 seconds) and I have come to a number of conclusions. It is blatantly obvious that the game as it presently exists is fundamentally flawed - but hopefully it can be fixed. Here are the first batch of my instructions to BTS on how to accomplish this.

1. Enemy weapons accuracy is too high. Please ensure that all enemy weapons accuracy are reduced so that I can advance my platoon of Morris Minors with impunity.

2. Friendly weapons accuracy is too low. I demand that my crews be allowed to close-assault veteran gerbiljagers using their quad pocketpilchardchuckywaffe.

3. The AI basically sucks. It should be reprogrammed to warn me about tactical oversights and should constantly monitor my decisions and provide a list of 5 best moves to win.

4. AI does not alert me when my FOs are smoking fags. This is definitely a game-destroyer for me. I know I speak of behalf of everyone here when I say that sometimes I forget where I put my FOs. I think they are sneaking along behind my schwereMorrisMinor Company but when I want to call down some heavy artillery I find the bastards are standing around smoking fags at the start line. Come on BTS what gives.

5. Astrological OOB. It has proven irrefutably that the positions of the planets and distant stars hundreds of light years away at the time of birth basically determine the entire course of one's life. I think it was a gross oversight of BTS not to include an OOB that contains complete astrological data on the individuals that make up our forces. Picture the situation - your veteran pilchardgrenadiers are attacking an enemy strongpoint. 50% of your forces are still milling around the set-up zone smoking fags thanks to the useless tacAI. Will your assault succeed. This is where the astrological OOB comes in. Simply click on your unit and you will find out that their zodiacal sign is Taurus with ascendant Reginald Maudling, their lucky color is red, they need a new challenge in life and should consider a career change. Now that is damn useful intel.

Please ensure that these instructions are carried out promptly.

Joe

[pcelt]

David Aitken wrote----"I am not some blinkered megalomaniac"

I have to agree here with you David . I dont see any clear evidence that you are "blinkered".

[killmore]

1) TCP/IP

2) "Small map size" should not depend on number of points I am playing on. (just see how small is the map when you select 2000 points)

3) Operations - the line of control is badly done. I am sorry to say this but CC has it much better done! I can sneak small unit around to gain HUGE teritory!

4) ASSAULT command for infantry. If tank moves 10 meters infantry should be able to chase it and assault it. (My opponent moves tanks just a bit every round to stop my infantry charges)

5) Fix Rotate AA 88 bug.

[This message has been edited by killmore (edited 08-10-2000).]

[David Aitken]

Neutral Party wrote:

> I think they are sneaking along behind my schwereMorrisMinor Company but when I want to call down some heavy artillery I find the bastards are standing around smoking fags at the start line.

I understand BTS are working on this one. They are trying to model a special 'power-up' you can buy - the Anti-Smoking Initiative. If you purchase this, all the walls and trees in the scenario will be adorned with posters bearing slogans such as "Smoking Kills" and "Smoking While Pregnant Harms Your Baby".

Once all your soldiers are made aware of the harm they are causing themselves, they will immediately extinguish their cigarettes and return to the healthy lifestyle of a frontline infantryman.

David

P.S. I find the schwereMorrisMinor to be far less effective than the ReliantabschutzengewaffeRobin. The special three-tracked design made for far better weight distribution, and also spawned some of Germany's funniest jokes, involving headlights and startled GI's.

[Guest Germanboy]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Neutral Party:

It is blatantly obvious that the game as it presently exists is fundamentally flawed <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now Joe, that is low even for someone who lists as interest 'counting on my fingers'. It has in fact been long established that the game is 'a broken product that needs fixing'. Why? Uh, because half a dozen people say so. So there. Next time do a bloody search before shooting your mouth off. May the hamsters get you like they did Ethan. Nuff said.

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

Andreas

[R-Man]

Save-able end of game movies with a double-speed playback is by far my greatest CM desire. A few AI improvements are always welcome too.

[rich12545]

The one improvement I'd like to see, and I emailed BTS about it (they said they would consider it) is mouse wheel support. If you move the mouse sideways with the wheel depressed, the view moves side to side, move it up and down and the zoom changes. If you turn the wheel, the view moves up and down. I think think this would improve the interface a lot and wouldn't take much to implement.