Possible enhancement re in-game idenrtification and organization of units

[pcelt]

With the current system of unit identification and C+C by individual and time-consuming unit clicking or cycling via "+ -" keys,I find I spend a lot of time checking the location of platoon squads and support teams like mortars and MMGs etc.to ensure that particular teams/squads have not been left behind or mislocated.

To supplement these and to facilitate and speed up this identification and reorganization of units ,I should like to suggest an elaboration of the current "Shift B" function which places bases under all of your units.I suggest a sub-menu on the screen which will permit you,in addition, to select (toggle "on--Off") at any time the bases specifically just for:

Platoon A units

Platoon B units

Each other Platoon units

MMG Teams

Mortar Teams

Each other Team Type

Forward Observers

Each Vehicle Type

This would enable you to get, at any given moment, a clear and integrated overview of each platoon's squads' positions and all the teams'locations and allow you to easily reorganize where platoons have been disorganized or teams left behind or mislocated.

I think this enhancement would complement the current methods and facilitate and speed up in-game identification of units and the necessary orders for their reorganization where desired.

May I emphasise in conclusion that in my view the game is absolutely superb and this enhacement is certainly not essential----I just feel it would add an extra v.useful dimension to easier and speedier unit identification, battlefield awareness and

reorganization orders.

[Maastrictian]

I find that by going to a high overheard view turning on bases and turning off trees I can easily locate everything I own. Its also not that hard to keep track of your units just mentally. Keep in mind that this is what a CO would have to do a lot quicker than any of us are playing, and under fire! (what a great idea... I'm going to have someone shoot at me while I play speed CM <g>)

--Chris

[Fred]

Maastrictian,

I have another view on this topic.

CM is not a role playing game about impersonating a CO in WWII, but it is a wargame and the player is just this; a player in front of a computer screen.

So the point that a "real CO couldn't do it" is not a valid one IMO, cause I'm no CO.

"Punishing" players to repeatedly hitting a key to see all the units in order to keep the "realism über alles" people happy, is possibly not the right way to do in a wargame that should appeal to all kinds of wargamers.

If I want this experience, I rejoin the army or play a role playing game like "Behind the enemy lines" (great rpg about small unit actions in WWII)

All aspects (realism, gameplay, UI) must be balanced; a difficult task, indeed.

Don't get me wrong; I've pre-ordered long before the beta demo and I think that this games is Game of the Year (read some of my reviews), but everything can be enhanced.

Fred

[pcelt]

Maastrictian -------------------------- I must say I find your argument rather ambiguous. On the one hand you are saying "turn on bases and turn off trees" and then click on each unit with a mouse-------all of which are totally artificial and game playing devices ----but it is unacceptable to use any further game aids to help locate and identify units.

After all, the purpose of the game is not to make unit identification tricky and time consuming but to have to make a series of tactical decisions to achieve victory conditions with the units you have.

I would also add that ,in the field, commanders would be receiving a range of information via unit radio and runner etc re positions and situations which we ,as gamers do not get.It is not possible to equate our position precisely with that of a live C.O.

Finally , if you as a player feel you do not want to avail youself of any of the game mechanisms you can just not use it----as happens with "fog of war"

I am not convinced that this argument is a valid one against this sort of enhancement

[This message has been edited by pcelt (edited 05-24-2000).]

[This message has been edited by pcelt (edited 05-24-2000).]

[Lorak]

Ok, don't flame me here... But before I chime in one way or another.. I'd like a little more info. How exactly are you guys losing your units? Does it happen in certain areas? mountains,woods, guys are real spread out? Just wondering.

Lorak

[Maastrictian]

Wow, didn't expect to get so violently disagreed with . Here are some clarifications.

Fred wrote:

-----

"CM is not a role playing game about impersonating a CO in WWII, but it is a wargame and the player is just this; a player in front of a computer screen.

So the point that a "real CO couldn't do it" is not a valid one IMO, cause I'm no CO.

"Punishing" players to repeatedly hitting a key to see all the units in order to keep the "realism über alles" people happy, is possibly not the right way to do in a wargame that should appeal to all kinds of wargamers."

-----

That's fair. I agree that such a feature would be an enhancement, but I really would not find it useful and would not use it. That's all I was trying to say. For me, part of the enjoyment of playing the game is to put myself in the place of the CO. As such I maintain a mental map of where everybody is. Its an important skill for a real life commander and a skill I pride myself on. Does this mean its wrong to cycle through your units every turn? Certainly not! But I would probably rather play a timed sort of TCP/IP game such as was being discussed on another thread. I think that sort of "fast and loose" play is more enjoyable.

pcelt wrote:

-----

"Maastrictian I must say I find your argument rather ambiguous. On the one hand you are saying "turn on bases and turn off trees" and then click on each unit with a mouse --all of which are totally artificial and game playing devices ----but it is unacceptable to use any further game aids to help locate and identify units."

-----

Actually, I was sugesting the "turning the bases on and trees off" as a helpful playing aid to the person asking the question, its not a technique I use. Sorry for the confusion.

pcelt then wrote:

-----

"After all, the purpose of the game is not to make unit identification tricky and time consuming but to have to make a series of tactical decisions to achieve victory conditions with the units you have."

-----

Well the question in my view is how you make those tactical decisions. I enjoy making them in an improvised, fast sort of way. This is not the only way to make these decisions, but it happens to be the one I enjoy and I would rather play with people who find this playing style atractive.

after that pcelt wrote:

-----

"I would also add that ,in the field, commanders would be receiving a range of information via unit radio and runner etc re positions and situations which we ,as gamers do not get."

-----

Actually, in WWII combat radio was not used at this tactical level (each company commander might have a radio). Runner, as you can imagine, was a tough job under MG fire. Mostly (as I understand it) commands were carried by voice and hand signals. If the .50 cal was left behind it is very likely the team leader would decide to stay put either because the CO must have wanted us to be here or because they frankley were a lot happier there than under fire. The CO could not ask for a show of hands if anyone was missing. The CO must have maintained a mental map of the terrain and the positions of his squads on that terrain, similarly to the mental picture a fighter piolt has to keep in a dogfight. I like being forced to keep such a map. As I have said, I'm not saying everyone must adopt this playing style, just that I enjoy it.

finally pcelt wrote:

-----

"It is not possible to equate our position precisely with that of a live C.O.

Finally , if you as a player feel you do not want to avail youself of any of the game mechanisms you can just not use it----as happens with "fog of war"

I am not convinced that this argument is a valid one against this sort of enhancement."

-----

I did not mean to argue against this enhancement, mearly that it is not as vital as some think and that it does not suit my particular brand of game play.

--Chris

[This message has been edited by Maastrictian (edited 05-24-2000).]

[pcelt]

Laurak,thanks for your interest-----

I think it is more likely to be difficult to keep an easy track of all your squads/teams in very cluttered terrain and also once a moving firefight has been underway for a time.

I am not suggesting that it is impossible to track all the units with the systems in place.But my point is that this requires clicking on each unit or cycling through each unit----and can be very time consuming . The additional cues, I have suggested ,would allow you to see the integrated overall sitn more easily and quickly-----one example---a platoon becomes involved in a firefight and you want to reinforce with an MMG or 60mm mortar.Instead of having to hunt about with mouse clicks or cycle through-- one menu click will show the position of all your MMGs or Mortars and you can order the nearest or least engaged to move into your threatened platoon area to support. You might find yourself in dire need of a bazooka team when a similar procedure could be applied.

I think it just usefully supplements the current systems and can speed up unit awarenes and orders.

[Black Sabot]

Correct me if i'm wrong, but can't you just double click on a platoon HQ to see where the sub-units are?

pcelt, is that what you're asking for?

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

"I do like to see the arms and legs fly"

[Guest tom w]

Pcelt:

I understand your concern, I don't share it, but I played VoT over the weekend (many times) with two players who were very experienced war game players (one actually complained that this was not really a war game because it had no "hexes" and he wondered where they went and if I could help him out by toggling them on)

Any way this player had the same problem using the game, he needed to use the + key to skip to each unit, and then I set him up to use the Shift P to see who had orders and who did not and he liked that, but he complained he could not see who was what and it was hard to find all his anti tank units.

SO OK I understand this problem, as has been suggested turn off all the trees, Shift T and turn on the bases shift B ( I play with Bases ON all the time) and Now if you want to see who is Where, Toggle through Shift C to grow all the units to Giant size let them all stick out like a sore thumb and you can see right away who is who and what is what.

I think that the game is perfect in this respect exaclty the way it is.

Pcelt:

I think If I understand you correctly that you could get the info you need as to who is who and where it is by using control 4 for a good camera view, turn off the tree's, turn on the bases and "grow" the units until you can see what they look like?

try that

does it solve your problem?

I have introduced 3 new people (expereinced 2D board wargamers) to this game and one of them took to it in all its 3D glory VERY quickly, saying something like YES this is the way it should be, one of them STILL has uses the over head view control 7 or 8 ALL the time and is not really thrilled with the game but he's coming along, and the third hated it, I spend this entire last long weekend playing head to head (hotseat) with the one who loves the game and after watching us get so much enjoyment out of it the other guy (the "I hate it guy") tried to learn the interface, he found it very hard and NOT at all intuitive, because he could not relate to the baord or the game or the units the way he did a 2D board game. by the end of the 3 day (late Monday) he was a convert and after I gave him a 50% bonus for the Germans in CE he soundly kicked my butt then he liked the game. He and the first guy played the German's in VoT three times and felt the scenario was unbalanced and that the Germans had NO chance to hold that town against a clearly superior American force with SO mcuh Arty! they both bitched alot about the Yank Arty.

These are guys that LOVE playing WWII from the onset to prove that Germany could have won the war, so they both naturally pick the Krouts every chance they get. But they figured that the German's in VoT don't have a chance against the Americans with 6 Shermans.

They tried three times against me and I won VoT all three times.

anyway

long post

done now

-tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pcelt:

Laurak,thanks for your interest-----

I think it is more likely to be difficult to keep an easy track of all your squads/teams in very cluttered terrain and also once a moving firefight has been underway for a time.

<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>

[pcelt]

Black Sabot

Yes you can---but this involves you in first locating all the HQs and clicking on them .If support units have fallen behind and are out of C+C they will not be apparent and you will need to search about to locate what you want.Also you will only be aware of the position of one support unit at a time . My additional view will enable you to see all the MMGs or all the 60mm mortars or all the Forward Observers etc + whatever platoon or platoons you are trying to reinforce.In my view it will make organizational decisions re the movement of units---which and to where, that much easier and speedier.

TOM ---------------------------------- I very much appreciate your detailed and constructive post detailing ways of identifying all the units.

I really do feel quite at home with the 3D map etc .But my personal feelings are that rather than take the steps you rightly identify as valuable -----keeping all the bases on permanently, removing all the trees at end of each turn, inflating all the units to giant size etc and then looking around,I would rather make use of an additional menu( such as I outlined )that would solve all these identification needs for me.

My view is that it would be neater, quicker and easier---less fiddly.

I fully respect your opinion and those of any others with different views. I simply wanted to air this possible enhancement as it seemed helpful to me . There doesnt seem any reason why there cannot be alternative means within the game for gaining info . We can then use whichever means suits our own preferences.

Cheers

[This message has been edited by pcelt (edited 05-24-2000).]

[ianc]

Guys,

there have been many requests for this type of 'unit navigation' screen for awhile and the debates have raged; primarily because some players felt that a 'unit info' screen would present too much info to the player.

A 'navigation screen' which would allow you to view your unit's organization all at once instead of searching the whole battlefield for them, then go to them by clicking on a unit icon (kind of like the 'buy' screen in Steel Panthers) was the next suggestion.

Steve has said that this type of aid will be considered for CM2 and will probably appear there, but it will not be included in CM1.

ianc

[Fred]

Maastrician,

you wrote:

"For me, part of the enjoyment of playing the game is to put myself in the place of the CO. As such I maintain a mental map of where everybody is. Its an important skill for a real life commander and a skill I pride myself on. Does this mean its wrong to cycle through your units every turn? Certainly not! But I would probably rather play a timed sort of TCP/IP game such as was being discussed on another thread. I think that sort of "fast and loose" play is more enjoyable."

So, you enjoy to impersonate a CO. Thats ok, because you like it.

Now, there is another gamer, named Fred. And I like to play wargames. I like to get a nice, organized table about my units. Realistic? Maybe not, but user friendly!

So, there is your voice, and there is my voice...

And I still have the opinion, that a game is a game, not a Westpoint CO training device!

And, once again, CM is no role plaing game for CO wannabees! It's a wargame to challenge your mind; an evolution of chess and H.G.Wells "Little Wars"...not more and not less.

And to artificially make the UI cumbersome is NOT the way to make people like me happy.

The long term success of CM will be decided by the way BTS balances both views. And a "punishment" for the players who do NOT want to impersonate a CO, but want to play a decent wargame, will certainly have a direct impact on sales figures. Believe me.

And high sales figures is what we all want for CM!

Fred

[Lorak]

well.. I waited and heard some of the details. And I still can't comment on this. No offense to anyone present. But how can you lose your guys? When I set up a battle plan I know what I'm sending over the hill. Same as who is on my flanks. If you divide your troops up into assualt groups, it is easy to remember what it is composed of. If you the add the fact that everyone should be in C&C then each group doesn't take up a large area either. I know I'm rambling, so I'll leave it at that. I guess I'm just at a lose as to what the problem is.

Lorak

[Guest tom w]

Hi Lorak

Nice to see you're back

(I say this because I was away all weekend)

I understand some players want a button they can click or a command to toggle bases on to just some kinds of units. I saw this first hand over the weekend I showed the game to two new guys who hand similiar comments. As they were used to and familiar with other game systems like Steal Panthers and Panzer General.

I figure, like your self that it is not that difficult to keep a mental note of who is where as I was the one who ordered all those units to where they are (or should be). I can see units getting lost when they break or are routed and choose to retreat take off on their own, but those guys are usually a right-off any way. Those might be the units that are being refered to, I can see how it is difficult to keep track or units that are routed or broken, but you will know where they are if you Shift G for Warning labels on. But some units can get lost when they loose their bases when they get eliminated, but same thing applies, SHOW your warning labels and it will give a red label for those eliminated.

I like the game the way it is with this user interface. Once you memorize the hot keys and all the shift functions you can toggle on or off it's easy.

I would like to add that I will bet most Mac users see this issue very differently that most non-Mac users. Most PC users that I know do not use their hotkeys or learn to memorize the quick keys or command key short cuts. I'm guessing here BUT if Steve and Charles are Mac users I understand and if they designed the interface then they may figure that all users "should" memorize their command key short cuts and "should" toggle things on and off by using shift G or T or P or whatever. For the record the shift key is not usually a Mac Modifier key, we use the "command" key beside the space bar on the mac keyboard.

I understand this is not an issue for pcelt as he was requesting a shift modifier key to toggle bases for vehicle types and MG teams and Mortar teams and the like.

I would say many non-Mac users are not in the habit of memorizing short cut keys as most PC user interfaces are designed with buttons to click that may or may not have short cut keys defined for them.

-tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lorak:

I guess I'm just at a lose as to what the problem is.

Lorak<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>

[This message has been edited by tom w (edited 05-24-2000).]

[Guest GriffinCheng]

May be what "pcelt" is asking for a TO&E table like East/West Front and TotP/PitS from HPS. This is what some people (from what I have read in HPS mailing list) complain about.

BTW, I am a MSWIN user since MS Windows 1.03 days (yes, I am *old*) and mouse was a luxury during then so I learnt most of keyboard shortcuts. And yes, most fellow Windows user nowadays don't know about most convenient keyboard short-cuts nor they use "double-clicks" and short-cut menu at all. I think they should use these features for most of the time it is more efficient. Oh otoh, I own a Powerbook lately for mobile wargamming.

Griffin @ work.

[Guest Babra]

I haven't read all the posts in this thread yet, but I have to chime in and remind all that all we have seen are a few small demo scenarios. We haven't seen the big stuff yet. I predict many a lost bazooka team in my future. The requested modification sounds like a good idea to me.