I want a roster, a roster !! Vote !

[PeterNZer]

MAKE IT A TOGGLE

there, everyone should be happy now. First person to run a mp game sets it on or off, you can choose in single player, job done!

*born diplomat hehe*

PeterNZ

t minus 3 days for PC arrival

[Chupacabra]

I'd say no.

I don't really like stuff cluttering up my screen.

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

Soy super bien, soy super super bien, soy bien bien super bien bien bien super super.

[Guest Chris B]

Yes to roster.

Anything that simplifies the somewhat kludgy interface is good. And poking around the battlefield, and with settings to find the right piece is not my idea of fun. Any large combats becomes search and find feast.

But I do not think this feature will come. BTS has not made the effort to put anything but the simplest of extra interface items into the game, but I understand, a lot of effort of motivating not having such features, so much that a lot of the "old-timers" are vehemently opposed to it.

Lets say that such a feature was introduced into the game for the benefit of "bad" players, if you do not like it, do not use it.

And while you are at it, do not use the "+"/"-" keys or Shift-C or Shift-V to find units. After all, if it is hard to use, it must make you a better commander. (Sarcastic smiley)

Ohh, and commander rosters...that's what roll calls are for.

[Moon]

The lack of an OOB roster, in my opinion, is a great - albeit agreeably artificial - tool to take away a tiny little bit of "God control" from the player... I think of it as a form of "friendly unit Fog of War". I believe this was (at least one of) the reasons to leave the roster out.

In other words, there are many ways to design the game to allow players to be more "efficient" - but not all of them would help the game, in my opinion of course.

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

"An hour has 60 minutes, each minute in action has a thousand dangers."

- Karl-Heinz Gauch, CO 1st Panzerspähkompanie, 12th SS Panzerdivision

[PzKpfw 1]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken:

You also seem to have the memory of a goldfish. If you're wondering whether your spotter has any ammo left, you remember where you left him and you click on him. It's not that difficult.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Heh, I resemble that remark . Heres an instance I had in a QB yesterday, I lost an spotter & an 250/7 mortar HT, not lost as in killed or KO'd lost as in they just dissapeared.

I spent a half hour searching the map for them and they were just gone I have no idea where they went I even checked the US kills & not 1 listed credit for them or even unidentified credit for any vehichle as all were identified. an roster might have shown me what happened to them, for all I know to this date they were beamed up by the Enterprise

Regards, John Waters

[SF]

Roster?? BAH!

I'd much rather see the proverbial tcp/ip implemented, before any effort's on other 'minor' niggle's are addressed.

[MarkEzra]

I've played this game since the Beta Demo, so running the "learn to play the game properly", won't wash (ask any of my PBEM OPFORs) LOL....I have always been for an easy to find Roster that will do two things

1. List all my active units, including re-inforcements

2. allow me to easily locate them from the roster list. This is especially helpful in finding replacements as they may be placed anywhere on the board including the enemies wooded, foggy rear areas.

I was for a roster in Nov and I am more adament in that feeling today.

[sniperscope]

NO

sniperscope

[Mannheim Tanker]

YES, YES, YES!

I don't see the problem with including one if you also include the ability to toggle it on and off. Those of you that vote "no" can simply ignore it. I can't think of any reason to not allow those of us to have it just because some people think it's X (insert reason here). If you don't like it, don't use it! There, I think I kicked the horse enough times

[Tobe]

I think a roster would be a great help. For those who don't like it, don't use it! In some of these large scenarious it's too easy to lose your spotters etc. And what's this about making the game unrealistic? I don't see anyone complaining about the fact that you can spend and hour contemplating a turn that would normally have to a be split second descision. Nobody complains that you can spin the camera around the battlefield, that's unrealistic. I think compared to these things having a roster of your units seems very realistic.

[fdiskboy]

These arguments always intrigue me. It's similar to the Aliens-v-Predator save game argument. Those who want it think it'll help them play the game their way. Those who don't want it say it's not the way they think the game should be played.

Why is it that we as gamers insist that we know the best way for other gamers to play their games? I for one would like to see a roster: for the same reasons that I like unlimited save game opportunities. They save me time, and my limited free time is precious to me.

The answer is easy. Implement the feature. Those who wish to use it may; those who dislike it may avoid it like the plague.

Why would someone hold it against another if they did want to use it? Does it make them, as some have suggested, an inferior or less skillful player?? Perhaps. Should that matter? I would say not. It gives those who oppose the "roster" a chance to revel in your superiority and flog them mercilessly through PBEM.

Either way, my opinion remains just that.

Thoughts? Comments? Family secrets?

[Guest mch]

You have a roster.

move through it by pressing (+)and (-)

[Tiger]

No. No roster please. This is a wargame. In real war, units do get lost or misplaced. You've got the plus and minus keys to cycle through your units, plus you can toggle unit bases, toggle to remove many terrain features, toggle density of the various terrain features, have a god's eye view from above, can enlarge the units so they're tiny or huge, and can replay the past 60 seconds infinitely from any angle. What more do you need? I think it's cool not knowing 100% of the time what's going on. It's called war, isn't it? People are just lazy I guess.

-Tiger

[This message has been edited by Tiger (edited 08-07-2000).]

[Jeff Heidman]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken:

Jeff Heidman wrote:

> IMNSHO,

We worship your greatness.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just send money, worship is not required.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

I'm saying the information is on the battlefield, like it is in reality.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's "on the battlefield"? What in the hell does that mean? Last I checked, there was no "battlefield", just a computer screen giving me information about a virtual representation of WW2 combat.

Making that information arbitrarily difficult to get to using my computer is not going to make my computer into a battlefield.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

Combat Mission provides you with numerous ways of assimilating what is happening on the battlefield.

You're so caught up with either clicking on a unit or using the + and - keys - that's a Close Combat way of thinking.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Quit with the CC references. I have not played CC in about 3 years, and have played many a wargame before and since then. I barely remember anything about CC, so my opinions really have nothing to do with that game. Do not presume that everyones opinions are driven by that which you seem to really dislike.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

In CM, you can put the camera wherever you want. You can put bases on units or enlarge them to see them better.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So? What does that have to do with the subject? Would having a roster suddenly make those techniques not work anymore?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

Rather than having men scattered all over the place, CM represents squads and teams as distinct groups, and distinguishes between them. You also have command lines to keep platoons together. I could go on.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I understand how CM works. Really, I do. I am pretty good at it actually. My desire for the info it provides to be better displayed has nothing to do with your unfounded perception that I am somehow incapable of understanding how units work together.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

You also seem to have the memory of a goldfish.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks. Always nice to move to personal attacks at this point in the discussion.

While I am sure you can remember the exact location and status of every single unit you have, just throw a bone to those less gifted of us who want to play a wargame, not memorization.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

If you're wondering whether your spotter has any ammo left, you remember where you left him and you click on him. It's not that difficult.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Apparently that is not the case for everyone, since there seems to be several people who say that they can and have done precisely that.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

If you have a roster, it tells you what a unit is doing, but it offers no contextual information.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Huh? I was thnking a roster would just have the info immediately available by clinking on the unit, along with the ability to click on the unit in the list to jump to it.

What are you thinking?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

What's the point in knowing whether a unit is moving or firing or whatever, if you don't know where it's moving or what it's firing at?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No point that I can think of. Of course, I did not argue for a roster with that information, nor ahs anyone else as far as I can tell.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

It makes far more sense to have all the information in one place (ie. on the ground), instead of picking some of that information and displaying it in a roster, which in itself is of little value.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I thought you said you didn't like it because it was unrealistic? If you do not find it valuable (presumably due to your perfect memory) then there would be nothing that was forcing you to use it.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

Want to know what units you have and what they're doing? (1) Remember. God gave you a memory for this purpose.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Than you better give Him a ring and tell Him He screwed up, since my memory is not up to the task of remembering where some 50 units are at all times.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

(2) Look and see. This will give you all the information you need at a glance, instead of offering a couple of contextually useless points of info in a place removed from where it really matters.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I hate to break this to you, but the "place where it really matters" is all on my computer screen. There is no other place.

Your assertion that the info would be useless is a strawman. If the info is useless in a roster, it would be useless when you clink on the unit also.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

Oldgamer wrote:

> I just want a simple list that prevents me from overlooking a Schrek (or whatever) in the big operations.

If you could overlook a team in the game as it is, you could overlook a team even if you had a roster. The units are all there - you just have to look and see. In the same way that you have to look at a roster and see what's there.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Exactly, a roster provides precisely the same information given now, just in a format that is more appropriate at times.

You are making an arguemnt from extremes. Every sinlge point you have made could be equally made by someone who thinks that the ability to get ANY information about a unit is unrealistic or undesireable.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

The only way to ensure you don't miss any units, is to go through the roster from top to bottom issuing orders. This is an awful way to play, and exactly what I'm getting at.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

THEN DO NOT PLAY THAT WAY!!!!

Having a roster does not force anyone to do anything! It does not magically turn CM into CC or anything else!

It is just another way of presenting information to the player. If someone wanted to, and ahd the patience, right now they could step through every single unit with the "+" key and accomplish precisely the same thing!

Adding a roster is a null operation when it comes to realism and feel, and a big plus when it comes to playability. Your argument seems like some kind of elitist demand that we continue to do something painful and difficult because it will make us better people some how.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

Combat Mission is about context and realism, not about lists and statistics.

David<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Agreed. And having a unit roster will not take away from either of those things. It will just make the game a little easier to play.

Jeff Heidman

[Blue Macs]

No No No !!!

i say spend more time playing the game and you get used to marshalling your forces. start small with just a platoon and support , then company and so on . soon you should be able to keep large forces under control at your fingertips. as has been mentioned in this thread, a roster may be useful in games like CC where there is less info available onscreen, but is unnecessary in CM. its just such a fab game already it doesnt need any clutter.

less say , more play

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

"If you see a white plane it's American, if you see a black plane it's the RAF. If you see no plane at all it's the Luftwaffe." -German soldier, Western Front, 1944

[Tiger]

It does screw up the game. With a roster, you'll never miss a unit like before, and this will take away much of the chaos and uncertainty of a battlefield. Multiplayer would go down the tubes because of this.

Some of the most fun mp games have been when I or my opponent "rarely" missed something.

-Tiger

[fdiskboy]

Tiger,

If you had purchased the game for me, then perhaps your opinion on "ruining the game" would be more important to me. I respect your opinion, even though you think my opinion makes me "lazy". You might consider eliminating the personal attacks whether intended or no and focus on the actual opinions.

[Jarmo]

Yes! Yes!

I'm sick of doing + and - all the time. Or rolling around

with maximum shift-c in search of that particular unit.

But on/off toggle would be best.

Maybe for CM2?

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

Now, would this brilliant plan involve us climbing out of

our trenches and walking slowly towards the enemy sir?

[WendellM]

I would greatly welcome a roster/OOB (preferably a click-able one that would then select the unit clicked).

I don't want any more information than is already in the game; I just don't want to have to +/- through all my units to get what I'm looking for. IMHO, it's purely a matter of making the game easier/faster to navigate for the player (though DO keep the current +/- system for its devotees).

I've gotta say that I personally can't see why any player would object to this. We aren't playing "Concentration" or Gin Rummy - CM isn't some "memory game." IMHO

[Jeff Heidman]

The most irritating thing about some of the anti-roster crowd is the very idea that someone who wants a roster is somhow inferior. That is a crappy attitude.

*I* think the game would be better with a roster. That does not mean I think those who wish to play without one are somehow lesser players. When I PBEM someone, I want to win becasue I apply better or more sound tactics. Not because they forgot about some unit, or did not notice something happening that they might have had they had a roster of units.

Jeff Heidman

[Oldgamer]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken:

<snip>

If you could overlook a team in the game as it is, you could overlook a team even if you had a roster. The units are all there - you just have to look and see. In the same way that you have to look at a roster and see what's there.

The only way to ensure you don't miss any units, is to go through the roster from top to bottom issuing orders. This is an awful way to play, and exactly what I'm getting at. Combat Mission is about context and realism, not about lists and statistics.

David<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Someone earlier in this thread mentioned assumputions. You're apparently assuming that I lose units, which to my knowledge I never have. I pay WAY too much attention to detail when playing turn based games, which in my opinion makes this game "gamey" to start with, really the same complaint people have made for years about cardboard turn based games.

Don't get me wrong, I love CM, but realistic?? You can drool over an email turn for hours, and in the ops I certainly spend sometimes much more time reviewing and analyzing than I'd like. Beyond the initial planning, being a real tactical battlefield commander is all about making well educated, RAPID decisions.

I don't believe a list would affect my gameplay in the least, but would simply make large games faster for me to play. I would not play the game with the roster as my interface, as I agree with you completely on this point.

[David Aitken]

Jeff -

Like it or not, you can't just put in a roster as an optional extra. The kind of things based on personal preference are irrelevant to gameplay - transparent houses, tree coverage etcetera. A roster would change the way Combat Mission is played, in general.

BTS, if they ever did it, would not just throw in a roster - that would be lame and incongruous. They would make it functional and worthwhile - or if they didn't, people would demand that they did. It would inevitably develop functions which even an experienced player would be ill-advised to ignore.

Adding a roster is the thin end of the wedge. It is an element which is not in keeping with the design of Combat Mission. If it were to be added, it would need to be supported too, or people would start asking why it's so lame. This is why the argument that it can be ignored by those who so desire, doesn't stand up.

David

[fdiskboy]

David,

Please add "In my opinion" to each of your statements. Providing the same information in a roster ALREADY available by cycling through your units with +/- changes the game how? That, unless I am confused by the plain English here, is all that is requested.

Please include specifics on what exactly would be changed OTHER than your personal preferences which are already noted.

Respectfully

[JWorthing]

NO

I'd rather have all that end screen stuff than a roster.

[PzKpfw 1]

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

No. No roster please. This is a wargame. In real war, units do get lost or misplaced.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats fine in real war, but CM is a game therefore unless you can prove to me that CM modeled an random % that your units will just dissapear or randomly become lost to simulate 'real war' occurences, it doesn't apply here.

Thats another thing, most of the comments here have been negative in the aspect that in 'reality' this or that does or doesn't happen, while again unless someone here can prove that the CM engine models all these 'realism' factors they are moot points.

Regards, John Waters

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

People who can smile when things go wrong have found someone else to blame.

[This message has been edited by PzKpfw 1 (edited 08-07-2000).]