SybotCB Posted March 27, 2001 Share Posted March 27, 2001 Perhaps you could add a "Boss Mode" I realize you can hit "esc", but for nostalgia sake if anything you could add a cute little compiling screen or processing data. Or a picture of some graphs on a desktop. That would be cool. [This message has been edited by SybotCB (edited 03-27-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Leader Posted March 27, 2001 Share Posted March 27, 2001 How about we make it useful and have an IN-GAME unit roster. For viewing or even -- gasp-- for finding and issuing orders to troops. Sort of like in SP:WAW. Maybe even the ability to switch a units headquarters. That would be SWEET! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SybotCB Posted March 27, 2001 Author Share Posted March 27, 2001 Actually a roster would be nice too. But that's been asked for here before, so I think they already knew about that. B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathdealer Posted March 27, 2001 Share Posted March 27, 2001 Stuff to see in CM2? I would really like to have ability to choose the shape of map in QBs - square, wide or deep. That would give immediately new things to think about. Also VLs locating should be 'sharpened' - the routine to calculate 'important' places on the map. It should be little random - sometimes it would be valley or hill or road jucture etc. When map gets bigger there should be a few/several locations like that - also it would make sense to have bigger VL in the middle of one such VL surrounded with a couple or few smaller ones. In the end result calculations troops with ammo should have 'weight' - thus removing crews holding VLs. And type of troop/APC/AFV should have value on counting which side has particular VL. There could maybe be total control = 4 or more value in VL area, partial control = 2 to 4 value in VL area and no control = less than 2 value compared to opponents troops in the area of VL. Bigger VL the bigger area of course... This would make city fights quite hard to get totally to one side which is somewhat 'historical'. Bunkers should have directed strength value in the end calculations - bunker overwatching VL -bridge should effect the control of that VL. Tanks should not have this ability - maybe gamey idea but I think it would make sense. Protecting VL would mean something then. Other thing is the VLs behind the line of troops in the end of battle. If there are no 'great' breaches between the VLs (how that is ever calculated) the VLs behind side should belong automatically to that side. Other thing possibly to come alive for troops the ability to fire at multiple targets on their own - less likely if buttoned of course - but especially German flameHTs etc. should be able to give fire to both sides. Sometimes troops in CMBO already have this ability but nonetheless it should be considered. Key issue here is buttoned/not buttoned: unbuttoned AFVs/APCs should have really low observation ability around of them. This is generally now calculated as longer reaction time I guess. Ending for QBs should get randomized ending - this has been talked before - but with 20 round would could get random +/-10% time variable meaning -2 to +2 random length. Longer game gives longer time variable. And somehow kind of making movies from battles would be great. I think there was a threat about this too... I'm not programmer but could those partly damaged buildings BMPs be randomly added with small holes in then - I think now they are those pink areas - and thus we would create real looking damaged things on the map? maybe this could be extended to AFVs and APCs too. All in all those holes should be rather small. Also multiple numbering to tanks would be nice but then we should have area in turrets where numbers could be placed. This method would greatly raise the workload of videocard though and thus maybe not such a good idea. Just a few thoughts - I guess all of us would come up with quite many ideas given time but what we really get is anyway going to make me have more and more sleepless nights... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maastrictian Posted March 27, 2001 Share Posted March 27, 2001 Bunkers should have directed strength value in the end calculations - bunker overwatching VL -bridge should effect the control of that VL. Tanks should not have this ability - maybe gamey idea but I think it would make sense. Protecting VL would mean something then. An interesting idea. There is enough value to having a bunker watching a VL already though. I mean, if the enemy has troops at the BL at the end of the battle then the bunker has "failed" right? The troops can now dig in. They may loose some more men before the day truely ends, but the VL has been taken. --Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wwb_99 Posted March 27, 2001 Share Posted March 27, 2001 Some improvements I would like to see: 1) Improve the Strat AI, especially regarding deployment. As it stands now, platoons are often stretched across the entire map, seriously handicapping the AI. Also, a little education in how to use heavy weapons support would help it. Mortars are not designed to advance with the riflemen. 2) User interface improvements, especially in the editor. A spreadsheet style unit data editor would be nice, as well as the ability to reset variables for a whole scenario (i.e. set the base ammo level to 60 instead of 40). 3) More random factors in QBs: Map size, map content, weather, map shape (see above, great idea), randomized experience within forces (mix green and regular squads, for example) and ammunition for infantry. 4) Make QBs generate a 'briefing' that is simply the parameters used to start the game. Will pretty much end setup cheating as we know it. 5) The ability to force airstrikes in the scenario editor for a given turn and sector of the battlefield. 6) The ability to pre-plan arty bombardments as well as movements from the deployment screen. WWB ------------------ Before battle, my digital soldiers turn to me and say, Ave, Caesar! Morituri te salutamus. Check out the Dogs of War CM Players Community Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathdealer Posted March 28, 2001 Share Posted March 28, 2001 Originally posted by Maastrictian: An interesting idea. There is enough value to having a bunker watching a VL already though. I mean, if the enemy has troops at the BL at the end of the battle then the bunker has "failed" right? The troops can now dig in. They may loose some more men before the day truely ends, but the VL has been taken. --Chris I meant that this way VL would not be taken with only one half-squad because in end calculation bunker had some 'value' on that VL. Exact values would be quite difficult to say without heavy thinking. Of course bunker should have ammo... But yes many things to consider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mikey D Posted March 29, 2001 Share Posted March 29, 2001 How about an on/off toggle for the goodbye explosion! That way clandestine games at work get a bit easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSpkr Posted March 29, 2001 Share Posted March 29, 2001 A small laundry list of changes I would like to see (some have probably already been mentioned - I apologize for any repetitiveness): 1. Bunkers for everyone. The simplest bunkers were holes in the ground with a couple of logs used to hold up a log roof and provide a firing slit. Every major combatant used these types of bunkers - they were relatively quick and easy to make, and provided squads and MG's protection. Read "Company Commander" by Charles Brown MacDonald. 2. Allow squads from either side to take refuge in bunkers or concrete emplacements. American troops fighting along the Siegfried line often used the abandoned or knocked out bunkers for shelter, and certainly used them to ride out the occasional artillery barrage. Troops in CM ought to be able to as well (within some limits - # of men or units, for example). Again, read "Company Commander." 3. Update graphics model to place a body at each spot where a member of the squad is killed, wounded, etc. This might take a bit more memory, but it would be interesting to see the trail of bodies in an assault, for example. Obviously, this function should be designed so that people with slower systems can turn it off in the preferences. 4. Horses. The Germans, Russians, and Italians (as well as Germany's various satellite countries) all made extensive use of horses and carts for transportation. In the game, these should be subject to morale, etc. (i.e., a horse unit caught in or near a mortar barrage will probably run wild, stampede, etc.) 5. Miscellaneous terrain - It would be nice to have the option of incorporating some terrain features into the map, including shell holes from previous shelling or bombing; and a 3D rendering of partially collapsed buildings (Aachen did not look nearly as pristine as it appears in the CM scenario - tanks had problems moving through the streets from all the rubble created by Allied bombing); derailed or destroyed railroad cars (a common sight in France), to name a few. 6. A unit tree, so that you can call up the tree and instantly see the morale state, casualties, communications status, ammunition level, etc., of each unit under your command. This should be designed so that you can click on the unit in the tree and instantly be taken to that unit on the map. Also, the tree should reflect which HQ is currently in communication with that particular unit. Finally, the tree could reflect each unit's "kills" in at least general terms (# people, # guns, # hard vehicles (tanks), # armored cars, etc. etc.). 7. A "vision" switch. Although you can go "eye level" with each unit and rotate the map to see what the unit can and cannot see, or you can use the "look" command to do the same thing, it would be more convenient to simply hit a button and be able to see (1) what a particular unit can see (including variations in shade to show where the vision is partially obstructed); (2) what a particular group of units can see (by clicking on the HQ for that group); and (3) the totality of the area your forces can see. This is a realistic function -- after all, a squad can instantly determine that it can't see a particular location in real life -- and would enhance game play. 8. An easy way to "record" an entire game for later playback. 9. Decorations, etc for various units (just a thought). So, what do you think? MrSpkr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russellmz Posted March 29, 2001 Share Posted March 29, 2001 Originally posted by Mikey D: How about an on/off toggle for the goodbye explosion! That way clandestine games at work get a bit easier. in case you still have problems with it, you can change the exit sound (file 00000171.wav) and either use a computer sound recorder program to reduce the noise level or copy in a different sound like the sniper sound 00000410.wav or the end of battle sound 00000129.wav. ------------------ russellmz, Self-Proclaimed Keeper for Life of the Sacred Unofficial FAQ. "They had their chance- they have not lead!" - GW Bush "They had mechanical pencils- they have not...lead?" - Jon Stewart on The Daily Show Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts