Tankety_Lee Posted January 17, 2001 Share Posted January 17, 2001 I got Combat Mission for Christmas, and have been rabid about it ever since! It is more than I had ever hoped an interpretation of the great tactical boardgames to computer could be. I have never been so sucked into a computer game! I do have a few ideas for add on modules to add differing types of gameplay, without fundamentally changing the engine. They are as follows: a) Some sort of utility that imports USGS DES (digital elevation survey) information into the scenario editor. That way you could download the elevation info for anyplace on Earth. You could then have a satellite picture of that area to provide the quick-battle map generator basic info on woods, roads, buildings and forests. In this way, we could play Combat Mission in our own neighborhood!! Would that be cool? add the option to impose a timer for the orders phase of a turn. While I am one of the gladdest to see the "we go" system, and hate the twitch-monkey games, it would also add an optional level of realism. What commander has all the time in the world to issue orders to his troops? You could have the timer be scalable, so that you could set it for 3 min per 1 min combat, or 2/1, or even 30 sec/1min. Whatever. This would be a way to test command under stress. It would also speed up those who take FOREVER to do their turns. It should definitely be optional, and mutually agreeable to those playing against each other, to impose a time limit. c) Though this could change the nature of the game, it would be a good option for those who really wanted a "you were there" level. In essence, at the beginning of the battle, you would pick who you wanted to be; Squad leader, tank commander, platoon headquarters, company headquarters, or battalion headquarters. Depending on who you picked, that would limit what level of view you could have of the battle field. So, a squad leader could only command their squad, and could only view the battlefield from where he was, at level 1 or 2. A company commander could view the battlefield from where they were located, but at a level 2 or 3. A battalion headquarters could view the battle field at only a level 3 or 4. Anyone could look at the battlefield map. However, your information about enemy units would be limited by what level of command you were at. Detailed info on what you could see, and only vague, general info on what you couldn't see but was passed down to you from above. While this seems drastic, again I think it should only be an option. It would also give a real first person view to the battle field. Lower level headquarters would only be able to see the immediate battle, but could easily see the lay of the land. Higher level headquarters would have good general situational awareness, but would be unable to check out detailed terrain up close and personal. The AI would have to run the higher level headquarters if you chose to be a lower level unit, but it may be possible to implement multiplayer play with many people commanding the many different units. Again, this would just be optional, buy could help make the game appeal to the first-person shooter crowd. It would also add a single "viewpoint" to the battle. I wouldn't want what is already in CM to change at all; These are just ideas to add options to what is already the best computer game ever made. I only want to see CM continue to grow and excel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted January 17, 2001 Share Posted January 17, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> add the option to impose a timer for the orders phase of a turn. While I am one of the gladdest to see the "we go" system, and hate the twitch-monkey games, it would also add an optional level of realism. What commander has all the time in the world to issue orders to his troops? You could have the timer be scalable, so that you could set it for 3 min per 1 min combat, or 2/1, or even 30 sec/1min. Whatever. This would be a way to test command under stress. It would also speed up those who take FOREVER to do their turns. It should definitely be optional, and mutually agreeable to those playing against each other, to impose a time limit.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> When you play a TCP/IP game you have an optinal timer setting for the plot phase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankety_Lee Posted January 17, 2001 Author Share Posted January 17, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kingfish: When you play a TCP/IP game you have an optinal timer setting for the plot phase.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That's great to know! I haven't yet done the TCP/IP. Any good references on how to go about setting up a TCP/IP game? Is it fairly self explanatory? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Napoleon1944 Posted January 17, 2001 Share Posted January 17, 2001 Just download and install the patch and host or join a network game. After you set everything up the game will tell you the IP address. Now you will really be hooked. I almost feel like a drug dealer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankety_Lee Posted January 17, 2001 Author Share Posted January 17, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Now you will really be hooked. I almost feel like a drug dealer!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Man oh man, shoot me that good CM stuff!! (I know, the first taste is free) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mannheim Tanker Posted January 17, 2001 Share Posted January 17, 2001 Welcome to the clan, Tankety! I played my first TCP/IP CM battle this weekend. Er - started it anyway. The battlefield was a little to large to properly view and give orders within 10 minutes per turn. We had to switch it to a regular PBEM to accomodate. Key point: when doing a TCP/IP game (especially your first!) you might find it helpful to keep to a smaller battle. Otherwise, it becomes reminiscent of those triggerfest games! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfish Posted January 17, 2001 Share Posted January 17, 2001 One more thing I forgot to mention about TCP/IP, you get to chat with your opponent while playing. Nothing like taunts and insults in real time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankety_Lee Posted January 17, 2001 Author Share Posted January 17, 2001 Does lag time cause much of a problem in TCP/IP? I have a sluggish 56k modem. Does the game run smoothly enough with that? My gues is it would, as only the orders are exchanged. The local copy of the game generates the turn. Is that the case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted January 17, 2001 Share Posted January 17, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tankety_Lee: I do have a few ideas for add on modules to add differing types of gameplay, without fundamentally changing the engine. They are as follows: a Depending on who you picked, that would limit what level of view you could have of the battle field. So, a squad leader could only command their squad, and could only view the battlefield from where he was, at level 1 or 2. A company commander could view the battlefield from where they were located, but at a level 2 or 3. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> There is a lot of merit to that. I like the scenario I found on the net of US paratroopers on D-Day and the designer suggested only viewing things from ground level and using the + - keys to change units - true fog of war! The downside to what you suggest is having the AI run the rest of the battle for you. A logical extensino is a "true" campaign game - including your face on the platoon leader icon. You start as a platoon leader, and gain promotions etc., up to battalion command based on your performance (hopefully not just a kill ratio, but on other criteria as well). Sort of like the campaign game in the old Squad Leader where you start as a 7 - 0 and work your way up. Now that would be truly cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Posted January 17, 2001 Share Posted January 17, 2001 Just so ya know, there won't be anymore changes or any add on packs to CM. At least not until CM2 is completed. The only patches or updates will be bug fixes and perhaps minor AI tweaks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tankety_Lee Posted January 17, 2001 Author Share Posted January 17, 2001 I was thinking primarily of future additions/ add ons to the Combat Mission series of games that will rule the roost (or should) in the future. The product is fantastic as is. Just offering ideas that came to me for eventual further consideration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Posted January 17, 2001 Share Posted January 17, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tankety_Lee: I was thinking primarily of future additions/ add ons to the Combat Mission series of games that will rule the roost (or should) in the future. The product is fantastic as is. Just offering ideas that came to me for eventual further consideration. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I understand what you were saying and certainly understand the interest in changes and add ons. But after CM2, they are going to work on a completely new engine (CM-II) that will be the basis for CM3 and CM4. I don't think there's going to be a lot of spare time for add ons to the original CM. As Steve has said in the past, there's only so much time, and SOOOOOO much to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mr. Johnson-<THC>- Posted January 17, 2001 Share Posted January 17, 2001 Just head of to the Combat Mission HQ and go to the chat room. Plenty of people will tell you how to get started. If you got ICQ we've got an active list going for CM there also. Glad the game is still spreading. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts