Clinton Posted June 28, 2001 Share Posted June 28, 2001 Some of these may have been suggested before, so forgive me if it is so. I just thought I would throw out some thoughts on potential additions, changes or features for CM2. 1.) More user friendly operations maker. exp(being able to place reinforcment markers, ability to change mission profile in operation such as I my Allies want to make a operation that involves me advancing and attacking a village then after I capture it I want the next battle, say battle 3 out of 4,parameters to change from attack to defence that way the germans can counterattack), 2.) Victory locations in Operations, 3.) improved AI more agressive, 4.) Ability to hot-key units so you can jump to them instantly without searching a large map for them, 5.) Ability to have a movement setting which allows all units selected to advance only as fast as the slowest unit(having a front line of riflemen,MGs, Flamers,with tanks behind them advance at the same pace to maintain the infantry screen in front of the tanks) 6.) lower profile unit bases. (I like to see my units easily with the unit bases on, however the big bright boxes cut off a small section of the units making them look very weird. Could they be changed to a less intrusive transparent base maybe like a circle and star for US ans ect.? I know they are hard coded but I think this would really add to the game. Right now the bright green bases look odd, I think that the semi-trans and unit specific would contribute to a "table-top" esque feel.) 7.) Dug-in possitions for tanks and vehicles with the ability to drive out of them. 8.) Record ability to save turns in game. I hope to think of some more as they come to me. Remember if you think these ideas suck or if they have been stated before, sorry bout that. Clinton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinton Posted June 28, 2001 Author Share Posted June 28, 2001 Some of these may have been suggested before, so forgive me if it is so. I just thought I would throw out some thoughts on potential additions, changes or features for CM2. 1.) More user friendly operations maker. exp(being able to place reinforcment markers, ability to change mission profile in operation such as I my Allies want to make a operation that involves me advancing and attacking a village then after I capture it I want the next battle, say battle 3 out of 4,parameters to change from attack to defence that way the germans can counterattack), 2.) Victory locations in Operations, 3.) improved AI more agressive, 4.) Ability to hot-key units so you can jump to them instantly without searching a large map for them, 5.) Ability to have a movement setting which allows all units selected to advance only as fast as the slowest unit(having a front line of riflemen,MGs, Flamers,with tanks behind them advance at the same pace to maintain the infantry screen in front of the tanks) 6.) lower profile unit bases. (I like to see my units easily with the unit bases on, however the big bright boxes cut off a small section of the units making them look very weird. Could they be changed to a less intrusive transparent base maybe like a circle and star for US ans ect.? I know they are hard coded but I think this would really add to the game. Right now the bright green bases look odd, I think that the semi-trans and unit specific would contribute to a "table-top" esque feel.) 7.) Dug-in possitions for tanks and vehicles with the ability to drive out of them. 8.) Record ability to save turns in game. I hope to think of some more as they come to me. Remember if you think these ideas suck or if they have been stated before, sorry bout that. Clinton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinton Posted June 28, 2001 Author Share Posted June 28, 2001 Bumpidty Bump Bump Does anyone have any thoughts about any of these ideas or any ideas that they, themselves want to throw out. I think it is important to keep suggesting things for BTS. Happy hunting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinton Posted June 28, 2001 Author Share Posted June 28, 2001 Bumpidty Bump Bump Does anyone have any thoughts about any of these ideas or any ideas that they, themselves want to throw out. I think it is important to keep suggesting things for BTS. Happy hunting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinton Posted July 3, 2001 Author Share Posted July 3, 2001 Bumpity Bump Bump! Just thought I would give it another go and see if anyone had any thoughts on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clinton Posted July 3, 2001 Author Share Posted July 3, 2001 Bumpity Bump Bump! Just thought I would give it another go and see if anyone had any thoughts on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Clinton: Bumpity Bump Bump! Just thought I would give it another go and see if anyone had any thoughts on this?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Every single one of them is a good idea imo. (by way of a bump) --Rett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Clinton: Bumpity Bump Bump! Just thought I would give it another go and see if anyone had any thoughts on this?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Every single one of them is a good idea imo. (by way of a bump) --Rett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stacheldraht Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 How about dummy minefields? I know the Germans used them in the West a lot, at least. They could be available for a nominal QB point cost and just look like standard anti-personnel mine warning signs, minus any mines. That could very well scare off troops that come in contact with the sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stacheldraht Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 How about dummy minefields? I know the Germans used them in the West a lot, at least. They could be available for a nominal QB point cost and just look like standard anti-personnel mine warning signs, minus any mines. That could very well scare off troops that come in contact with the sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Crowley Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 All pretty reasonable ideas. I think BTS's Steve has already indicated that dug-in/reverse-out is a strong possibility. As far as AI agressiveness, I don't think it needs to be more aggressive necessarily but AI does need to be smarter as far as setup is concerned, in QB's. Sets-up,on the attack, way too far back and is far too scattered for C&C. It would be nice to see a range of possible respones from the AI i.e sometimes cautious, sometimes extremely aggressive, just to keep you guessing. After all not all human players are the same, so why not variations in the AI player? Couple this to a more fully randomised QB set-up (with some more map size variables) and you have a near unlimited supply of battles of the size you want, without any bias towards one side or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Crowley Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 All pretty reasonable ideas. I think BTS's Steve has already indicated that dug-in/reverse-out is a strong possibility. As far as AI agressiveness, I don't think it needs to be more aggressive necessarily but AI does need to be smarter as far as setup is concerned, in QB's. Sets-up,on the attack, way too far back and is far too scattered for C&C. It would be nice to see a range of possible respones from the AI i.e sometimes cautious, sometimes extremely aggressive, just to keep you guessing. After all not all human players are the same, so why not variations in the AI player? Couple this to a more fully randomised QB set-up (with some more map size variables) and you have a near unlimited supply of battles of the size you want, without any bias towards one side or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Peace Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 I'd like to see move in column orders, as well as multiple-waypoint settings for group orders. Also a "move along the twisty road order" would be nice. I'd also like to see improvements in the AI, especially the ability to control the "aggressiveness" setting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren Peace Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 I'd like to see move in column orders, as well as multiple-waypoint settings for group orders. Also a "move along the twisty road order" would be nice. I'd also like to see improvements in the AI, especially the ability to control the "aggressiveness" setting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PiggDogg Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 Additional ideas (some have already been mentioned in this thread & elsewhere) for CMBB & beyond: (1) Smarter AI [present AI is as smart as a box of rocks]. (2) Units seek & utilize nearby cover without explicit orders [related to smarter AI]. (3) Group way points. (4) An 'immediate runaway if you are shot at' command [yes, I am aware of the 'withdraw' command]. (5) Command for CMBB to cook my breakfast, lunch, & dinner and vacuum the floors [lol]. If these are installed CMBB will be well near perfect. Richard Cuccia, ICQ# 116577632, richardcuccia@home.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PiggDogg Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 Additional ideas (some have already been mentioned in this thread & elsewhere) for CMBB & beyond: (1) Smarter AI [present AI is as smart as a box of rocks]. (2) Units seek & utilize nearby cover without explicit orders [related to smarter AI]. (3) Group way points. (4) An 'immediate runaway if you are shot at' command [yes, I am aware of the 'withdraw' command]. (5) Command for CMBB to cook my breakfast, lunch, & dinner and vacuum the floors [lol]. If these are installed CMBB will be well near perfect. Richard Cuccia, ICQ# 116577632, richardcuccia@home.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col Deadmarsh Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 1. Pausing Before Shooting/Smoking This will allow you to smoke an area without using up a tank's entire smoke supply in one turn. 2. Multiple Pauses During Turns And At Beginning Of Turns This will allow a player to move a tank up a slight hill to get a shot off at the enemy and then retreat back down for cover. As it is right now, we have to use workarounds which are an unnecessary burden. 3. "Fallback" Command (Idea From Jaldaen) This command will serve to move your infantry squads or teams away from the enemy at a slower pace than withdraw, yet taking a lower morale hit. It shows in abstraction, a team backtracking or moving away using cover fire to get the entire squad out of harm's way, preventing the enemy from rushing them and shooting them in the back. Also, could we have an option to rotate after withdrawing? I'm confused now as to why we don't. If you're running away from the enemy, wouldn't you want to turn around and see if they're following you? 4. Hand To Hand Fighting Animation I'd like to see at least some sort of animation showing squads in hand to hand combat, even if it looks rudimentary. Sound is just not enough. 5. Multiple Area Targets Per Turn This one is very important! We should have the ability to provide suppression fire for more than one suspected target a turn. Also, there have been hundreds of times that I've needed to smoke more than just one patch of trees to move my infantry into an area but I can't. I have to use one minute's worth of smoke (the entire supply of one tank) on one area. Let us give the orders to smoke at the very least a second target in that turn to create a wider or longer smoke screen for the infantry. 6. Infantry Smoke I'm still lobbying for this one too. [ 07-03-2001: Message edited by: Colonel_Deadmarsh ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col Deadmarsh Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 1. Pausing Before Shooting/Smoking This will allow you to smoke an area without using up a tank's entire smoke supply in one turn. 2. Multiple Pauses During Turns And At Beginning Of Turns This will allow a player to move a tank up a slight hill to get a shot off at the enemy and then retreat back down for cover. As it is right now, we have to use workarounds which are an unnecessary burden. 3. "Fallback" Command (Idea From Jaldaen) This command will serve to move your infantry squads or teams away from the enemy at a slower pace than withdraw, yet taking a lower morale hit. It shows in abstraction, a team backtracking or moving away using cover fire to get the entire squad out of harm's way, preventing the enemy from rushing them and shooting them in the back. Also, could we have an option to rotate after withdrawing? I'm confused now as to why we don't. If you're running away from the enemy, wouldn't you want to turn around and see if they're following you? 4. Hand To Hand Fighting Animation I'd like to see at least some sort of animation showing squads in hand to hand combat, even if it looks rudimentary. Sound is just not enough. 5. Multiple Area Targets Per Turn This one is very important! We should have the ability to provide suppression fire for more than one suspected target a turn. Also, there have been hundreds of times that I've needed to smoke more than just one patch of trees to move my infantry into an area but I can't. I have to use one minute's worth of smoke (the entire supply of one tank) on one area. Let us give the orders to smoke at the very least a second target in that turn to create a wider or longer smoke screen for the infantry. 6. Infantry Smoke I'm still lobbying for this one too. [ 07-03-2001: Message edited by: Colonel_Deadmarsh ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlowMotion Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>James Crowley: It would be nice to see a range of possible respones from the AI i.e sometimes cautious, sometimes extremely aggressive, just to keep you guessing. After all not all human players are the same, so why not variations in the AI player? Couple this to a more fully randomised QB set-up (with some more map size variables) and you have a near unlimited supply of battles of the size you want, without any bias towards one side or the other.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This AI non-predictability (and thus scenario replayability) would also increase if scenario designers could define new randomizing elements like: -reinforcement arrival chosen from a list of places, not always the one same place -some of the troops could be bought, not always preselected. One could for example define that 75% of the 1. reinforcement (worth X points) would be AI selectable, 25% predefined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlowMotion Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>James Crowley: It would be nice to see a range of possible respones from the AI i.e sometimes cautious, sometimes extremely aggressive, just to keep you guessing. After all not all human players are the same, so why not variations in the AI player? Couple this to a more fully randomised QB set-up (with some more map size variables) and you have a near unlimited supply of battles of the size you want, without any bias towards one side or the other.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This AI non-predictability (and thus scenario replayability) would also increase if scenario designers could define new randomizing elements like: -reinforcement arrival chosen from a list of places, not always the one same place -some of the troops could be bought, not always preselected. One could for example define that 75% of the 1. reinforcement (worth X points) would be AI selectable, 25% predefined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcm1947 Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 BOY I'M WITH YOU ON EVERY ONE OF YOUR SUGGESTIONS COLONEL DEADMARSH. WOULDN'T THE GAME BE IMPROVED BY A BUNCH? HERE'S HOPEING. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD MY FAVORITE SUGGESTION. THAT TANK TURRERTS COULD BE COMMANDED TO ROTATE/TURN IN THE DIRECTION YOU WANT IT TO INDEPENDENT OF THE HULL. EXAMPLE; TANK HEADING WEST AND YOU WANT IT TO TURN IT'S TURRERT EAST WHILE THE TANK CONTINUES ON IT'S WESTWARD MOVEMENT. ANOTHER ONE OF MY WISHES WOULD BE TO HAVE FLARES IN THE GAME. I REALLY ENJOY NIGHT ACTION AND THIS WOULD SIMPLY BLOW THE GAME AWAY, COUARSE I'M FIXIN TO GET A 850 hZ PROCESSOR FOR MY COMPUTER AND AM READY FOR THE PROCESSOR HIT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcm1947 Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 BOY I'M WITH YOU ON EVERY ONE OF YOUR SUGGESTIONS COLONEL DEADMARSH. WOULDN'T THE GAME BE IMPROVED BY A BUNCH? HERE'S HOPEING. I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD MY FAVORITE SUGGESTION. THAT TANK TURRERTS COULD BE COMMANDED TO ROTATE/TURN IN THE DIRECTION YOU WANT IT TO INDEPENDENT OF THE HULL. EXAMPLE; TANK HEADING WEST AND YOU WANT IT TO TURN IT'S TURRERT EAST WHILE THE TANK CONTINUES ON IT'S WESTWARD MOVEMENT. ANOTHER ONE OF MY WISHES WOULD BE TO HAVE FLARES IN THE GAME. I REALLY ENJOY NIGHT ACTION AND THIS WOULD SIMPLY BLOW THE GAME AWAY, COUARSE I'M FIXIN TO GET A 850 hZ PROCESSOR FOR MY COMPUTER AND AM READY FOR THE PROCESSOR HIT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Alkema Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Colonel_Deadmarsh: 1. Pausing Before Shooting/Smoking 2. Multiple Pauses During Turns And At Beginning Of Turns 3. "Fallback" Command (Idea From Jaldaen) 4. Hand To Hand Fighting Animation 5. Multiple Area Targets Per Turn 6. Infantry Smoke [ 07-03-2001: Message edited by: Colonel_Deadmarsh ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ditto, except for number 6, I think we can assume that the troops are smoking every chance they get. (Oh, that wasn't what you meant?) Besides I am willing to accept that A - it wasn't done and B - smoke grenades designed for marking purposes would be even more pathetic than 2" morter smoke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Alkema Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Colonel_Deadmarsh: 1. Pausing Before Shooting/Smoking 2. Multiple Pauses During Turns And At Beginning Of Turns 3. "Fallback" Command (Idea From Jaldaen) 4. Hand To Hand Fighting Animation 5. Multiple Area Targets Per Turn 6. Infantry Smoke [ 07-03-2001: Message edited by: Colonel_Deadmarsh ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ditto, except for number 6, I think we can assume that the troops are smoking every chance they get. (Oh, that wasn't what you meant?) Besides I am willing to accept that A - it wasn't done and B - smoke grenades designed for marking purposes would be even more pathetic than 2" morter smoke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Alkema Posted July 3, 2001 Share Posted July 3, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Clinton: 5.) Ability to have a movement setting which allows all units selected to advance only as fast as the slowest unit(having a front line of riflemen,MGs, Flamers,with tanks behind them advance at the same pace to maintain the infantry screen in front of the tanks)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That would be the "Move" order <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> 6.) lower profile unit bases. (I like to see my units easily with the unit bases on, however the big bright boxes cut off a small section of the units making them look very weird. Could they be changed to a less intrusive transparent base maybe like a circle and star for US ans ect.? I know they are hard coded but I think this would really add to the game. Right now the bright green bases look odd, I think that the semi-trans and unit specific would contribute to a "table-top" esque feel.) Clinton<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Don't forget that the size of the base is an indicator of how much area the unit fills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts