CMX2 Wishlist

[legend42]

aka tom, your correct about the cheating issue and

I dont think that could ever be overcome and probably while we will never see such a feature,its just a wish,I'd much rather see all of the other top priority issues get into CMX2,I'm already parnoi about cheaters and cheating,imagine what that feature would do to my paranoi state of mind.

ps When cheaters die they should be condemed to

play a gameboy for eternity.

[c3k]

Another thought: Battle/Operation organization. Currently all Battles and Operations are listed alphabetically with a little blurb, and number of turns/size. I'd like to see the date included.

In fact, I'd like to see the following listed: Sides, date, force size (points for each), force type (all inf, all armor, combined, etc.), map size, battle type (meeting, assault, etc.), and a summary description.

Finally, I'd like to be able to select how I organize the scenarios based on the above criteria. If I want a summer of '41 battle, let me arrange the list by date. Click. Or, hmm, I'm ready for the mother of all battles. Click on "size". There's a 10,000 pointer!

Thanks,

Ken

[c3k]

(Still waiting for the fix for my double-post syndrome. D'OH!)

[ June 11, 2003, 06:03 PM: Message edited by: c3k ]

[Schoerner]

Regarding the learning-effect, i have the following idea:

audiovisual AARs (acoustically commented movie-replays).

All we need for that would be the possibility to make 'movies' out of the full game replays.

A videorecorder function, with cut/copy/paste and the possibility to attach zoom level and camera positions to each scene.

I guess whole game replays in general will tend to be not too much of interest for other players, but a cut movie-version including only the important and most interesting scenes, enough for revealing the plans and tactics and showing the best scenes (ACTION! - hey, CMX2 will offer eye-candy, too, so why not) ?

If CM would offer that, then players could record their comments and explanations for the scenes with a mic and include it as mp3 with the movie-replay.

Synchronization between the movie and the explanations: all that's necessary is to start the audio file first, which is including a countdown for starting the movie within CM.

Imagine a download depot, with hundreds of analyzed battles (sometimes from both sides) with all the information about the plans, how they were executed or why they failed.

[ June 12, 2003, 06:02 AM: Message edited by: Schoerner ]

[Joques]

Originally posted by DingoBreath:

Multi-player teams battling other teams. Even in PBEM. This would cause some serious FOG about what the commander on your flanks is doing.

-We lost Company F again!

-Again?

[undead reindeer cavalry]

ho ho ho.

- eastern front, please.

- real 3D houses, real 3D vehicles. ability to shoot houses that are on higher ground & ability to take cover behind vehicles.

- follow road, follow road in formation. (i shouldn't be doing this micromanagement.)

- commands for infantry moving as fast as possible without getting tired. (i shouldn't be doing this micromanagement.)

- water. rivers, lakes, bridges, frozen lakes, swamps.

- cliffs.

- key shortcuts for grouping, as in C&C, AOE etc.

- ability to place tags on the map. like victory flags but with your own comments.

- much longer battles & much bigger maps for <1000 point games. ~30 turn battles are more like random action than tactical strategy.

- capture the flag play style. fun & interesting. both sides have defensive areas with foxholes and so forth. unlimited reinforcements until either side has all the flags. etc etc.

- full movie replay. even if it makes the units "seem" super-reactive afterwards.

- no borg thing. i freakin hate them swedes. but make it so that i won't be lured to switch between units a gazillion times to overcome the lack of hive mind.

- ability to choose sides freely, e.g. to wage ussr vs ussr battles.

- include damaged battlegrounds to contain destroyed vehicles.

[Da Beginna]

Hi there! Lot's of good proposals out here, I hope at least some will make their way into the game.

First, I really don't like the idea of putting civilians into the game.

Some of the things have already been mentioned:

"Limited" fire

It should be possible to limited the amount of shells Mortars, Arty Spotters [...] let go, as it's crap to waste half of your ammo in just one or two turns! Or to keep away infantry from revealing their position by constant fire. I don't like combinations of firing and movement orders to achieve the same effect as setup times or leaving a good position for this effect are quite gamey ans stupid.

Improved fortifications

I would like to see shelters, fortified house and other structures into which squads could move in and out. The modell of trenches and fox holes could use some improvement as well.

Different type of minefields (different quality of anti tank mines, like wooden mines) should be simulated. It would also be nice to have bob traps and concealed tank traps / ditches. "Fake" minefields would also be nice.

Advanced pioneers

I would be great to see pioneers demolish structures more professionaly... just when tanks roll over a bridge for instance by a wire controled tnt-load. Or to have bangalos (?) for the Allies and Goliath (I like those little buggers!) remote controlled tanks.

Simulate impacts of tank movement

Another nice to have would be to see the effects of tank movement... like making the track movement visual, destroying walls and fences while moving a tank over it... and maybe even houses. Simulate that King Tinger tanks and similar heavies can only use heavy street bridges.

A lot of things more like more kinds of buildings like towers, castles, watch towers, simulate cellars... or Sherman bulldozers clearing road blocks...

Anyway, the CM series is GREAT. Keep it going!

[MikeyD]

Looks like there's some that want it to lean more towards a 'shooter' game (viewing through guner's sight, etc.) and others that want it to lean more towards a 'grand strategy' game (ability to set up a resupply system, etc.)

Whatever they do, and how ever they do it, I can almost guarantee that a large minority is going to scream that the game has gone off in the wrong direction. Hell, even if the game stays exactly the same someone's going to scream that it went in the wrong direction!

I don't know what I admire most about BFC, their cleverness, their dedication to accuracy, or their superhuman ability to take unwarranted abuse!

[JonS]

Patrick Moore and aka_tom_w,

please send me an email. I have something for you.

Regards

JonS

[UberFunBunny]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

Looks like there's some that want it to lean more towards a 'shooter' game (viewing through guner's sight, etc.) and others that want it to lean more towards a 'grand strategy' game (ability to set up a resupply system, etc.)

Whatever they do, and how ever they do it, I can almost guarantee that a large minority is going to scream that the game has gone off in the wrong direction. Hell, even if the game stays exactly the same someone's going to scream that it went in the wrong direction!

I don't know what I admire most about BFC, their cleverness, their dedication to accuracy, or their superhuman ability to take unwarranted abuse!

Let's hope it's not a case of the "difficult second album"....

[c3k]

Another idea: A Unit save feature.

At the end of a scenario or operation, I'd like to have a one step process to save all the units. (A separate file for each side.)

Then, I can be able to access those units with the scenario editor. Be able to track total kills. Change status - add replacements for casualties or change from, say, green to regular. Change HQ stats. As units gain battle experience, give them a status upgrade.

This would make tracking a unit VERY easy. My idea would apply to a long-term campaign. (Not necessary for the game to implement.) I could set up a battalion or regiment and create a long series of battles and operations and not be limited to the unit status at the end of the last battle.

To add back in men for replacements I envision a "counter" function with a "+" "-" key. I.e., after a battle a 12 man squad is listed as having 7 left. Save the units. Open the editor, access the unit file, select that squad. I want to simulate the unit getting replacents, so I click the "+" key several times. Now the squad has 10 men. (The weapons allocation would be identical to current implementation. Currently the infantry tries to retain weapons based on firepower(?) as they get reduced. Simply reverse the process.)

Ken

[Schoerner]

For the realism-freaks out there:

in multiplayer games the option, to block view levels higher than 1+2.

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by JonS:

Patrick Moore and aka_tom_w,

please send me an email. I have something for you.

Regards

JonS

e-mail sent

-tom w

[Patrick Moore]

I would like to see the ability for a battle designer to mod vehicle/guns performance/operational status. I have read accounts of specific battles where, for instance, an AFV/gun is present but has mechanical problems (slow speeds only, only HE for ammo, immobile AFV, No ammo for main gun, turret/gun cannot rotate, etc.)

Pardon my ignorance, but I've only played around a tiny bit with the battlemaker in CMBO/CMBB and I don't recall seeing this feature.

[Sigurd]

Limit for number of commanded units by HQ

suggestion for the Command & control system :

The delay system represents the transmitting of the orders to all subordinated units (squads, teams, FO,...) through hand or voice signals, phone, radio, runners

In the current implementation, a Company commander can give in one turn orders to an infinite numbers of unit, which is obviously too much

I'd lke to see a system where HQ have a limit of number of units commanded, which would depend on the HQ's :

rank

experience

casualties

A veteran battalion HQ would be allowed o command , say, 15 units maximum, whereas a green platoon leader could just direct only his allocated squads with just an extra unit.

I didn't see any suggestion like these

What do you think of it ?

[SgtMuhammed]

I like the command limitation idea. I would also like to be able to assign units to new headquarters. Put mortars under control of their platoon HQ or assign machineguns to specific platoons, stuff like that.

I hate trying to fire a mortar barrage only to find that command has been ursurped by some other HQ.

[moneymaxx]

Ok, here goes my personal wishlist.

a) A better modelling of the behaviour of broken units. I think that they should surrender more often, especially if running away means running over open ground.

Higher buildings with more levels.

c) A better modelling of destroyed houses. Until now they leave a plain rubble tile that doesn’t block LOS a lot. 3d-rubble would be a good solution, e.g. leaving some walls partially intact.

d) Decreasing armour quality after several hits. IIRC, the way it is modelled until now shell hits don’t produce accumulating damage. After a non-lethal hit the armour is “as new” when the next shell arrives. While in real life even non penetrating hits could produce cracks in the armour plates or HE shells could rip off part of the protection.

e) A preview of the calculated waypoints. In CM the AI sometimes re-plots waypoints to get a vehicle from point A to B. What looks to the player like a perfect straight movement through 2 wood-patches could easily result in a movement AROUND those patches with sometimes undesired results. This and other re-plot related problems could be easily solved if the waypoints were shown directly after the movement order has been given.

f) I think the rarity cost system of CMBB is very good but should be extended to troop quality as well. Especially in the early months of the war regular or better Russian troops were very rare but that is not reflected in the point cost (only the combat performance is). E.G. everybody buys regular or veteran KV-1s in QBs while those crews were very difficult to find and handpicked. Those battles would be more balanced (realistic???) if those qualities weren’t readily available, therefore much more expensive. The same applies to infantry units.

g) Area/knock-on effects. In real life I wouldn’t be to happy to stand 1 meter away from an exploding Flamethrower vehicle, though I wouldn’t have much time to be unhappy anyway :eek: . In CM nothing happens. Even a very simplified model could solve this, e.g. giving the exploding vehicle a blast value like a HE shell (If ripped of turrets flying through the air are modelled some destructive force good be assigned to them too). The same could apply to building simulating the effects of flying debris while collapsing. Another effect of collapsing buildings could be that adjacent roads are made impassable because they are blocked by rubble.

And I’d like to repeat some suggestions that were already mentioned:

a) Full movie replay with VCR function.

assign support weapons to a HQ so that they don’t switch.

c) Eye candy(dynamic lighting, (pseudo) physically correct effects of explosions, e.g. a flying jeep .

d) Topographical maps

e) Hard coded “Iron Man” rules. I’d like to try it with CMBB but my finger is always magically drawn to that ‘4’ key . That would include, not just blocking level 3 and up views, but actually a new option in the battle parameters like EFOW. The program then blocks certain keys depending on the unit and its position. E.g. a sharpshooter on the ground can only use level 1 (all other keys don’t work), while the same sharpshooter in a church tower can use level 1 to 3, a tank with good optics can use the magnifying keys etc..

So Charles, now go, through some caffeine into the fluid that nurtures your floating brain and PROGRAM!!!!

[ June 13, 2003, 09:34 PM: Message edited by: moneymaxx ]

[M1A1TC]

For the next CM game Id like to see WW1 or Pacific Theater. Western and Eastern fronts have been done too much, as much as I like playing them. We cant ignore other important conflicts.

[Eddy]

I don’t know if this has been mentioned before, as I haven’t got time to read all the way through the post (I’m at work), but how about variable weather during a scenario.

So say you start off with a clear day but there is a percentage chance of it raining each round, or snowing or whatever, set by the scenario designer. The designer could set it at 0% for a summer’s day, or 30% for autumn or spring and so on. Or perhaps the designer could specify in round 15 it will start to rain. This, I think, will make the game more realistic, which I remember reading is the intention of BTS.

Obviously, this would introduce more luck into the game, and could punish players (e.g. ordering tanks across country and then it starts raining, increasing the chance of tanks bogging) unfairly; but it would be more realistic.

And thinking about it you could have weather reports or some other indication that, for example, it may start raining in twenty minutes or whatever. A player could or could not take this into account; it would be their call.

Certainly in Western Europe (I live in Britain), the weather can change rapidly, easily within the space of twenty minutes.

Cheers

Ed

P.S. Never done a scenario or Quick battle so if this exists already ..... erm I’ll feel very foolish.

[Sigurd]

I don't know if the following idea was already mentioned :

After the first rounds of an Arty Fire mission have landed, a LOS obstruction should not diminish the precision of the arty mission, as if it was plotted out of LOS from the beginning

Once the coordinates are registred by the battery, and validated by the FO with the first rounds, it should continue whatever the LOS is after the first shells landed

It must even more be implmented since in CMAK (and CMX2 I presume), vehicules and artillery explosions will produce dust obscuring the LOS...

[Steiner14]

Trigger levels for AT-guns.

It would greatly increase the TacAI's possibilities, if scenario designers could create cover-arcs with trigger levels.

The level could be determinded i.e. by points of the targeted unit, by light/medium/heavy tank, or by hit/destruction percentage, or combination).

You think an area is safe, bring the best tanks in and suddenly they become knocked out with rear shots? All possible without big changes to the TacAI simply with trigger-levels.

[SFJaykey]

My CMX2 wishlist would have to start from the "ground" up: terrain.

- Smaller tile sizes, 5m maybe? 10m at least.

- Fences and hedges that divide tiles from one another, rather than occupying a full tile. This might enable better calculation of their effects on LOS, cover, and movement, as well as more aesthetic maps.

- More specialized tiles: Orchard and garden tiles. Haystacks. Small creeks.

- Fog of War applied to terrain: no more perfect maps.

That should get us started.

[kipanderson]

Elvis, hi,

You posted,

“My biggest wish.....I had always dreamed of an incredible WW2 game that gave me all the feel that I had with SL/ASL and then CMBO came out and exceeded my woldest dreams.....My wish now is for a game that takes that to a level I haven't even thought of.”

Would not be possible to agree more, CMBO was beyond my wildest dreams. I am constantly saying that I do not believe how luckily I have been, we have all been, that BFC produce the games they do instead of some multi-million selling Star Wars game.

All the best,

Kip.

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by kipanderson:

Elvis, hi,

You posted,

“My biggest wish.....I had always dreamed of an incredible WW2 game that gave me all the feel that I had with SL/ASL and then CMBO came out and exceeded my woldest dreams.....My wish now is for a game that takes that to a level I haven't even thought of.”

Would not be possible to agree more, CMBO was beyond my wildest dreams. I am constantly saying that I do not believe how luckily I have been, we have all been, that BFC produce the games they do instead of some multi-million selling Star Wars game.

All the best,

Kip.

YES I agree with ALL of that

And I like this one TOO:

"e) Hard coded “Iron Man” rules. I’d like to try it with CMBB but my finger is always

magically drawn to that ‘4’ key . That would include, not just blocking level 3 and

up views, but actually a new option in the battle parameters like EFOW. The program

then blocks certain keys depending on the unit and its position. E.g. a sharpshooter

on the ground can only use level 1 (all other keys don’t work), while the same

sharpshooter in a church tower can use level 1 to 3, a tank with good optics can use

the magnifying keys etc.."

Hardcode Iron Man FOW as an optional setting

-tom w

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by SFJaykey:

My CMX2 wishlist would have to start from the "ground" up: terrain.

- Smaller tile sizes, 5m maybe? 10m at least.

- Fences and hedges that divide tiles from one another, rather than occupying a full tile. This might enable better calculation of their effects on LOS, cover, and movement, as well as more aesthetic maps.

- More specialized tiles: Orchard and garden tiles. Haystacks. Small creeks.

- Fog of War applied to terrain: no more perfect maps.

That should get us started.

YES

and Absolutely Yes to:

"- Fog of War applied to terrain: no more perfect maps. "

(Terrain fog of war, units get lost, the map is not what is really there, and the player does not know it until his units see it with their OWN "relative spotting" eyes! I LIKE IT!)