Jump to content

when will the biggest major flaw of CM be solved?


Recommended Posts

I'm talking about recon.

I mean that with the current engine it's not possible to recon in a realistically way:

you need to offer the vehicles as target, instead of driving from cover to cover as fast as possible.

Then one person (not the whole crew!) leaves the car and takes a careful look around.

This kind of recon is not possible and IMO it would be fantastic if BTS would implement that ASAP.

[ August 21, 2003, 08:33 AM: Message edited by: Steiner14 ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most grogs would say that Borg spotting is the major current defect. IIRC, Steve mentioned the the next version of CM will feature AFVs with non-organic crews, IOW, a member will be able to leave the vehicle for reconoitering. This speparation will allow the re-crewing of guns as well.

Personally, I wish BFC had included, instead of Shoot&Scoot (which I don't trust), a Make Contact,Reverse&Hide command.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by PeterX:

IIRC, Steve mentioned the the next version of CM will feature AFVs with non-organic crews

What, you mean..? Are they going to include synthetic crews?

Wow. CM: Rise of the Machines! I can see it already, Arnold gasping his last words after a 155mm HEAT shell has penetrated his lederhosen and caused a scratch: "Ich komme zurück." At least Borg spotting wouldn't be an issue then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, wiseguy:

ORGANIC

1. Of, relating to, or derived from living organisms: organic matter. 2. Of, relating to, or affecting a bodily organ: an organic disease. 3a. Of, marked by, or involving the use of fertilizers or pesticides that are strictly of animal or vegetable origin: organic vegetables; an organic farm. b. Raised or conducted without the use of drugs, hormones, or synthetic chemicals: organic chicken; organic cattle farming. c. Serving organic food: an organic restaurant. d. Simple, healthful, and close to nature: an organic lifestyle. 4a. Having properties associated with living organisms. b. Resembling a living organism in organization or development; interconnected: society as an organic whole. 5. Constituting an integral part of a whole; fundamental. 6. Law Denoting or relating to the fundamental or constitutional laws and precepts of a government or an organization. 7. Chemistry Of or designating carbon compounds.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can fake it a bit right now by putting a tank hunter team or sharpshooter on top of a scout AFV to disembark and look around. The problem with this is that the scout gets stripped off the AFV by even long range MG fire, while IRL the advantage of an enclosed AC is that it protects the occupants at least from harrasing small arms fire.

FWIW, while it would be *very* nice to have non-organic crews and the more realistic scouting behaviors that would result (I do worry about the pesticides, tho tongue.gif ), I certainly think borg spotting is a much bigger flaw than this.

It's also important to keep in mind that most CM senarios I've seen take place long after forward scouting has taken place - ACs usually scouted well ahead of the main body, looking for enemy contact, not a few hundred meters ahead of the main body when contact was thought to be iminent.

There are exceptions, though, and If you play a lot of light recon force battles or MEs (which are not my first choice for battles), then I can see how forward scouting by dismounted crews would really be missed.

Cheers,

YD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for dismounted recon, there's not much to keep you from embarking a combat team or sniper (onto vehicles that will carry them, of course) and chauffering them around the board. The main problem with dismounted recon is it takes advantage of the 'borg spotting' thing, and it's difficult to keep up with the tempo of the game. Though CMBB is considerably slowed-down over CMBO, 'embark-drive-stop-disembark-run-sneak-run-embark-drive...' Sounds like it would make tripling the average scenario length necessary.

[ August 21, 2003, 09:41 AM: Message edited by: MikeyD ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Sergei:

Wow. CM: Rise of the Machines! I can see it already, Arnold gasping his last words after a 155mm HEAT shell has penetrated his lederhosen and caused a scratch: "Ich komme zurück." At least Borg spotting wouldn't be an issue then.

Who are you trying to kid? You know perfectly well that the T-100 is a cyborg. So 'borg spotting would, in fact, be even worse!

/SirReal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by SirReal:

Who are you trying to kid? You know perfectly well that the T-100 is a cyborg. So 'borg spotting would, in fact, be even worse!

/SirReal

Doh! Of course, and that's the way it would HAVE to be for realism's sake! What do you think the "Skynet" started from? I'll tell you: there was a brain flowing in a tank, trying to make the best wargame ever. Incidentally, there was a blackout in the area, and so this brain malfunctioned, making it consider mankind a detriment to its task with their incessant nagging over issues like "borg spotting". To counter this disturbance, it decided to make its game one in which borg spotting was essential for realism, but its disturbed mind couldn't tell the difference between the game and reality. So the Charlesnet convinced Steve to install a thermonuclear warhead that he had recently ordered from Uzbekistan, to its LPT port. A new era had begun, an era of big guns and strong accents. The first patch of the Termadnator series was however very easy to recognise:

matt.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by PeterX:

Most grogs would say that Borg spotting is the major current defect.

Don't know if it's been suggested in all of the lengthy discussions of borg spotting, but I have the perfect solution. Since in any solution to borg-spotting, it's likely that the player himself (herself? tongue.gif ) knows more than any actual commander would, we must reduce the information the player has. In order to do this, the player should be required to take an enormous bong hit and a shot of tequila after each minute of game time.

Preliminary testing shows that this really eliminates that player-omniscience problem which is the root cause of all borg-spotting evils.

Just trying to make the world a better place.

Dr. Rosenrosen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Dr. Rosenrosen:

In order to do this, the player should be required to take an enormous bong hit and a shot of tequila after each minute of game time.

Dr. Rosenrosen [/QB]

As I recall the SPI Civil War Folio game Chancellorsville had a similar optional rule. The standard rules were very restrictive on Union movement for a large portion of their forces. this was to simulate the indecisiveness of General Hooker after he was stunned by a shell hitting a house he was leaning against.

The optional rule allowed the Union player to freely move all units. But just before starting the game he had to drink a pint of whiskey and allow the Confederate player to hit him over the head with a two by four. The Union player was also required to play from that point without seeking medical attention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Recon will also be improved a lot by SOPs.

TacOps' SOPs are a great deal better than what the current CM engine has.

TacOps:

- scout car with scout team in it drives up a road

- on contact it can automatically stop or drive back or pop smoke and drive back

- it can kick out the team or not before falling back

- trashing the scout car will not leave a crew providing absolute spotting

- but the scout team may or may not survive

CMBB:

- scout car with no disembarkable passengers drives up a road

- sees a threat

- turns to it with CMBB's awful turn rates to fire the puny 20mm at a big gun

- next order phase the player cannot fall back along the road because it turned and turning back to be parallel to the road takes the whole turn

- nobody disembarks

- but waxing the scout car leaves a crew providing absolute spotting

Here are the options you have in TacOps:

sop.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The advantage of playing on huge maps ...

The effect is that you can have recon units that are effective in the correct role because you cannot cover the map with enough eyes.

I have just spent 4 turns chasing a German AC with T34's because it got around behind me. Now when I say chase I got within 84 metres but that AI is no slouch popping smoke like a train and going hell for leather. My opponent and I were very impressed.

A battalion of Inf and 20 plus tanks is not that overwhelmimg on a huge map so snipers, LMG's, AC's all have an important role. Mind you if you do not mind having units sneak behind you no worries....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that I finally understand what Borg spotting is, what is the solution to this problem within a PC game? The reason I ask this open-ended question is because you as the player know everything that is going on. You naturally impart this to your units on the computer battlefield. What would be a way around this?

When you issue a command you have to give a reason to execute it and if the reason is "To go all the way across the board because the armored column is coming that way", then the game stops and says "This unit wouldn't know about that."?

Has anyone thought about a work around to this problem that waters down the realism?

I've probably missed a dozen threads on this already so I apologize in advance for being un-informed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by redwolf:

[QB] Recon will also be improved a lot by SOPs.

TacOps' SOPs are a great deal better than what the current CM engine has.

TacOps:

- scout car with scout team in it drives up a road

- on contact it can automatically stop or drive back or pop smoke and drive back

- it can kick out the team or not before falling back

- trashing the scout car will not leave a crew providing absolute spotting

- but the scout team may or may not survive

While I can see the merit of SOPS for adding even more realism to an already admirable product, I would hope that they would be provided as an optional rule.

I very much enjoy CMBB/CMBO, but simply do not have the time to play the larger scenarios or even get involved in PBEM. I find myself rushing through the end of a game, because I just do not have the time to give it the thought it truly deserves. If I had to add even more time to think about all permutations (i.e. providing a SOP) I probably wouldn't play at all. On the other hand, I would like to see the SOPS included for the occasions that I that I can give the game the attention it deserves.

I believe this is my first post, even though I've been lurking on and off pretty much since the beginning.

I'd like to put in my only request for a game enhancement ..... smile.gif

Would it not be possible at the end of the game, i.e. when you "Look at map" to still have the LOS tool enabled, even for destroyed/abandoned units. I'm always curious to see how the ATG managed to knock out my 10 King Tigers peeping through a hole in the woods. Its hardly a game-breaker, but would be nice addition.

Jeremy

[ August 21, 2003, 04:17 PM: Message edited by: Jeremy Holt ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Jeremy Holt:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by redwolf:

Recon will also be improved a lot by SOPs.

TacOps' SOPs are a great deal better than what the current CM engine has.

TacOps:

- scout car with scout team in it drives up a road

- on contact it can automatically stop or drive back or pop smoke and drive back

- it can kick out the team or not before falling back

- trashing the scout car will not leave a crew providing absolute spotting

- but the scout team may or may not survive

While I can see the merit of SOPS for adding even more realism to an already admirable product, I would hope that they would be provided as an optional rule.

I very much enjoy CMBB/CMBO, but simply do not have the time to play the larger scenarios or even get involved in PBEM. I find myself rushing through the end of a game, because I just do not have the time to give it the thought it truly deserves. If I had to add even more time to think about all permutations (i.e. providing a SOP) I probably wouldn't play at all. On the other hand, I would like to see the SOPS included for the occasions that I that I can give the game the attention it deserves.

</font>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In that case I think I must have mis-understood when SOPS are set up! I was under the impression that this was on a turn by turn, move by move basis - but from what you're saying this is a per game issue?

Would it therefore mean that you would have a kind of player style or player template that you would impose on all the games you play? - I rather like the idea of this, because I'm a bit of a coward, and rather fancy the idea "Shoot and Scarper"

Jeremy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Jeremy Holt:

In that case I think I must have mis-understood when SOPS are set up! I was under the impression that this was on a turn by turn, move by move basis - but from what you're saying this is a per game issue?

Would it therefore mean that you would have a kind of player style or player template that you would impose on all the games you play? - I rather like the idea of this, because I'm a bit of a coward, and rather fancy the idea "Shoot and Scarper"

Well, you can change it as often as you want but unless you do the old settings stay in effect (in TacOps some get reset when they are activated). An important aspect of TacOps is multiplayer per side, and usually the commander will tell his player what SOPs to give to their units (unless some units have good reason to be different). It is pretty common to leave the "pop smoke and retreat option on for 2/3rds of the game until the moment for a decisive engagement has come.

If you look at the options you will also see "set all ground units", which is obvious and "copy". That feeds a copy'n'paste mechanism where you can paste by clicking a bunch of units or by drag-selecting them and then paste.

sop.jpg

SOPs alone are not good enough, BTW. In addition, you need speed settings. TacOps is slightly higher level and abstracts everything into "combat speed "which only differs by terrain, but not from orders, which is a mistake IMHO. However that may be, in CM you would in any case need an additional speed setting.

But it would still greatly simplify CMBB, instead of all that hunting, move-to-contact etc. stuff you would have "slow, combat speed, fast" and in addition the SOPs. Remember that you don't need top visit the SOPs every turn, so you can happily plot away fast and slow moves all while the SOPs stay in effect.

[ August 21, 2003, 09:39 PM: Message edited by: redwolf ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by redwolf:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Jeremy Holt:

In that case I think I must have mis-understood when SOPS are set up! I was under the impression that this was on a turn by turn, move by move basis - but from what you're saying this is a per game issue?

Would it therefore mean that you would have a kind of player style or player template that you would impose on all the games you play? - I rather like the idea of this, because I'm a bit of a coward, and rather fancy the idea "Shoot and Scarper"

Well, you can change it as often as you want but unless you do the old settings stay in effect (in TacOps some get reset when they are activated). An important aspect of TacOps is multiplayer per side, and usually the commander will tell his player what SOPs to give to their units (unless some units have good reason to be different). It is pretty common to leave the "pop smoke and retreat option on for 2/3rds of the game until the moment for a decisive engagement has come.

If you look at the options you will also see "set all ground units", which is obvious and "copy". That feeds a copy'n'paste mechanism where you can paste by clicking a bunch of units or by drag-selecting them and then paste.

sop.jpg

SOPs alone are not good enough, BTW. In addition, you need speed settings. TacOps is slightly higher level and abstracts everything into "combat speed "which only differs by terrain, but not from orders, which is a mistake IMHO. However that may be, in CM you would in any case need an additional speed setting.

But it would still greatly simplify CMBB, instead of all that hunting, move-to-contact etc. stuff you would have "slow, combat speed, fast" and in addition the SOPs. Remember that you don't need top visit the SOPs every turn, so you can happily plot away fast and slow moves all while the SOPs stay in effect. </font>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Jack Carr:

Now that I finally understand what Borg spotting is, what is the solution to this problem within a PC game? The reason I ask this open-ended question is because you as the player know everything that is going on. You naturally impart this to your units on the computer battlefield. What would be a way around this?

When you issue a command you have to give a reason to execute it and if the reason is "To go all the way across the board because the armored column is coming that way", then the game stops and says "This unit wouldn't know about that."?

Has anyone thought about a work around to this problem that waters down the realism?

I've probably missed a dozen threads on this already so I apologize in advance for being un-informed.

I believe BFC actually already gave a pretty good answer to this in a thread several months ago (do a search on Borg in the thread body and you might get it to come up.) Might be in here:

Borg spotting

But I don't think your concern is going to be addressed. That is, they are not going to hide information from you any more than they do now. I believe the solution is that they simply do not want, once an enemy is spotted, to be immediately known to every unit simultaneously which is what happens now, so units will have to spot for themselves. They may (speculation) be able to share information with other units, however(?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...