Discussing the limitations of the current CM engine for simulating WW2 engagements

[Runyan99]

I also think that Andrew's idea where some units are ineligible for command at certain times is interesting, as is Salt's idea where one player might actually be able to issue orders more often than another player.

Any sort of development along these lines would help to simulate real world C&C problems, tend to slow the action down to a more 'realistic' pace, and take a bit more of the 'game' aspect out of the simulation.

Oh, and before the first person jumps in and argues that CM is a game and not an simulation, let me remind you that BFC has licensed the game to help train Aussie officers. So they have now broken into the simulation market, and I can only assume they are interested in continuing to move in that direction.

EDIT - oops, someone just beat me to it!

[Runyan99]

Let me add that I also want to be able to push around all of my troops. I don't want to take control totally away from the player. I don't simply want a 'commander' simulation where I issue broad directives and sit back to watch the AI handle the role of the platoon commanders.

But on the other hand, I want something that approximates the pace and the friction of the real-world battlefield. The ability to issue orders to every unit on the map every 60 seconds is possibly too much control. All the units are a little too available for the omnipotent guiding hand that is the Player. It is probably too 'gamey', and I don't mind some refinements which will place some restrictions on exactly when, or to whom, I can issue my orders.

[Pzman]

Yes CM is a WWII combat sim, but the question is how much control does the avrage player want? It seems that there is a small group of grogs and other that want this. What about those of us who would like to continue to play in at least a similar way to what it is now? The question is this, where do we draw the line between simulation and game when it comes to CM?

A Battalion CO's orders may take more time to come through than what may be seen in CM, but lets not forget that CM is a squad level game. Is not the breifing something like the overall commanders orders? So would we then not be playing any role from cp's, to majors?

[ July 16, 2004, 03:37 PM: Message edited by: Panzerman ]

[Sirocco]

The command delay we have now limits the issuing of orders. But it's one of the abstractions in the game, and it has it's faults. A more detailed battlefield communication system - the use of radio's, runners and spoken communication, for example - would just broaden and deepen that, without necessarily making it a completely different game.

[Sergei]

The problem comes with finding the compromise between limiting what the player can do as the overall commander and still allowing the player to do what the platoon and squad leaders would be doing instinctively (relying just on the TacAI here is not necessarily a very good idea).

I thought the C&C rules in Steel Panthers 3 and SPWAW were ingenious. In it, you give targets for every formation (platoon). Moving to the general direction of the target is free, but moving to other directions requires the squad to be in command and it eats command points of the platoon leader (if the platoon leader is out of points, higher commanders' points in the c&c structure would be used instead, supposing there is a connection). These points recover over time. Also changing the platoon's target uses up command points, as well as ordering artillery barrage (which any leader can do if can contact the artillery).

I don't want CMX2 to use SP3's C&C system, not at all. I'm just bringing this up as what I see as an innovative improvement over that of original SP. A simple yet radical change. Maybe we'll see something like that happen in CM.

[junk2drive]

that is why i never used sp c&c system, i don't want that kind of game. the current cm is as close as i've seen to 3d sp, and that is how i like it. but in sp it is optional and if in cmxx it should be optional too.