CMx2... a little more to chew on...

[GSX]

I agree with Dorosh, it sounds great. Well done guys I cant wait to see it. Just remember its a game and we want to play it.

[flamingknives]

Originally posted by RMC:

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

Ammo resupply would be good. It would serve to make the game more realistic.

Oh, yeah. Reminds me of the first time I played the demo for Close Combat. After my mortar expended its 30 rounds I moved them to the building called "Ammo Dump" to get more..... </font>

[GSX]

I presume that BFC are not making a game exclusively for Grogs and have a far wider audience in mind. So I also prsume that some of the fantastic wants of 1 or 2 individuals just wont be there. Sure they can ask what we want, they dont have to take our advice though. Frankly some of that advice would need a Super Comp to run it. bring it up to date and improve it, add new innovations, let it run on my new PC. PBEM I can live without. Horses, I dont think many of them were in company sized assualts other than cossacks. BFC just arent going to put in your kubelwagen wing mirrrors guys, and the majority dont want it ether. Grog grog grog. make me a GAME....

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

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

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

Ammo resupply would be good. It would serve to make the game more realistic.

Oh, yeah. Reminds me of the first time I played the demo for Close Combat. After my mortar expended its 30 rounds I moved them to the building called "Ammo Dump" to get more..... </font>

[RMC]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

Who said anything about doing that way? i was thinking of the company sergeant trundling up with one of the Carriers or somefink.

I guess you never played Close Combat. My comment was intended as a joke. There was no resupply. But there was an ammo dump on the "off the beach" map. Later versions allowes scrounging, but there was no resupply.

It would add a whole new level to the tactics if you could cut off a strong point by interdicting it's supply route, or pause an attack to re stock and reorganise the assault troops.

Maybe. How long do you see a resupply action taking for infantry? For armor?

[JonS]

don't know about resupply, but I was recently reading about breaching wire - 2(NZ)Div developed a drill that enabled them to pass an entire battalion over a wire barrier in 2 minutes, with no particular equipment.

Food for thought maybe.

[flamingknives]

A lull in the fighting? 5 minutes, for infantry? Once the ammo is there, obviously. You could use it to stock up positions that you expect to see some serious fighting as well. Maybe.

Armour would obviously take longer, and could hardly be done on the front line (although I believe it was on some occasions, El Alamein being the most notable)

[JonS]

SP did ammo resupply reasonably well. I recall a Goose Green scenario that used it very effectivly. Light helos were loaded with a small cache which they could drop off anywhere, then units moved to it for resupply. Came in handy for topping up Milans. Anyway, something similar for bren carriers would seem aropos - a small cache which could be offloaded at a location of the players choice, and to which units could move for more ammo.

[Michael Dorosh]

There is the problem of co-ord, however. A full scale battalion attack would have the Ammo DPs set in advance, so that CSMs, CQMSs, etc could find them via map reference. The CSM would come forward and drop the ammo at a preset point. When possible, runners ("carrying parties" they called it in WW I, don't know if that name stuck in the Big One) would go back for it. Time? Dependent on the terrain traversed, exposure to enemy fire (shells, snipers, etc.).

As for dispersal of the ammo once it was brought forward - as fast as someone from each section or team could run back and grab some, unless a runner brought it forward to each firing position...

EDIT - the problem occurs when units are not in contact with their DP for whatever reason, the CSM's carrier is hit by indirect fire, the carrying party gets lost (or killed), of the unit is moving too fast and the DP is put in the wrong place. These problems would be hard to simulate due to the omniscience of a single player and thus, perhaps, better left abstracted.

[ February 15, 2005, 03:36 PM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ]

[RMC]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

A lull in the fighting? 5 minutes, for infantry? Once the ammo is there, obviously. You could use it to stock up positions that you expect to see some serious fighting as well. Maybe.

5 minutes was about what I was thinking too. But when I translate that into CM language it becomes 5 turns. Suddenly 5 turns out of a 30 turn game seems more significant.

I think prepared positions could be handled easily enough, by giving the unit a larger ammo stock of its own. Until it moves, which would then call for some way to account for the ammo left behind. The ammunition could then assume some value for the defensive player and he could have to make decisions about when to abandon the position or attempt to retake it.

Armour would obviously take longer, and could hardly be done on the front line (although I believe it was on some occasions, El Alamein being the most notable)

The maps are big enough where withdrawing armor to a protected location is entirely feasible. The time factor is the big bugbear. How many turns to get the tank back there? How many turns of resupply ops? How many turns to get back into the fight? How do you represent the vulnerability of the crew if, say, Jabos show

up?

If ammo is done in this way, should fuel be done that way too?

[YankeeDog]

Ammo resupply/redistribution could be tackled at a whole variety of levels.

At the platoon level, I do think it would be nice to see a platoons that have been engaged in fighting, but granted a respite to "reorganize", with more ammo-depleted squads "borrowing" some ammo from their fresher partners. I also think it would be realistic for platoons to redistribute manpower to a degree when reorganizing (for example, assign the last 3-4 men of a heavily depleted squad to the other squads). I think this should probably be automatic, and happen without player input whenever a platoon is given a chance to sit in one place without anything pressing to do.

At the Company level, it is my understanding that for most Nationalities in WWII at least, some ammo was kept in reserve with at the Company CP, and sent forward by runner to whichever platoon or MG section needed it. I think modeling this would add a very nice additional level of realism to the infantry model, espeically on the defense -- intra-company lines of communication suddenly become (realistically) much more important so you could to shift ammo reserves where they are needed.

Same goes for Battalion-level, except here the use of vehicle(s) and more powerful ammo types becomes more likely.

So I think intra platoon resupply (redistribution, really) is definitely within CM's purview. Company-level resupply would be more subltle, but would definitely add to the realism of the game. Battalion level resupply would probably be much less common within the CM timeframe (again, assuming length of CM battles in minutes stays roughly the same), but certainly possible, especially on a well-set up, dug in defense where the defender has had the chance to organize and cache defensive supplies.

I'm more skeptical about resupply for armor. The time it would take to drive the tank back to a safe resupply point, get the ammo stowed, and move forward again makes this unlikely at the CM scale, I think. Certainly not out of the realm of possibility, though.

Cheers,

YD

[Michael Dorosh]

Although, YD, there were some exceptional instances of vehicles being accompanies by ammo vehicles due to low onboard stowage - the larger assault howitzers, for example, but also mortar vehicles and some halftrack-mounted weapons systems which had ammo trailers.

I bet Jon S would love to see a troop of Quads with 25 pdrs and limbers wheel into a position and be unable to fire until the GPO and his Acks got the guns on line... As irrelevant as it might seem to a company or battalion level battle on a 9km sq map...

[YankeeDog]

To follow up, on times for various levels of resupply, assuming WWII theater similar to the ones already done in the CMX1 games:

For intra-platoon, probably in the 2-5 minute range -- i.e., a platoon left sitting unmolested in one place w/ all squads in reasonably close proximity "evens up" the squad ammo loads, and reassigns any orphans, etc.

For intra-company, probably more like 5-10 minute range for simple small arms resupply. I *do* think this would show up at the CM level, especially for a well-dug in, supported infantry defense.

For intra-battalion, probably more like 10-30 minutes, and so often outside of CM's purview, but in the case of well-established defensive MLR, I can still see this being a factor.

Other aspects of ammo caching could add additional complexity. For example, I have often read account of ATG crews keeping only 5-6 rounds in any on location, and preparing multiple firing positions with additional ammo. The crew shoots off the ammo in one spot, and then the entire crew moves the gun as fast as possible to a new location. Obviously this would allow the crew to move the gun a fair bit faster than what you see currently in CM. It would be interesting to see this kind of thing modeled in CMX2.

Of course, many (including myself) believe that there is still a fair amount of "time compression" in current CM games as far as the actual time it took for an interesting slice of a company to battalion-level action to take place IRL. If battles get longer (in terms of "real world" minutes) in CMX2, then the case for resupply becomes even stronger.

Cheers,

YD

[YankeeDog]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Although, YD, there were some exceptional instances of vehicles being accompanies by ammo vehicles due to low onboard stowage - the larger assault howitzers, for example, but also mortar vehicles and some halftrack-mounted weapons systems which had ammo trailers.

I bet Jon S would love to see a troop of Quads with 25 pdrs and limbers wheel into a position and be unable to fire until the GPO and his Acks got the guns on line... As irrelevant as it might seem to a company or battalion level battle on a 9km sq map...

Absolutely. In fact, if CMX2 takes on the challenge of modeling on-map indirect fire by tracked howitzers and the like, modeling this kind of gun + ammo vehicle/trailer could become very important.

[dalem]

Would it be Groggily acceptable to have a very abstracted "Resupply" mechanic that works a little like the "Fanatic" attribute in CM? Something toggleable by a player/scenario designer to allow, say, certain squads a certain percentage chance of being resupplied with certain ammo types after a certain time of the scenario has expired?

Because without adding resupply points, ammo carts, ammo vehicles, and all the rest, isn't that the end state we are really interested in as players - the hope/need/bonus that a squad looking at flatlining its ammo pouches might get an extra breath of life?

None of us really want to spend time yanking a half squad out of the line to go try and get ammo, do we?

-dale

[junk2drive]

YD

"For intra-platoon, probably in the 2-5 minute range -- i.e., a platoon left sitting unmolested in one place w/ all squads in reasonably close proximity "evens up" the squad ammo loads, and reassigns any orphans, etc.

For intra-company, probably more like 5-10 minute range for simple small arms resupply. I *do* think this would show up at the CM level, especially for a well-dug in, supported infantry defense.

For intra-battalion, probably more like 10-30 minutes, and so often outside of CM's purview, but in the case of well-established defensive MLR, I can still see this being a factor."

In current game timeframes, supply doesn't become an issue until 30-40 turns. So your idea would apply.

[Redwolf]

Those 14 points sound very much fine to me.

If I sense things correctly, the optimal (most natural) battle size for CMx2 will be a little less than CMx1.

That's great because

</font>

• it means the 30 or 45 minutes length is more apropriate</font>
• the battlefield will be easier to fly over</font>
• the ammo resupply issue won't be that much of a problem than with a higher level</font>

What I am concerned about is my standard CM concern, that attempts to recreate the chaos of combat and unpredictability are implemented by unrealistic, artificial measures, especially slowdown features but also by omitting details that would allow a real world commander to overcome slowdowns. I really don't like to see slowest turn rates, always defaulting to a slow turret when the turret speed was variable and the new (CMBB) MG effect radius not taking cover into account (troops in trenches supressed the same way as those not in), to name some examples.

However, again I think a slightly smaller scale would help since it allows more attention to details.

Another problematic area might be the detailed terrain modeling. In my opinion, the quick and dirty approach of CMx1, with rough 20x20m piles, and not sperating looks from functionality, is a great feature and brought us many battles by scenario designes with limited amount of time. IMHO it was well worth the disadvantages of edgy roads and boring cities.

I hope that a solution can be found to keep the quick'n'dirty approach in CMx2 and not mandate to start fiddling with tiny terrain tiles or a seperate representation of terrain feature and looks.

[ February 15, 2005, 04:13 PM: Message edited by: Redwolf ]

[YankeeDog]

Problem with simply random resupply is that positions with no possible line of communication could receive resupply.

I definitely don't want to have to plot movement waypoints for every damn ammo runner in a company. OTOH, I don't want squads in forward positions, which would realistically have their resupply routes interdicted, unrealistically getting additional ammo when they shouldn't be.

And therein lies the challenge, I guess. . .

Cheers,

YD

[junk2drive]

dalem

Why not? I you know that supply is in the game, you will play it differently. If need be, you will send troops for supplies.

[Michael Dorosh]

I think dalem's and Redwolf's posts stand in stark opposition to each other - and illustrate well the issue of abstraction vs. detail.

I think abstraction is preferable to total absence, perhaps even preferable to detail though YD makes good points in favour of detail.

[Kong]

Well since we're talking about resupply I would like to see some representation of wounded and in particular healthy persons having to take time to assist the wounded, bandage, drag to safer location, etc. This would temporarily reduce firepower until heathly units are back 'on-line".

[aka_tom_w]

"Another problematic area might be the detailed terrain modeling. In my opinion, the quick and dirty approach of CMx1, with rough 20x20m piles, and not sperating looks from functionality, is a great feature and brought us many battles by scenario designes with limited amount of time. IMHO it was well worth the disadvantages of edgy roads and boring cities.

I hope that a solution can be found to keep the quick'n'dirty approach in CMx2 and not mandate to start fiddling with tiny terrain tiles or a seperate representation of terrain feature and looks."

Yeah But...

um I don't think there will be any tiles at all if the new map is a vector based wire frame editor design...

I dream that terrain map will be Like building something in Bryce or the Terra Forming Tool in Sim City...

.

.

this concept would suggest to me there would be no more tiles at all.

but I have no idea how they will actually do it.

I have REALLY enjoyed making maps and landforms in the Sim City terrain editor and I would be thrilled if some such map editor would be available in CMx2

-tom w

[junk2drive]

Kong, that's the problem with abstraction. Some would say that what you want is already figured into the time it takes for a suppressed squad to recover fully.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by junk2drive:

Kong, that's the problem with abstraction. Some would say that what you want is already figured into the time it takes for a suppressed squad to recover fully.

And a detail grog would point out that SOP was sometimes to leave wounded men on the ground unassisted. So where would you draw the line?

[eyepilot]

In terms of abstract re-supply, if units with a chance of being re-supplied are out of position...then they don't get re-supplied.

seems easy enough.

[ February 15, 2005, 04:57 PM: Message edited by: eyepilot ]