What do we want in the new CM game, Part Deux!

[Kip Watson]

Sorry for this, but I was having a quiet morning so I decided to waste my time and your bandwidth with this mockup of an earlier post I made. The idea being the main window stay much as it is and to have a smaller window for animated 'renderings' of individual units (eg. higher res, every member of squad etc).

The mind boggles with what you could do with the squad/unit one, but basically the sort of things that would be impractical to apply to the main window.

The binocular one would be cool too and you could go nuts* with dust, wavy-mirage-distortion (hot weather), grey curtains of rain, huge night-time muzzle flash, that sort of thing.

And by being much less than full screen and affecting only one or a few units they shouldn't max out CPU power. (not that I know much about such things)

And note also the slow motion button!!

(* or alternatively you could go "Nuts!" )

[Mr. Tittles]

Could be Borgy but its some cool ideas if limited in Borginess.

I wonder if LOS checks should be made from many beat up units.

[Pzman]

Looks good, and I don't see how it would create borg spotting.

[throwdjohn]

Personally, I think the new game should NOT be super complicated like all of these suggestions.....um suggest? DAMN ME! Anywho, the simplicity of the game is what made it possible for me to pick it up and play as a kid, and I cannot deal with a game more complicated than AK. Plus i cannot i repeat CANNOT get a new comp.

[hoolaman]

With the new CMAK patch in place and much new action in the forum, I am trying to resuscitate this (crap?) thread.

[aka_tom_w]

Nice work

I REALLY like the idea of the binocular view

NOW the real question is how to intergrate it into the user interface and the playability of the game without "breaking" the game, "the FUN ™", or the user interface, which everyone is now VERY familiar with.

BUT

the idea of a "zoom" view with Binoculars is a GREAT idea. (the trick is how to make it work seemlessly and well in the game).

-tom w

Originally posted by Kip Watson:

Sorry for this, but I was having a quiet morning so I decided to waste my time and your bandwidth with this mockup of an earlier post I made. The idea being the main window stay much as it is and to have a smaller window for animated 'renderings' of individual units (eg. higher res, every member of squad etc).

The mind boggles with what you could do with the squad/unit one, but basically the sort of things that would be impractical to apply to the main window.

The binocular one would be cool too and you could go nuts* with dust, wavy-mirage-distortion (hot weather), grey curtains of rain, huge night-time muzzle flash, that sort of thing.

And by being much less than full screen and affecting only one or a few units they shouldn't max out CPU power. (not that I know much about such things)

And note also the slow motion button!!

(* or alternatively you could go "Nuts!" )

[Kip Watson]

The thing is a lot of people have discussed how they would like to see a lot more detail in the game - high res graphics, every man in squad etc.

Which does sound cool, but actually I also really like the concept as it is now of the 'war game come to life', with units on bases etc. In a big battle it can be hard enough not to lose track of units simply by overlooking them - I mean does anyone actually play whole games at 'actual size'?

And the fact that squads a limited in what they do on the map (the way they walk etc). makes unit recognition easier - eg. the more 'realism' you add, the more difficulty you get in picking the HMG from the bazooka from the 'God's Eye' view.

But still it would be incredibly exciting to see all the members of a squad blasting their way into a building, advancing by bounds, or the complete team of an MG or gun doing their thing.

Which may be completely impractical - but if it weren't, it would be better not to handle it in the main window (IMO) which works great being nice and clean.

The 'binocular' thing already exists, in the way you can go to zoom level 1 and use the zoom-in key. I love this feature and use it all the time, but it takes a bit of navigation - so if you were to have a window for one animation, why not have a window for this as well, with a bit of extra 3D attached.

[throwdjohn]

Im going to agree with Kit. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, as we say in Tejas. Id like to see more detail and a more immersive experience with CMx2, but not because of complicated graphics, etc. I'd like a more extensive campaign type mode, improved AI, and greater scope in terms of times/theaters

[hoolaman]

It's not so much that it's broke, more that it's a bit old and worn out. I for one expect to see greatly improved graphics but not to the detriment of other areas, and BFC has stated that this will continue to be their philosophy.

Looking back through this thread will reveal many non-graphics related ideas and questions.

I would like to see a little more control at a sub squad level. I know I mainly play company or smaller level games and the "feel" of infantry battles just doesn't seem right. Having a twelve man squad react like a single entity at all times just doesn't seem right to me. They behave almost like a vehicle.

I would like to see each man in a squad simulated better, if not fully represented. Individual ammo load and morale should be shown at the very least, and maybe even squad formations. I think split squads should also be treated a bit better to allow more realistic squad movement. Even at a battalion level attack, the brave actions of just one man can often turn the tide of a battle. There is no scope for this stuff currently, even at some vague abstracted level.

I don't think a campaign mode as in "fight your way across europe" should be integral to the game, but that the operations mode should be expanded. Allowing designers the tools to build any historical battle such as resupply, replacements, event triggers. Allowing new objectives such as reaching point x by time y, destroying a selected structure, capturing prisoners etc. should be high priority to allow people to construct (if they wish) one unit's "fight across europe".

With a better C&C and communications system you could also have small independant patrols and outposts, and have units behave in realistic ways to help reduce the old borg spotting problem. SOPs would allow all units to behave more realistically in TacAI mode, and scenario designers or QB setup screens could apply all the same principles to the AI to produce a range of behaviours; historical or otherwise.

Anyhow, this is not new by any means, but I hope others put forward what they wish and hope a new CM to be.

[Tarkus]

I am digging this one out for it seems to be relevant still, somehow.

Also because I had an idea that belong to this thread. Here it goes.

Do you guys use the "import" map feature a lot ? I didn't but I am getting into a long 5 battles QB thanks to this feature, which I think has been a bit overseen. The possibilities with this thing are amazing ! You can grab the best looking map there is, edit it as a scenario, play it, then move on to a follow up QB with new forces and really try to occupy the terrain for an overall superiority. You must think in terms of maintaining yourself on the ground you gained, and also secure it properly for following battles. That means you must try to know what your opponent is up to and try to prepare for his blow in future battles. Reserves get their full meaning in this context. Of course, to make things right one have to carefully think about setup zones and victory flags, but it really enable some pretty realistic battles that include plausible recce scenarios.

Anyway, my point is that this is a feature that could be expanded somehow to allow some long term campagning without falling into the not-CM-scope problem. For example, one problem of the import map and OBs feature is that players can see the final screen in all its details. That, in turn, prevent or discourage players to keep reserves for following QBs since the exact composition of your current forces are then known to your opponent.

What is called for is some sort of double password locking device to enable QBs to be used as the realistic start for following ones. To prevent the final turn to be shown, and maybe even to restrict acces to the score. When players are done with a QB cycle, they can share their password to "unlock" their game and closely look at it in all its details.

You may see it as some sort of "quick operation", but there are considerable differences. Importing QBs allow you to buy other forces. This allow for really challenging play with a context where contact has been made, troops are still on the line, and you bring in reinforcements tied to the setup zones.

Another point is that this import feature could benefit from some customization, like restricting (or not) the type of forces available for purchase in following battles, padlocking or redrawing following battle setup zones, setting the amount of supply on-map units get between battle (like operations, but choosen by the players), which could also be tied to the map somehow, depending on the terrain (some positions are easier to supply then others?).

Anyway, I do not know how big this feature is for you, but now that I actually discover it, it seems to me it is the best multiplayer experience CM can provide. Hence this looong post.

Cheers

[throwdjohn]

Hoola, you're readin; my mind. I love small actions too, and they are a tad unrealistic. One problem I have is the morale drop for half squads.

[Panzer76]

I see one fundamental flaw with alot of the suggestions, they really just talking about CMAK with a big patch. This is NOT what we will get. Try not to restricted by the current framwork (CM) while thinking out ideas.

[Znarf]

I would like to have the ability to place tank and vehicle wrecks on the battlefield when designing a scenario and have them provide cover for infantry. Tanks and vehicles shot up during the game would also provide cover.

Placing tanks and wrecks on the battlefield beforehand provides a more complete "feel" of previous combat.

Also, I want to see a body drop from the three man squad when there is a casualty (perhaps only if KIA, as a medic may evacuate the wounded).

[Sunray]

I don't have many revolutionary thoughts and maybe those I do have are already mentioned by other posters but here goes anyway:

Gameplay:

- some form of "graduated" borg spotting eg only units in los within 100m can fire same turn at spotted enemy

- ability to create mixed vehicle platoons/troops eg Brit Sherman/firefly combo with endless Axis variation particularly as that's what they did

- more user friendly group/follow my leader commands eg waypoints, stock formations(wedge, column etc) auto intervals - we all know the problem - both for inf and vehicles

- contoured/gridded terrain with on/off toggle

- applicable on board arty( eg inf support but not anti-tank)to have indirect fire capability

- new campaigns eg far east to cover Burma and Pacific and the 1940 campaign in France

- a smarter AI(or somefink)

- flares for night battles

Graphics:

- if Battlefront was able to upgrade the whole environment(terrain, buildings, vehicles, troops animations etc etc) to match(or exceed) that provided by say CDV's Codename Panzers and be moddable to boot then we'll getting somewhere! I don't know if that would be too processor hungry as a whole package so if not my individual wish list for an improved (not new) graphics engine would include

- variety of individual colour/damage schemes for vehicles within SAME unit - eg take tools4fools' jgdpanzers in cmmos and have that amount of variety per INDIVIDUAL platoon vehicle - also vehicles should be individually numberable(not just the dreaded 808!)

- greater variety of uniforms for infantry, again within same unit eg overcoats for some, white parkas for others within a single platoon

- let's SEE those aircraft!

- vehicles leaving tracks/tire marks

- gunsight view available in planning and movement phases

- improved animations for vehicle events eg destroyed(flying turret!)damaged(takes damage), track hit(loses track)

- improved animations for infantry(these REALLY need a going over)eg variety of positions/poses within squads, rag doll physics for casualties - less matchstick men more Call of Duty in miniature

- off board artillery firing animation with on/off toggle

That's enough!

Cheers

[Tarkus]

Originally posted by Sunray:

- improved animations for infantry(these REALLY need a going over)eg variety of positions/poses within squads, rag doll physics for casualties - less matchstick men more Call of Duty in miniature

Pssst ! look.

Originally posted by Madmatt:

It is very safe to say that amongst all the changes that will be highlighted in CMx2, greater 3d character modeling and animations will be among them.

Thats all I can say for now though...

Madmatt

:cool:

[Znarf]

Originally posted by Znarf:

I would like to have the ability to place tank and vehicle wrecks on the battlefield when designing a scenario and have them provide cover for infantry. Tanks and vehicles shot up during the game would also provide cover.

Placing tanks and wrecks on the battlefield beforehand provides a more complete "feel" of previous combat.

Also, I want to see a body drop from the three man squad when there is a casualty (perhaps only if KIA, as a medic may evacuate the wounded).

Oh yeah - a campaing option, where you develop your player from battle to battle and/or operation to operation.

[Itchyscoop]

Excuse the repetition, but I would dearly love to see some cooperative gameplay options in the new series. There is huge potential for games involving 3+ players. With two or more players on the same team, but each only aware of the precise locations of their own units and those of their ally that they have postively identified, you would get some much more interesting 'fogs of war'.

If you are unaware whether the 'Tank?' approching from your flank is one of yours or one of theirs, the consequences of your decisions will sudddenly get much more interesting!

[Stan Hope Park]

Individual men

At the moment shift-M allows larger squads to be represented by two or three men. An

additional option should be added for those with high end computers to allow the

representation of each individual man.

Build your own squad

The unit menu could do with being more flexible. The ability to add or subtract weapons

or men from a squad would be extremely useful. The ability to build these squads into

larger units would greatly enhance the game.

Taking away restrictions on the use of enemy equipment would cater for captured

weapons, and would go some way towards allowing hypothetical conflict with historical

Allies (e.g. Patton’s War).

Index of units

Having to cycle through friendly forces with the “+” and “-” keys is thorough but clumsy.

There needs to be an equivalent of Close Combat’s “F5” key.

Theatre and time

I don’t know how difficult it is to add vehicles and equipment to the game but if that

meant buying more discs then I am sure there would be no shortage of customers! Imagine

being able to use any nation’s equipment, real or hypothetical, 1895 - 19xx.

Presumably Combat Mission’s engine would be good until the guided missile is invented?

As things stand there is no provision for chemical weapons, but I suspect that the demand

for these is limited.

Campaigning

Battles make more sense when they fit into a larger picture. As things stand, campaigning

is pretty much DIY. I am sure players would be grateful for any form of assistance in this

area. At the simple end of the scale, keeping a record of survivors at the end of a battle

would help, especially with the preservation of fog of war. More sophisticated

campaigning might link battle maps. More sophisticated still and the AI is able to control

enemy forces across several, or many, maps.

In fantasy land, Battlefront and Panther Games get together and fuse Combat Mission

with the Airborne Assault series!

Improved terrain

Smaller tiles would allow better townscapes. It would increase the likelihood that a

building would overlap a tile, but perhaps this is an opportunity rather than a problem, as

it would encourage more modular buildings.

Quays and cantilever bridges.

More elevations.

Aircraft

I, for one, am quite happy with shadows moving across the map. Gliders which have

landed or crashed would be a major improvement. A few tweaks would make the arrival

of paras as reinforcements more satisfactory.

The game can already cope with fairly intense artillery bombardment, so the effect of

heavier bombing should not be difficult to simulate.

Bridge demolition

Didn’t the paras have bridges blown up in their faces at Corinth and Son?

Proper water

Fords, pontoon bridges and landing craft.

Follow order

For convoys on roads.

The movie file

I subscribe to this one!

[EarlofWarwick]

For history buffs, CM is fantastic. No other game can, in so much historically accurate detail, simulate a battle as well. But my biggest gripe has always been the graphical representation of infantry, which at times can shatter the “willing suspension of disbelief” needed (in addition to historical accuracy) to create a truly immersive gaming experience. Make the infantry graphics more believable (less robot-like or less cartoonish), and I will probably never install anything else on my hard-drive again.

Problems and solutions:

Let’s start with infantry in fox holes and trenches: if you can have tankers’ upper bodies emerge from cupolas, why not do something similar for grunts in improved positions? At the most, we should only be able to see their heads and weapons poking up from behind their cover.

Robotic soldiers (and face-in-the-dirt, butt-up-in-the air, spinning soldiers): Clearly new postures and motions need to be added to the current motion repertoire. My most ardent desire is a believable prone firing position for all troops, not just machine gunners and a/t pop gunners.

Catatonic statue soldiers: troops looking across 20 meters of open ground a nearby foe should do more than just kneel and take the occasional perfunctory shot. Close combat needs to look like close combat. Ramp up the frequency of movements in the soldiers’ motion inventory. This includes those famously imperturbable platoon and company commanders.

[Kip Watson]

I know this will put me in a minority, and I also would like to see more realistic infantry, but - just as a 'toggle capable' option - I still like the idea of the toy-soldiers-come-to-life look.

I can't help it, with their bases on and their slightly wooden poses, it just reminds me of playing wargames as a young 'un all those years ago.

[Sergei]

Originally posted by EarlofWarwick:

Let’s start with infantry in fox holes and trenches: if you can have tankers’ upper bodies emerge from cupolas, why not do something similar for grunts in improved positions? At the most, we should only be able to see their heads and weapons poking up from behind their cover.

However, don't forget that this is a strategy game, and the graphics are part of the user interface. If you can't see your concealed sniper (as it should be until he fires or moves), then it's gonna be damn hard to select him... or to fix your eyes on the dug-in enemy that your men have spotted. First and foremost the graphics need to support gameplay, looking ultra-realistic comes second.

[EarlofWarwick]

I would agree with that, except that I would vote for visual aids the player could voluntarily superimpose on hidden troops and weapons (like the unit bases).

[throwdjohn]

CSO, very good suggestions. However, I am steadfast in maintaining that any changes which complicate gameplay too much should be able to toggled on/off. The current level of complexity is already hard enough to handle as is.

[Bannon DC]

Maybe the ability to control the rate of fire for units. For example, a vet 50mm mortar will go through its entire 30-40 rounds of ammo in about 2 minutes. How about the ability to slow them down -- like order "suppression fire" where it shots at about half its maximum rate?

Also, using mortars as an example, does "area fire" have to mean fire at that exact spot? How about within 10-30m... this would help in suppressing a platoon instead of just a single squad. I've grow appreciative of "green" mortar crews of late for this very reason... they aren't on target!

-- --

Regarding the often made comment about the AI's use of leading point with it's HQ units -- how about some sort of command or moral bonus for when the HQ leads the way? This is the sort of thing you read about or see in the movies... the Lt. charges out in front and the otherwise "pinned" squads get off their butts and charge out behind him.

[Bannon DC]

Oh... and can I have a graphic for barns?

Maybe even a few cows in the fields too. Chickens? Nah... what good would that do?