I'm bitterly disappointed, or, Roster Revisited

[ianc]

Hello all,

Very nice demo. Great new features, textures, etc. But...

Where is the roster screen many of us had been hoping for? The one that doesn't give you any information about your units, but just lets you jump to them quickly and easily? Is this just something that got left out of the demo but will be in the final game?

There has been so much discussion on this in the past (leading back to 1999...). Could it really be that all the heated debate was for naught?

It's clear that it's a feature that many want by this point... I know I'll probably get flamed for revisiting this while everyone is hugging themselves over how cool the demo is, but dammit, I'm bitterly disappointed!

One look at the thousands of Russian units in Yelnia and I give up. I'm told there is an FO in there somewhere... How do I find him? Oh well, guess it's back to punching the +\- keys 7500 times to find him. Or maybe it's just not worth it...

This sucks hard...

ianc

[Col Deadmarsh]

I couldn't agree more...

[Battlefront.com]

The simple answer is... it was too much work. As it was we spent more than 6 months extra time on CMBB than we had planned, yet we could probably continue working on it for another 3 or 4 years just with our initial "wouldn't it be great to have..." list we put together prior to starting on CMBB. So yeah, tons of stuff didn't make it into CMBB, including a limited Order of Battle screen (we never, ever wanted to do a full info screen). This is the tough reality of too little time, too many ideas (good and otherwise).

I will also add here that we never promised this feature. We only said that we would put something in if it made sense and if we had the time. Since we didn't have the time, making sense or not was irrelevant.

Some sort of Order of Battle will be in the engine rewrite. It isn't a critical feature, but it would be nice for navigation purposes to some degree. Since the game is being totally rewritten, this should not be a time consuming feature to add.

Steve

[StellarRat]

I noticed this problem the other day too. Unless you have memorized the location of all your units it is difficult to find a certain one. Now that we are going to have swarms of Russian units and bigger maps this is going to take even longer. That's about the only compliant I have with the interface. Doesn't seem like this would be a big deal to program either, all the info is already there all we need is a button or hot key and a simple clickable list.

[ianc]

The simple answer is... it was too much work. As it was we spent more than 6 months extra time on CMBB than we had planned, yet we could probably continue working on it for another 3 or 4 years just with our initial "wouldn't it be great to have..."

OK Steve, that sounds like an honest answer and I'll accept it, so thanks for putting it out there.

StellarRat's comment about the vastly increased size of the engagements we're likely to see on the eastern front is valid though...

Still, I'm bitterly disappointed. But not bitterly enough to stop me from buying the game though. Thanks again for the speedy response,

ianc

[Michael Dorosh]

I'm not sure I see a huge problem here, just an inconvenience. Finding units is accelerated by several means

a) paying careful attention in the setup phase. With variable morale even for computer picked forces, as well as casualties AT START, a good player will go through each unit one by one in any event to see how many men, what fitness and fatigue state, and what weapons they have etc. Grouping the men according to the overall plan will help you retain the information of which units have gone where.

The group command feature lets you quickly see where units are - click and drag, and all your units get highlighted by a blue box. Very convenient for finding troops in deep underbrush. If you see 5 or 6 boxes close together, you can bet it is one of your platoons.

c) Hiding trees and increasing the unit size to +4 also gives a very quick peek at the units on the board, and is easily reversed.

I never got much use out of the overhead map in CC - the one that showed the location and status of all units - in any event.

It would be a nice to have feature, if a bit unrealistic, but hopefully Ian you will find the lack of a OOB not too cumbersome; I'd hate to see you leave the community in frustration - you would be missed.

[Agua]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

c) Hiding trees and increasing the unit size to +4 also gives a very quick peek at the units on the board, and is easily reversed.

You know, this is so frickin' obvious, but I tried both of these suggestions the first time last night. I always play max terrain/realistic scale, but just getting into the habit of utilizing these features for ID, when needed, saves a lot of time.

[Battlefront.com]

Hi inac,

OK Steve, that sounds like an honest answer and I'll accept it, so thanks for putting it out there.

StellarRat's comment about the vastly increased size of the engagements we're likely to see on the eastern front is valid though...

Depends on how you play, I suppose. I don't feel any need to have the OB window. Never did, still don't I made the Yelnia Stare scenario and played it many times in various different forms. This meant the OB changed, sometimes significantly, from game to game as I did initial playtesting. Never once did I think "Good Lord! I wish I had an OB feature".

While I do not disagree that some people might find the lack of such feature a problem, I totally disagree (as I always have) that this is a feature that is of paramount importance to include. It would be a nice addition for some, but I can't think of a single feature that made it into CMBB of similar coding/testing time that I would rather swapped for this one.

And as Michael suggests, turning Trees off is probably the single best way to find units. Bases on (another feature I have never, ever, EVER used since Charles first coded it ) can also help out. The other lesson is to spend the time during Setup to make sure you know what you have and where you have placed them. If you rush through Setup you will find yourself far more easily confused later on.

Steve

[StellarRat]

OK, it is hard. I wouldn't have thought that, but I can accept it. No use crying about unavailable milk. Next time. I guess one of reasons it bothers me is that I set the unit sizes to realistic and turn off the bases when I play so it is already difficult to find them sometimes. Still I do think this is an excellent idea.

[Michael Dorosh]

Perhaps in future incarnations, instead of the "wasted" space on the sides of the interface, we can have bases on/off, trees on/off, unit size etc. buttons, rather than CTRL-whatever. Then you can point and click the trees off, survey, then click them on. Or have a configurable button for two settings with a personal combo of these (ie for orders, one button gives you trees off, bases on, size +1, then click for the movie and you get no bases, trees extreme, size realistic, etc.)

[jdmorse]

Also in the category of "it's not quite as bad as you think"' is that the support weapons, FO's vehicles, HMG's etc are grouped together and easily reviewed with the +/- keys. I am in cmmc and with huge maps and Bat size forces, finding that Fo's location, or a lone Mg I knew was out there somewhere, or simply way on the other side of the board was no real problem. As to the men, except where the platoons have been sliced up and lost the HQ, the lines of CoC and group select also make it easy to find and review. (even there, if you locate even one of the units of the platon the +/- will review even the killed ones)

Maybe not as efficient as an OOB but then again, like Steve I haven't really felt the lack, and there are other things, like Michael mentioned that eleviate the problem

[ September 05, 2002, 09:21 PM: Message edited by: jdmorse ]

[Pvt. Ryan]

Michael, I really like your idea, but don't forget that the amount of wasted space depends on what resolution you play at. 1600x1200 gives you tons of wasted space, but 800x600 does not.

[sbg2112]

All of this is why I've previously suggested letting us use the CTRL key settings for things like unit scale, trees, bases, roof visibilities, etc to set things up one way for the orders phase, and another way for the movie phase. In other words, the keys would work exactly as they do now, but the state would apply ONLY to the phase in which it was set.

With this change, I might set it up so that bases are on during the orders phase, but off during the movie phase, etc.

In some sense, BTS has already seen the wisdom of this: You can only see movement / targeting lines in the orders phase.

[ianc]

Hi Steve and all,

I know there are plenty of people who don't want and need this feature. But, there are plenty (myself included) who would like it. Adding it would please people and make the game more accessible to them, which is pretty important I think.

We've been all over the arguments for and against many times (nigh unto puking methinks). I've heard all the workarounds (unit scale, trees off, etc.) many times too and am well aware of them. These do mitigate the problem somewhat, but they're workarounds nonetheless, and as such, inconvenient. They mask a larger problem.

One thing I think is just as important as being able to find your units, is that it helps you to grasp the overall composition of your force at the outset of the scenario to see it in a tabular form. I know you didn't have trouble with Yelnia Steve, but that's because you made it up to begin with. What about the poor clod like me who's just opening up the scenario for the first time? All I see is a massive horde of men everywhere with no apparent organization that I've got to wade through and try to make sense of before I can begin playing, ie. having fun. Having a roster screen would enable me upon first looking at the scenario to say to myself, "Aha, I've got 3 companies, two FO's, and 2 platoons of T34's". With a fast visual rundown like this, I could begin mentally apportioning men for various tasks I might identify for pursing my strategy, rather than wasting 1/2 hour just trying to figure out what's going on. I know this info also appears in the briefing, but quite apart from the fact that this info isn't available in the scenario itself, what about user-made scenarios whose authors aren't thoughtful enough to include it?

Anyway, I know you don't think it's critical or even necessary, but there are others who disagree, and the inclusion of this feature would help them to enjoy the game more, which can't be a bad thing.

It seems like it's all spilled milk at this point anyway. We aint' gettin' it and that's that. But, 3-4 years down the road after the upcoming rewrite, you'll hear from me again, whining "But Steve, you promised"!

Thanks for the comments and the apparent value you place on my presence MD, nice to know someone would miss me if I dropped off the face of the earth!

Take care,

ianc

[Ozzieboy]

A suggestion would be to mod the unit bases - square for infantry, triangle for spotters, circles for AT teams, etc...thoughts?

Chr

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Ozzieboy:

A suggestion would be to mod the unit bases - square for infantry, triangle for spotters, circles for AT teams, etc...thoughts?

Chr

Or be able to set the group command feature to include only certain unit types - AFVs, wheeled vehicles, FOs, HQ, crew weapons, squads, or any combo therein? So that when you sweep the area and set it to, say, FOs, only the FOs are highlighted?

[Conscript Bagger]

I really like the idea of different unit base shapes. Also, for others who may not know, I just discovered the doodad-density hotkey (shift-N) last night. Makes it a lot easier to see the Sovs in the brush!

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Offwhite:

I really like the idea of different unit base shapes. Also, for others who may not know, I just discovered the doodad-density hotkey (shift-N) last night. Makes it a lot easier to see the Sovs in the brush!

But check out a platoon HQ in a foxhole...you can't see his base at all! Bailed out crews near their vehicles, unit in proximity to one another - all make the bases hard to see and different shaped then become irrelevant - don't they?

[Chad Harrison]

Personal opinion, but I would rather see a number of other features focused on before an OB screen for in game. It would be nice, but other things would be nicer. Like, . . . flipping turrets

[Battlefront.com]

ianc,

I know you didn't have trouble with Yelnia Steve, but that's because you made it up to begin with.

If you saw how many different versions I made, and how little sleep I had, I think you might rethink this statement Also, I didn't have the benefit of the briefing. I changed the support units almost everytime I played it, so I *did* have to look around and find whatever it was I bought (which I might not even have remembered ). But I never found it to be a problem, as I never found it to be a problem in CMBO regardless of who made the scenario. Turning trees off helps a whole bunch!

Anyway, I know you don't think it's critical or even necessary, but there are others who disagree, and the inclusion of this feature would help them to enjoy the game more, which can't be a bad thing.

Provided that the feature doesn't detract from anything, agreed. I think the kind of OB screen that is currently being asked for (as opposed to many of the previous suggestions) wouldn't be a bad thing to add at all if we had unlimited time or ran out of good ideas to code up. But is this thing more important than, I dunno, the Death Clock?

Like I said, I can't think of anything I feel that is in CMBB now (of similar effort) that could have been lived without any better than the OB screen. So the question isn't "would it have been useful if added?" rather "what would have not been in the game now to accomodate that the OB screen and on balance would the game be better off?".

With hindsight I am sure that if I looked through every feature we put in I might be able to find something that could be yanked out, but thinking back over the development as it really happened I can't think of anything I would have done differently.

Steve

[Marlow]

Originally posted by ianc:

Having a roster screen would enable me upon first looking at the scenario to say to myself, "Aha, I've got 3 companies, two FO's, and 2 platoons of T34's".

Most briefings give some sort of an order of battle. Yelina Stare gave you exactly the type of information you were looking for, and teh briefing can be called up with a hot-key.

[Shosties]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

But check out a platoon HQ in a foxhole...you can't see his base at all! Bailed out crews near their vehicles, unit in proximity to one another - all make the bases hard to see and different shaped then become irrelevant - don't they?

It would be nice, in the rewrite, for the unit bases not to get clipped into odd shapes or into oblivion by the surrounding terrain.

Different bases for different units would also be neat. Indeed, it would be cool to have "nationality" bases with crosses or roundrels like in Talonsoft's Campaign Series.

[ September 06, 2002, 09:02 AM: Message edited by: Shosties4th ]

[Preacher]

One look at the thousands of Russian units in Yelnia and I give up. I'm told there is an FO in there somewhere... How do I find him?

Read the briefing. It clearly says that the Russian FO is over on the right side of the map. I generally can't find anything in my life (ask my wife), but I was able to find that FO about 3 seconds after the screen loaded because of the info given in the briefing.

Preacher

[Wreck]

I have never had much problem finding units in CMBO or the BB demo. I generally play with trees off, bases on, smallest size. On the other hand, I rarely play larger scenarios in part because keeping track of everything is tedious. But even then, it is not the problem of finding specific things that I dislike, but rather the problem of synchronizing the movements of zillions of units, and having to navigate on very large maps.

In BB, setting a unit's covered arc (with covered arcs shown) helps to make it more visible. I wonder if FOs can have covered arcs? If so, just set it to be a 270 degree arc, and it will probably stick out very nicely.

[jbulldog]

Hello,

I never have trouble finding units in CM. It is all about command and your organizational skills in deploying your command. Your units should be broken up into mini task forces and assigned objectives. Don't intermix your units into a huge mass and have units running in and out of eachother. Sometimes the better organized commander wins the day on the battlefield, remember as the commander YOU are managing the battle.