Lars Posted April 8, 2002 Share Posted April 8, 2002 What about sound contacts? Your idea would work best if both players agreed to use the same settings, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted April 8, 2002 Author Share Posted April 8, 2002 What do you mean 'agreeeing to use the same settings'? I don't think you've understood the idea if you make such an off the wall comment as that. (I mean it's exactly as relevant as if I demand that we both use unit bases, or don't, or if we both have ambient sound turned on) Sound contacts would work just the way they work now, because I haven't proposed anything that would change them. Perhaps they could be improved but that's a different story. [ April 08, 2002, 12:48 PM: Message edited by: CMplayer ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj. Battaglia Posted April 8, 2002 Share Posted April 8, 2002 CM Player has some good ideas. It is important, in my opinion, to keep opponents guessing when it comes to low-level contact. The variable-time display might work well, however I think in some cases the last seen markers should be made to disappear. This might be a fairly random occurence, with a higher probability as friendly troops move closer to that last seen area. This would reflect the fact that friendly troops would have in mind the last seen location and be keeping it under observation. At some point they might determine that, in fact, there are indeed no enemies there. In that case the markers should disappear. CM Player also hints at another aspect of FoW that I think should be incorporated at some point: uncertainty about KIA enemy units. Is it gamey to call off an arty strike against an enemy gun position the turn after you see that it is abandoned/KO'd? To some degree yes, but it is certainly excusable: you don't want to waste rounds on a dead target. I would propose adding in some randomization to determining KIA of enemy units. In most cases, especially at close contact, there would be no change to the current system. Sometimes, however, a unit would in reality be KIA but the enemy would not know this right away. It might require longer observation or closer contact to determine this for sure. And this could work the other way: enemy uinits that have taken a pounding might in rare cases, be thought of as KIA when in reality they have hidden, rallied, or even played dead. Perhaps when this occurs they would automatically enter "hiding" status and the owning player could give them targets and "unhide" them later on. This could also be tied to the experience level of the unit in question, both observing and target (Gino Merli playing dead with his .50 cal comes to mind). Sure, sometimes one sees a cataclysmic explosion that no enemy could survive, or a piece of enemy ordnance obviously destroyed, but in some cases destruction may not be so obvious (such as abandonment). You've just pounded the heck out of that AT gun position. It must be dead by now. The only way to find out is advance on it. Overall this would add a bit more suspense to the game, and might encourage the overkill tactics often employed to neutralize opponents in war. As I said, it should certainly not be in every case that this happens, in addition to being tied to concealment, experience, etc. By the way, von Trapp was in the Austro-Hungarian Navy in WWI, as the present-day Croatian coast was under their control. Their navy was mostly kept bottled up, however. Miklos Horthy, leader of Hungary until 1944 when the Germans sent him packing, was an admiral in the A - H navy. He was later known as "The Admiral without a Navy" because he kept the admiral title when Hungary became independent but had no coastline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted April 8, 2002 Share Posted April 8, 2002 Maybe I've misunderstood you (it is Monday, after all). If you are running a half squad around trying to generate a lot of markers, And I have markers turned off, What have you accomplished here? Am I missing something? If you aren't paying attention anyway, then it makes zero difference. Or lets say your half squad is popping up every 15 seconds in a tree line to generate the markers, and I have the markers set to never expire. It's not going to take me too long to connect the dots on the time stamps. All you've done here is created screen clutter (as you noted) and probably tipped your hand. But it is an interesting idea, I just wonder how useful it really would be. Couldn't hurt to try it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairbairn-Sykes Posted April 8, 2002 Share Posted April 8, 2002 Originally posted by CMplayer: ... I expect to be ridiculed, pilloried...This I can do. I think. [5 minutes later] Well, I'm not coming up with any innovative ways to deride you and your fancy-pants idea. I'm going to have to get back to you on this one. Originally posted by CMplayer: Because it would be more possible to bluff about your force size. A squad could move around and reveal itself from several different points to try to appear bigger and more ferocious than it really is. This kind of thing was done for real. Often. In the current system, each time the squad reveals itself, the previous last seen marker disappears, so it doesn't work. Well it worked for you - now didn't it. My greenies had no idea that they weren't facing a brigade sized garrison with all that scurrying to and fro that you did. Bigger and more ferocious is great, sure, but four (count 'em) 120mm spotters do the trick just as well. Under your proposed system I might have thought you had eight spotters. Sheesh. But seriously, it sounds like an idea that could be implemented with relative ease (not that I know anything about programming) and would make the whole scouting/recce part of CM that much more challenging. [grumble...grumble...something inaudible about Puppchen...grumble] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted April 8, 2002 Author Share Posted April 8, 2002 Originally posted by Lars: If you are running a half squad around trying to generate a lot of markers, And I have markers turned off, What have you accomplished here? Am I missing something? Yes you are missing everything. _If_ you have markers turned off _and_ you don't pay attention to the guys who are appearing and disappearing then I don't care if I accomplish anything or not because you are going to be fighting from such an additional FOW that you will be at quite a disadvantage. If you have markers turned off _and_ you do pay attention to the guys you see appearing and disappearing then the only difference is that you have to keep your sightings in your head instead of on the board. Then it works just as well, if not better. But the point is that you can increase or decrease the expiry date during play.So you can keep it at a manageable level, and only turn it up if you really want to look closely at something. Or turn it off to take a screenshot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted April 8, 2002 Author Share Posted April 8, 2002 Originally posted by Lars: Or lets say your half squad is popping up every 15 seconds in a tree line to generate the markers, and I have the markers set to never expire. It's not going to take me too long to connect the dots on the time stamps. All you've done here is created screen clutter (as you noted) and probably tipped your hand.Yes but you have to connect the dots. It's this connecting the dots that I find interesting about CM. The screen clutter needn't be much worse, as long as you set a short enough expiration time, liek 3-4 turns. Then if you want to check up on something, you increase the expiration time just long enough to check. There are a number of other things to be gained apart from bluffing about force size as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted April 8, 2002 Author Share Posted April 8, 2002 Originally posted by Fairbairn-Sykes Trench Knife: [grumble...grumble...something inaudible about Puppchen...grumble]It's not like the puppchens actually hit anything. That tank of yours I whacked with a schreck. Serves you right for buying tanks in extra dense woods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted April 8, 2002 Share Posted April 8, 2002 Originally posted by CMplayer: Yes you are missing everything.This is usually the case all to often, I find these days, sadly. I find myself more often than not, turning stuff off, and trying not to get overwhelmed with info. Your playing style is obviously different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairbairn-Sykes Posted April 8, 2002 Share Posted April 8, 2002 Originally posted by CMplayer: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Fairbairn-Sykes Trench Knife: [grumble...grumble...something inaudible about Puppchen...grumble]It's not like the puppchens actually hit anything. That tank of yours I whacked with a schreck. Serves you right for buying tanks in extra dense woods.</font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted April 8, 2002 Author Share Posted April 8, 2002 Originally posted by Lars: I find myself more often than not, turning stuff off, and trying not to get overwhelmed with info. Your playing style is obviously different.Okay, but actually as it is now, you can't turn them off. Acc to my proposal you would be able to turn them off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts