mazex Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 In the upcoming(?) Combat Leader there have been concepts proposed where the game is turn based but not in the way that all units move and then all units from the other side. Depending on the command level, communications etc you get to command different squads/platoons/companies at different turns... Wouldn't that be something to think about. For example, a platoon with a rookie commander, bad comlink and under a lot of suppression is just available for orders every 2 minutes while platoons with good commanders, good links to the next level in the chain of command will be available for orders ever 30 seconds or even less? /Mazex 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillweed Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 I'm excited. So is co-play going to be in for CMSF, cause I though that was going to have to wait for CMBOx2. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Originally posted by mazex: Wouldn't that be something to think about. For example, a platoon with a rookie commander, bad comlink and under a lot of suppression is just available for orders every 2 minutes while platoons with good commanders, good links to the next level in the chain of command will be available for orders ever 30 seconds or even less? /Mazex I think command delays do a fine job already. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted November 5, 2005 Author Share Posted November 5, 2005 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by mazex: OK, it would eliminate some of the frustration with the TacAI - but let's face it, that's maybe what makes CMx1 so good?Agreed. That would be exactly what some players have always wanted, but it turns the game into a fantasy trip that has nothing to do with tactical command realities. Michael </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirocco Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 I don't foresee a problem with it. The command and control improvements would seem to deal with any "instantaneous" commands. And it's much more realistic to issue instructions whenever they come to mind rather than waiting for artificial pauses. But we'll see how that all works out when we have the demo. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSColonel_131st Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 I guess it could actually be a step toward realism - if there isn't too much micromanagement needed for the subordinate units. After all, any real company commander works "realtime", but then, he hasn't the need to control every tank, vehicle and squad in it's smallest details. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 No, CoPlay is still not planned for CM:SF. It is just another example of our long term planning for the CMx2 engine. Get RealTime (and the basic game) working right, then do CoPlay. Very difficult for us to handle both at the same time. But everything we are doing now, including RealTime, has CoPlay in mind. I don't foresee a problem with it. The command and control improvements would seem to deal with any "instantaneous" commands. And it's much more realistic to issue instructions whenever they come to mind rather than waiting for artificial pauses. Exactly. Without the new Command and Control modeling CMx2's RT experience would be not all that different from a standard RTS in too many ways. When we get CoPlay in place there will be a whole 'nother layer of C&C that currently isn't relevant to a single player experience. For example, imagine not being able to communicate with the formation on your flank or having to wait 10 minutes for a messanger to get back with information. These sorts of things are pointless when there is a single player in control because he already knows too much. But "demote" the player to having only realistic info and suddenly C&C takes on a whole new meaning! Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Can you give us some idea, Steve, of what will be in place while we wait for CoPlay to address this issue of instantaneous commands? Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Originally posted by Sirocco: And it's much more realistic to issue instructions whenever they come to mind rather than waiting for artificial pauses.Agreed, but with the previously stated provisos. But we'll see how that all works out when we have the demo. Agreed with that too. From what Steve says, they are at least thinking about this issue, even if they are not ready to show their hand on it yet. I will be interested to see what they come up with. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarquelne Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 I will be interested to see what they come up with. I wonder if your units will volunteer information on sightings or enemy actions. While you're paying attention to platoon B will platoon A keep you informed, or will you have to scroll over there and check on 'em? If the situation arises will a little "Hey, Cap, lookatthat. They do have some T-72s." text-box pop up, or will you have to just go check when you hear the shelling start? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted November 5, 2005 Author Share Posted November 5, 2005 Originally posted by Michael Emrys: Can you give us some idea, Steve, of what will be in place while we wait for CoPlay to address this issue of instantaneous commands? Michael I would guess Steve may be asking us for a show of faith that the new Command and Control system, combined with the new extreme fog of war options AND relative spotting will have a somewhat cumulative impact that should reduce just about anything "instantaneous" in the game, BUT I am just guessing. -tom w [ November 05, 2005, 11:32 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarquelne Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 I would guess Steve may be asking us for a show of faith that the new Command and Control system, combined with the new extreme fog of war options AND relative spotting will have a somewhat cumulative impact that should reduce just about anything "instantaneous" in the game, BUT I am just guessing.Or Tinkerbell dies, yes? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 We're actually not quite sure what we're doing with delays. There is a theoretical case to be made that, like Tom said, there isn't a need for them anymore. At least not for things as simple as movement Commands. Calling in artillery, setting up weapons, vehicles reaching top speed, and what not obviously should be delayed realistically since even in real life there are delays. Right now what we're doing is keeping all options open. When the game is more or less functioning (full maps, lots of units, etc) we'll see how things shake out. Then we'll see if there needs to be a different treatment for WeGo vs. RealTime. My guess is we'll have some sort of Command Delay system for WeGo and nothing for RealTime. But that's just a guess Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Well, if I understood what you posted earlier, the game can be paused to check the whole scene and give commands to each of your units... Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 Actually, I think that was extrapolation by some non-Steve person. The implication seems to be that the game can be run in Real-time or WEGO. In real-time, will there be an option to delay a set of orders until a 'go' command is given? That'd be really handy in co-ordinating assaults and movements. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M1A1TC Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 I would never play it RTS style. The reason is why I love CM games is that they are turn-based. I like taking my time and use strategy. RTS games seem to be a click-fest, to see who clicks faster. That is lame Id like to have a pause command, like in Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic. You can pause the action, give orders if you want to 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 I'm not sure that it would be a click-fest if CMSF plays out in a realistic rate. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M1A1TC Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 I sure hope not. That would kill this game for me 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bamse Posted November 5, 2005 Share Posted November 5, 2005 I have a feeling that CM:SF will be better than X-COM:Apocalypse. And that is the best game ever... /BjörnE 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted November 6, 2005 Share Posted November 6, 2005 We are planning on allowing the option to pause single player RealTime games. Multiplayer, or "iron man" type settings, no pausing. For WeGo it will be identical to CMx1 in that you issue all your orders, hit GO!, and the action is carried out without interruption for 60 seconds. CMx2's RT function had better not turn the game into a click fest, because if it does then we would have failed miserably from a design standpoint. We are going to allow coordinated execution of Commands. Command and Control will be critical for it going according to plan though! Yet another reason why C&C is important. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juan_gigante Posted November 6, 2005 Share Posted November 6, 2005 I actually think that realtime with pausing might be more fun than WeGo. Really, right now my #1 issue is full movie replay, and whether or not it'll be in. And that that is my biggest issue is a really, really good thing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted November 6, 2005 Author Share Posted November 6, 2005 We are planning on allowing the option to pause single player RealTime games. Multiplayer, or "iron man" type settings, no pausing.OK then I think its great that there will be a multiplayer "ironman" option for RealTime with NO pausing allowed. That sounds like a GREAT option. I am wondering if that somehow implies that TCP/IP multiplayer is be considered as a feasible option for multiplayer play? :confused: -tom w 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinetree Posted November 6, 2005 Share Posted November 6, 2005 Sounds like CMSF will play like HTTR.Funny thing is the devs of HTTR's successor, COTA have included a 'run-to' function that can make the game turn-based. Gonna be a good year for the innovative wargaming crowd... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted November 6, 2005 Share Posted November 6, 2005 Steve, It all sounds good to me… but it makes me laugh . Some years ago I posted that it was inevitable that CM would go RT when the computers were powerful enough. You posted back that “CM will never go RT…” and the phrasing was very forceful . You seem to have changed your mind . But it suites me. Steve, one question. One of your reasons,in fact it was “the” reason for saying that CM would never go RT was that the AI could “never” be as powerful in a RT game. Just not enough thinking time for the computer in a complex game. You pointed out that RTS games have by our standards tiny numbers of manoeuvre units, tiny maps… and so on… Well how have you over come this… is it not still the case that RTS games tend to have far fewer units and smaller maps than we would all wish for? Do you not still take a hit in AI but just at a higher level as all PCs are now more powerful? All good fun , All the best, Kip. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted November 6, 2005 Share Posted November 6, 2005 Kip, I think you missed the "neener neener neener" bit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.