1:1 representation and casualties

[vincere]

I think that I read that casualties are going to be handled abstractly? Just wondering if we are likely to see wounded pixel troopers writhing on the floor; trying to crawl to cover, screaming out for medic?

Will squads/teams have an order option or tac AI operation of aiding a fallen comrade or two. Like giving first aid, draging into cover, taking to aid station or casualty evacuation point etc?

Along the lines of company/ battalion scale have battalion abulances and medics been considered?

My opinion is if done right could really add to the emersion into the game.

[ September 11, 2005, 01:51 PM: Message edited by: vincere ]

[Battlefront.com]

We haven't decided yet. The problem is one of consistency. If we show wounded then players are going to want to do things with wounded. To do that we have to implement a fairly significant bunch of features to simulate all of that. In theory we want to, but we're not sure if that is something we can bite off for the first release.

Steve

[stoat]

What about a marker for every casualty? They wouldn't have to move, and wouldn't require additional features, but I think it would be a nice touch to have each one represented.

A continually thickening line of bodies stretched right up to the muzzle of an MG-42, whose crewmen lie scattered about in and around their foxhole...

Just a thought.

[vincere]

What type of markers are you thinking about? "Markers" makes me think of a flag or similar? If so IMO Markers would be a good idea for CM1; but I can't really see the point of swapping 1:1 representation of live pixel troops to markers for wounded and KIA. Also it might seem a little odd to have them disappear or for the wounded to be totally still.

Steve, thanks for response. I would think it could have gameplay implications too, possibly good and bad. Anyway will be interested when its decided.

[ September 11, 2005, 04:15 PM: Message edited by: vincere ]

[stoat]

No, not a flag. The same as the "eliminated" marker in CMx1. Or at least similar.

[stoat]

I'd say just leave markers for the KIAs, but (AIUI) this is determined by a formula, so wouldn't work. And I admit that stationary or nonexistant wounded would be unrealistic. It was and still is just a thought.

[gunnersman]

...If we show wounded then players are going to want to do things with wounded...

Steve

What do you mean? Do you mean as in try to save them? If so, why not have something setup in the code to where a random "roll of the dice" (for lack of a better term) has a brave soldier try to save the wounded, drag them to safety, etc.

[hoolaman]

I would be happy with:

During the movie playback, there would be a few generic animations for KIA and wounded. A wounded man would drop and maybe crawl slowly toward cover. A dead man would just drop.

After the movie finishes, the animated soldier turns to a marker such as a little red cross or skull to mark wounded and killed. It could be optional to have them just disappear.

The point being that during the movie, the immersion is not lost, but you don't have to worry about "doing things" with your wounded during the next turn. KIA might also be graphically left where they fall after the turn with no game effects (nothing you can do for them), but maybe hardware effects make this impractical.

[stoat]

I always thought that the number of dead was decided after the battle by a formula. So you wouldn't know if a specific casualty is dead or wounded.

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by stoat:

I always thought that the number of dead was decided after the battle by a formula. So you wouldn't know if a specific casualty is dead or wounded.

I am under the impression that might change in CMx2

-tom w

[stoat]

That would be nice to see. If a tank explodes, it would be nice to know all five (or so) men are dead, and not just a set percentage of them.

[Zalgiris 1410]

Yeah I don't like the abstracted percentage ratio handling of WIA/KIA in such specific instances in CMx1, they are just too unrealistic since the crew members would mostly be fully toasted.

I'd like to say that I am with the tendancy of this thread so far, only depict the casualties but don't make the players worry about having to do anything for them for playability sakes.

[Ardem]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

We haven't decided yet. The problem is one of consistency. If we show wounded then players are going to want to do things with wounded. To do that we have to implement a fairly significant bunch of features to simulate all of that. In theory we want to, but we're not sure if that is something we can bite off for the first release.

Steve

I disagree with that once they are wounded or killed, I don't want anything to do with the malingers. They can roll around screaming, and add atmosphere, till I come up myself and shoot them for not taking the hill.

[a-lamer]

I would definetly want to see dead bodies left on the ground. This really is the marker for me how the battle is going. In CMx1 I never really understood the scale of my losses, well not atleast with a quick look. Bodies on the ground would certainly help this one.

As for the wounded, I would have them go on in the battlefield normally, but would have em act with reduced effiency. With reduced I mean, slower movement and firing speed.

[Tero]

On a related note: how do things stand with the musical chairs representation of vehicle crew casualaties in CMx1 ? I hope with 1:1 representation you get mobility kills when the driver gets hit or the gun gets inoperable when the gunner gets zapped.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by a-lamer:

As for the wounded, I would have them go on in the battlefield normally, but would have em act with reduced effiency. With reduced I mean, slower movement and firing speed.

Oh boy. I think you forgot about the part where you want to slip behind the controls of a King Tiger and see through the gunner's sight.

Steve, I think you know my stance on this. You know as well as I do that putting them on the map means lots of other issues - how badly wounded are they, why can't they still shoot if they're shot in the legs, why aren't there medics modelled, how come the AI keeps targetting my ambulances, blah blah blah

Leave 'em out, just like you say.

The overriding concern here is that if CMX2 is going to be a company scale game, well, guess what - a company commander has nothing to do with casualty evacuation, other than telling his platoon commanders before hand where the casualty collection point/casualty clearing station is - and maybe he even leaves that to the Company Sergeant Major/First Sergeant/Hauptfeldwebel/etc.

There's no need to include them unless everything that goes with it goes in too. I'd as soon not wait til Christmas 2006 for the first release TYVM.

[Ardem]

I think you can put them in as a graphic feature in the movie sequence but at the end of it they just disappear.

People seem to forget superficial wounds are never counted, like a graze across the arm, most time the soldiers don't even know they been hit until after the battle.

But if you get shot in the leg or arm or even foot it is game over, none of this its a slight wound he can keep moving crap. Try laying on your back screaming for your mum.

I think seeing wounded in the movie yes, then disappear at the end, having them remain on the battlefield NO.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Ardem:

But if you get shot in the leg or arm or even foot it is game over, none of this its a slight wound he can keep moving crap. Try laying on your back screaming for your mum.

Unless of course the first TITLE is "DC War Heroes", with module 1 - "Sergeant Rock and the Combat Happy Joes of Easy Company", module 2 "J.E.B. Stuart and the Haunted Tank" and module 3 "We Ran Out of DC War Heroes so Here Are Sgt. Nick Fury and the Howling Commandos." In which case all American GIs will only

a) suffer non-fatal wounds, usually to the left shoulder

have their shirts ripped off 10 seconds into the fighting and then hang in shreds for the rest of the battle

[Hensworth]

Going to 1:1 representation is the key issue here I think.

When my squads were representations of squads I didn't mind the wounded being abstracted either. I.e. I knew that those 3 men aren't actually 3 men and that I had to click on the unit to see if they had taken any casualties.

However, if every man I have is actually shown on the battlefield, it's a different story. IMHO, watching your squads apparently vanish into thin air as they take fire is going to look stupid.

[Peter Cairns]

I'd go for a seperation system

Dead:- Lie their doing nothing spread eagled.

Seriously wounded;- Crumple up and move a bit ,but wave unhurt troops on so they can't help and ignore them.

Light wounded, these can move at reduced speed and slowly head back to the rear, or move to seriously wounded who they then help to the rear.

By making the light wounded under AI control deal with the seriously wounded you get the graphic effect of casualties without the player having to do anything and it effecting game play.

Lastly

Unwounded:- These would be people who looked wounded (limp, lost helmet) who appeared in targeted squads that had taken fire, but who acted as normal, a sort of Eye Candy.

Peter.

[vincere]

Sgt_Kelly

Going to 1:1 representation is the key issue here I think.

When my squads were representations of squads I didn't mind the wounded being abstracted either. I.e. I knew that those 3 men aren't actually 3 men and that I had to click on the unit to see if they had taken any casualties.

However, if every man I have is actually shown on the battlefield, it's a different story. IMHO, watching your squads apparently vanish into thin air as they take fire is going to look stupid.

That's one of the points I was trying to make.

Michael Dorosh, I can understand your hostility to casualty representation, I think that we might agree that it could really screw with game play. But if realism is being aimed at then I would suggest that the severe wounded could impinge on a company commander's plans. Reminds me of the maxim 'that it's better to wound a guy than to kill, because it takes out more people to deal with him.'

As for Hardware issues, I really don't see how there can be too many since the wounded and KIA would have previously been doing their tac stuff.

[ September 12, 2005, 02:16 AM: Message edited by: vincere ]

[GreenAsJade]

If they are dead (no longer useful in any way) can we PLEASE PLEASE have a way of turning them off? This especially goes for AFVs as well.

From a playability point of view, if they're no use, I don't want to see them.

GaJ

[Peter Cairns]

Yes but with relative spotting and the effects of artillery, the position of dead or wounded can give an indication of enemy movemnets and or positions.

They could also have a moral effect on new or reinfocing units. There is nothing takes the eagerness away from troops quite like seeing bits of their comrades spread all over the place.

As long as it can be done in a way that doesn't alter game play i am for it.

Peter.

[mrpwase]

I agree with the 'eliminated' graphic for KIAs. A long stream of dead bodies trailing my squads obviously won't be good in the long run for me, but will at least look nice.

[Cpl Steiner]

I know this has been discussed at length before but I think the more we see the effects of casualties, the more immersive the game will be. There is obviously a "diminishing returns" factor here, so we don't want to go mad, but I would welcome anything that showed how casualties can hinder the company commander's plans. In the film "Black Hawk Down", there is a scene in which the commander tells an officer to get his men to the crash site, and is told that they can't move because they have too many casualties. It's only a movie, but it makes a valid point. In some situations, abandoning the wounded is not an option.