Engineering, mines, wire and breaching operations in CMX2.

[kipanderson]

Hi,

I know this will not be at the top of the list, but especially with a contemporary game on the list, the problems with mines, wire and engineering in general in CMX1 need a look at, in my view.

Firstly, this should not be seen as a criticism of CMX1. I know it was designed with company v company battles lasting some twenty minutes in mind. In that light mines and wire do what they do very well in CMX1. But in longer games, say one hour, plus the modelling of breaching operation in any contemporary game, (can one have a contemporary game without breaching operations ), mines and wire do need a look at, in my view .

One example is that if a tank makes it through a minefield in CMX1following tanks and infantry cannot take advantage by following in its tracks.

Battlefront knows their own game better than I do, so will not list all the problems with engineering in CMX1, but I hope engineering/obstacles will make it onto the list of matters to be looked at maybe in game three of CMX2.

All the best,

Kip.

[YankeeDog]

I wholeheartedly agree.

Expansion of the modeling of combat engineering, and combat obstacles isn't on my "must have" list for CMX2, but it's pretty high up on the "really nice to have" list.

Cheers

YD

[flamingknives]

I agree with Kip.

Although the things we agree on don't have the best record of making the game...

[Philippe]

I would dearly love to be able to shove a bangalore torpedo into an entanglement and blow a path through the wire.

[SgtMuhammed]

Originally posted by Philippe:

I would dearly love to be able to shove a bangalore torpedo into an entanglement and blow a path through the wire.

Yeah they are a lot of fun. Carrying them is a bastard though. Or did you mean in the game?

[Zalgiris 1410]

I agree with the idea of having sappers being able to use bangalore torpedos to clear wire entanglements in the new game, ahem. They could be carried by sappers in the place where German Infantry squads carry their rifle grenades, while they would work against sections of wire similarly to how the demolition package charges do against minefields. That shouldn't be too hard to develope for CMx2 IMO if it is treated like that.

(Some BFC only has to make sure the Tac AI handles it all effectively. I can already see complications cropping up for when sappers are faced with both mines and wire obsticles. I would suggest that they be programmed to clear the mines first.)

Now I'm wondering which device should be used to remove a road block?

[KG_SSpoom]

Nice point Kip. I hadnt thought about the old follow my tracks through the mine field tactic.

=)

[flamingknives]

Originally posted by Zalgiris 1410:

I agree with the idea of having sappers being able to use bangalore torpedos to clear wire entanglements in the new game, ahem. They could be carried by sappers in the place where German Infantry squads carry their rifle grenades, while they would work against sections of wire similarly to how the demolition package charges do against minefields. That shouldn't be too hard to develope for CMx2 IMO if it is treated like that.

AAAARGGRGGRGRR! :mad:

If you're going to write something like that, at least include a caveat. Something like:

"I know next to naff all about programming computer games, but please indulge my suppositions"

or

"I have assumed that CMs code works in a particular fashion, but in reality I am an ignoramousas to the specifics, so I could be entirely and unmitigatedly wrong"

or

"I am Charles => I actually know what I'm talking about."

Back on topic:

Roadblocks would be dealt with by bulldozers and the like, which would require engineering vehicles in game.

[76mm]

My big pet peeve is not being able to clear roadblocks in the game. A lot of times these couuld be as simple as a couple of trees knocked down across a road, but in CMx1 they're there for good. Roadblocks on a more mammoth scale might indeed by immovable in the CM timeframe, but I would think that the smaller ones would be a lot more common.

76mm

[Gordon]

I'm hoping that wire, roadblocks, trenches, etc. are all "deformable" terrain as outlined for walls in a different thread.

[SgtMuhammed]

Back in the mists of time (CMBB) BFC made it clear that the roadblocks represent major construction efforts. After all, they can stop a tank. In that case you can either see them as a large ditch or as a whole lot of very heavy things. Now designers and players often put them in and say that they are smaller than what they really are but that doesn't change anything.

Small roadblocks are currently best simulated by wire, which is impassible to wheels but not tracks and slows feet.

I hope there will be more engineering options but I'm not going to be upset if their aren't. I would much rather be able to simulate the battle for Hosingen, not the clearing of the roadblocks around it.

[John D Salt]

Originally posted by kipanderson:

[snips]

I know this will not be at the top of the list, but especially with a contemporary game on the list, the problems with mines, wire and engineering in general in CMX1 need a look at, in my view.

It would be nice to think that we will get 1. massively-expanded treatment of field engineering and 2. amphibious units that float in the new engine. This will enable people to the things everyone really wants to do for the Normandy campaign, that is, the beach landings themselves, in reasonably convincing fashion.

It night also let us do the assault on Walcheren, as long as they don't leave out the Royal Marine Commandos again.

Dammit, I forgot to put "Include Royal Marine Commandos" in my top 5 wish-list.

All the best,

John.

[Philippe]

That's alright, I haven't put in mine yet. And when I do I'll be sure to include an entry for Italian frogmen.

[Zalgiris 1410]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Zalgiris 1410:

I agree with the idea of having sappers being able to use bangalore torpedos to clear wire entanglements in the new game, ahem. They could be carried by sappers in the place where German Infantry squads carry their rifle grenades, while they would work against sections of wire similarly to how the demolition package charges do against minefields. That shouldn't be too hard to develope for CMx2 IMO if it is treated like that.

AAAARGGRGGRGRR! :mad:

If you're going to write something like that, at least include a caveat. Something like:

"I know next to naff all about programming computer games, but please indulge my suppositions"

or

"I have assumed that CMs code works in a particular fashion, but in reality I am an ignoramousas to the specifics, so I could be entirely and unmitigatedly wrong"

or

"I am Charles => I actually know what I'm talking about."

Back on topic:

Roadblocks would be dealt with by bulldozers and the like, which would require engineering vehicles in game. </font>

[kipanderson]

John, hi,

good to hear from you as always

Hope things go well.

All the best,

Kip.

[flamingknives]

Originally posted by Zalgiris 1410:

Flamingknives have you got a heavy drinking problem? Perhaps you should hit the decaf

How did you guess? My tea mug is a bit on the weighty side and sometimes my hands wreak revenge by typing vitriolic rhetoric.

I see quite a few people claiming that a particular alteration would be simple to program, but I think that Charles is really the only person qualified to comment. Or one of the other guys at BFC.

Perhaps was needed

[JasonC]

Variable minefield density. And shape, especially allowing big fields with low chance of hit per meter travelled. No prior knowledge of the density or extent of a field, when a mine is hit. The present uniform individual small tiles don't create realistic minefield effects because they are too predictable, and their expense makes them too rare on the ground. Both hidden AT and hidden AP affected, though the AP effect is probably more important.

Fortifications that are terrain, with entry and exit, have already been mentioned. I hope there is also a wider variety of them (e.g. wood proof against 81s, wood and sandbag proof against 105s, concrete, deep dugouts proof against arty but without firing positions, shallower dugouts giving trench-like cover but holding whole platoons, blockhouses), and that firing slit vulnerability is considerably reduced.

That will make engineering much more important for the attackers, realistically. In the real deal, you couldn't just stand off at 400m and destroy anything. And mines were serious enough "just go around" wasn't a realistic solution. Together, well-prepared defenses would be considerably tougher than they are now.

[Sergei]

Originally posted by JasonC:

Variable minefield density. And shape, especially allowing big fields with low chance of hit per meter travelled.

While I agree, one problem occurred to me regarding the clearing of paths through mine fields. If a tile with low density was used, then how would it be represented when pioneers swept a safe path through it? Would they clear the whole big field (makes no sense)? Or a narrow corridor (how to graphically represent this?)?

[Tero]

Boobytrapped (AT-)mines (as well as actual booby traps) making the clearing of the minefield more interesting ?

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by Sergei:

While I agree, one problem occurred to me regarding the clearing of paths through mine fields. If a tile with low density was used, then how would it be represented when pioneers swept a safe path through it? Would they clear the whole big field (makes no sense)? Or a narrow corridor (how to graphically represent this?)?

I have no idea if BFC even intends to address this issue any time soon, or ever, but my own preference would be that merely a lane would be cleared. Graphically it would be represented by two white lines of tape representing the limits of the lane. That's how it was usually done in real life.

Michael

[Zalgiris 1410]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Zalgiris 1410:

Flamingknives have you got a heavy drinking problem? Perhaps you should hit the decaf

How did you guess? My tea mug is a bit on the weighty side and sometimes my hands wreak revenge by typing vitriolic rhetoric.

I see quite a few people claiming that a particular alteration would be simple to program, but I think that Charles is really the only person qualified to comment. Or one of the other guys at BFC.

Perhaps was needed </font>