The main UI explained

[Yardstick]

Originally posted by flamingknives:

...under the TL (2nd fire team) looks like an ACOG scope, which to me indicates a designated marksman.

If that is the SDM, I hope they replace the grapic with an ACOG. The one in the pic is a M68 Aimpoint, that's a close combat optic, no magnification.

[akd]

Originally posted by Angryson:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by flamingknives:

...under the TL (2nd fire team) looks like an ACOG scope, which to me indicates a designated marksman.

If that is the SDM, I hope they replace the grapic with an ACOG. The one in the pic is a M68 Aimpoint, that's a close combat optic, no magnification. </font>

[M1A1TC]

You mean in the game or in real life? Cause in real life, not all rifles or MGs have optics. In my 8 years of US Army service, Ive never used one with optics

[akd]

Originally posted by M1A1TankCommander:

You mean in the game or in real life? Cause in real life, not all rifles or MGs have optics. In my 8 years of US Army service, Ive never used one with optics

HHC 2-1 Infantry Co., 172nd Stryker Brigade Combat Team. Every rifle has an optic:

http://www.teamwaggonerracing.com/Lindsays%20AK%20Pics.htm

[Yardstick]

Yeah, every infantymen has an optic. M4-M16A4-M16/203 all have either an M68, an ACOG or a EOTech 550 AA. I have the EOTech, and I love it. EOTech

Most M249 and all M240B have the Elcan M145

M145

[M1A1TC]

I guess I should have been more specific. In my MOSs, 19k20 and 14S20, we do not have optics on personal weapons. So maybe the infantry have them, but not vehicle crewmembers (which is what I am)

[juan_gigante]

I assume that BFC will be modeling small arms with different types of optics? As in, the marksman should have different optics than the regular infantry dude, who would have different optics than the tank crewman.

[M1A1TC]

I sure hope so. And this should effect their performance and range as well

[Yardstick]

Originally posted by M1A1TankCommander:

I guess I should have been more specific. In my MOSs, 19k20 and 14S20, we do not have optics on personal weapons. So maybe the infantry have them, but not vehicle crewmembers (which is what I am)

You are deploying soon right? When we rolled out it was like the RFI flood gates opened and we had new gear comming out of our ears. Alot of our tankers have M4s w/M68s,ACOGs and EOTechs. Some have shotguns, it's crazy.

[M1A1TC]

Yeah, I am deploying to Germany for a year, after my unit goes to Military Police school.The unit we are taking over in Germany are in Iraq.

I doubt Ill get any new toys, since we are shipping most of our weapons with us

[hellfish]

M68 CCO's don't offer any magnification, though, do they? They're just a substitute for iron sights. I think other than maybe a small toHit vs. non-optic weapons bonus, there isn't really much of a difference, gameplay-wise. The biggest element of gameplay affected by CCOs or other reflex sights would probably be portraying the rifles graphically.

Originally posted by flamingknives:

Area 4 seems to be additional equipment. In the given picture this looks like a Javelin, one reload for the Javelin, a radio of some description and a personal data gubbins.

I see one Javelin and one AT4/M136 LAW.

[kipanderson]

Steve,

You posted,

“Serious WIAs and KIAs are dropped out of the display of the parent unit.”

My concern is this…. will we be able to see at a glance if the squad has suffered causalities in the “current game/battle”?

Let me explain.

You may remember that with CMX1 there was a problem with being able to spot the casualties in operations, there were suffered in any given battle. In CMX1 previously suffered casualties, from “previous battles” in an operation, are shown to the right of the + sign. This makes it very difficult to spot exactly when your units start to take casualties in a current, second or third battle, in an operation.

What all this incomprehensible ranting comes down to is….. we need to be able to spot, at a glance, the casualties suffered in the “current” battle as opposed to just being able to spot the strength of a given unit. So as to be able to spot when casualties start being taken. And which units are taking them.

If you follow my rantings .

All good fun,

All the best,

Kip.

[M1A1TC]

Since this is 1:1 representation, you will see smaller platoon as KIA drop. No more abstract 3 men platoon

[kipanderson]

Hi,

“Since this is 1:1 representation, you will see smaller platoon as KIA drop. No more abstract 3 men platoon”

But if one started with, say, nine squads at different strengths it is very difficult, often impossible, to tell “exactly” when casualties start to go down and in which squads. This is why at a glance there is a need to be able to spot which squads have suffered casualties in the current game. WIA and KIA in the current game need to be marked in the squad info box. In my very prejudiced view .

All the best,

Kip.

[hellfish]

Wouldn't you see a KIA/WIA represented on the map? Shouldn't be too hard to figure out where he came from, methinks.

[Peter Cairns]

kipanderson,

If I am interpreting Steves comments and the provisional design for the interface correctly, when you click on a squad you'll get a detail of the current weapons and fitness of each man.

Part of the debate is whether if you move the cursor over a man you'll get more info.

I am not sure if dead will show as dead or just disappear, thats one for Steve.

Anyway if you loose track of which squad had what and can't tell if it's taken casualties, you shouldn't be a company Co, try restricting yourself to a platoon, or a squad, or a sniper...

Peter.

[Battlefront.com]

Kip, we're still trying to decide how to portray this. There is some tricky stuff to account for because the system does not want to have the same Soldier in two places at once. So when a guy is KIA, WIA, or split off he is removed from that unit's roster until (and if) he returns to that unit. We would like there to be some way to know that a unit started out with x guys and only now has y, but we'll have to see how this can be done.

Steve

[Peter Cairns]

Steve,

What about a button in part five of the UI that let you, check the original squad size, so you could compare.

Although that wouldn't tell you if a man was dead or just lost.

Peter.

[undead reindeer cavalry]

will the main UI show mission related info, or perhaps general unit roster of some kind, when no unit is selected?

it would be cool if you would have some kind of unit roster & if you could move to a unit's location by clicking the unit in the roster.

[Battlefront.com]

No space for a button in #5. All slots taken up by Soldiers. We've got some ideas, but it really isn't about the display of the information but rather the tracking of the information itself.

An ingame Order of Battle will eventually make it into the game. We'll have to see if it gets into CM:SF or not.

Steve

[kipanderson]

Hi,

“We would like there to be some way to know that a unit started out with x guys and only now has y, but we'll have to see how this can be done.”

That would be perfect as I do enjoy biggish battles. Although I recognize that with CMX2 the smaller battles will also be hugely good fun, more so than with CMX1.

All the best,

Kip.

[Cameroon]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

An ingame Order of Battle will eventually make it into the game. We'll have to see if it gets into CM:SF or not.

I thought an in-game OoB was something "ruled out" more than once as too much information? If I wasn't at work I'd search the forums, but I would swear that it's come up more than once as a request.

[Peter Cairns]

Okay hows this for a solution, as units take casualties or people get detached have the rst of the units say things like,

"Oh my God Chucks dead !"

or

"Where the hell is Pete ?"

Okay not one of my better suggestions, but then given my suggestions thats pretty bad.

Peter.

[Battlefront.com]

An ingame OB, with limited information, is something we've never been against. When this discussion got started way back in the CMBO days people were asking for a "report" more than they were an Order of Battle. By report I mean something that gave tons of information about things like head count, morale status, etc. This would give the player situational awareness that is far in excess of what a commander should have, even today (though it's getting pretty close to that).

What I mean by an Order of Battle is simply a list of all your units and having them act as hotlinks to the actual unit.

Steve

[aka_tom_w]

What I mean by an Order of Battle is simply a list of all your units and having them act as hotlinks to the actual unit.

Steve

I could be wrong but I think that is all most folks here are asking for when they want the Order of Battle to be somehow part of the interface.

This is all we are asking for "simply a list of all your units and having them act as hotlinks to the actual unit."

I could be wrong but I had thought that was all that was ever requested?

-tom w