delay between orders issued and carried out?

[Juardis]

Just finished scanning all the threads here and, after my first pass through and reading the more interesting/promising thread titles, I have some questions.

1. I assume you can choose the speed at which your real time forces move? By that, I mean how fast do your troops move? I hope I can make it real slow (like what I remember CC was, not like AoE).

2. I'm struggling to determine how this RTS will work. I've read it'll be like CC, but in CC did we give each squad a command/order, or was it each individual? I can see where if there are 100+ units on the battlefield to command that I'll be quickly overwhelmed if I have to give orders to each unit, so I guess there's some way to group them? And an easy way to figure out who to give the order to?

3. And finally, for now, is there a delay for giving an order?

4. I lied, one more. Can you issue multiple waypoints? If so, I gather the AI will override those commands if the situation warrants it, in which case, are the previous commands then forgotten and you have to issue them again?

5. When do I send my money in?

[ August 15, 2006, 10:14 PM: Message edited by: Juardis ]

[gunnersman]

ASAP. Send your cashiers check or money order to:

gunnersman

2860 N Sheridan Road

Tulsa, Ok 74115

Please, dont be stingy.

Dont tell me you didnt see that coming.

Ok, ok, seriously.

From what I've read:

2)You give the squad orders and not individual soldiers.

3)There is no emphasis on command and control. But there is slight delay but I think its only inherent in the programming and not so much because of delay due to orders trickling down through the ranks.

[ August 15, 2006, 08:43 PM: Message edited by: gunnersman ]

[Mord]

You can give an individual soldier orders as well as whole squads.

Mord.

[Moon]

1. No, you cannot speed up or slow down the action. At TOWs scale featuring individual men and not whole armies that would be really odd. You can however pause the action to check the battlefield and issue orders.

2. Mord is right, you can group soldiers (and tanks/vehicles/guns) and give them orders as a group, or you can give orders to individual soldiers, too, if you want to finetune/micromanage some actions. You could even tell a soldier to use a specific weapon to target the turret of an enemy tank if you want. Or you can order the driver of a tank to bail out and scout out some enemy position.

The ability to pause helps if you really want to start micromanaging, but you are not forced to micromanage - if you prefer a more hands-off playing style you can do that, too, since the AI is very good from what I have seen. The interface is very good and makes it easy to find units on the map and access them quickly - one of the most useful features is that you are able to click on the icon above each unit which jumps to that units position for example, no matter where it is on the map.

3. Command&control are not simulated. There is a tiny delay (like one second or so) when you issue orders, but that's it.

4. You cannot issue waypoints actually, but this is offset to some extent by the great pathfinding AI. And yes, the AI can and will override your orders from time to time based on a soldiers/units morale or the situation at hand.

5. Later this year.

[Dark Knight]

One of the very noticeable differences between squads of different quality (IE regulars versus elites) was the time that it took them to respond to orders. Are you saying that it will take the same time for an order to be transmitted whether your troops are veterans walking across a quiet field or conscripts in the middle of an artillery barrage? Surely there must be some delay depending on a units' situation and training level like there was in previous CM games?

[Moon]

TOW is not even attempting to simulate C&C, so the answer is no, there is no difference in how quickly units respond to orders based on their training.

Now of course this doesn't mean that there is no difference... in fact, there is a lot. TOW simulates other human factors in a lot more detail than CM, for example morale, various skills (like accuracy, recon etc), so the kind of abstracted system C&C like CM has is not really missed.

It is still gamey of course because the player has a god-like view and ability to act, but then this is the case in most wargames out there with a few very notable exceptions (inlcuding our upcoming Histwar game just to mention one example). Keep in mind that TOW is lower on the scale ladder than CM. It really goes down to the individual soldier level, so you cannot take some of the design decisions from CM (or other games) and copy and paste them.

For example, units/soldiers in TOW can also be pro-active (something that CM didn't have) and they do act on their own if you don't give them orders. What they do and how they do it DOES depend on their training/skill level. This is a whole different way to "simulate" command issues than CM or other games have.

Martin

[Other Means]

Proactive units, that's good. Can you give an example?

I'd really like to see units assaulting a position where they can see the defenders are pinned and stuff like that. That could be fun.

[Other Means]

Presumably we can cancel these proactive orders? "Get back here NnnJenkins!" kinda thing?

[Moon]

Yes, of course you can. From issuing a different order to a simple "stop everything now". Or just "stop moving" for example. In some cases the AI will ignore even that, but only if the soldiers are spooked (panicked, routed).

An example of proactive AI is when you issue a firing command. If the enemy units fired on begins retreating, your unit(s) might decide to pursue without needing your input. This even works to some extent when you didn't give an order at all - if enemy is within LOS, (some of)your units will begin attacking, and this includes moving into good firing position for example. You can force units to stay in place or hold fire also of course.

In CM which is turn-based the player is SUPPOSED to make most of these decisions, and the AI is largely passive/reactive. In TOW, which is real-time tactical (I like that phrase), there is more AI under the hood; including true pathfinding or e.g. formations -columns moving down a road etc. by the way.

Martin

[Other Means]

Originally posted by Moon:

{snip}

there is more AI under the hood; including true pathfinding or e.g. formations -columns moving down a road etc. by the way.

Martin

That's going to make a lot of people very happy.

[Juardis]

Originally posted by Moon:

1. No, you cannot speed up or slow down the action.

Bummer. Even at "CM like" speed, sometimes there was just too much happening to keep track of it all, especially when you got above company size engagements where you were commanding 25+ entities.

2. Mord is right, you can group soldiers (and tanks/vehicles/guns) and give them orders as a group, or you can give orders to individual soldiers, too, if you want to finetune/micromanage some actions. You could even tell a soldier to use a specific weapon to target the turret of an enemy tank if you want. Or you can order the driver of a tank to bail out and scout out some enemy position.

So can I assume from this that ToW will be like Squad Leader in real-time? I'm commanding individual soldiers? Which can be grouped (e.g., gun crews)?

The interface is very good and makes it easy to find units on the map and access them quickly - one of the most useful features is that you are able to click on the icon above each unit which jumps to that units position for example, no matter where it is on the map.

As I understand from other threads, individual soldiers will pick up weapons and attempt to use them. Will it be obvious to me that PFC Juardis dropped his M1 and now has a BAR? I could see where that would change how I would want to use him. Or is the AI smart enough to know how to use him?

[M Hofbauer]

Moon:

"You can force units to stay in place or hold fire also of course."

dioes this depend on unit quality? i.e., are very experienced units more likely to keep fire discipline than green soldiers?

Juardis:

"Will it be obvious to me that PFC Juardis dropped his M1 and now has a BAR? I could see where that would change how I would want to use him. Or is the AI smart enough to know how to use him? "

the problem I see with scavenged weapons that you get to keep for the campaign is that after a while every single russian soldier in the squad will be toting a MG42and similar...

[BeauCoupDinkyDau]

Originally posted by Moon:

real-time tactical (I like that phrase)

So do I. :cool:

[Juardis]

Hofbaur, I would assume that in order to use the scavenged weapon one must have access to the ammunition used in said weapon, so I wouldn't think that you could keep a scavenged weapon from one mission to the next. Of course, I could be wrong too.

[M Hofbauer]

Originally posted by Juardis:

Of course, I could be wrong too.

I assume you are.

I think you still havent fully immersed in what kind of game ToW will be.

You are thinking too little game, too much simulation, too realistic.

too-too-too

[Tarquelne]

Originally posted by M Hofbauer:

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

[qb] Of course, I could be wrong too.

I assume you are.</font>

[Steiner14]

Originally posted by Moon:

Or you can order the driver of a tank to bail out and scout out some enemy position.

I always wanted that that. Wow.

[M Hofbauer]

Originally posted by Tarquelne:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by M Hofbauer:

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

[qb] Of course, I could be wrong too.

I assume you are.</font>

[Tarquelne]

I think it was said earlier (another thread) that captured weapons wouldn't be kept from scenario to scenario in the campaign.

wrong.

I found the reference I was thinking of. In fact, I found two somewhat contradictory statements. One plainly stated, one less plain but more directly applicable. One statement from Megakill, one from Moon. One raises a question of quantity, the other a question of definition...

Ok, so I looked it up. But you can't make me post the links.

[Moon]

I believe that one of us might have been talking about captured equipment like captured enemy anti-tank guns or howitzers, while the other was talking about small arms. I don't think that small arms can be kept from scenario to scenario, but (some) captured big guns remain with your core force and can be re-used later in the campaign.

Martin

[Jussi Köhler]

Can they be upgraded, say a 75mm up to a 88mm?

[Tarquelne]

Originally posted by Moon:

[QB] I believe that one of us might have been talking about captured equipment like captured enemy anti-tank guns or howitzers, while the other was talking about small arms. I don't think that small arms can be kept from scenario to scenario, but (some) captured big guns remain with your core force and can be re-used later in the campaign.

Tarq's lawyer here:

It is my clients claim that the above both sums up the previously referred to statements and resolves any apparent contradiction between them. But, as a firm upholder of civil rights, freedom of speech, privacy, and anything else I can think of that might be used as an excuse he will not provide documentary evidence at this time. If we receive a lawful court order we will of course comply with it to the fullest extent possible.

[Moon]

No, Jussi, at least I haven't seen any option to upgrade units. What happens though is that you get new equipment (and troops) for each new mission in the campaign. (It appears also that what you actually get also depends somewhat on your previous successes.) So what you can do is adjust your deployed core force each time by swapping out equipment and also swapping out crews of course. If you want to really start micromanaging you can take your most experienced driver and put him behind the wheel of your best tank for example. Or exchange a crappy noob with a really good experienced gunner on that Tiger.

The fact that each man is simulated individually really puts a new meaning into concepts like "upgrading" I just now realized...

Martin

[RMC]

Players are going to do what the Germans did. They're going to channel resources to a a few special units and not worry too much about the rest.

Hey! We can also do like in the war stories were the hot tank commander continually commandeers another tank to take into the fight - during the battle.

[M Hofbauer]

Tarq's lawyer,

I have to reject your last writing on the grounds that you failed to provide a power of attorney to legally act for Tarq.

until then you are merely dust beneath my feet, and your statements buzz of flies in my ears.

Tarquelne,

now you've done it.

all I can say is that either - gasp - it seems that Moon just called Madmatt a liar,

or Madmatt IS a liar OR used misleading statements in false advertisement.

OR somefink.