Relative Spotting revisited

[ianc]

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The enemy units can ONLY be viewed by the player while the player has the friendly unit selected (only in view level 1, (?) that one may be a sticky point, maybe from any view level to make the game actually FUN and playable) that originally spotted the unit.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This just makes the game more difficult to play without increasing realism. The player still has the same information available to him as he did before, he just has to click all over the place to find it. PITA.

Hmmm... Quite true. I agree 100% with the second part of this quote, but I'm scared to death that someone actually even suggested it, since BTS used exactly this same logic in not including a 'Unit Navigation Screen' that would allow you to see your unit list and jump to a particular unit by clicking on it. Keeping fingers crossed for its NON adoption as a possible solution...

ianc

P.S. Yes I know I'm a snivelling little thread-hijacking bitch. Sorry...

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Big Time Software:

Tom, I know you have been a participant in many of the previous discusions. I would have hoped that you picked up on the fact that Relative Spotting is only the underlying mechanism, not the solution.In other words, there are all SORTS of things we can do once Relative Spotting is in place that will increase realism, decrease the Borg, and at the same time make CM more fun. Having restrictions on targeting is just ONE feature made possible by Relative Spotting. A better system of artillery requests is another. More accountable and detailed C&C delays is yet another. There are LOTs of possibilities made possible because of Relative Spotting. So again, don't think of Relative Spotting as the solution, but a part of the underlying foundation for other features which in turn will do lots of things to improve the game on all levels.

When we get into this phase of design we should all have a nice group think about ways we can leverage Relative Spotting and other systems to make CM more realistic. But at this point, we don't have the time to do that. Already spent too much time on this issue as it is

Steve

"I would have hoped that you picked up on the fact that Relative Spotting is only the underlying mechanism, not the solution."

OK that sounds good. I have very little idea of how Extreme FOW will be implimented in CMBB so of course I am only guessing as to how Relative Spotting might be part of the Borg problem in CM II.

"Having restrictions on targeting is just ONE feature made possible by Relative Spotting. A better system of artillery requests is another. More accountable and detailed C&C delays is yet another. There are LOTs of possibilities made possible because of Relative Spotting. So again, don't think of Relative Spotting as the solution, but a part of the underlying foundation for other features which in turn will do lots of things to improve the game on all levels."

That sounds very positive.

"When we get into this phase of design we should all have a nice group think about ways we can leverage Relative Spotting and other systems to make CM more realistic."

WELL OK! if thats an invitation to participate in discusions on the Design of CM II with respect to Simulated Relative Spotting and the "BORG-Like Swarming Units Response" (B-LSR) problem, then I can't wait to get started . I'm sure lots of folks here would be interested in participating.

As you can imagine we all CAN'T wait to see exactly HOW Extreme FOW works in CMBB and your latest solutions and tweaks!

-tom w

[aka_tom_w]

Well I guess that's about that!

oh well,

it was fun while it lasted

-tom w

[James Crowley]

I wonder would it be possible, maybe as part of the next "bone-throwing" session, to have a bit more hard info. around what extreme FoW in CMBB actually is, and some indicators as to the dampening effect on the borg problem.

I appreciate much of what Steve has said in this very interesting thread, although I'm not sure I necessarily agree with all of it.

If I have time, which is rather in short measure at this point, I will try and post in a few more ideas, assuming anyone's interested.

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by James Crowley:

If I have time, which is rather in short measure at this point, I will try and post in a few more ideas, assuming anyone's interested.

Sure

I'm interested when you find the time ....

-tom w

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by James Crowley:

I wonder would it be possible, maybe as part of the next "bone-throwing" session, to have a bit more hard info. around what extreme FoW in CMBB actually is, and some indicators as to the dampening effect on the borg problem.

I appreciate much of what Steve has said in this very interesting thread, although I'm not sure I necessarily agree with all of it.

If I have time, which is rather in short measure at this point, I will try and post in a few more ideas, assuming anyone's interested.

any further ideas?

Well the thread has now totally dropped off the rader screen.....

it may be gone but it is not forgotten

-tom w

[Kallimakhos]

Haven't yet read all the posts to this thread, maybe this has already come up, but anyway:

What I would really like to see in the next generation is the hard-coded, non cheatable level 1 view only hard core gaming mode (don't remember how it was nicked) as an option. Sure there would be lot of room to get this perfect, like forcing the player give orders in a certain order etc, but this would be quite close to realistic relative spotting. Also getting lost would be a real possibility especially in low visibility, when your unit has lost contact to his pals (it's night, all you see is woods around you, hear nothing but wind in the trees, have no idea where others disappeared and which way you should be going... no way to plot your movements but guessing - or start yelling for others and get shot by a nearby enemy MG ). Higher officer view could have a compass on the screen + a map with varying level of detail and accuracy, evolving as more information is gathered.

Lot of possibilities here, one that comes to mind is giving grafical clues to where south might be, (moss on the stones, foliage of trees etc) which could make a big difference in player skills.

The big problem here is how to show the movie without ruining the game. The all knowing movie would be out of question, and on the other hand going through the movie from each units point of view would take ages. One possibility is to show whats happening first on a crude map, from where you can jump to hotspots and visual goodies in 3d.

Additional possibility is not to be able to see the movie when unit is not in C&C, or seeing it after a delay. At the end player should be rewarded by seeing the whole movie same way as now.

Hope this makes some sense.

[Kallimakhos]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

Of course I'm sure we would all like to find a solution where we could "Have our Cake and EAT it too!" I'm always wondering if we have over looked something...

What about keeping all these ideas in mind:

"So my point is that it isn't so much the SPOTTING but rather the IDing. This

is especially true for the attacker, the attacker gets WAY too much

information regarding targets. The ability of all units to ascertain exactly

WHAT it is they are spotting is as much a problem as sharing spotting because

that is the intel they are sharing that is SO valuable.

A game suggestion then is to bring down the IDing level but keep the spotting

the same. This could be an extreme FOW option (cause theres always some that

like it just the way it is)."

And add some of these ideas:

The idea of ONLY seeing enemy units from view 1 (ONLY) while your friendly unit is selected) is a novel approach to the problem. This suggestion does not limit ANYTHING else to view 1 it only limits the ability of the player to see opposing units (which should be VERY poorly ID'd to prevent positive intel info) that his friendly units are in contact with or have LOS to from their unique perspective in view 1. All other views work fine (but you can't see any opposing units unless you are in view 1 and have the unit selected that has LOS to the opposing unit). Combine this suggestion with a few of Ceasar's proposals:

"1. Every unit had to individually spot a unit. Obviously if the enemy unit fires, it will be easier to spot as all units will turn to the sound of fire. Fuzzy logic should determine spotting i.e you get x% chance of spotting in the given conditions (depending on the unit quality as now), with this chance increasing with sound and other factors drawing units attention to that area.

3. FOW applied to the map. The map should only initially give broad information (the sort you could get off a map and with general info from the local populace) The map should only get updated as units within CnC (up to at least the Co level if one is present). If a player gives an order, that as a result of ignorance of the map, cannot be obeyed then the unit will stop and behave with normal TacAI behaviour. This will cause the unexpected delays that would happen in real life. Spotting from a distance should have fuzzy logic applied that causes inaccuracies such as incorrect elevetions, missing small copses, ditches etc. The map updating should suffer the same CnC delays as above.

4. Allow normal squad level delays to be applied to small movements and 5 - 7 waypoints for those in local CnC, but much greater delays related to the above CnC delays for large movements or higher numbers of waypoints. This would force players to maintain realistic command structures and more importantly slow down the current almost immediate response to a significant threat.

5. As CnC would be much more important, units that lose their HQ should be able to attach to other HQs with reduced performance (and none of the modifiers)"

Or the AI could Grow or spawn new leaders from the ranks of the non-coms. Sorry I don't have source on that it was someone elses idea to provide an option for short term leadership (depending on mitagating circumstances) as an emergency measure so that there would be a chance the Player would not instantly loose ALL control over all units not in C&C after the loss of their HQ unit.

-tom w

Ha! I knew I wasn't going to be the first one to think of this. Now that I've read all (well, most) the previous posts I see that my thinking is going along same paths with Tom on many issues, but maybe there are some original ideas in my innocent little suggestion.

So, where to go if we want to avoid both the Borg and Gods view problems as much as possible, and at the same time give the player control and ideally right amount of information at the squad/vehicle level, platoon/company commander level and at the supreme commander level? This is indeed possible and as additional bonus your troops can get lost or end up in wrong place both at middle and squad level, in a very natural way, which was before just a distant dream for Steve

The solution could be called simply Iron man Immersion (bit easier than the IMSRS-FOW ) which naturally should be optional "ultimate ffow", meant only for the groggiest and the most anal gamers (which could very likely make the majority!). This is a solution to most if not all major conserns raised before, not perfect but closest I can concieve.

This gives also answer to the question which role does the player take. A dual role. On the one end supreme commander, with the cumulating knowlegde of the overall situation on an evolving 2D map, being able to give direct and more general orders to platoons and companies. On the other hand the role of each squad/vehicle with very limited visibility (only level 1) and limited info (relative spotting). There is also the intermediate level, platoon/company commander, which would be some sort of mix of these two, and needs lot more thinking.

One of the good points is that there is clear distinction between different roles, and player can choose by the size of battle, individual tastes and other factors weather he prefers giving the "planning orders" (2D) or "control orders" (limited 3D).

Nothing good comes without cost, in return we must give up some of the fun, no unlimited movie watching (only level 1 and not even for every unit) until the end, and assigning individual orders to squads/vehicles could be bit tedious, as it must be done in a certain order and cycling through units without mouse pointing (unless there is a good roster which BTS might oppose). Even though this model greatly reduses the available information, I don't see how it would be possible to totally avoid some "unrealistic" bits and peaces of info spilling from the order fase and limited movie whatching for the perceptive human minds. E.g. whatching from a hill can give you clues how not to get lost with a unit. Also, it is actually quite hard to imagine how and if this would really work in actual game, for one I've never played with Iron man rules and this is quite different.

Im sure there must be something very wrong with this suggestion, because it sounds too good, and I'm sure these will be pointed out. But now to the details:

1. As the supreme commander HQ ('you') you have the 2D map of the battlefield, and on that map you see your troops in C&C and the cumulating info on the enemy positions and map details. This info can also be falce. On the map you can give more complicated movement orders (many waypoints) with shorter delays to co's and platoons with established communications. This of course requires improving the AI, to handle formations with some skill. Changing these orders before the object has been reached or contact made with the enemy means long delays (getting the orders to all concerned, regrouping etc.) Once in contact (ie fired at) unit should respond with more autonomy, so shorter delays. In other words, now the player is in a way in the shoes of the platoon commander. Many intermediate C&C issues still need a closer look at this level.

- 2D map can contain also some prebattle recon info, not necessarily allways true, on enemy troops and positions, depending on the type of the battle and randomized or bought before the battle.

- Recon order, as somebody already suggested. On the 2D you can give orders to appropriate units to recon in a certain direction, and if succesfull and not dying, after a while, depending on communications, you get more info on the 2D map. Special AI routines needed of course. This way if a recon unit with no radio and out of C&C is totally destroyed, no info is given, except getting meeting enemy somewhere along the route. If crew or stragler survives the more accurate info comes after long delay if at all.

- Same way all info from units encountering enemy units and in C&C, end up eventually on the 2D map, after certain delays which also take into account info going from up to down to all subcommanders, which then naturally happens "instantaneously" because they are your 'alter egos'. But because they can "see" only at level 1, in game terms they only know there is something in that direction, and their movement is more limited than when given orders on 2D map.

- artillery: spotters in contact with higher headquarter units, especially 'you', mean shorter delays.

- If the 'you' HQ is lost, also much of the information on the 2D map is lost.

- giving a order on 2D map includes random risk that the unit gets lost or ends up in wrong location. This won't be presented on the 2D map, but if you notice something is wrong in the level 1 view, you can reorder with considerable delay.

2. Level 1 view, commanding individual squads and vehicles. First, different set of orders from the 2D map which represent "planning orders, and include only various types of movement. These control orders include also targeting, searching hull down positions etc. There could also be some special orders for midlevel HQ's. Relative spotting, only enemy units you see here are those spotted by the selected units and those spotted by units in close contact or good communication line, with a certain delay. The "send runner" command suggested by someone sounds also very good.

- a big handicap is that to keep it realistic, control orders should probably be given in certain order (which?), after planning orders, to get no extra information from other units, and could be given just once in every turn. But maybe with the more flexible and easier "planning orders" on 2D map this could be avoided, if the biggest problem in "Gods view" is moving all the troops you want to handle a situation those troops should have no knowledge of. Also although the level 1 view would give you more info on enemy troops than the 2D map, it would be much harder to grasp and put to context. Anyway, there is a real problem here.

- giving movement orders only in visible boundaries preferred, but it should be possible to plot also into "grey" areas, with considerable risk and delay. The system should be flexible enough to work well in all wheather conditions.

- general "battle sounds this way" markers.

- if unit out of C&C, only generic markers for spotted enemy units to avoid unrealistic ID'ng.

- suppressed units available info even more limited.

- unit can get lost relatively easily in the "natural way", as prescribed earlier.

- possibility for enemy units to go back to totally unspotted under certain circumstanses.

3. The movies. Only level one and 2D map. Ideally the map shows "hotspots" which you can click and see when something worthwhile is going on, so you dont have to go through each and every unit, although this would still be possible, starting with HQ's, spotters etc down to ordinary units, except for units out of C&C (panic, too far etc), so no info can be gained from those. Unlimited movie wathcing after the game has ended obligatory reward after getting through the hardship!

- units coming back to C&C could show their earlier movies (battlestories for mates ) at that point, if necessary.

Underlying the whole system individual unit communicative abilities as has been suggested,(depending on technology, experience etc.) which affect information delays and accuracy, spotting aid for other units etc.

Well, now that much of my original hybris has worn off I see there are many unsolved problems, programming difficulties, gameplay could perhaps get too complicated, so maybe this is not worth while (the price is too high?). Still, hopefully there are at least few good ideas to add to those presented earlier.

[aka_tom_w]

Thanks for posting Kallimakhos

Thanks also for taking the time to read all the previous posts

I really liked this point:

"The solution could be called simply Iron man Immersion (bit easier than the IMSRS-FOW ) which naturally should be optional "ultimate FOW", meant only for the groggiest and the most anal gamers (which could very likely make the majority! ). This is a solution to most if not all major conserns raised before, not perfect but closest I can concieve."

I agree, of course it should be optional something like FOW for REAL men of course suggesting that playing with any "less" FOW would be for "girlymen" (use thick Germanic accent for optimal effect re: Saturday night live)

That was one helluva of lengthy post on relative spotting.

Of course it all sounds mostly good and I agree with almost all of it

-tom w

[ May 07, 2002, 11:03 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[aka_tom_w]

Kallimakhos,

you speak ALOT about the "2D" map...

may I suggest you re-read your post and edit it to include suggestions as to how and when the 2D map may "relate" or "turn into" the 3D map we all know and love. What is the relationship between your 2D map and the 3D map we see in the movie?

Are you suggesting a 'shrouded' area of grey like in Warcraft for example? If so you should be prepared for major dissent and dissagreement on that suggestion. I highly doubt BTS would ever consent to the implentation of any form or shroud of grey unknown map area.

BUT some form of RECON "could" transform a 2D "road map" into the detailed 3D map we see in CMBO.. somehow ...the trick is how... as always the Devil is in the details!

great post none the less...

-tom w

[Kallimakhos]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

Kallimakhos,

you speak ALOT about the "2D" map...

may I suggest you re-read your post and edit it to include suggestions as to how and when the 2D map may "relate" or "turn into" the 3D map we all know and love. What is the relationship between your 2D map and the 3D map we see in the movie?

Are you suggesting a 'shrouded' area of grey like in Warcraft for example? If so you should be prepared for major dissent and dissagreement on that suggestion. I highly doubt BTS would ever consent to the implentation of any form or shroud of grey unknown map area.

BUT some form of RECON "could" transform a 2D "road map" into the detailed 3D map we see in CMBO.. somehow ...the trick is how... as always the Devil is in the details!

great post none the less...

-tom w

Thanks, nice to see I'm not beating up a totally dead horse.

Good questions. First the map. What I'm thinking, the maps are exactly the same in terms of game mechanics, just like now, level 1 (3D) and level 8 (2D). The difference is that the 2D map would have lot of various information filters, both on map details and positions of one's own troops (if out of C&C, only last known position shown) and positions of enemy troops, and also random distortion of information. It would be nice also make the map more maplike, altering the graphical symbols, for more realistic feel. I can see that the whole thing would require a lot if ingenious programming, but probably something similar is going to be done anyway in the lines of unknown territory.

A very good question is how much randomness there should be in the beginning, maybe the commander on advance could some times have a just a crude map showing roads and villages (a LOT of filtering), and the map getting more detailed as more information is gathered. Defending commander would of course have much better map in the beginning, showing heights, woods etc. This information could also be bought before setup (aerial recon). A evolving map is of course not very "realistic" (your troops are not cartographers), but good for the gameplay.

This whole consept is based on Iron man rules, and so the commander shouldnt be able to use any 3D map (exept the view from his command post), because that would allow "flying" and memorizing terrain features to use later when ordering units in level 1 view.

I see that I forgot to spell it out that unit view (level 1) should be static, in the way that you can turn your hed but not change the camera position. This makes giving movement orders tricky. One problem I had in mind was this: it's night and thick fog, visibility 30 meters. Should the unit be able to move only 30 meters at a time, or more? And how to plot your movement to the other side of a house, where you can't see? Also what the player sees in level 1 and what the selected unit sees are not the same thing. So there are actually three possibilities:

1. Movements can be on plotted inside the visibility (line of sight) of the selected unit.

2. Movements can be plotted only where the player sees in level 1 view

3. No restriction on movement.

Someone with more experience with the Iron man rules could have better insights if this is really a problem and how to solve it, but to me it seems the current system could be better, ex. if you leave a house, from which you can't see outside, it is very difficult to know how far away from the house you actually end... hey, now I got it!

Well, to think of it, the solution seems quite easy, apparently too obvious to me! Make the movement line show distance just like the targeting line, and you can give easily simple order like move 100 meters to that direction, even if you don't know whats out there!

Once again, getting confused trying to write and think at the same time, Kallimakhos.

[aka_tom_w]

OK

lets revisit IronMan Rules

Franko also independantly codified these rules into this document. (see below)

(I am somewhat ashamed to admit I have never had the self discpline to adhere strictly to these rules in a CMBO game BUT if there was an OPTION to Play IronMan FOW with Relative spotting I think it would be fun for the hard core grogs out there )

found here:

http://home.arcor.de/tcmhq/Nifranko.htm

FRANKO'S TRUE COMBAT RULES

1. INTRODUCTION. The following rules are designed to maximize the realism and immersion of single-player play. Generally speaking, as the human player, you are not allowed to do use the tools

of the game interface for the purpose of doing anything your troops could not do in real life. All

rules set forth below must be construed according to that principle.

2. SELECTING UNITS. Only use the "+" or "-" keys to move from friendly unit to friendly unit. Then,

use the "tab" key. You can then only rotate in place to scan the surrounding terrain (imagine you are

where the unit is, and that you can only see what THAT unit can see..its pretty simple).

If there is friendly unit within the line of sight (LOS) of the unit you have currently selected, you

do not have to use the + and - keys. Instead, you can simply point and click on that target unit,

THEN hit the tab key. Any other way of accessing an enemy unit is forbidden.

3. VIEWING YOUR SURROUNDINGS.

A. PANNING. After accessing the unit and hitting the tab key(which orients the view of the unit

forward), you can only "look around" by using the pivot keys (1,3,7,9) on the keypad. In other words,

you can pan 360 (your guys can turn around and look where they are).

B. BUILDINGS: If your units are in a building or he unit icon (such as vehicle), blocks your view,

you can use the "8" key to click ahead only such distance which is necessary to clear the sprite.

C. ELEVATED VIEWS. Once turns begin (after setup), you may use only the lowest-level view ("1" on the

keyboard), unless the following apply:

1. If your unit occupies are a two-level building, you may use View 2 ("2" on the keyboard") from the

units location; and

2. If you are on the top floor of a church, you can use View 2 or View 3, whichever you prefer

Note: The Setup procedure may offer you further viewing options. See Rule __, Below.

4. ENEMY UNITS. You may not, under any circumstances, "click on" or "select" an enemy unit. Use the

"N" key to select targets.

5. ZOOM KEYS. You may not use the "zoon key" (the brackets), unless the following exceptions apply:

A. You may use up to Zoom 2x if you're unit you are "looking from" is platoon leader or above.

B. Your unit may use up to Zoom 4x if it has optics (e.g, an artillery observer, an AT gun, a tank).

If you really want to be anal, buttoned up tanks or tanks that suffered casualties can only use up to

zoom 4x in the direction of their turret facing, because, that's where the gunners optics are facing!

American tanks may not be able to zoom at all..we can debate that one later.

C. During Setup, under specified conditions (see below)

6. WEATHER. You must always have weather and fog set to "full"

7. SPECIAL SETUP RULES. The following setup rules apply depending on whether you are the attacker,

defender, or if the battle is a meeting engagement.

A. Attacker: During setup you may use View Level 7 ("7" on the keyboard)to aid in setup, in addition

to the views you are permitted in Rules 1, 2, or 3, above. This "attacker's map" rule represents the

"map" your troop commander would use to help prepare your troops for the assault. Whether such a map

is available should be specified in your briefing by the designer.

B. Defender: During setup you can use the map rule, above, if your signal corps has its act together.

In addition, you can freely move about the map in level 1, or view level 2 (or 3, if a church) if

that part of the map your viewing from is a multi-level building

C. Meeting Engagements. Both sides may only view using the Attacker's map rule, or from any spot in

their setup zone (only). Again, if a spot in their setup zonehas a church or building, adjust

accordingly.

D. OPTIONAL RULE: During setup you may print out a map (by taking a screen shot and printing the .bmp

file) for use during the battle. This map should be at the minimum View Level 7.

8. GAME SETTINGS. Use only "Realistic" Sized units. Always have "full terrain" on. Turn unit bases

and detailed armored hits "off". Generally speaking, use only those feature that the troops could

use. Needless to say, Fog of War is ALWAYS set to FULL!

Always interested in your input.

Frank M. Radoslovich

[ May 08, 2002, 02:55 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[aka_tom_w]

"This whole concept is based on IronMan rules, and so the commander shouldnt be able to use any 3D map (exept the view from his command post), because that would allow "flying" and memorizing terrain features to use later when ordering units in level 1 view."

The REALLY REALLY tricky part about all this is "What does the Player actually see??"

As it is now the CMBO game is played on a 3D map in total 3D space and both players see all things in "God view" 3D technicolor, both while plotting the move and while the movie plays back.

OK for CM II lets assume for the moment they will stick with the same format (i.e. the plot orders phase and then the 1 minute movie combat resolution phase, everyone here seems mostly comfortable with that format) then how do you make the relationship between the 2D road map you get to see when you are setting up before the battle and the FULL blown 3D environment map you see in the movie where your units are fighting and moving?

For relative spotting and terrain FOW and to eliminate the concerns with regard to the "borg Like" behaviour of units, it would seem some things (intel & info ) must be kept from the player, and this is either control of units or information about the map and the battle and whats actually happening out there.

(I think I have said that a few times). One way to do this is with the 2D road map, BUT we must be very careful not to suggest we are trying to make this like another board game like Squad Leader, (Clearly, BTS would never let that happen ) NO, what we want is EXACTLY the opposite with Relative Spotting, realistic immersion in the battlefield experience and terrain Fog Of War. (OK, I would hope we would all want it to be FUN to play as well, however from this thread we can see there are many many different ideas of what "Fun to Play" means!) I think we have to be careful here because when this has come up in the past many folks have loudly stated they did not want to end up playing a game called "Recon Mission", something to the effect... "HEY! this is not Recon Mission, its Combat Mission!" I for one would like to see MUCH more emphasis on Recon prior to the battle, this would mostly be from for solitar play against the AI on defense as the AI i patient and won't care how long your recon missions take.

So back to the point, the question then becomes what does the Player see in the 1 minute movie play back (from WHAT perspective) and what does the Player see during the orders plotting phase. Franco's list of IronMan True Combat rules suggests a quideline for what the player sees during the orders phase, but what about the Movie playback phase and what about how to include the 2D road map? Surely I think we can all agree we don't want to see combat resolution during the one minute movie play out with ugly icons on a flat ugly 2d road map!

-tom w

[ May 08, 2002, 11:50 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[Kallimakhos]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

OK

lets revisit IronMan Rules

Franco also independantly codified these rules into this document. (see below)

(I am somewhat ashamed to admit I have never had the self discpline to adhere strictly to these rules in a CMBO game BUT if there was an OPTION to Play IronMan FOW with Relative spotting I think it would be fun for the hard core grogs out there )

Thanks for reposting the Iron man rules, a good memory refresher. I share your sentiments, it's now too much self control also for me but I hope there will be some kind of hardcoded option for this type of play in the future versions of CM.

If not anything else, I believe this thread has presented many good ideas for this type of game.

[Kallimakhos]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

So back to the point, the question then becomes what does the Player see in the 1 minute movie play back (from WHAT perspective) and what does the Player see during the orders plotting phase. Franco's list of IronMan True Combat rules suggests a quideline for what the player sees during the orders phase, but what about the Movie playback phase and what about how to include the 2D road map? Surely I think we can all agree we don't want to see combat resolution during the one minute movie play out with ugly icons on a flat ugly 2d road map!

-tom w

I agree, I wouldn't mind seeing lot more recon elements implemented in the game.

How much I try, i can not see other way around the combined effect of Borg spotting and God's view than to give up level 4 both during movie watching and giving orders, and there is a heavy cost, ex. using minor elevations for cover during longer movements besides some of the fun. But it is also fun to know you don't know everything, and at squad level, in the middle of the incomprehenciple chaos around you, you soon develop a new kind of relationship for your pixelmen. Also knowing that good communication lines would really make a difference would have a profound effect on how one manages his troops, and this would make the game tactically and strategically even more interesting.

Now let's see how one certain player watches his movies, and that would be me, cause I can't lurk behind other players shoulders . There would be of course be as many styles as there are players. Usually first I whatch the movie 1-3 times on level 4, depending on the map size, to get overall picture of what is happening. Then, because I'm sucker for immersive graphics, I run aboard a vehicle along a road on level 1 locked to the unit, go along a infantry assault against enemy positions, whatch how my tank creeps to the hill and engages, smokes one enemy before getting smoked etc. This can go on for a long long time, depending on my mood.

So for me the biggest thrill in 3D graphics is on level 1 locked on unit, which gives the feeling of immersion, other modes (mainly level 4) are more for the intellectual "chess game" purposes, seeing what is happening and how I can counteract. Conclusion? If I would see the generel development of the battle only on the 2D map, but still see the hot spot and other movies in immersive first person 3D graphics, personally I wouldn't feel like losing lot of the fun I'm used to, and this would be compensated in other areas. But I'm sure many players would feel otherwise.

[aka_tom_w]

sorry for the bump

I know this is an old thread

well you know, I was just wondering want Extreme FOW in CMBB will be like????

(since is does not show up well in pretty screen shots AND they are stunning!, I thought I would ask about Extreme FOW in CMBB again?)

So I bumped this one, please excuse the interuption.

thanks

-tom w

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Big Time Software:

If so we could easily make CM play so that you deploy your troops (which CM buys for you) by simply clicking down the HQs at the next level lower than your own (i.e. if you are the Major, you can only click on the Company HQs). CM would then deploy all the rest of the units without you even seeing them. Yup, you wouldn't see anything except what was around your HQ unit, which would be set up and unmovable (for the most part) after the Setup Phase. Then the game would start. You would issue a couple of vauge orders to your next lower HQs and then sit back and wait. From Turn 1 on all friendly units would disappear from the map. Every so often a Spotted icon would appear where MAYBE one of your directly subordinated HQ was. At this point in time you might get back some meaningful information from the HQ, or perhpas not. Depending on if the HQ is in radio contact or not, you could issue orders to the HQ along the vauge lines of Turn 1. You will have no idea what that HQ does with them until the next time he resurfaces. If there is no radio contact, runners would be necessary and that means instant communication would be impossible, thus making that Spotted icon appear less frequently and even more prone to error. After the shooting would start you might have a rough idea about where and the nature of the shooting. But until one of those ghost icons popped up, you wouldn't know much more than that. And even when that does happen, you would only get back snipts of text about what was going on and you could still only issue a few vauge orders.

Gee... DAMN does that sound like fun! Whoopie Cripes, we wouldn't even need to program in anything except some sort of ZORK like text adventure script engine and a few generalized combat resolution equations.

As someone who has served in the company headquarters of a reserve Infantry company, I would say that Steve makes sound much more fun that it really is, if you can believe that. In the open terrain in which our company operates, I usually don't even see anyone, and sometimes will go through an entire exercise without hearing any shooting. Granted, I have only been on a handful of exercises as part of the company headquarters element, I nonetheless can attest to the fact that the company OC usually checks his map and leaves things to the platoon commanders. The main role of company headquarters is to stay in place, liase with battalion HQ, make sure that the CQMS is operating and providing the company with rations and bullets, dealing with POWs, etc.

Such a game would be perfectly simulated by a chat room, where you listen to the CSM and the OC telling war stories, getting the odd meteorological report on the radio, doing your radio or line checks every hour, and having the OC move periodically to the CQMS, RQMS, or battalion HQ for an Orders Group.

[James Crowley]

Tom W

I agree, it would be nice to get an idea of what extreme FoW entails; even if only a brief outline.

However, given the comments accompanying the recent 'bone', it seems fairly unlikely that there will be much in the way of explanations about anything, at least for the time being.

Oh well, all in good time I suppose.

[Bruno Weiss]

Now here's something. I thought that once an FO had targeted that if he thereafter moved the incoming fire would stop "when" he moved. Maybe I'm not remembering this right but I just had an instance where a German 120mm FO had re-targeted with a 14 second delay and seven rounds left at the beginning of the turn. He was on the second floor of a large building taking incoming fire. Just prior to the 14 seconds passing, he decides to up and bolt out of the building in a safe direction. Now, the whole time he's high tailing it the 120's start falling right on target. His LOS to the target was held during the run out of the building "luckily" I suppose. So I guess I remembered wrong about arty fire stopping if an FO moves?

[Michael Emrys]

I'm confused about this too, Bruno. In my early games I noticed that the countdown paused while the FO was moving and took that to be the norm. But lately I noticed a couple of times when I had the FO in motion the countdown continued. So I dunno...

Michael

[aka_tom_w]

this is topic is fashionable once again

-tom w

[Bruceov]

The proiblem with the solution to borg spotting is this: In real life the cut off platoon would probably act intelligently aiding the overall effort. With relative spotting a lot depernds on the q

[Bruceov]

I really hope someone reacts to this. In real life the cut off platoons fate is subject to the skill of the non-commisioned officer in command and the courage of the men. This person will probably direct the platoon to take appropriate action. At the critical moment the squad may act heroicly or they may rout. Unless the ai was a lot better than it is now the player is not going to get the benefit of the occasion when the squad acts intelligently or heroically.

[Bruceov]

Sorry about the first post, it was unintentional

[Bruceov]

In other words: the AI is not intelligent enough to effectuate relative spotting and have an enjoyable game.