Can we have these back please?

[panzermartin]

For the Normandy title..is there a chance to reintroduce:

-Troops surrendering.

-Routed troops running backwards to safe area, not just disappearing with a (!). I would understand this in abstracted CMx1 but disappearing soldiers in 1:1 simulation isnt up to the realism of the rest of the game.

-Kill list. No replay and no kill list dont help to understand what worked and what not in RT mode.

-Detailed armor hits texts. Works as a quick damage report.

-Flags for capture objectives. Call me nostalgic but I miss this "wargame" touch. It also made

things clearer on who has what.

Thanks!

[Big Poppa Pump]

Agree with all but the flags. Not against it but perhaps not as nostalgic.

Small units surrendering, IMO, ws well done in CMx1.

I would also like to see routed troops running off the field or at least a scalable "!" (can this be modded?) In CMx1 routed troops provided information to potential weak spots. As it stands I'm never able to notice any enemy routing until reviewing thee battle summary. Also a marker as to where enemy troops routed would be nice for after action review.

Also would add hand to hand combat to the list. For me no fancy graphics are necessary.

[SoopSandwich]

I would definitely like to see a kill list showing which squads / vehicles killed what.

[Paper Tiger]

-Routed troops running backwards to safe area, not just disappearing with a (!). I would understand this in abstracted CMx1 but disappearing soldiers in 1:1 simulation isnt up to the realism of the rest of the game.

This has come up before and the reasons for not having this feature are quite simple. You would be introducing YET another level of split squad behaviour. And hell, you would potentially have hundreds of individual units doing this in a mission, and the TAC AI would then have to 'control' these fleeing troops in a realistic manner eating up CPU cycles. Or you can have it abstracted like the way it is now. I'd like to keep it simple thank you.

The Kill List will make a reappearance at some point in the future. My guess would be for CMx2 WW2 but we'll have to wait and see. I'd really like this feature too.

Flags? This would reduce some of the uncertainty of who controls what objective. Personally I prefer it that way but I can understand other player's frustration with it. Perhaps if this feature were ever to be considered, it would best be a feature for the lower difficulty levels of play and not Elite or Iron.

[Lanzfeld]

Hand to hand combat is a must. This game needs it. I did a small trial yesterday. I had a blue squad fire off all its ammo and nades and a red squad did the same (playing hotseat against self). Then I had the two squads walk down the road hand-in-hand without so much as an insult to the other (enemy) squad. Surreal......and wrong!

[Vinnart]

I agree with all of the above. I too prefer, and miss many of the "wargame" aspects from Cmx1. that made things clear. Cmx1 was as simple as a board game to follow, but with the underlying complexity the computer brings. In my opinion taking too much of a “game” out of game takes some of the simplistic beauty out of it. For example I also liked knowing for sure whether my troops were in a cover terrain or not.

Another thing I would like is a more familiar camera control for RTS control using the mouse wheel, as opposed to the left and right mouse buttons. The Mouse wheel should control elevation, and pressing the mouse wheel button allows the camera to rotate.

I came up with what I feel is the quintessential command and control layout for a RTS version of Combat Mission. Here is the link to it with illustrations:

http://www.suddenstrike.com/index.php?uid=forum_message_list&uid_forum_topic=8407880&uid_forum_section=38202&offset=0&total=15

[Battlefront.com]

In short... pretty much "Yes" to everything stated above. I think I've touched on each one individually over the past many months, but it's easy for that info to get lost here.

One thing we are not going to do is reintroduce Flags. They simply don't fit CMx2 as far as we're concerned. The behavior, however, is in there already since you can assign spots that have to be Occupied. Unlike the generic Flags the area can be as large, or as small, as the scenario designer wishes it to be.

Steve

[Lee]

Another vote for detailed armor hit text. You've just got to love seeing that text saying that a round has shattered on your Tiger's armor! Or that spalling has been let loose in an enemy tank from your last hit. Super fun!

[panzermartin]

Thanks Steve, I didnt remember all these had been mentioned. About the Flags, I actually think of them as a visual cue and not determining the objective area as in CMx1. It was cool seeing them changing hands. The current system is better for sure but it would be nice to have a visual indication of who has the possesion of the objectives. Anyway, I can live without them..

[Pvt. Ryan]

We will also need troops riding on tanks for WWII.

[thelmia]

Cool. I miss unit kill stats. That was a great learning tool for figuring out what actually worked best. Since we can't always see directly what is killing the enemy because of fog of war it can be hard to piece together what actually happened. I still don't have a good idea for how effective snipers are, for instance.

[Lanzfeld]

-Routed troops running backwards to safe area, not just disappearing with a (!). I would understand this in abstracted CMx1 but disappearing soldiers in 1:1 simulation isnt up to the realism of the rest of the game.

This has come up before and the reasons for not having this feature are quite simple. You would be introducing YET another level of split squad behaviour. And hell, you would potentially have hundreds of individual units doing this in a mission, and the TAC AI would then have to 'control' these fleeing troops in a realistic manner eating up CPU cycles. Or you can have it abstracted like the way it is now. I'd like to keep it simple thank you.

I do understand why they replaced routed troops and prisoners with the CPU friendly "!" symbol instead...but I will miss them.

Reminds me of two stories from CM centered around the prisoners feature.

The first is the time my PBEM opponent had a group of about 25 of my guys as prisoners marching them to the back of his side of the bocage map. He marched them right into my secret flanking squad which liberated all of them!

The second story is a tragic insight into the realities of war...but an "OMG!!!" moment in CM. I was marching my captured German prisoners to my "holding house" at the back of the map. I had about 6 or 7 captued German squads guarded by a squad of mine with "low" ammo. I had everybody neatly lined up in single file going down a road when an freak nebleweffer (SP) landed square in the middle of everyone! Only 1 German squad lived...routed forever I am sure.

I know CMx2 is not a prisoner simulation but it sure was a cool little side feature of CMxx1.

[MeatEtr]

Good to hear kill lists and armor hit text will be addressed. These are sorely missed from the CMx1 series.

[Tactical Wargamer]

WeGo or at least variable speed real time..........in MP games would be real nice!

[Big Poppa Pump]

Been brought up previously but I do not know if a definative answer was given. I'd like to see a return of covered armor arcs.