It happened again! What? I don't know...

[c3k]

Gents,

I refer you to this thread: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=74868

I'm playing the USMC:Rahadnak Valley scenario which came with CM:Marines. (Note: it is a very good scenario. Thank you to the designer, George McEwan, and the playtesters noted in the briefing!)

This scenario takes place over segmented terrain on a map measuring approximately 1600x1200 meters. 1.92 MILLION square meters. Or the easier 1.92 square kilometers. Or, 3/4's of a square mile. It's large-ish. Oh, and very well done!

As Blue, my starting force contains 38 units. If I break my squads down into thirds, I could start with 56 autonomous units. Reinforcements bring it up to 74 individual units.

Okay, 74 units, nearly 2 square kilometers; cool. However, "stuff" keeps happening that I don't find out about!

Example: I placed a squad in an overwatch position. As they moved, I replayed the turn. They got there fine. I never saw a new enemy contact. I audited the squad's condition for the next turn or two. It never changed. Several turns later, I noticed a casualty had occurred. When? I don't know. He had already been treated and disappeared.

In this game I play the squad leader. (And other roles of course.) It it a major burden to expect players to note the condition of 74 units at the start and finish of every turn. And that's just one company of infantry and their lift.

I would think having the unit icon flash for a minute or so whenever the unit takes a casualty would be a huge improvement in playability.

Light up the icon with a flashing red cross. Make it yellow if that's the what the hit caused: a yellow casualty. Put a flashing exclamation mark over the icon if they get suppressed due to incoming fire. Make it yellow, or green, or red, whatever color the suppression meter shows. Place a knife or a bullet, in red or yellow, next to the icon if the unit autonomously engages the enemy.

Right now, if a unit advances, takes a casualty, fires on the enemy, and then goes to ground, I may not know about it.

If I were the squad leader, I would know about it! I'd guess the platoon leader would find out pretty soon; as would the company CO. Since this game simulates all those command levels, why can't we get a system to notify the player?

And for those who don't want it, make it an optional toggle.

Thoughts?

Thanks,

Ken

[Elmar Bijlsma]

Since this game simulates all those command levels, why can't we get a system to notify the player?

I do not think CMSF simulates any command level at all. It simulates the battles. Some command gets modelled, but as a means to and end. I'm pretty sure Steve has said something along those lines.

And for those who don't want it, make it an optional toggle.

Ah, but is that simple? I'm not opposed to implementation of this because I am a meanie. Time spend on this feature will take time away from some other feature. If you get this, I don't get better QBs. And I happen to think this is a fairly irrelevant feature, at least for me. So a single dude in some far off corner of the battlefield gets shot and you don't get to hear about it. Is this important? Not really.

If troops are dying by the platoon load, yeah, that'd be bad. But then again, if that can happen unnoticed then you are a poor commander, and deserve what you land yourself in, and no amount of reporting will help you.

95% of the battles I play, I get along just fine without unit X telling me it got wiped out. In the 5% of cases that don't go well I blame myself, not the in-game reporting of casualties. I pay attention to the wrong battle, I get deservedly punished for it.

Besides that, I've never seen a game with reporting system I was happy with. I got told too much or told too little. Even systems where you could de-select certain message types failed to give me what I want when I wanted it. I'm far better at retrieving useful information from a game then any system Charles could ever put together.

[Chainsaw]

Besides that, I've never seen a game with reporting system I was happy with. I got told too much or told too little. Even systems where you could de-select certain message types failed to give me what I want when I wanted it. I'm far better at retrieving useful information from a game then any system Charles could ever put together.

Have you tried Steelbeasts Pro PE ?

The info you get about what happens to your units under your command is good enough, there is a text box down left and a squelsh sound when something happend. a time stamp and message of what happend like:

00:30 11A have reached CP3

00:35 11A we are under fire

etc etc. works like a charm, if you yourself are in contact you hear something is happening, when you got that spare second you browse thrue the reports to se what happend to who.

Its a good solution for what are being discussed here.

/Thomas

[c3k]

Of course a priority system has to be in place for improvement. And, in actuality, I agree with you that if the choice is a better icon system or a better QB generator, the QB generator would win. However, I do not know what BF.C's timeframe is, nor do I know how much more they are willing to improve this system. I throw these ideas out on the forum to get BF.C's attention and to let them see whether it is just one guy's ideal or if it's something a lot of other customers would enjoy. That support may make a difference in how BF.C prioritizes their resources.

Regards,

Ken

[Apocal]

This is why I rarely play battles above the company level. Too much stuff happening and you can't give lower-level fights the attention they deserve. At least not RT, which I play.

[Chainsaw]

I play WEGO and still think Company is max a player should be given, plus support units ofcourse, but the core should max be company size. its the perfect size for me atleast.