Infantry

[El Gato]

Comparisons have been made to Close Combat. Can the developers describe how the infantry in TOW2 behave similarly or differently to CC. One thing that is CC did well is to manage the squad as a unit, like you would a tank. Although the micro managing abilities in TOW are nice, it can be somewhat tedious to have to get all the down to the individual infantryman to accomplish tasks that a commander wouldn't normanlly have to do. Such as ammo management, unit cohesion at the squad level, unit reaction to external influences. Most of my experience with the game comes from TOW1, and managing the infantry was a source of frustration for me.

Since the comparison has been made between the two games, then the expectation gets set that the games might be similar, I thought it would be good to address that comparison (emphasis on infantry).

El Gato

[Sybma]

Double click on the leader of a squad and your commands are adressed to the squad in total like all CC versions.

[Archmoco]

Double click on the leader of a squad and your commands are adressed to the squad in total like all CC versions.

I dont know, I like control of single soldiers, on mission set up you can re-group you men into different teams and they can be pulled and pushed into anti-tank guns. You can custom manage what weapons they pick up from the battlefield, I would hate to lose this feature, it can be a bit troublesome in large battles, maybe a 1/4 speed would be handy for those really intense times when there are 3 or 4 battles that need attention.......Anyway surely Kursk will be more about armour?

[WillyPete2171]

Comparisons have been made to Close Combat. Can the developers describe how the infantry in TOW2 behave similarly or differently to CC. One thing that is CC did well is to manage the squad as a unit, like you would a tank. Although the micro managing abilities in TOW are nice, it can be somewhat tedious to have to get all the down to the individual infantryman to accomplish tasks that a commander wouldn't normanlly have to do. Such as ammo management, unit cohesion at the squad level, unit reaction to external influences. Most of my experience with the game comes from TOW1, and managing the infantry was a source of frustration for me.

Since the comparison has been made between the two games, then the expectation gets set that the games might be similar, I thought it would be good to address that comparison (emphasis on infantry).

El Gato

I think the same as you. I hope we will be able to control "squads" as it can be very tidious to control a single man. 6-12 men squads would be perfect.

To be honest I really couldnt get into the other Theatre games. The graphics seem to be a little too weak and the gameplay a little slow. ToWKursk might be the answer to our prayers. The close combat series had a lot going for it, its a smae Atomic closed, because those game were ahead fo their time. In essence ToWKursk could be the modern Close Combat.

[El Gato]

I'm not exactly for having micro managing features removed. I just want to have my infantry squads doing their jobs without me having manage every aspect of every soldier to complete a mission.

A good example from TOW1 was you have a bazooka man who runs out of rockets, the man 10 feet to his left has a satchel with 5 more rockets, yet the two will never interact to exchange the needed ammo to the bazooka man. I have to make one of them move close to the other, then look through their bags, tell one to give the rockets to the other, say yes its 'ok', now go back to the bazooka man to tell him to start firing again. All the while I have Panthers rolling down on the position. Even slowing it down to 1/4 speed won't make that any less tedious.

I just think that some of these functions need to be modeled and not left up to the commander to handle in the middle of a battle.

[WillyPete2171]

I'm not exactly for having micro managing features removed. I just want to have my infantry squads doing their jobs without me having manage every aspect of every soldier to complete a mission.

A good example from TOW1 was you have a bazooka man who runs out of rockets, the man 10 feet to his left has a satchel with 5 more rockets, yet the two will never interact to exchange the needed ammo to the bazooka man. I have to make one of them move close to the other, then look through their bags, tell one to give the rockets to the other, say yes its 'ok', now go back to the bazooka man to tell him to start firing again. All the while I have Panthers rolling down on the position. Even slowing it down to 1/4 speed won't make that any less tedious.

I just think that some of these functions need to be modeled and not left up to the commander to handle in the middle of a battle.

we are thinking the same. I feel at this point the weakest link, as far as game mechanics, is the infantry. I even have a good idea on how to handle it & I hope the game designers are listening.

Besdies better AI and pathing, there should be an option to put infantry into a "squad mode." just like how infantry enter a vehcile or building, they can enter a mode similiar to Close Combat where all 10-12 squad members move as one entity/unit. As of now, they stray from each other and seem to "float" around the screen. Think of "squad mode" like entering an invisible vehicle to keep them together, and if you wanted to split them up or control each individual soldier then you have the option to let them "exit" or "bail out" of squad mode.

Not only would this make it easier to control infantry as a whole, but you would be able to control more of them andf have larger operations since you would be controling full squads instead of each individual soldier.

[Knokke]

I really don't understand the problem you have with this "squad mode". As it is now, the game has the same way of handling squads like in Close Combat (double click on one of the squad members, and the whole squad will be selected and ready to follow your orders). Only there is the possibility that was lacking from CC, to give specific orders to individuals in the squad (you can order some of the soldiers to give supporting fire while some others are ordered to flank an enemy squad for example).

If you don't like to micromanage every single soldier, just give a move/assault/ambush/fire order to the squad as a whole. The AI will take care of the "liitle details" like scavenging weapons and ammo from dead bodies.

The only grief I could have about infantry, is the high rate of casualties due to friendly fire (it seems that once a soldier has started it's "shooting sequence", he won't stop even if a squad mate moves in front of him). This is especially annoying when some members of the squad are moving forward to assault an ennemy position, and one of their mates decided to throw a grenade at the same time.

[El Gato]

I confess that my experience with the game stopped at TOW1, and my reason for bringing this up was to see if things were different in TOW2.

Knokke, from your post I gather that the "little details" are being handled by the AI in TOW2, because this was not the case in TOW1.

It feels like to me that there could be more work done in terms how a squade works/moves/fights as a unit, compared to as a group of individuals.

[WillyPete2171]

I really don't understand the problem you have with this "squad mode". As it is now, the game has the same way of handling squads like in Close Combat (double click on one of the squad members, and the whole squad will be selected and ready to follow your orders). Only there is the possibility that was lacking from CC, to give specific orders to individuals in the squad (you can order some of the soldiers to give supporting fire while some others are ordered to flank an enemy squad for example).

If you don't like to micromanage every single soldier, just give a move/assault/ambush/fire order to the squad as a whole. The AI will take care of the "liitle details" like scavenging weapons and ammo from dead bodies.

The only grief I could have about infantry, is the high rate of casualties due to friendly fire (it seems that once a soldier has started it's "shooting sequence", he won't stop even if a squad mate moves in front of him). This is especially annoying when some members of the squad are moving forward to assault an ennemy position, and one of their mates decided to throw a grenade at the same time.

the issue is that the system is sloppy. Id rather have the game focus more on the squad instead of each individual soldier. The scale of the game doesnt really need for control of each soldier. They seem to float around instead of staying together in a tighter formation, and they seem to forget their orders, which calls for even more micromanagement. Im simply asking for a tighter squad system with better AI and pathing, one click to bring up the whole squad and then issue orders to them.

infantry survivability is another issue. I really havent noticed friendly fire though. What I have noticed is long range and accurate enemy fire that takes out all infantry before you can bring them up and close with the enemy.

[WillyPete2171]

I confess that my experience with the game stopped at TOW1, and my reason for bringing this up was to see if things were different in TOW2.

Knokke, from your post I gather that the "little details" are being handled by the AI in TOW2, because this was not the case in TOW1.

It feels like to me that there could be more work done in terms how a squade works/moves/fights as a unit, compared to as a group of individuals.

in regards to infantry, in my opinion the game has improved from TOW1, but infantry gameplay still needs work. its still focused on the individual soldier as if it were a tank or another vehicle. The scale of the game makes control of an individual soldier tidious. Of course you can double click to gain control of the full squad, but like I wrote in my other post, the currrent squad system is sloppy. They dont stay in formation together, ect. The game still treats infantry as a group of individuals instead of cohesive squads...

But dont take my psot as putting the game down, because this is my favorite war game. Ive played the Kursk demo and think its great. Infantry AI has improved a little, but as far as the demo is concerned its still the same as ToW2Africa

[El Gato]

I don't want to bring the game down either, I feel that if these issues with the Infantry were resolved, this game could surpass the popularity that Close Combat enjoyed. I would like to hear from the developers about how they feel about these concerns, if there are any plans address them, ect...?

[sand digger]

Anyone who thinks that the infantry was perfect in the CM series is having themself on, my conclusion is the it must be very difficult and time consuming to model infantry in the broad sense realistically. Then you have arguments over what is 'realistic'.

For example, there is a widely held belief that an infantry attack with only light organic support over open ground against a similarly equipped enemy is suicidal. My extensive reading of WW2 reports suggests that is not necessarily so, but that is apparently a minority view.

In summary, IMHO games in general over estimate infantry casualties and unrealisticly portray infantry behaviour in many scenarios.

[Arzok]

We use infantry soldiers like heros.

So the casualties are heavy...

I think that TOW is very realist from this point of view.

In the reality, probably that 90% of our orders will not be followed because they are too sucidals.

[Stoppelhopser]

I agree, Arzok.

However there are game mechanics, in general and not only specific to the TOW series that also make for higher casualties.

One is terrain. Its simply not detailed enough yet. In reality a single infantryman can find much more cover than even the most detailed game terrain as of now can offer. And he can move into buildings, cellars etc.

Then I think that defending AI generally spoken hits too often at longer ranges and attacking AI doesn't go for cover as fast as in real life. A great uncle of mine once said that after the first mortar hit in the vicinity his whole old Zug (platoon) lay down to the last man in half a second and the next time even faster

Another is mission structure.

Here, specifically in TOW, you are asked to attack with numerically inferior troops and often without adequate artillery support a defender with favourable terrain.

I would bypass or outflank a strong position with a field of view of two Kilometers of flat terrain if I had the luxury to do so. Then again, sadly in the real ww2 sometimes infantry assaults were made under such circumstances. And they were cruelly costly of course.

And you are right, many times soldiers which had found good cover would not listen to our dilettantic urges to die in the open ...

Perhaps in another ten years with even more processing power we will have a believeable infantry AI. But its far easier to make graphics enhancements of course.

[JayA55]

I must say I'm a bit disappointed to hear that the infantry combat hasn't improved. 1C must understand who this game is being marketed to and listen to their views. The demographic for this game wants realism. For them not to correct this issue on this new release is not a good sign, the game has a lot of potential but Ill have to wait to see if they fix this in an update. I hope they do because the rest of the game seems superb. Certainly a job well done despite the omission, but plz listen to your audience on this key issue in order to drive sells. Thx

[Tartari]

I must say I'm a bit disappointed to hear that the infantry combat hasn't improved. 1C must understand who this game is being marketed to and listen to their views. The demographic for this game wants realism. For them not to correct this issue on this new release is not a good sign, the game has a lot of potential but Ill have to wait to see if they fix this in an update. I hope they do because the rest of the game seems superb. Certainly a job well done despite the omission, but plz listen to your audience on this key issue in order to drive sells. Thx

ToW1 infantry was good enough, (if you took the time to learn how to really handle it) but difficult to play without many pausing. Now, with ToW2 engine improvements, infantry is much more easier and funny to play. IMO, ToW2 is now the best WWII infantry simulator in the world at the platoon scale at the moment. Just take the time to master it.

[HARI SELDON]

ToW1 infantry was good enough, (if you took the time to learn how to really handle it) but difficult to play without many pausing. Now, with ToW2 engine improvements, infantry is much more easier and funny to play. IMO, ToW2 is now the best WWII infantry simulator in the world at the platoon scale at the moment. Just take the time to master it.

Tartari:

Could you please provide details as to why you believe that this is the premier WWII infantry simulator in the world at platoon scale. Maybe an "infantry tutorial" may convince us all that your opinion has merit. I for one, would be very pleased to be convinced of your opinion.

[Tartari]

Hari,

i did' nt write "perfect", I wrote "best" IMO, because I don't know any other realistic WWII tactic game ( CMx1 and Close Combat are too much abstracted to be called "simulators" at least at section/platoon level). CM: N will maybe be another good one and perhaps the "best".

There are still flaws though: one is that "historical" values are used for small arms ranges and not "practical" ones (that was fixed by the Small Arms Mod for ToW1), another one is that excessive friendly fire is still difficult to avoid even when properly using combat formations.

As for an infantry tutorial, I'd be very glad to make one if I have the time.

[JayA55]

ToW1 infantry was good enough, (if you took the time to learn how to really handle it) but difficult to play without many pausing. Now, with ToW2 engine improvements, infantry is much more easier and funny to play. IMO, ToW2 is now the best WWII infantry simulator in the world at the platoon scale at the moment. Just take the time to master it.

I'm referring to the gameplay/simulation aspect, so it's not about mastering it. Even if I was a pro at it that still doesn't hide the fact that infantry is too accurate among other pitfalls. Right now TOW 2 just doesn't properly simulate infantry combat.

[WillyPete2171]

I must say I'm a bit disappointed to hear that the infantry combat hasn't improved. 1C must understand who this game is being marketed to and listen to their views. The demographic for this game wants realism. For them not to correct this issue on this new release is not a good sign, the game has a lot of potential but Ill have to wait to see if they fix this in an update. I hope they do because the rest of the game seems superb. Certainly a job well done despite the omission, but plz listen to your audience on this key issue in order to drive sells. Thx

I feel that same as you. They are very close in having an outstanding game, but are missing something. I think if they decided to rework the game engine and make a modern version of Close Combat, then they would have a real winner. Think about it, there is still a very large and active Close Combat community for a game that came out over 12 years ago...

[Tartari]

I'm referring to the gameplay/simulation aspect, so it's not about mastering it. Even if I was a pro at it that still doesn't hide the fact that infantry is too accurate among other pitfalls. Right now TOW 2 just doesn't properly simulate infantry combat.

Do you know a better 1:1 WWII tactical game, a "realistic" one of course? I'd be glad to test it.

[Broadsword]

The Darkest Hour mod for Red Orchestra is about as good as it gets for real-time tactical combat on individual-squad-platoon level. But it's MP only. Still, the experience of playing it within a realism clan on Steam (i.e. the 29th ID) is worlds beyond any other gaming experience. It's the only WWII shooter I'm playing anymore.

[sand digger]

The gross overestimation of infantry casualties is quite easily verified, just look at how long your average infantryman lasts in a game and then compare that with actual WW2 infantry casualties over the same time span.

As for the 'its because you have not learnt properly' comments, what elitist nonsense.

[Tartari]

Sand Digger,

did'nt want to irritate you...

As for real casualties, depends on the battle, the Berlin battle was very bloody for example...

I think that Arzock was in the right:

We use infantry soldiers like heros.

So the casualties are heavy...

I think that TOW is very realist from this point of view.

In the reality, probably that 90% of our orders will not be followed because they are too sucidals.

[Arzok]

In real life, our soldiers will probably kill us as we are not very good officers