Wish List

[hank]

I skimmed back and didn't see these suggestions (not saying they aren't there, but I didn't see them with my old eyes):

1 - I would like to see more descriptive equipment symbols in the Equipment window to the side. It would be a tremendous improvement to me if these symbols were silhouettes of the actual equipment. Panther silhouette for a MkV Panzer, Sherman Tank for an M4, etc. ... instead of a truck for a tank. ?? (... and sure, I can read the words but graphics really add to immersion IMHO) Why use a truck symbol for an armored equipment type? The graphics would probably have to be a little larger than they are now which may prevent much detail but at least the same type symbol that is displayed on the counter could be used. From an outsider, it seems to be a fairly simple change.

2 - The ability to kick a unit in the butt for not obeying orders after 2 or 3 attempts. I've had units sit in rest mode with enemy combatants moving by its flank. I tried moving them away repeatedly but sometimes they just "rested", time after time after time. Other units would move but one or two wouldn't.

3 - Future plans to add some Eastern Front Battles like: portions of the kursk battle (south and north separate); Kharkov; Smolensk; etc.

I've had the game for over a year. I didn't play it for quite a while because my KP/BiN/PzC games were taking all my time. Now I'm playing HttR more and find it to be a great game. I know with BiN, we just had a patch release and it had many enhancements. I hope HttR developers do the same.

My $0.02

Hank

[JeF]

hank,

Point #1 is already on Panther ToDo list, AFAIK. I know that it is not included into the next game. Hopefully, your welcome reminder will prompt Dave to check that the priority of this specific point did not suddenly drop to an unacceptable value.

BTW, there are already two patches available. Did you try them ?
Check : http://www.matrixgames.com/support/downloads.asp

Cheers,

JeF.

[hank]

Thanks

I think I'm running 2.286. ... I checked a few weeks ago and I think what I has was the latest.

For me, with strategy games like these, graphics mean a lot. PzCampaigns and BiN are very abstract yet you can get a great feel for the equipment and weaponry through the pics. ... and the encyclopedia that comes with SPWaW is real interesting.


regards

Hank

[iaidoka]

Hank

I am a real newbie to wargaming but bought HTTR a few months ago and have some difficulty learning all the military symbols and lingo etc. Anyway, I also bought the strategy guide and that helps tremendously if you are thinking of buying it.

Re wishlist, I would like (I think El Savior might have added this as well) the ability to plan a scenario within the game over the relevant map and use coloured 'pens' etc in devising how to tackle each scenario. Pen and paper just doesn't cut it unfortunately.

[Arjuna]

iaidoka,

I take it that the "planning graphic overlays" you are talking about are non-interactive - ie just for your appreciation/reminder and not to actually transmit orders?

[iaidoka]

Arjuna,

Thanks for the reply - yes, I would like a non-interactive 'planning tool' to essentiallyreplace what people might scribble with pen and paper when planning what to do in a scenario. For example, using Tutorial 1, rather than using pen and paper to draw a rough map of the area and to decide how to take the various bridges, destroy the other German forces, hold the DZ etc etc, you could do this on the computer screen using different coloured 'pens' to plan out your attack, save that 'bit of paper' for reference and then play the scenario.

BTW - its a great game that I really enjoy playing - and I seriously have no experience of wargaming prior to HTTR (apart from FPS games, which aren't really Wargaming[:)]).

Hope this makes sense.

[Mark Weston]

I'd just like to second this request. It would be a great tool for making on-map notations for planning, making notes, and would be particularly useful as the system moves towards team-play (though I realise that's some way in the future).

On the other hand, I realise this is a pretty high-cost request.

[Rubber Sword]

Hi, am still playing and enjoying this great game.
One thing that has been bugging me recently has to do with "mopping-up". After I've advanced there will usually be a small unit of the enemy. Too small to send a company after really, but if I leave them alone they tend to kick my butt later on. So I have to send a company after them. My wish would be able to click on the offending unit and tell my lads to "Go get'em". Instead I find myself wasting my time leading my unit on a wierd dance across the countryside following the troublesome enemy unit.
Maybe a "chase enemy" order button?
cheers
Rubber Sword

[RoyalOak]

Hi,
Just discovered this wonderful game. Really a thrilling experience : I think i've not played a game so fun and innovative since Close Combat II.
Here is my wish list :
- When issuing a defense order, i'd like to see units use towns and woods to provide cover. As it stands now, it's very difficult to place the defend icon at the right point to have units using for exemple the border of a wood, or the configuration of a town to have both good LOS and good cover. I've just lost more than 4 hours with a battalion trying to put them at the right place...
- I think the "one hour free delay phase" should be shortened. For the moment, it looks a little gamey : i launch recce mission during the first 59 minutes, and then issue orders. I think a grace periode of 5 minutes is enough there.
- Also, why not diminue delay when the new order is close from the first one. For exemple, give an order to attack at troops already doing a probe mission should be easier and quickest than ordering the same troops to defend.

I really hope my poor english is understable [:)].

Thanks for a great game !

[Arjuna]

Royal Oak ( must be a naval man [:)] )

Welcome.

Re Defense. Have you got the latest patch ( build 86 )? This had code that adjusted the location of defending units to occupy the edge of covered terrain ( woods/urban ). Use the Frontage and Depth settings to define the occupied area of the task and position it such that the forward edge is roughly in line with the woods edge and the units should seek out that edge to deploy.

Re. Orders Delay Free Period. You are the first to suggest that its' too long. What do others think?

Re Orders Delay Modifier for similar task types. Not a bad idea. We already minimise or ignore orders delay when you tweak an existing task - eg, change the formation type or the frontage etc. Again I'd be interested to hear what others think about this suggestion.

BTW your english is great.

Many thanks.

[Isacco]

I, like RoyalOak, think the "order delay free period" is a little too long. I think this period depend on the initial set of "order delay" parameter. If you choose "None" at start 1 hour is a good one but if you set the "order delay" on "realistic" (or more) at start this period will be 10 minutes or less ....

About the second suggestion in my opinion war is a chaotic affair so a new order is a "change" in all the situations. Something that is clear for us will be a problem for another man so I like a system who create this type of problems (even if I don't like it when I play!!![:@]) ....

Regards,

Isacco

[RoyalOak]

Hi Arjuna,

Thanks for the very quick and complete answer.

Yes, I'm using the last patch. Guess I've still to learn how to place the defend icon. Also, I'm not familiar for the moment with frontage and depth.

Here is a little more :

For artillery

- Add a smoke order to artillery. I really hate to send my troops in lcear ground to take a bridge [:)]
- Drop the indirect fire capacity of heavy flak : the AI can't manage it (in Para rescue scenario, I've given Son battalion as a whole an order of defend : the AI has sent the heavy flak 10 kilometers back). I've not found any sources relating the use of the 88 as an indirect weapon.

For routing/retreat

- Make routing less common, but add side effect. I'm quite surprised to see routing troops take with them heavy equipements, like guns or MG. Also, routing recovers should take more time.
- Add a disband chance for routing troops that have lose too much men/morale/equipement. This is a also an easy way to get rid off those irritating artillery spotters in the rear
- Directly linked with the precedent : for long scenario, make disbanding troops reappears after 2/3 days in ad hoc formation like security company.

For leaders :

- add an initiative level for leaders. Those with a great level should try to adapt themselve to the situation.
- use more the different capacity of the leaders. I've the feeling now that a Volksturm or an SS battalion will try to execut an order exactly the same way if put in the same situation.
- add national doctrine when executing orders. For now, all troops tends to act like russian ones : execut the orders, without consideration for losses. If I'm right, the allied doctrine in WWII ask for a superior concentration of fire.

Concerning the interface :
- Change the LOS button. Rather than drawing lines, I'd prefer to have visible ground appears in a different colour when I clik on a point on the map

[Arjuna]

ORIGINAL: RoyalOak

Hi Arjuna,

Thanks for the very quick and complete answer.

Yes, I'm using the last patch. Guess I've still to learn how to place the defend icon. Also, I'm not familiar for the moment with frontage and depth.

Here is a little more :

For artillery

- Add a smoke order to artillery. I really hate to send my troops in lcear ground to take a bridge [:)]
- Drop the indirect fire capacity of heavy flak : the AI can't manage it (in Para rescue scenario, I've given Son battalion as a whole an order of defend : the AI has sent the heavy flak 10 kilometers back). I've not found any sources relating the use of the 88 as an indirect weapon.

The historical references for Market Garden are replete with examples where the Germans used 88s for indirect fire. Essentially the entire 1st Flak Bde was employed in the indirect role. Given that the Germans had lost most of their artillery in the retreat from Normandy, these were the only indirect guns available in any quantity. Just check out the bibliography in the Strategy Guide for these references.

Some 88 units that we knew were employed in the direct fire role we have not provided with a Bombard capability. But most can Bombard.

For routing/retreat

- Make routing less common, but add side effect. I'm quite surprised to see routing troops take with them heavy equipements, like guns or MG. Also, routing recovers should take more time.
- Add a disband chance for routing troops that have lose too much men/morale/equipement. This is a also an easy way to get rid off those irritating artillery spotters in the rear
- Directly linked with the precedent : for long scenario, make disbanding troops reappears after 2/3 days in ad hoc formation like security company.

Units do lose guns etc when routing. However, we have reworked this code extensively for our next game, Conquest of the Aegean ( COTA ). Units will also disband sooner once they get low in numbers.

For leaders :

- add an initiative level for leaders. Those with a great level should try to adapt themselve to the situation.
- use more the different capacity of the leaders. I've the feeling now that a Volksturm or an SS battalion will try to execut an order exactly the same way if put in the same situation.
- add national doctrine when executing orders. For now, all troops tends to act like russian ones : execut the orders, without consideration for losses. If I'm right, the allied doctrine in WWII ask for a superior concentration of fire.

By and large we use the Aggro parameter for this already. The use of different doctrines is built into the existing engine but due to time pressures we have not made extensive use of it. It is something that we will work on over time.

Concerning the interface :
- Change the LOS button. Rather than drawing lines, I'd prefer to have visible ground appears in a different colour when I clik on a point on the map

For COTA we will be providing both the existing Line LOS tool and a new Area LOS tool. [8D]

[RoyalOak]

Thanks again for the fast answer. It's really awesome to see all the features that will be implemented in COTA : I can't wait for this game now !
I'm particulary glad that the routing/retreat will be reworked.
I'm slowly discovering all the depth of the game : I've just started my first campaign (Arnhem Historical as Allied), and I have to say i'm very impressed by the way the game works.
Is there any chance you will use the engine to make a game at the platoon level ? It seems perfect to recreate tactical engagement.

[Arjuna]

RoyalOak,

Probably not real soon now. For the foreseable future we'll be focusing on the current company level. But hey throw us a million dollars and we'll see what we can do. [;)]

[Mark Weston]

OK, my wishlist so far (some are duplicates of previous posts)

1. Be able to change the colour and/or size of the mouse-pointer order-icon (e.g. the bombard cross-hairs). I keep losing track of the black ones.

2. Be able to remap command keys.

3. Graphic overlay for planning, making notes (attack ordered at 10pm etc), keeping track of intel. Extra points if the overlay could be multi-layered. (We've talked about this in another thread in conjunction with team-play, but I'd use it right now if it was there).

4. Be able to order an attack for a particular time (subject to being far enough in advance and absent enemy action, obviously)

5. I'd like to "sandbox" with the game, and possibly use it as the resolution mechanism for a CPX-style game. I'd like a game mode that would allow me to see both sides without fog-of-war, and ideally I'd like to be able to run both sides from the one machine.

6. Chat that will allow me to type more words (!), and where I can easily see the previous conversation.

7. An option for unit icons that show the space they actually occupy.

And, just because I haven't said it before here even though I've owned the game for at least nine months; congratulations on producing a great game! This is the future of computer wargaming, even if hardly anyone seems to have noticed yet...

[Arjuna]

Mark,

Re. #1 - For COTA we have new cursors with both dark and light edges so they stand out no matter what the underlying terrain pattern/colour.

The others will have to wait for future games in the series I'm afraid.

And thanks for the kind words. [:)]

[Fred98]

I no longer play the AI in any game. But the AI is a useful tool to learn game mechanics, to see if such and such is possible or to try out a tactic and review the possible responses.

To achieve this F.O.W. needs to come in a number of flavours

On for A and on for B
On for A and off for B
Off for A and on for B
Off for A and off for B
-

[39battalion]

I really enjoy this game but it would be even better if you could get a message to indicate casualties during each combat for each unit attacked like " 5 men killed" or " 3 tanks/vehicles destroyed".

For me this would make the actual combat more interesting. I like to know the outcome of combat fire especially the fate of tanks. As it is I find I am constantly hitting the equipment tab to check casualties for each unit.

I don't know how difficult this would be to implement but it sure would be appreciated

[Agema]

Wouldn't it be a problem that with tens (even hundreds) of units and the frequency of casualty checks due to the real-time nature of the game that you'll get far more casualty reports than you could handle?