Future Directions - Features

[bardolph]

Thanks for the kindly response. [:)]

[wodin]

Hmm..huge scenarios..not my thing sadly. I hope the EF game has a good selection of lowish unit density. As I said a few times I love low unit density but scenarios lasting a few days.

[CriticalMass]

ORIGINAL: pacwar

At the risk that someone else has suggested this let me propose the following...when you get a message about a specific unit it would be useful if you could just click on the message and it would either take you to the unit in question on the map or highlight the unit in the OB so you could click on the OB and get to the unit...as it is now, unless I've missed something, when I get a message that unit so and so has halted or failed in their assault I've got to pause the game and search the OB and/or do a quick visual scan of the battlefield to figure out where the unit is...perhaps this is just a reflection of too much micromanagement on my part but some of the messages can be critical...

There is partial support for - the first part of - your suggestion. Check out page 31 of the manual - Navigate Messages.

[Phoenix100]

Click on msg log in sidebar, Critmass (make sure a unit not selected - click on blank area of map - and look at sidebar; the msg log is last on the right). All messages also come up there (though you can change settings to restrict this) and when you click on them there it highlights unit on the map, for most messages, not all. Not for a blown bridge, for example. And playing Meuse to Rhine, for example, it's easy to miss which of the several thousand bridges just went when the map is so huge and you're not usually looking at all of it - then you have to click on each bridge to see if it's there or not by the movement possibilities. I agree, it would be nice if you could click on all messages and the subject was highlighted.

[RockinHarry]

Two more:

Some indicator for what unit is currently calling for artillery support (and which, if there´s multiple of the same type available). Maybe a Binoc symbol on the counter and a line similar to the command and supply ones.

I´d also like to see units blinking (or framed, or whatever), that race across the map, indicating an intel update to units that were lost contact to formerly. I find it oftenly confusing and disturbing to see those "intel update moves" mixed with true moves of units that can currently be observed by any friendlies.

[invernomuto]

Some suggestions, mostly already mentioned:

1) an option to scold / replace a commander that it's not performing well (you are the CinC, that's part of the fun ).
2) a "linked scenarios" campaing system
3) more randomization options for scenarios (e.g. : have selectable random "variants" for scenarios, random reinforcements, random supply etc).
4) multiplayer co-op.
5) more detailed maps (3d, 2d with elevation layers etc).
6) consult with your high HQ staff to develop the initial plan of a scenario.

[RockinHarry]

Something that likely could be rather easily be implemented, ...what about some weather forecast added to the side bar Weather Display? Some 48 hours would be quite useful, for planning operations. Since some the data is already available from the mission editor, maybe some not too complicated routines would do the purpose. [8D]

As sort of expedient, a mission maker could provide some basic data (mission briefing) from the mission editor, but only makes sense for the starting days and historical weather.

[dazkaz15]

The excellent Battle planner, drawing overlay tool that they added in the latest Hearts of Iron 3 game would be a very nice addition to this game.

See here for examples:

Edit: Can't post the link yet as I have not been on this forum long enough yet.
Just go the Hearts of Iron Forum, and take a look at the player created examples in one of the threads there.

[dazkaz15]

Being able to select multiple units by Ctrl clicking on the OOB list would be good.

[miya]

Today I experimented with the Scenario Maker, by the way, I like the new tool to compare the combat values.

Taking a look at the objectives and the circular shaped perimeter, it could be a useful addition to change the perimeter to a elliptical shape.
The idea is to match better the outline, the contour of a ridge or a city.
It would require three values to save, the angle of the axis, length of the major axis and length of the minor axis.
Would there be any impact on the AI if it has to secure an objective which is narrow on one axis and stretched on the other ? What I have in mind, maybe the AI would arrange its forces in a long line.

[wodin]

Not a new feature as such but what I'd like to see in future games is in the scenario description it says roughly what scale your playing at..i.e Corps or Division or Battalion. That way I know roughly how many units will be in a scenario before I choose to play it. Or even if it says small\medium\large\extra large..

[miya]

What about an option to rename units during the game ?

I'm thinking of a situation where the player might collect several companies from three or four different battalions and combines them under one battalion HQ. In that case I would prefer to give the battalion a new name and call it "Lonsdale Force" or "KG Walther" for example.
Of course this only makes sense during longer and larger operations.
It certainly will add to the flavor, while playing.

[wodin]

I'd like in the final AAR screen to be able to see starting number of equip and finishing number..for both your troops and the enemies..I'd also like to review the enemies OOB and be able to see what units where taken out at a glance. I'd like also to be able to see the enemies Commanders names if known at the end. I'd like to see formation pointers for the enemy as well when you click on a unit during the review AAR.

Then obviously what many have asked for be able to see what unit the enemy unit surrendered to or was destroyed by, even if possible a breakdown of what weapon and which unit per casualty.

I'd also like leaders to have a bigger impact and with that also have leader casualties where they are either out of action for a couple of days and then come back or are wounded enough to mean they want be back in the game or dead..then you get a replacement with different stats taking over the unit. Not only is this great for immersion I think if Leaders where made to have a big impact on unit performance you'd able to get those situations where a unit with a great leader held out against the odds..

[GBS]

ORIGINAL: dazkaz15

Being able to select multiple units by Ctrl clicking on the OOB list would be good.

THIS!

[RockinHarry]

Unit leader losses and replacements, or possibly manually changing them.

Consolidation (dissolving) of units. Was more of a german practice, than for the western allies though.

A replacement of men an material system, particuarly for longer operation games.

[hjc]

ORIGINAL: miya

What about an option to rename units during the game ?

I'm thinking of a situation where the player might collect several companies from three or four different battalions and combines them under one battalion HQ. In that case I would prefer to give the battalion a new name and call it "Lonsdale Force" or "KG Walther" for example.

Seconded.

[wodin]

ORIGINAL: RockinHarry

Unit leader losses and replacements, or possibly manually changing them.

Consolidation (dissolving) of units. Was more of a german practice, than for the western allies though.

A replacement of men an material system, particuarly for longer operation games.

Consolidation already happens in game I think..units when low on men are disbanded and they are sent to fill up other units.

[RockinHarry]

ORIGINAL: wodin

ORIGINAL: RockinHarry

Unit leader losses and replacements, or possibly manually changing them.

Consolidation (dissolving) of units. Was more of a german practice, than for the western allies though.

A replacement of men an material system, particuarly for longer operation games.

Consolidation already happens in game I think..units when low on men are disbanded and they are sent to fill up other units.

Yep, I meant manually consolidating units, not the automatic ones, when certain units are as good as destroyed. Say...purposely merging 2 x 20-30% strength units, or feeding them to other units, to get them up full strength again. [:)]

[Alchenar]

In the AAR review part of the game, I'd like to be able to see what the enemy supply levels were, as well as their strength as a proportion of starting strength.

Along with wanting to know abo/ut individual unit combat effectiveness (the tank company I had on the hill all game, did they actually hit anything), I want to know the answers to questions like 'that group of enemy units I managed to cut off, how close were they to running out of ammo?'

[Arjuna]

Some of these AAR requests go against the principle of not providing perfect intel. In real life commanders would never know the answers to some of these questions.