Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: MikeAP


Mad Russian, my question...?

I've got units out of trouble by hasty move but they tend to be taking long range fire on the edge of the main combat zone. In effect trade off any remaining protection for sheer speed and also hope they are a peripheral target for whoever is shooting at them.

I've not worked out how to get units out of contact in any semblance of order, so I tend to use 'screen' and let the AI solve the mess I've created (oddly it does seem to work).

Best solution seems to be attack in force somewhere else, distract the enemy and get them to shift fire. Much easier to write than do, but its part of the logic to a Soviet echelon style assault or NATO's longer range fire doctrine

MR mentioned earlier, "timing is everything". There comes a point where it is extremely difficult to disengage from the enemy due to his proximity and firepower. If you wait too long to disengage you may very well end up toast. There has been times that the best I could do was place my units on screen and wait for them to withdraw on their own. Sometimes it works, sometimes they get killed before they can disengage and withdraw.
 
That being said, combat is difficult and confusing. It would be extremely difficult to design an orders system that allowed you to cover ever situation. This thread did receive some attention last night in the developers team meeting. I do know that there are additions we want to make to the orders system in the future (what exactly we will be able to do is still being discussed). MR mentioned a possible "hold at all cost" order. Maybe a "retreat under fire" order. The reason these things were not in there in this release is time. Release now or in a year or two?
 
What the game does now is make you think and plan within the parameters of what the game can do. Once the bullets start firing it is easy to lose control of the situation. And that is how it is for the commander on the battlefield.

I've not worked out how to get units out of contact in any semblance of order, so I tend to use 'screen' and let the AI solve the mess I've created (oddly it does seem to work).

That's a good idea, but the friendly AI will randomly move to a hex of their choice - sometimes they make a move that is un-recoverable.

ORIGINAL: cbelva
What the game does now is make you think and plan within the parameters of what the game can do. Once the bullets start firing it is easy to lose control of the situation. And that is how it is for the commander on the battlefield.

The game is about the plan, I understand. However, you cant give me 'elite' or 'veteran' units that act like boy scouts when they take fire - you dont just 'lose control' of Elite units. Elite/Veteran units should execute orders rapidly and despite combat conditions.

Finally - after playing several scenarios, I think the Hasty Movement timer is still a bit long. Is there any way to mod this?

ORIGINAL: cbelva

Once the bullets start firing it is easy to lose control of the situation. And that is how it is for the commander on the battlefield.

The next time I'm going through MDMP and Course of Action Development with my commander I'm going to tell him that we can only plan one movement technique with 3 waypoints at a time...and absolutely ZERO contingency planning. No alternate/subsequent positions, no decision points, no branch plans.

I'm sure that will fly with him...[:D]

ORIGINAL: MikeAP

I've not worked out how to get units out of contact in any semblance of order, so I tend to use 'screen' and let the AI solve the mess I've created (oddly it does seem to work).

That's a good idea, but the friendly AI will randomly move to a hex of their choice - sometimes they make a move that is un-recoverable.

You are correct about the randomness of the withdrawal direction. It used to be worst and most of the time they would withdraw towards the enemy. Now it does a better job (key word is better not perfect). During development we discussed giving units with screen orders a fallback location. I really like that idea and hope we can implement it eventually. However, it still came down to the number of hours in a day and when we wanted to release the game.

ORIGINAL: MikeAP

Finally - after playing several scenarios, I think the Hasty Movement timer is still a bit long. Is there any way to mod this?

It can't be mod, but if you have a recommendation on a more reasonable delay to impose on units receiving Hasty Movement I am sure that Rob and Jim would take it under consideration.

Another thing for me is the randomness of the game play. This isn't chess. Neither is combat. In stressful situations people do things. Sometimes odd things. Sometimes things that get them killed.

When I see a unit that moves in a way other than I would move it I look at the lower level. That commander made the decision to go that way. Why? It doesn't look smart. But there could be a myriad of reasons why they don't do the smart thing.

I always chalk it up to combat stress.

Having said that I don't want completely stupid commanders either. Moving forward from a screen position you are forced out of is not smart.

We've worked on the AI to have it make better choices. As Charles said, it's better. I don't want it perfect. That would take some of the realism out of it for me. The key is to strike that balance.

In answer to how to withdraw, if they are key units cover them in smoke and leave as fast as you can. Keep your people in command radius so they respond to orders with a minimum of delay. Put them on screen and have the computer decide when they feel enough threat to move. Waiting for the gamer to recognize that moment and get out in time is often too late.

Good Hunting.

MR

ORIGINAL: MikeAP


The next time I'm going through MDMP and Course of Action Development with my commander I'm going to tell him that we can only plan one movement technique with 3 waypoints at a time...and absolutely ZERO contingency planning. No alternate/subsequent positions, no decision points, no branch plans.

I'm sure that will fly with him...[:D]

Geez, usually we just get a directed COA and have to figure out the details ourself!

ORIGINAL: BROJD

ORIGINAL: MikeAP


The next time I'm going through MDMP and Course of Action Development with my commander I'm going to tell him that we can only plan one movement technique with 3 waypoints at a time...and absolutely ZERO contingency planning. No alternate/subsequent positions, no decision points, no branch plans.

I'm sure that will fly with him...[:D]

Geez, usually we just get a directed COA and have to figure out the details ourself!

"I want one movement technique with 3 waypoints"

Commander has been playing too much FPC:RS again

ORIGINAL: MikeAP

The next time I'm going through MDMP and Course of Action Development with my commander I'm going to tell him that we can only plan one movement technique with 3 waypoints at a time...and absolutely ZERO contingency planning. No alternate/subsequent positions, no decision points, no branch plans.

I'm sure that will fly with him...[:D]

While you're at it ask him if he ever had a plan that worked as set out.

I'm sure he'll have some interesting stories for you. Few of which will be about a plan that actually worked as expected. [:D]

Good Hunting.

MR

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

ORIGINAL: MikeAP

The next time I'm going through MDMP and Course of Action Development with my commander I'm going to tell him that we can only plan one movement technique with 3 waypoints at a time...and absolutely ZERO contingency planning. No alternate/subsequent positions, no decision points, no branch plans.

I'm sure that will fly with him...[:D]

While you're at it ask him if he ever had a plan that worked as set out.

I'm sure he'll have some interesting stories for you. Few of which will be about a plan that actually worked as expected. [:D]

Good Hunting.

MR

Thus the point of contingency planning and branch plans.

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

Another thing for me is the randomness of the game play. This isn't chess. Neither is combat. In stressful situations people do things. Sometimes odd things. Sometimes things that get them killed.

When I see a unit that moves in a way other than I would move it I look at the lower level. That commander made the decision to go that way. Why? It doesn't look smart. But there could be a myriad of reasons why they don't do the smart thing.

I always chalk it up to combat stress.

Having said that I don't want completely stupid commanders either. Moving forward from a screen position you are forced out of is not smart.

We've worked on the AI to have it make better choices. As Charles said, it's better. I don't want it perfect. That would take some of the realism out of it for me. The key is to strike that balance.

In answer to how to withdraw, if they are key units cover them in smoke and leave as fast as you can. Keep your people in command radius so they respond to orders with a minimum of delay. Put them on screen and have the computer decide when they feel enough threat to move. Waiting for the gamer to recognize that moment and get out in time is often too late.

Good Hunting.

MR

Speaking of Smoke, I don't have the game available right now, can units 'self' smoke? Don't, US, companies or at least BN's have mortars available, I don't remember seeing them in the game. If so can these smoke?

Unit with smoke dischargers, use them in the combat model. US forces usually have mortars that can fire smoke.

If you give a unit a "deliberate move" order, it switches to "screen" after reaching the objective.
To have it switch to "Hold", you must use an "Assault" order.

HanBarca,

That is correct.