The Wish List

[Primarchx]

Is Czechoslovakia an included theater of ops in this game? Is Wisconsin? [:D]

ORIGINAL: ferg1234

I looked through all 8 pages and noticed nobody has requested the EM-50 Urban Assault Vehicle. I, for one, think it would be a real game changer for the NATO forces.

[Jafele]

Don´t know if it has been mentioned before but I´d love to be able to move the screen using the mouse.

[CapnDarwin]

Jafele, you can. Just left click on an empty area of the map and drag while holding the mouse button down. It is the method I use all the time. [:)]

[Jafele]

Wow! Thanks for the info [;)]

[Xenomorph]

Wodin really nailed the good ones above. What I can think of at the moment:

1. The ability to edit casualties in game. Meaning: if you want to pause and play a local battle using another game at the squad level (MR has clearly worked on the ones I'm thinking of) and then take those results and incorporate them into a larger FCRS battle. I'm certain you guys have seen the boards where folks have long been looking for a game offering such an ability. (No need to respond to this one. Just for your reference esp since I've asked it before. Plus I don't have time to read these entire threads so maybe its already been brought up.)

2. I'm sure this is a tough one but anything that can be done to streamline the engine to make bigger maps w more units that won't bog down the system too much would be huge for me. I like huge battles even if they take a long time to resolve but I believe I'm not typical in that regard. (I'd not be surprised if you're thinking about duct taping Xenomorph on the front of your lead T-80 but, hey, just askin'.) [:D]

Thanks as always for a great game!

[IronMikeGolf]

Hi,

New to the game and community, so if I repeat things already hashed out earlier in this thread, just count it as another vote.

1. Task organizing: As NATO (at least with US forces), I should be able to task organize, including units on the reinforcement schedule. Example: 3-41 IN starts on map and 2-66 AR is a reinforcement at say 3 hours. I should be able to swap a mech company and a tank company and end up with the mech company arriving with 2-66 AR and the tank company on map at start.

2. Reorganizing: I don't see any issue (at least with US Forces) with folding damaged platoons of like type inside a company together. Those guys do know each other by voice over the radio and have worked together. The reorg does happen in training, too, at maneuver training centers (at least it did in the 80's and 90's when I was in light and mech inf battalions).

3. More of a scenario design issue, but it feels like the recon/counter-recon fight is missing from the dance. So, if Pact is attacking at BMNT, the previous 6-10 hours has seen a lot of activity in sector by Pact recon and whoever gets the nod to go BRDM hunting.

4. Don't know if the game engine takes into account relative elevation differences in regards to cover when resolving direct fire.

5. I know logistics is abstracted, but combat and field trains ought to be on the map and if they get hit, it should degrade resupply of ammo (increase time, ration ammo, etc). Maybe the time length of a scenario makes it moot. Maybe not. Sure would have an impact on follow-on fights in a campaign.

[CapnDarwin]

Jeff,

Welcome to the dance. I will circle back this evening and answer/comment on your points. Thanks for posting your thoughts. [8D]

[IronMikeGolf]

S2? S2? S2!?!?! Where the f&*(#K is my S2? I see his 577 right over there!

I spent some time in S3 and G3 shops (when not in a Bradley turret). Radio b*)ch/Battle Sgt. We tracked the bad guys. We had the bad guys OB and kept track of strength of MRCs based on contact reports. I am thinking something like the friendly OB in the BIC with a % strength. Maybe it starts just down to Bn level and fleshes out as units make contact. And yeah, units get identified by name. That's realistic.

That kind of info (accounting for location of enemy (units) REALLY helps you decide when/if to make a counter attack. Accounting for everyone on the battle field tells you if/when he's committed his reserve, etc.

[Tazak]

Iron Mike Golf: You can do something akin to this at present, if you know a BMP regiment has 142 APC/MICV the staff screen tracks kills of various kinds, be aware there is a call for greater level FOW that would seem to at opposites to what your thinking of

[IronMikeGolf]

Yeah, I know I can keep track of kills and I could open the editor to get the starting OB and watch the TOC log for unit ID. I am simply nominating this to be n AI staff function and integrate it into the UI. I agree, we do have most of the info (except starting OB run through a FOW filter) and can do it manually. It would really slow things down. Enough to make it a full time player job.

[TigerTC]

ORIGINAL: Burnsj002

Okie forgive me if this has been brought up before. My wish is to replay a completed game i.e. a game from start to finish. So I can study it. (currently you can only replay the last turn) --unless I'm wrong. View it as either Player one Commander or Player two Commander or both. I want to sit and eat popcorn a re-watch the game that I have either lost or won...

I would love this -- a good replay of the game, especially in a save-able file so that I can keep each and every battle I wage.

[IronMikeGolf]

Helos should land and be vulnerable to indirect fires while doing resupply. Currently, they remain in the air (and so can spot further) and suffer no consequences of receiving arty.

Helos are a huge combat multiplier and given that, I think we should have FARP type units on the map. It would be a really big deal to lose that and would also increase rearm/refuel cycle times for helos. That's because, there'd likely be a single one per side in a scenario and so it would be placed further to the rear than a Bn or Bde.Regt CP, which is currently used for helo resupply, in order to increase its survivability.

[CapnDarwin]

Helo's should be vulnerable to indirect fire if they are sitting still in a hex hovering or resupplying. I'll verify the resupply mode/on call is not doing something odd this weekend.

FARPs and other loggy functions are abstracted out (for now). It is a layer of mechanics that would take some time to implement in the current engine. Once we get into our 2.1 mode we can talk in-house on what would be needed to do a simple loggy system.

[IronMikeGolf]

Cool, on the FARP.

On the indirect vs helos in resupply, I made a scenario and put a Hind flight in resupply. Hit it with suppression and neutralization missions, including a three banger of neut. Readiness unchanged and no hits. I'll try a huge number of M109's and slam it and see what happens.

[CapnDarwin]

Can you post your scenario in the Tech section and I'll run it while in the IDE/debugger and see if I can trap what is going on. I did not see anything that should be hampering that fires, but it seems like something is of the rails in that case.

Thanks!

[IronMikeGolf]

OK, it is having effect. It would help if I had eyes on target the first time I tried it.

I did find another bug. I'll post it on Tech Spt.

[CapnDarwin]

No problem. There's a lot of stuff going on in the code to do combat so I'll bet we'll be digging small, odd, in the weeds bugs for a while. Also adds to the fun adding new features that compound the mix too.[X(]

[IronMikeGolf]

Not a bug. MLRS ICM stomps 'em pretty good. So does a few iterations of bn 3 from Corps arty. Got the helos to take some hits and go to 1% Readiness.

[HeinzHarald]

What I want most is better performance. I don't mind watching the action, but clicking and scrolling is a bit too laggy on the computer I prefer to use (i5 dual core, 4GB RAM, Intel HD4000). It's not the best of computers for sure, but it should be possible to make the game run better I would think.

[IronMikeGolf]

I'd like to see fire control measures:

Arty control measures: CFL, FSCL. These would be modeled by affecting delay. In-scenaro artillery TRPs. By this I mean, I should be able to make a target list and update throughout the scenario. These would take time to become effective and would reduce time to fire. Registered targets. These would be like what is currently in the game now, but would be the fastest arty missions. Also, it would require expending rounds (arty units start with fewer rounds) and accuracy/effectiveness would be increased. Should only be applicable to units set up in a defense.

ADA control measures: weapon control status (Hold, Tight, and Free), a toggle to permit/deny AD units engaging ground units (other than self defense).

Direct fire control measures: Engagement areas, sectors (for plt and smaller), engagement criteria (range, min size force, distance from a hex), engagement priority (tank, IFV, C3 vehicle, AD vehicle, AT vehicle, recon vehicle, probably others, too. Probably specify top 3, everything else is equal). I'd use inheritance, so if you set something for a Bn, you don't need to go to every plt.

Units should shoot closest to farthest when shooting the same priority. Currently, a unit will split its fire all over the place, engaging a tank company at 1500 meters, then the next time it fires, it shoots at another tank company at 3000 meters, even though the closer one is still combat effective. The company at 1500 is more dangerous and we trained to shoot that before shifting fires to the same sort of target that is further way. This really ought to get fixed soonest.