Matrix Games Forums

Here's some more for you guys: Overlays. Two come to mind and they are an air defense overlay and something along the line of the MCOO (Modified Combined Obstacle Overlay)

The AD Overlay would show hexes that can be engaged by units that have the Air Defense Capable special. Maybe some filters for altitude bands (if the engine models that) and radar coverage, too. A LOS check for radar would also be helpful.

The MCOO would show obstacles, minefields (existing and planned) along with shading for both slow-go and no-go terrain. I am thinking instead of the numbers for maneuverability hindrance we have now, this shows a color shade above a certain hindrance rating (maybe 50%)

I don't think these things would be "gamey" in that they model real planning products made by staffs.

Hell, just the ability to "mark" on the map with a virtual grease pencil would be killer....

To cover a few items.

1). You can see the engagement range of AD weapons now using the max fire range display. AD weapons show as a ring of hexes within the range display.

2). We are talking about adding restricted terrain to the map editor for 2.1. This would allow for cliffs or heavy woods and such to block or impede certain types of units to move. We would also have to show that and maybe resurrecting and changing the movement overlay to show the known map obstructions is a great way to do that.

3). We are talking about a Battle Planner for 2.1. This would be the way to mark up maps and "draw" out your plan of action for a battle. A lot depends on getting the rest of the 2.1 game engine stuff added and working first.

Great ideas! Thanks for sharing.

On item 1, I was also thinking of incorporating terrain masking. The overlays (weapon and radar) would show cumulative coverage as well.

I hear what you are saying.

As a relatively new player of FPC-RS, but one who has a good understanding of combined arms tactics and the late Cold War, I think there are some great suggestions in this thread, none of which I particularly disagree with. In the relatively short time I've played I'd highlight the following improvements as my top priorities:

1. Use of engineering assets, such as bridging and breaching, is too abstracted. For example, as far as I can tell, any unit can bridge a river or breach a minefield. In general, bridging and breaching assets would have been held at an echelon higher than platoon or company and would be critical assets requiring careful application and protection. Loss of these assets could prevent a river being crossed or a (significant) minefield being breached. I'd like to see bridge-laying and breaching assets being represented by dedicated units allocated as per real TO&Es and requiring judicious application in-game. Of the two, I think minefield breaching could still occur organically without dedicated assets, but with material penalties in both time and losses.
2. Air assault should be represented. Air assault was a key component of Soviet (not to mention NATO) combined arms tactics, particularly when supporting Forward Detachments, and it would be great to put in an air assault on a bridge or key terrain feature and hold it until ground forces link up.
3. Linked to #2, inclusion of Special Forces or long-range reconnaissance teams that can be inserted or infiltrated behind enemy front lines to establish covert OPs or conduct sabotage and/or harassment of rear areas. The establishment of OPs by SF or any other units will also require a 'Hold Fire' command.
4. I agree that events that occur out of line of sight of the player's units should not be reported to the player, such as unobserved minefield strikes or enemy losses due to artillery fire.

The above points have already been covered by others but I thought I'd add my initial observations. I'm loving the game and will be playing it a lot more so look forward to developments.

Cheers

ORIGINAL: Panzer_Leader

3. Linked to #2, inclusion of Special Forces or long-range reconnaissance teams that can be inserted or infiltrated behind enemy front lines to establish covert OPs or conduct sabotage and/or harassment of rear areas. The establishment of OPs by SF or any other units will also require a 'Hold Fire' command.

Don't know if that would fit the scale.At least in Germany, LRS Units are/were Corps assets. The intel they gather would IMO only make sense as part of a mission briefing or a special unit in an Arborne Op Scenario.

A few of my suggestions.

Adjust SOPs(remember TacOps4?)

Not necceseraly as in depth, but a "hold fire" order, like Panzer_Leader said, or a way of setting engagement ranges would be nice. Maybe even priority targets.

Engineering

The minimum I would expect is

1.) dedicated ScatMine Systems, dedicated Mine Breaching Systems, Mine plows and rollers.
2.) Dedicated River Crossing Equipment, including AVLBs and Ribbon Bridges. Introduction of different river tyes. (Maybe Stream, Minor and Major River?)
3.) Helo Delivered Minefields.
4.) Point Minefields
5.) Preplanned minefields vs. hasty minefields (Authorization takes time)

I would be delighted to see:

1.) The Ability to put down lanes, and close them later.
2.) Proper Nato Battlefield graphics (A replacement for the bridge marker would be nice too...)
3.) Single- and double density minefields.
4.) An engineering control window (Maybe as part of the TOC) where I can see how many AEVs are are available for what task, and e.g. how many hexes of AT Scatt mines I have still available. Plus the Option to dispatch an available ScattmMien System to a pre planned Minefield.
5.) Abatis, Anti-Tank Ditches, and Cratering.

Artillery

1.) Ammo indicator, also for non-standart ammo
2.)Smoke screens to be fired for a certain amount of time.
3.) "Overwatch" for GSR Indicating an area, that is to be overwatched. Arty that is dedicated to the GSR will start firing once enemy units cross this area.
4.) An Fire Support Tab, similar to the aforementioned Engineering Control Window. Showing the total of available Indirect Firing Units, which missions they have and how much high value ammo there is left.

MISC

1.)Combat Power Display. When Clicking on an HQ, displaying the current Combat Power of the complete in percentage (maybe where the supply is shown)
2.)More generic scenarios. (Qucik Battle Generator?) Choose your Engagement Type (Probe, Attack, River Crossing, Deliberate Attack, Persuite, Meeting Engagement)Choose Scale (E.g. Bn Vs Rgt). Computer assignes force level (Similar to Assault). Player can choose Entry times and points of units. Preparation time varies fromEngagement Type to Engagement Typeand influences Pre-Battle Intel of the Attacker and how many Obstacles may be placed by the defending palyer pre-game.

Hope you are all well,

A

ORIGINAL: calgar

ORIGINAL: Panzer_Leader

3. Linked to #2, inclusion of Special Forces or long-range reconnaissance teams that can be inserted or infiltrated behind enemy front lines to establish covert OPs or conduct sabotage and/or harassment of rear areas. The establishment of OPs by SF or any other units will also require a 'Hold Fire' command.

Don't know if that would fit the scale.At least in Germany, LRS Units are/were Corps assets. The intel they gather would IMO only make sense as part of a mission briefing or a special unit in an Arborne Op Scenario.

Yes, I did think that as I was writing it but decided they could still be present on the battlefield and influence the outcome of the tactical fight, observing MSRs, dropping key bridges, targeting headquarters etc. so figured I would add them as something for consideration - and I know others have already requested the same. How best to integrate them at the echelons represented in FPC-RS I'm not so sure.

Bigger hexes. Not the size they represent but larger hexes themselves so that the units easily fit within the hex. Right now they seems wedged in there, at least they do to me.

This might be a repeat, but...

Be able to set the amount/mix of HE, FASCAM, and Smoke for arty units in the scenario editor (and illum, RAP, etc once these are implemented)as well as being able to set replenishment rates for those special munitions.

This is high on the develop team's wish list.

Excellent and thanks!