1:1 representation

[CSO_Talorgan]

Does this game have 1:1 representation (one pixel soldier simulates one real soldier); or is it moddable into such a state?

[Erik Rutins]

Since I'm not sure which area you are more interested in, I'll give you two answers.

Visually, you can have as many soldiers per squad as you want. The default is five and switchable to three in the options for low end systems. A few copy/pastes in a XML file can raise that to ten or twelve or whatever you like.

Game-wise, the game does not look at a squad in terms of individual soldiers. It looks at infantry units as Teams or Squads and has rules for effectiveness and casualty tolerance for those two categories. Squad or Teams are the basic unit rather than individual men, but they can be take several levels of casualties and can be unsuppressed, suppressed or pinned based on how much fire they are taking (or lose morale on a squad or platoon level and retreat).

Regards,

- Erik

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: CSO_Talorgan
Does this game have 1:1 representation (one pixel soldier simulates one real soldier); or is it moddable into such a state?

No. The soldiers represent the location of the squad. The squad may have 8-12 men but only the usual max of 5 model soldiers. Usual setting is for 3 to represent the squad.

[ravinhood]

It basically sounds like a board game counter with pretty pictures as many as you want, but, it's still just a counter a piece of cardboard that flips for suppression and disruption in what looks like could be 3 steps or 4 steps, but, it really doesn't matter how many individual graphics of lil men you have once the steps are reached the entire counter/unit is gone. It's probably the only thing that bugs me about this version because it's going to seem rather unrealistic when the program rolls some lucky 12 and the entire unit just goes poof. Maybe in another version they can get on a more realistic man to man level of elimination like say Steel Panthers or Combat Mission does it.

[CSO_Talorgan]

Thanks for your answers.

A few copy/pastes in a XML file can raise that to ten or twelve or whatever you like.

If it is possible to mod small units with individuals represented then these could presumably be combined to produce larger units?

I wonder if anyone actually tried that in Winter Storm.

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
It's probably the only thing that bugs me about this version because it's going to seem rather unrealistic when the program rolls some lucky 12 and the entire unit just goes poof. Maybe in another version they can get on a more realistic man to man level of elimination like say Steel Panthers or Combat Mission does it.

Hm - personally I don't find a squad wipe-out unrealistic, as long as it's rare (which it currently is). Squad wipe-outs with "one shot" only generally happen with squads moving in the open and hit by high-caliber HE and even then they're uncommon. It might appear more realistic to say "10 of 10 men lost" but I'm not sure there's much of a difference.

I think more detail in the infantry assault and city fighting rules will add more to infantry combat than tracking men individually.

Regards,

- Erik

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: CSO_Talorgan
If it is possible to mod small units with individuals represented then these could presumably be combined to produce larger units?

I'm not entirely sure I understand the question, to be honest. Right now you there's no command in the game to combine two teams into a squad or three squads into a platoon or so on. In terms of how large you could make a unit visually, you certainly could define it as having forty men as far as how it shows up on the battlefield and then give it firepower and weapon stats to match a platoon, but the problem is the game is not expecting platoons as a unit so the casualty tolerance would be inaccurate. The game expects squad and team elements right now at this scale.

Regards,

- Erik

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
It basically sounds like a board game counter with pretty pictures as many as you want, but, it's still just a counter a piece of cardboard that flips for suppression and disruption in what looks like could be 3 steps or 4 steps, but, it really doesn't matter how many individual graphics of lil men you have once the steps are reached the entire counter/unit is gone. It's probably the only thing that bugs me about this version because it's going to seem rather unrealistic when the program rolls some lucky 12 and the entire unit just goes poof. Maybe in another version they can get on a more realistic man to man level of elimination like say Steel Panthers or Combat Mission does it.

No. It unrealistic to play man : man on this level. The squad disposition of PC represents the combat effectiveness of the squad. That is what the platoon leader needs to know. I doesn't depend on there being 7 or 8 unwounded men in the squad.

Under what impossible circumstances would squads be communicating their exact number minute after minute to its platoon leader? That is unrealistic.

[ravinhood]

And at what level of "REALISM" does a squad leader or platoon leader become omni present and SEE ALL in the first place. The entire map, every unit in the company, every tank? etc. etc? Of course we can use realism and unrealistic to death when it fits OUR objetives and AGENDA's can't we?

[Mobius]

To model the fog of war there is diminishing return from lower level units. It doesn't have to be 0% but it is not 100% either.

The strategies of the Commander, on the other hand, involve not simply making a decision; just giving his troops an objective and then walking away wouldn't be a very effective or efficient way for a commander at the company/task force level to run a battle. Instead, the commander takes what all of his men are telling him (both with their reports (platoons) and with the actions that they take (squads)) and turns that into a successful battle. If, for instance, a platoon has attempted to assault a pair of buildings and the commander notes that two of the squads involved are currently spending their time finding cover rather than attacking, he most likely would decide to support the attacking units with more suppressive fire. If, at the same time an enemy force attacked another of his platoons, however, the commander would likely order the assaulting platoon to withdraw and commit his reserves against the attacking enemy force.

In addition, more often than not, the people under the commander are not contributing to the overall solution unless the commander has resolved exactly what that solution is. The chances of a unit wasting their time are high; they do not know, nor are they required to know, what else is going on. It is the commander's job to make all of these units work together, and to ensure that a solution a) has been found and b) has a high likelihood of success.

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
And at what level of "REALISM" does a squad leader or platoon leader become omni present and SEE ALL in the first place. The entire map, every unit in the company, every tank? etc. etc? Of course we can use realism and unrealistic to death when it fits OUR objetives and AGENDA's can't we?

What are you talking about? None of the squad or platoon leaders in the game see everything. The player, who is assumed to be a company/battalion commander is the one who sees an aggregate view.

[ravinhood]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
It's probably the only thing that bugs me about this version because it's going to seem rather unrealistic when the program rolls some lucky 12 and the entire unit just goes poof. Maybe in another version they can get on a more realistic man to man level of elimination like say Steel Panthers or Combat Mission does it.

Hm - personally I don't find a squad wipe-out unrealistic, as long as it's rare (which it currently is). Squad wipe-outs with "one shot" only generally happen with squads moving in the open and hit by high-caliber HE and even then they're uncommon. It might appear more realistic to say "10 of 10 men lost" but I'm not sure there's much of a difference.

I think more detail in the infantry assault and city fighting rules will add more to infantry combat than tracking men individually.

Regards,

- Erik

My concern is not so much the wipe outs, but, the ANIMATIONS of the units being lost from 5 down to none or 10 down to none as I plan to mod in 10 men or 12 men per squad. Are they all gonna fall down in a "random" death chain order? Or are they all gonna fall down like ring around the rosey at the same time? My fear is they are gonna do the latter. As there are step reductions also, is the squad size going to diminish in size as well as they go down in steps? Those kinds of animations are what I'm concerned about.

[ravinhood]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
And at what level of "REALISM" does a squad leader or platoon leader become omni present and SEE ALL in the first place. The entire map, every unit in the company, every tank? etc. etc? Of course we can use realism and unrealistic to death when it fits OUR objetives and AGENDA's can't we?

What are you talking about? None of the squad or platoon leaders in the game see everything. The player, who is assumed to be a company/battalion commander is the one who sees an aggregate view.

That's what I was talking about since so many times realism and unrealistic bring their ugly heads to the forefront of most games. Even the company/battalion commander wouldn't see what we see as a PLAYER was my point. This omni present view we always get in these games is "unrealistic". Thus why use the excuse when other things popup that players ask for that someone else thinks is unrealistic was my point as well.

Because Mobius said: After I had said I would LIKE man to man type or 1:1 type play

No. It unrealistic to play man : man on this level.

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
My concern is not so much the wipe outs, but, the ANIMATIONS of the units being lost from 5 down to none or 10 down to none as I plan to mod in 10 men or 12 men per squad. Are they all gonna fall down in a "random" death chain order? Or are they all gonna fall down like ring around the rosey at the same time? My fear is they are gonna do the latter. As there are step reductions also, is the squad size going to diminish in size as well as they go down in steps? Those kinds of animations are what I'm concerned about.

I'm not sure why animations are such a concern, but the guys don't animate in any chain. The squad is up until destroyed. For now, you'll have to use your imagination for the rest. [;)]

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
That's what I was talking about since so many times realism and unrealistic bring their ugly heads to the forefront of most games. Even the company/battalion commander wouldn't see what we see as a PLAYER was my point. This omni present view we always get in these games is "unrealistic". Thus why use the excuse when other things popup that players ask for that someone else thinks is unrealistic was my point as well.

Of course, but there's a difference between the "player interface" level and what the units on the map actually can see and do. The player interface has to make concessions for playability. The unit level should be as realistic as possible for the scale of play without forgetting that a game also has to be fun. I'm not aware that anyone said that the game does not make such concessions - it's full of them, as is any game.

Because Mobius said: After I had said I would LIKE man to man type or 1:1 type play No. It unrealistic to play man : man on this level.

Well, that's Mobius' opinion. I happen to think that it would also be a step of detail too far for this scale, but I certainly understand why folks request it.

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
Because Mobius said: After I had said I would LIKE man to man type or 1:1 type play

No. It unrealistic to play man : man on this level.

I said that because you said this:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
Maybe in another version they can get on a more realistic man to man level of elimination like say Steel Panthers or Combat Mission does it.

My opinion is that a man to man level of elimination is not more realistic at this level, it is less. Counting troops in a squad seems like a crutch some games use if thay can't come up with an elegant way of representing them.

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: Mobius
Counting troops in a squad seems like a crutch some games use if thay can't come up with an elegant way of representing them.

I wouldn't go that far - but I don't think it's ideally suited to this level. We could do something in the future if we figure out a way to do it that adds to realism and fun instead of just adding to the bookkeeping.

Regards,

- Erik

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

ORIGINAL: Mobius
Counting troops in a squad seems like a crutch some games use if thay can't come up with an elegant way of representing them.

I wouldn't go that far - but I don't think it's ideally suited to this level. We could do something in the future if we figure out a way to do it that adds to realism and fun instead of just adding to the bookkeeping.
Regards,
- Erik

I think its at least going backwards. PC gives the relative fighting ability of a squad by just looking at its status. In a counting system you get the number then have to calculate in your head if 6 out of 10 men left is good enough to make an assault or is it too beaten up.

Counting men, ammo or gallons of gasoline may not be bad if it was left internal to the game. Showing it to the players and having them make command choices based on a number is what I'm against.

[ravinhood]

Counting men, ammo or gallons of gasoline may not be bad if it was left internal to the game. Showing it to the players and having them make command choices based on a number is what I'm against.

 
Not me I love that stuff at the squad/platoon tactical level.
 
An Erik you still didn't answer my question of how the game models infantry death. So, I'll ask it again. If I have 5 men in my squad and it gets some form of reduction do any of those men die/fall down/remove from the group as per whatever the reduction step calls for?

[Erik Rutins]

I answered that above. No, they are all up until the squad is destroyed. Panzer Command has some nice realistic animations, but we have nowhere near the graphics budget of a mainstream title. So infantry falling down individually as casualties are taken was looked at and pushed off to the future due to budget reasons.