Suggestion: Rush/etc. to nowhere

The highly anticipated second release in the Panzer Command series, featuring an updated engine and many major feature improvements. 3D Tactical turn-based WWII combat on the Eastern Front, with historical scenarios and campaigns as well as support for random generated battles and campaigns from 1941-1944.
Post Reply
WhiteOwl
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 2:04 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Suggestion: Rush/etc. to nowhere

Post by WhiteOwl »

This isn't a massive issue but because of the platoon oriented command concept if you want to rush or advance your squads, but your commander is already in a good place, you still have to rush/advance them a tiny bit just to make the command available to the rest of the platoon. Since rushing in particular causes reduction in various factors (sighting, concealment), this could be improved by having an "in-situ" sub option for those two commands.

Just an idea...

Cheers
User avatar
Erik Rutins
Posts: 39731
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA
Contact:

RE: Suggestion: Rush/etc. to nowhere

Post by Erik Rutins »

That could be added, I see your point. The original intent for that kind of maneuver was to use Engage -> Move and Engage -> Stay.
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC


Image

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.
rickier65
Posts: 14253
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2000 8:00 am

RE: Suggestion: Rush/etc. to nowhere

Post by rickier65 »

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

That could be added, I see your point. The original intent for that kind of maneuver was to use Engage -> Move and Engage -> Stay.


I'd 2nd that request. I found myself in the BC1 tutorial rushing across open while I kept one squad in treeline, but to do that I had to "rush" that 1 squad to a 1 meter away spot and it wasn't as effective in covering. I thought it assumed defence at that point, but I'm not sure.

Rick

EDIT: It may be that when I'm playing with more units, this won't be as apparent, but since in Bootcamp I only have the 3 squads to work with it might be exagerating the need for it. I guess I dont know how the other scenarios will play out yet.
thewood1
Posts: 10148
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:24 pm
Location: Boston

RE: Suggestion: Rush/etc. to nowhere

Post by thewood1 »

In a couple of other posts I posted this as an overall issue with platoon level commands for a squad-level game.  You either have to micromanage squads after issuing platoon commands or live with squads being out of place.  It is a similar issue to what CMSF has, except its squad orders to individuals.  In PCK, you at least have the option of micromanaging squads into place.  While there are a lot of benefits to platoon oders in a squad-based game, you really need a good TacAI that can adjust the squads to nearby cover or LOS.
User avatar
Erik Rutins
Posts: 39731
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA
Contact:

RE: Suggestion: Rush/etc. to nowhere

Post by Erik Rutins »

ORIGINAL: thewood1
While there are a lot of benefits to platoon oders in a squad-based game, you really need a good TacAI that can adjust the squads to nearby cover or LOS.

Hm, I started thinking about this and could see both pros and cons. Can you elaborate on how you would see this working without creating a new type of problem for the player?
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC


Image

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.
thewood1
Posts: 10148
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:24 pm
Location: Boston

RE: Suggestion: Rush/etc. to nowhere

Post by thewood1 »

Take a look at how long they have been working on it CMSF.  Even CC had this issue to some extent.  My opinion is either try to do it full bore like CMSF (most likely not worth the effort), or skip platoon movement altogther and order each individual squad.  As a matter of fact, most of my movements in CM1 were done by highlight an entire platoon and giving a movement order.  Then after they had started, I went in and adjusted each squad's waypoints, either by moving them or adding one to the end.
 
Maybe thats how you do it.  I haven't checked PCK, but may give the platoon order and then based on stance or platoon order, be able to adjust the waypoints of each individual squad instead of waiting for them to get to the final position.  I see PCK as first being the company commander and sending a platoon off in a general direction.  I then become the platoon commander and adjusting individual squads.  It also kind of how I played CM1, although without the platoon restrictions, but with some significant command delays.
 
Sorry, that was a brain dump and a little incoherent.
PDiFolco
Posts: 1195
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:14 am

RE: Suggestion: Rush/etc. to nowhere

Post by PDiFolco »

A related point : it seems that a squad can rush for several turns without any fatigue ... Is that intended ? Seems to me a "rush" should be limited to 1-2 turns (try running 160 sec with 30kg+ pack...)[:-]
PDF
User avatar
Erik Rutins
Posts: 39731
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA
Contact:

RE: Suggestion: Rush/etc. to nowhere

Post by Erik Rutins »

ORIGINAL: thewood1
Maybe thats how you do it.  I haven't checked PCK, but may give the platoon order and then based on stance or platoon order, be able to adjust the waypoints of each individual squad instead of waiting for them to get to the final position.

Yeah, that's exactly how I do it actually, when I'm playing.
I see PCK as first being the company commander and sending a platoon off in a general direction.  I then become the platoon commander and adjusting individual squads.  It also kind of how I played CM1, although without the platoon restrictions, but with some significant command delays.

That's sort of how it does work, yep. In general the individual squad management becomes more "of interest" when you're actually close to the enemy or in combat.

Regards,

- Erik
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC


Image

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.
User avatar
Erik Rutins
Posts: 39731
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA
Contact:

RE: Suggestion: Rush/etc. to nowhere

Post by Erik Rutins »

ORIGINAL: PDiFolco
A related point : it seems that a squad can rush for several turns without any fatigue ... Is that intended ? Seems to me a "rush" should be limited to 1-2 turns (try running 160 sec with 30kg+ pack...)[:-]

Correct - instead of limiting it with fatigue, we instead limited the speed a bit to what a soldier could sustainably do with assumed combat gear. I can see the argument for fatigue as a better limiter in some cases, but it does add another thing to track on a squad by squad basis. When I think about other ways to implement this I think an alternative might be to add a "max turns" and "cool down" period to Rush like we do with artillery.

Regards,

- Erik
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC


Image

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.
Capitaine
Posts: 1028
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2002 10:00 am

RE: Suggestion: Rush/etc. to nowhere

Post by Capitaine »

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

When I think about other ways to implement this I think an alternative might be to add a "max turns" and "cool down" period to Rush like we do with artillery.

That would be a very elegant solution. I too thought of fatigue when using "rush" for *foot* units on consecutive turns, and this could work pretty well to show that rate can't be sustained (and then you might could speed up the movement too since it wouldn't have to be sustained indefinitely).

One added thing on not having a "Stay" command for "Rush": Units like the trucks in Boot Camp scn 6 are not given an Engage order I don't believe. And certain other units also appear to move only by Rush. In such cases the need for a "Stay" command is heightened b/c there's no alternative order to use to accomplish the desired movement. Please consider adding it to Rush; I'm sensitive to the need for a rudimentary order format but don't see this as a grievous departure from that. [;)]
User avatar
Prince of Eckmühl
Posts: 2459
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 4:37 pm
Location: Texas

RE: Suggestion: Rush/etc. to nowhere

Post by Prince of Eckmühl »

ORIGINAL: thewood1

In a couple of other posts I posted this as an overall issue with platoon level commands for a squad-level game.  TacAI t
Could it be that this is actually a platoon-level game with squad-level commands available to the player?

PoE (aka ivanmoe)
Government is the opiate of the masses.
rickier65
Posts: 14253
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2000 8:00 am

RE: Suggestion: Rush/etc. to nowhere

Post by rickier65 »

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

.... When I think about other ways to implement this I think an alternative might be to add a "max turns" and "cool down" period to Rush like we do with artillery.

Regards,

- Erik

I think that would be an excellent solution, I thought about fatigue when I started my very first BC sceanrio and wondered how long I could rush before I gave out - then realzied maybe I wouldn't.

Rick
Post Reply

Return to “Panzer Command: Kharkov”