Wish List

[Rooster]

I would also like to see units (probably at the regiment level) pay some sort of operational penalty if they operate too closely to each other's zones, especially when mixing armor and infantry. Such overlapping and interference surely would mess up command and control.

[MadScot]

ORIGINAL: Rooster

I would like to see the ability for amphib assaults. I could be wrong, but COTA wouldn't feature any, but using those COTA estabs to create other scenarios makes me think about the low countries.

Couldn't you consider an amphibiously assaulting unit to be essentially the same as a paradropping unit, and place it at the water's edge, highly disorganised? True, it wouldn't model the ship-to-beach segment, but the existing game doesn't model flak versus the airdropping units (unit estabs on the ground being fixed, as far as I've been able to tell).

And why would COTA not have amphib assaults? They were in the plans for both Mercury and Hercules/C3 AFAIK.

[danielr_g]

The thing I'd like to see is the shape shown on the screen really be representative of where the unit is. For example, as it is now, when units go into road formation they get into a long line, but that long line swings all over the place in a matter of seconds and is almost never along the road (there is always some part that is way off the road unless the road happens to be exactly straight).

The game as it is revolutionary, but the next step is to make what you see on screen truely reprentative of what is happening on the ground. Otherwise this isn't all that much different that Hexagon based game where units are put in different formations (ALA Avolon Hill's old Gulf Strike and Aegean Strike board games).

Anyways, that is clearly an item for a future game, not a bug fix.

And while I'm at it, it would be kindof cool if you could zoom in to squad/vehicle level to watch what was going on, but lets not get too out of control here [:D]

[HercMighty]

ORIGINAL: danielr_g

And while I'm at it, it would be kindof cool if you could zoom in to squad/vehicle level to watch what was going on, but lets not get too out of control here [:D]

Seeing would be cool, but like you said there are many more things we need done and more areas of operations done first.

[Arjuna]

Dan,

I agree that it would be nice for the occupied area to snake along the road. I'll add that to the wish list.

[Rooster]

ORIGINAL: MadScot

Couldn't you consider an amphibiously assaulting unit to be essentially the same as a paradropping unit, and place it at the water's edge, highly disorganised? True, it wouldn't model the ship-to-beach segment, but the existing game doesn't model flak versus the airdropping units (unit estabs on the ground being fixed, as far as I've been able to tell).

Thanks MadScot - yours is a really good idea - I think I'll try it. However, the way I'd really like to see it implemented would be to have it as an option on engineer units or certain engineer units that carry/supply the boats for this kind of operation. It wouldn't be too different from a bridging unit in that regard, only you wouldn't need a crossing point on the map. It would give you the flexibility to strike across a river almost anywhere.

[Arjuna]

"...almost anywhere..." I love that. [:)]

Reality check. Few rivers can be crossed anywhere along their length. The main reason being access to the river's edge. If this is too steep ( most common reason ) or too soft to facilitate a good access ramp then having the pontoon in the water won't help. IRL there are relatively few crossing points along most rivers ( for vehicles that is ). That is why they are strategically important.

[Golf33]

Current is also a big problem for assault-boat crossings. Even at Nijmegen the American paras nearly got swept away by the river; a less determined group of soldiers might not have made it across at all.

Regards
33

[HercMighty]

Old unit reports leave a Black box.

1. This color is hard to see on at least the HTTR map and would be nice if a different color could be chosen. (This also goes for some town names)

2. With a new color maybe we could get a sliding color depending on the length of time this marker has been there.


Number one being the most important.

[Rooster]

"almost anywhere" - [:)] Okay okay. Let's change that to "a location of the attacking commander's choosing, rather than the obvious and well-defended locations."

At 4:30 am on July 7, 1944, the 117th IR crossed the Vire near the Pont de St. Fromond in assault boats, securing the far side without having to fight across the bridge. The crossing was chosen to take place a few hundred yards north of the bridge where the river bend protected the crossing from German gun emplacements.

"Engineer guides and 16 Assault boats were provided by the 105th Engineer Combat Battalion for each of the leading companies. Scaling ladders with hooks at the ends were specially designed by the engineers as a means of getting from the river up the steep banks, which were eight foot high on both sides of the Vire."

http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/books/wwii/100-13/st-lo_2a.htm

[Arjuna]

[:)][:)]

I realise that such impromptu river crossings were done. However, they cannot be just anywhere along the river. You need some way of identifying these locations. That's why we have "Crossings" that are created in the MapMaker. A Crossing entity does not have to have an actual bridge or even a ferry, it can be just a bare bones or "potential" Crossing. On the HTTR maps there were few eligible crossings potential or bridged. That was mainly because of the factors mentioned above - ie steepnesss of bank, boggy ground and current.

You can, however, go into the MapMaker and change the map by adding in extra crossings. That's your perogative. Make sure though that when playing H2H you and your opponent have the same map.

[Golf33]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

You can, however, go into the MapMaker and change the map by adding in extra crossings. That's your perogative. Make sure though that when playing H2H you and your opponent have the same map.

Best done by saving a changed map under a different name so you still have the original. Edit the scenario to change the map it uses and save that under a different name as well; then send the scenario and map to your opponent.

That way you don't stuff up your original maps and scenarios.

Regards
33

[Rooster]

RE Amphib Assualt.: Great suggestions and good ideas. I will try them out.

I am impressed with your involvement on these forums guys... you make a great game even better. [:)]

[Rooster]

Another (small) wish: Can you publish the strat guide as a *tagged* PDF so I can get it to reflow on my Pocket PC? Without being tagged, you can't really read the strat guide because it displays too large.

This would make my time on the crapper so much more enjoyable.

Thanks!

[&o]

[Razoredge33]

would it be to much to ask for a game based in the pacific. with like marines and the japanese i think that would be cool because u can have them come up ont he water edge and stuff. also maybe like a cinematic brefieng and debrifing that would be cool to like really immerse u in the game. and maybe when u a unit surrenders u get the info on the rest of the battalion depending on how many surrendered maybe even regt. and maybe not for like the next game but for a future game is to have like a small cinematic box to kinda like show u what is really going on. and maybe the lines that show where a unit is wouild like bend and conform to like the land features around it and like when a unit gets routed like the line like busts and stuff that would be cool.and thats all i can think of

[PaulWRoberts]

This is probably somewhere on the list already, but I'd like to see a slight mod to the Stratmap in the upper left corner. The green dots are easy to see, but the reds are nearly impossible.

[EDIT: This is more of a problem with Bil's brown map add-on than with his green one, at least on my monitor.]

And another:

How about an ammo level display for ALL units (such as we now have for artillery only with F10)?

[marc420]

Hey guys! I'm new to this game, and this is probably already listed in the 5 pages of this thread I haven't read. But the one thing I'd like to see would be tools to help me see the status of all my forces.

Ie, when I start a scenario, I spend a lot of time with the arrow keys trying to figure out what forces I've got. Then when I'm playing a scenario, I spend a lot of time cycling through units trying to see what orders they've got. Also, it might be nice to get some sort of indicator of roughly how much order delay a unit has left till it executes the order I've given it.

There might be several ways of doing these things, but one overall OOB display that shows the units and their current orders, future orders and approx delay remaining would do the trick.

BTW, on orders delay, I'm assuming the HQ has a rough idea of how long its going to take for the orders to get there and get going. And probably the orders have a start time included. So I expect not to know exactly to the minute when a force will start to execute my orders, but I'd expect a commander would have a rought idea.

And actually, as I type this a "start time" might be a neat addition to an order. That would give a commander the ability to issue orders to a number of units, and tell them all that the op begins at 0500 the next morning. To me, that somewhat simulates what I seem to read a lot of which is a commander and his staff and officers sitting down the night before and coming up with orders to be executed the next day.

[Error in 0]

Nice ideas, marc420. In addition I would like multiple orders for a unit. Ala 'Attack A first, and then defend B upon attack completion.' I would assume developing those 2 orders at the same time would cost less time than doing it seperately. Also I would like a button on top named 'Ubermensh'. Clicking it would max out all unit parameters. [:D]


JT

[MadScot]

I don't think a unit should save any planning time for sequential orders like that. (So you could give sequenced orders, but it won't get you to the end point any faster)

After all, it actually requires much more planning to deal with the what-ifs from the first action.

If you order a combined arms bn to attack a bridge, then move away and defend a nearby village - what do they do if losses from the assault leave what would have been the two left flank companies badly understrength - in reality, they'd replan the defence - which means more time. It makes more sense to do each task separately.

The only case where it doesn't matter is when resistance is expected to be weak, and is in fact also weak. Then use a MOVE order to "attack" the first object (with suitable aggro etc) then finish the move at 'B' with a defensive orientation. It's not a 'strong' attack but no sane bn commander would plan in detail for actions after an assault the results of which are unknown.

What if the attack fails, even?

[Arjuna]

ORIGINAL: marc420

Hey guys! I'm new to this game, and this is probably already listed in the 5 pages of this thread I haven't read. But the one thing I'd like to see would be tools to help me see the status of all my forces.

Ie, when I start a scenario, I spend a lot of time with the arrow keys trying to figure out what forces I've got. Then when I'm playing a scenario, I spend a lot of time cycling through units trying to see what orders they've got. Also, it might be nice to get some sort of indicator of roughly how much order delay a unit has left till it executes the order I've given it.

There might be several ways of doing these things, but one overall OOB display that shows the units and their current orders, future orders and approx delay remaining would do the trick.

Yes this is one of my and Paul's favourites on the wish list. We plan to implement this for BFTB.

BTW, on orders delay, I'm assuming the HQ has a rough idea of how long its going to take for the orders to get there and get going. And probably the orders have a start time included. So I expect not to know exactly to the minute when a force will start to execute my orders, but I'd expect a commander would have a rought idea.

That is exactly how it is.

And actually, as I type this a "start time" might be a neat addition to an order. That would give a commander the ability to issue orders to a number of units, and tell them all that the op begins at 0500 the next morning. To me, that somewhat simulates what I seem to read a lot of which is a commander and his staff and officers sitting down the night before and coming up with orders to be executed the next day.

Yes this would be good. It begs the question though of what do they in the interim - ie between now and the specified Start time. Do they continue on with their current order or do they just halt and Defend till then or should they Reorg or Rest. We can certainly work out a regime for handling this, but it will require some thought to cater for all the cases ( well the worst cases in particular [;)]).