Future Directions - Features

[henri51]

It would be fun and instructive for the player to be able to easily modify the scenario, for example to replace all of the commanders with the three stooges or Rommel and Patton to see the difference. And to modify the units, for example to equip the German Armored Companies with all Panthers and all the Americans tanks with Stuarts!...It would be interesting to see a scenario that is normally unwinnable by the Germans with all Peipers commanding the German tank units and all doctors from Mash commanding the Allied tanks...[:'(]

Although at first sight this sounds like stupid fun, in fact it would allow the player to better grasp the effect of various factors such as leadership and equipment. I bet most wargamers (not the ones on this forum[:D]) have no idea of what their units contain and what they are capable of, and especially what the difference in capabiity would be if some things were changed.

In the meantime being able to change the commanders at various levels of command would be fun.

Henri

[Lanconic]

ORIGINAL: OlegHasky

I am not interested in playing scenarios, for the express reason that you are locked into historical mistakes.

Case in point in Bulge simulations:

The SS Panzer corps is deployed to attack thru the worst possible terrain against a full strength enemy.
It takes no imagination to postulate the likely outcome.

Now...imagine the same units deployed at the Monschua Gap. (forgive my spelling)

OR....

Bastogne would be unlikely to hold against two SS panzer corp.

Just simple examples

Thats a good time to point "manual unit placement" option. Wich seem that could be the blessing fpor ...series like "Decisives Battles of WW2".[:'(]
As BFTB/COTA/HTTR operates on a smaller scale. We know its impossible.

You can always check Yorself how much You can pull out from the "mistake"

Does this 'option' allow you to add units that are not included in the historical scenario?

I can offer you a Wargame on this level that DOES have a campaign scenario, even if a bit dated.
However, it isnt a computer wargame, very sad.
'Wacht am Rhein' - SPI 1978? I cant recall

So it IS possible to do it.

[Mac_MatrixForum]

One small feature that came into my mind while watching and playing the tutorial is this. Coordinating the units would be much easier if you showed the times at the various waypoints for the selected unit(s). Say I click a commanding unit, I see what the commander has planned for the route, but why not also put the time at the waypoint on the map at the same time? Then I wouldn't have to click on the individual waypoint to check when he will get there. I also like to select my commanding unit, then shift-down to see all the subordinates and how the commander has planned to use them. In this case I would expect to see the time on target for each.

[Arjuna]

ORIGINAL: Mac

One small feature that came into my mind while watching and playing the tutorial is this. Coordinating the units would be much easier if you showed the times at the various waypoints for the selected unit(s). Say I click a commanding unit, I see what the commander has planned for the route, but why not also put the time at the waypoint on the map at the same time? Then I wouldn't have to click on the individual waypoint to check when he will get there. I also like to select my commanding unit, then shift-down to see all the subordinates and how the commander has planned to use them. In this case I would expect to see the time on target for each.

Nice idea. The only trouble being this, that when you nissue the order we do not calc the route. Thi is done when the subordinate receives the order ( ie after orders delay ) so there would be a lag. If you are wanting an estimate, then that's another matter, but for an actual time based on the calced route there would be a delay before displaying.

[FredSanford3]

Or maybe in each linked scenario, you get to invest VP's (same currency as the on-map objectives) on a menu of available formations. Each Formation has a VP cost and a time-to-enter map estimate (and location). If you want the I SS Panzer Korps for the Monshau Gap Scenario, it'll cost say 120 VP's. For that investment, you better sweep the map. This allows a commander to allocate resources to different places in the line. During the game, instead of a fixed reinforcement schedule, you have access to the Available Formation menu for in-game 'emergency' requests. But it'll cost you, and they may take awhile to get there. There could even be some scattering of arrival times (stretching and random-delays on the entry) due to enemy air superiority or other interdiction efforts. Further, as time goes on, some formations may no longer be available as they are assigned missions elsewhere.

ORIGINAL: OlegHasky

I am not interested in playing scenarios, for the express reason that you are locked into historical mistakes.

Case in point in Bulge simulations:

The SS Panzer corps is deployed to attack thru the worst possible terrain against a full strength enemy.
It takes no imagination to postulate the likely outcome.

Now...imagine the same units deployed at the Monschua Gap. (forgive my spelling)

OR....

Bastogne would be unlikely to hold against two SS panzer corp.

Just simple examples

Thats a good time to point "manual unit placement" option. Wich seem that could be the blessing fpor ...series like "Decisives Battles of WW2".[:'(]
As BFTB/COTA/HTTR operates on a smaller scale. We know its impossible.

You can always check Yorself how much You can pull out from the "mistake"

[Mac_MatrixForum]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

ORIGINAL: Mac

One small feature that came into my mind while watching and playing the tutorial is this. Coordinating the units would be much easier if you showed the times at the various waypoints for the selected unit(s). Say I click a commanding unit, I see what the commander has planned for the route, but why not also put the time at the waypoint on the map at the same time? Then I wouldn't have to click on the individual waypoint to check when he will get there. I also like to select my commanding unit, then shift-down to see all the subordinates and how the commander has planned to use them. In this case I would expect to see the time on target for each.

Nice idea. The only trouble being this, that when you nissue the order we do not calc the route. Thi is done when the subordinate receives the order ( ie after orders delay ) so there would be a lag. If you are wanting an estimate, then that's another matter, but for an actual time based on the calced route there would be a delay before displaying.

Yeah, it's not really a problem if you first display an estimate. I realized this from the tutorials that you can make so much better estimates than I [:)]. So something like the method you did manually including quick path + guesses for reorg etc. would be just super. You could display these in brackets i.e. (16:34). Then when you have the actual times available just show it e.g. 16:37.

[DanOppenheim]

I would like a way to dump force lists at the end of scenarios, please! As requested in this thread.

[Renato]

Here are my preferences (not necessarily in order of importance because that depends on the chosen scenarios):

- Mount and dismount infantry and equipment
- Minefields, roadblocks, trenches
- Off-map and naval artillery
- Vehicles recovery and repair
- Campaign mode (carry-over of units from a scenario to the following one, reserves)
- More coordinated intelligence where previous information is remembered
- Indication of general area where supplies are eliminated or interdicted
- New doctrines (Russian and maybe Japanese)
- Smoke
- Amphibious equipment and landings

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: CriticalMass

WOW, this is exactly one year and one day since you originally posted it GG...synchronicity

Woah, that scares me now. I didn't notice. Well, the same second, but I missed it by 3 minutes. Spooky, though. [X(][:D]

Good find, CM.

[phredd1]

I'd give this system a chance if there was an Eastern Front title. The current subjects just haven't pulled at me enough to try them.

[Fred98]

ORIGINAL: Lanconic

I am not interested in playing scenarios, for the express reason that you are locked into historical mistakes.......

....The SS Panzer corps is deployed to attack thru the worst possible terrain against a full strength enemy.

Fans can always utilise the scenario editor and place units in non historical locations.

If you had placed the SS Panzer Corps in a different location the logistics would have been moved differently and battle would have started at a differt time which leads to......................

-

[Frank.Costanzo]

I would like to see:

1. All reinforcements shown on the OB grayed out.
2. Smoke
3. Mines
4. Causalties listed as you go, numbers, pecentage

[Arjuna]

Reinforcements are greyed out on the OB Display. They only appear when using the organic forces structure type. WHen doing so there are three filter buttons at the bottom of the OB display and one of them toggles on and off the rienforcement units. Try it.

[wodin]

More detailed AAR. I would like to see how each unit performed. A breakdown of what the unit destroyed and if possible what enemy unit they belonged to. Would be even better if you could access this during the game but in the AAR would be good enough. Its something that has been asked for for awhile.

Also more deatiled radio feedback. Maybe you could receive a message asking for backup or asking to be pulled out of action. This would be handy in overall assessment of the battlefield as sometimes you need to leave some units to it whilst concentrating on others.

[Frank.Costanzo]

Thanks, Still getting to know the new features. This game is great!

I would like to see the ability to re-orgainze units in the OB screen. Maybe have the OB screen as a pop up, so it can be enlarged.

[Captain_Ahab]

Some ideas for greater immersion.

1.  More staff officer type briefings. Eg. Chief of Staff informs you what he thinks enemy intentions may be, or suggests plans.
2. In game scripting, for example an Operation Cobra scenario would require carpet bombing by the US/British airforce and this could be included, but because it was a strategic decision, it would be outside of your control.
3. The ability to plan an artillery barrage. Useful for set-piece battle type scenarios.

[wodin]

ORIGINAL: Captain_Ahab

Some ideas for greater immersion.

1.  More staff officer type briefings. Eg. Chief of Staff informs you what he thinks enemy intentions may be, or suggests plans.
2. In game scripting, for example an Operation Cobra scenario would require carpet bombing by the US/British airforce and this could be included, but because it was a strategic decision, it would be outside of your control.
3. The ability to plan an artillery barrage. Useful for set-piece battle type scenarios.

Like the idea of the chief of staff briefings...though I imagine in the scenario breifings you are told what needs to be done (maybe it needs to be in greater detail)...in the other games you get a different briefing depending on side. There was also a historical backdrop.

[Howard7x]

Arjuna,

This was something I brought up a couple of years ago and hopefully you can add it into the next title.

Pretty simple gripe I had mainly with COTA as for me, it was a battle I knew little to nothing about. Front end interface, when selecting battles without going through the text files it was very difficult to figure out how each battle linked from one to the next and what the timeline was. When selecting a scenario, it would be great if they were displayed on a map of the entire theatre, showing the location and time of the battle in relation to the other scenarios. This way you could give the player a guide as to the scenario they are playing and how it actually fits into the bigger picture of the entire battle. I found myself enjoying the COTA scenarios but having no clue as to how or why I was fighting them in the grand scheme of things.

I hope you understand my point and it kind of makes sense! Im downloading BftB as I type [:)]

[Grim.Reaper]

I know this probably won't make it in, but after playing other games that have this feature, I find myself missing it. When moving around the map, I would like to be able to click and drag the map which allows for better positioning of the map. Although scrolling to the edge if screens is fine, I just think you can get more precise if clicking and moving. I would also still keep in the edge scrolling as well.

[bretg80]

I would like to see google-like map movement such as the sling-scrolling and the grab and move to a location. Very nice game.