2.* Wishlist Thread

[Deepstuff3725]

Hey, quick question.
Is there a way to make off board artillery part of reinforcements? I'm wanting to have artillery only available about halfway through a scenario. Any way to do this, or limit the availability to certain turns? Having a probability of off board artillery being a available would be great as well.

If not currently in the game, can this be included in the future releases?

Thanks

[robshelby]

I would like to see all the platoon units for the AXIS (German, Italian) that are in the WEST FRONT OOB but NOT in the EAST FRONT OOB added to the EAST FRONT OOB. While this may not be historically accurate, all units had the potential of being sent to the eastern front.

[Crossroads]

ORIGINAL: robshelby

I would like to see all the platoon units for the AXIS (German, Italian) that are in the WEST FRONT OOB but NOT in the EAST FRONT OOB added to the EAST FRONT OOB. While this may not be historically accurate, all units had the potential of being sent to the eastern front.

Unfortunately, easier said than done, as the WF and EF German Platoon01.oob files differ from each other, and the slots for new units are quite used up. You might try your luck with the -X noencryption option and manually editing and adding the units you want to introduce to EF.

FWIW there's the Allied Germany available for EF, for some What-Ifs. Included in the Forgotten Battles Mod, that is.

[robshelby]

I have manually add and edit the units. But, I can not get game to see it. What is the -X noencryption option ?
and how do I use it. Please

[Crossroads]

ORIGINAL: robshelby

I have manually add and edit the units. But, I can not get game to see it. What is the -X noencryption option ?
and how do I use it. Please

Here's a couple of pointers, they are sort of intertwined so here's three links:

[*] Developer Diary #4 - Creating a new Dynamic Campaign Game

[*] Developer Diary #3 - Adding new units with -X NoEncryption option

[*] Developer Diary #2 - Having fun with randomly generated battles

Any questions let me know, preferrably post at the end of the relevant How-To thread above so the discussion is then kept there for others possibly looking at this as well. [:)]

[Hoplite1963]

1.Currently indirect fire artillery missions and airstrikes always arrive the next turn after they are plotted. (i.e. 6 minutes later) it would be good if in the scenario editor you could set the delay in turns for on map and off map artillery and airstrikes separately for each category and separately for each side with no upper limit on the number of turns of delay.

2.I would also like to see negative reinforcements (withdrawals) implemented for both on map and off map units.

3.Related to this I think rather than being available as a number of missions off map air strike assets should be treated as off map units with variable availability.

4.It would also be good to be able to call for reconnaissance missions that would fly on and reveal more about the layout of the target area in the way that airstrikes now work, as I think this would be a more realistic way of representing these missions particularly for faster reconnaissance planes.

5.I would like it to be possible to set interception and counter battery values in the scenario editor for each side that would give a percentage chance that plotted off map air-strikes will not get through or that off map artillery that fire will be taken out by counter battery shoots.

[Crossroads]

Neat ideas there Ian [:)]

[DonCzirr]

Very minor request - Alt Labels option like in JTS Panzer Campaigns

Current white block styles are not all that pleasing aesthetically

[Crossroads]

ORIGINAL: DonCzirr

Very minor request - Alt Labels option like in JTS Panzer Campaigns

Current white block styles are not all that pleasing aesthetically

Already implemented in CS: Middle East, available with coming titles too [:)]

[Big Ivan]

CS Dev Team,

In the editor and/or while playing a game would it be possible to show range display for multiple units?
Ex: say you have a Panther & a Mark IVj in a hex and you click to highlight both, then select the "G" key for range
display and it would display ranges for both units color coded differently.

IMO this would be a nice feature especially in scenario design.

Also somewhere I thought I posted asking for range display in the scenario editor and when playing a scenario for off-board artillery units.
Just reviving that request so its on the list.

Thanks
John[;)]

[MagellanPOL]

In Edit sometimes I use toggle fixed ( fatigue, distributed ). Could change the way modify the status of units.
Now is that: first I put Units on the map and then choose Units and changing status on toggle ( fixed, fatigue, distributed )
New Buttom with new way: first I choose bottom (toggle fixed ( fatigue, distributed )), then every Units J put on the map have automatically fixed ( fatigue, distributed ).

This way is faster when I create new scenario

[Crossroads]

Well understood, and a neat idea while at it. Thanks! [:)]

[carll11]

I dont understand Magellan, are you saying there is a way in 'edit scenario' to press one button then all of the units you place are automatically fixed?

[Crossroads]

^^That is his wishlist item, I think.

[MagellanPOL]

The idea is to first set the unit properties (e.g. fixed or fatigue, distributed) and then set each unit on the map have such properties.

[berto]

Or we could hot key it: Place unit, press the f(atigued) hot key, place unit, press the f hot key, ...

And similarly for the other unit modes.

[wings7]

ORIGINAL: berto


Or we could hot key it: Place unit, press the f(atigued) hot key, place unit, press the f hot key, ...

And similarly for the other unit modes.

Excellent idea!

[carll11]

Yes please, that would be fantastic, a hot key for fixing units ( and others) in edit mode,,,,many cases of cyber beer all around;0

[hazxan]

Firstly, thanks for all the development work on this. I was late to the party on this, only bought it a couple of years of ago. But it's become one of my favourite wargames and will stay on my hard drive for ever, and I still won't have played all of the scenarios!

Anyway..one little GUI improvement. The message box that reports damage after firing always starts in the lower left and is moveable. Would it be possible to auto-position it near to the action it is describing? Not obscuring, but a little to the right/left and above/below.

[Rake]

ORIGINAL: Crossroads

ORIGINAL: carl11

fine, make it 3 hours, its a Game;)

and with the appropriate equipment,it can be done in less than that, say 4 hours, dig, logs, sandbags.

In case you or anyone else is not aware of this: Construction Engineers already with JTCS can create Trench systems. Trenches are not Bunkers of course, but they are much better than IPs.

I got bored today and started poking around the forums.. I came across this post and just couldn't believe how quickly some posters think engineering functions can be completed. The ability to construct trenches within the time frame of ANY CS game is just wrong, much less bunkers

I have worked in surveying, civil engineering and heavy (highway) construction for over 40 years. Even with modern excavators, it is not possible to create a trench system for the size of a CS hex within a day (240 turns), much less 6 minutes.

Among many other things, I have been extensively involved in the oversight of pipe excavation and installation. Some of my work has involved estimating time and materials necessary to complete a construction project. Many of the tools available for this purpose use 30 cubic meters/ hour as a starting point for estimating trench excavation. This equates to a trench roughly 3.2' deep x 3.2' wide x 100' long. It also assumes using modern track excavators; the 30 CM/hour number assumes the use of a one-half cubic meter bucket. Naturally, there are multipliers for additional work, such as types of soils encountered, if shoring is required to keep the trench from collapsing and whether trucks or haulers are being loaded to move the material to another site. This number corresponds fairly well with the production I've observed over my years in the business.

The 250 meter hex used by CS comprises approximately 13-1/2 acres (actually 13.37 acres, 5.41 hectares). The length of each side is roughly 144 meters. Using the industry standard of thirty meters an hour mean that it would take nearly 5 hours for one excavator to dig the length of one hexside. This certainly doesn't include the timber and other materials necessary to support the trench and provide top cover from artillery and air bombardment. It's also entrenchment solely along one side of a hex, not trenching that will provide all-around coverage.

I haven't been able to determine the number of men in the Construction Engineer platoon used in the game. I'm guessing the number would be approximately 40 -50 men. A search of the US Army TO&E for a construction battalion turned up cranes, front-end loaders; lifts, bulldozers, etc. While a dozer can push material around, they're not generally capable of trenching. Certainly, given enough time, a dozer could create a wide ditch like an anti-tank trench. but it would be nearly impossible to build a trench system with a bulldozer... certainly not within the time limits of ANY Campaign Series scenario. A bulldozer is fine for a tank scrape, but this would be closer to an improved position rather than a trench.

Equipment that I did not find in the TO&E, and that I would assume to be available, were excavators and backhoes. Still, this is at battalion level and neither would likely be available in significant numbers at the platoon/company level. A standard backhoe would be capable of helping in the construction of a trench system, but production rates would be far less than the 30 CM/Hour shown above. Backhoes are generally used for cutting small (1-2' wide) ditches for small pipe installations, i.e., smaller utility lines. I would expect excavators to only be used in areas quite removed from the FEBA and certainly not in the area encompassed by a CS scenario.

I don't understand the reasoning behind the decision to allow trenching to occur during a scenario. As it is, allowing a 20-30% chance of improving a position within 6 minutes is extremely liberal. But this has been that way since the beginning and I don't really see a reason to change. But, after 7 attempts (42 minutes) the probability of having constructed a trench system (encompassing the all-around defense of more than 13 acres) is greater than 50% (52.2%). It's just not possible within the time frame, not even if an entire CB unit took part with all of their standard equipment.