RE: If you could add one feature...

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: If you could add one feature...

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Flashpoint Campaigns Series >> Requested Features and Ideas >> RE: If you could add one feature...

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: If you could add one feature... - 11/17/2016 3:53:33 PM

CapnDarwin

Posts: 8467
Joined: 2/12/2005
From: Newark, OH
Status: offline

There are a couple people working on making maps similar to what William does. There are a couple threads in the scenario mods forum that show the tools and techniques being used. Check those out to get an idea of what goes into just making the map art.

_____________________________

OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!

Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC

(in reply to kevinkins)

Post #: 61

RE: If you could add one feature... - 11/17/2016 9:21:51 PM

kevinkins

Posts: 2257
Joined: 3/8/2006
Status: offline

Not sure what you mean. Are you saying the process is so cumbersome that a Pro edition would have little to no appeal? I tried scenario design and it was not bad at all. A discount on Hexdraw would be cool if it could be arranged. The free mapping tools available can be used but do not compare. Just an idea.

Kevin

(in reply to CapnDarwin)

Post #: 62

RE: If you could add one feature... - 11/18/2016 4:45:38 PM

CapnDarwin

Posts: 8467
Joined: 2/12/2005
From: Newark, OH
Status: offline

What I am saying is scenario design on an existing map is easy. Using the map values editor on a map image takes some time to do, but it is feasible. Making a map image using any type of third party tools will vary in complexity. Making a map to the level of William's work takes a number of tools and days of work. My point is that there is no simple point and click tool we can make that will equal what he does to get a final map image and map data file. We could look at some type of point and click hex filler post Southern Storm with the understanding it will not look as good or have the flexibility of style his maps bring to the game.

A lot here for everyone to chew on and think about.

_____________________________

OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!

Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC

(in reply to kevinkins)

Post #: 63

RE: If you could add one feature... - 11/19/2016 4:50:55 AM

kevinkins

Posts: 2257
Joined: 3/8/2006
Status: offline

As an example. I was making a Korea '85 scenario back in August and, try as I might, the map was not up to the same quality as if I had purchased Hexdraw and with it the ability to import the nice ground textures. Laying a great topo on a perfectly aligned hex grid still was not what fellow players would expect to battle on. There was no visual way to signal elevations without using cartoon-like freeware map software. I was thinking a partnership with Hexdraw might be an efficient way to extend the engine. Custom maps may have limited appeal so to have a relationship with Hexdraw might not be worthwhile since it would only benefit a few folks like myself.

(in reply to CapnDarwin)

Post #: 64

RE: If you could add one feature... - 11/20/2016 11:02:11 AM

WildCatNL

Posts: 513
Joined: 3/27/2009
From: Eindhoven, the Netherlands
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kevinkin
As an example. I was making a Korea '85 scenario back in August and, try as I might, the map was not up to the same quality as if I had purchased Hexdraw and with it the ability to import the nice ground textures. Laying a great topo on a perfectly aligned hex grid still was not what fellow players would expect to battle on. There was no visual way to signal elevations without using cartoon-like freeware map software. I was thinking a partnership with Hexdraw might be an efficient way to extend the engine. Custom maps may have limited appeal so to have a relationship with Hexdraw might not be worthwhile since it would only benefit a few folks like myself.

Thanks for the feedback and suggestion.

We are a small team, and the map editor is a secondary issue; in order for people to want to create maps, the core game itself should be great first. Any time spent on the map editor is not going towards making the core game great.
So, organizing the map creation such that more of it can be done better with external tools is a great idea, and something we've been looking into.
However, instead of doing more with HexDraw (aimed at the "looks" of the map), we are doing more with (free) QGis (aimed at efficiently handling digital elevation data and overlays from Google / Openstreetmap).

This is for the following reasons:
For a good map, we need a clear 'map values' bitmap for scanning, so the game understands the terrain, and a clear 'pretty' bitmap for display, so the player understands the terrain.
HexDraw doesn't support that distinction, and doesn't let you swap art styles for a given map. So it forces you to compromise both maps into a single map. Either the map is looking pretty, and the map designer has to manually provide a lot of corrections/annotations each and every time he changes the map and scans it anew. Or the map is looking really basic and scans well.
HexDraw also doesn't support reading topographic data (such as digital elevation data), so you'd have to edit the elevation for each and every hex.
HexDraw's art falls short when you want to display the contours of a multiple elevation step on a hex side (for example, going from elevation 1 to 3), especially when combined with a stream running along the hex side. Southern Storm's terrain is more hilly and its terrain representation is a bit richer than Red Storm's, and HexDraw doesn't support this fully.
HexDraw isn't free, and the demo didn't support creation of a full size map for Red Storm.

We have gone the other way, creating templates and styles and a tutorial to create clear 'map values' bitmaps from topographic data using the free QGis tool. (See this thread). This speeds up map creation for the 'map values' bitmap and corresponding .fp10 terrain file part. I value that a lot, having to create most of the maps.
QGis does nothing to make maps look pretty though. For the pretty maps part, I'm using a 'home-grown' tool that reads the .fp9/.fp10 terrain file and renders that terrain in a 'pretty' way. It's not art based, but creates a 3D model of the terrain, and renders that in 2D with contours and shading, then populates it with houses, trees, and nicely curved streams and roads. It also guarantees consistency between what the game thinks is the terrain and what the player sees as terrain.
The big downside of this tool is that it is a command-line, Linux based, memory hungry tool, and not easy to turn into a friendly Windows GUI based tool; putting it behind a web-site based UI probably is more feasible.

I have been supporting the map creators who use QGis with renders of their .fp9 terrain files, which they can edit afterwards. I should be able to do this also when Southern Storm launches.

William

_____________________________

William
On Target Simulations LLC

(in reply to kevinkins)

Post #: 65

RE: If you could add one feature... - 11/20/2016 4:13:22 PM

kipanderson

Posts: 394
Joined: 8/27/2001
From: U.K.
Status: offline

William,

thanks.. that sounds great.

Thanks.

All the best,
kip.

(in reply to WildCatNL)

Post #: 66

RE: If you could add one feature... - 11/20/2016 5:02:51 PM

kevinkins

Posts: 2257
Joined: 3/8/2006
Status: offline

Thank you. I did not know that option existed. Missed the thread in September and/or it's significance. I will download and check it out for the Korea project. But first a silly question or two: what is a QGI? Google brings up nothing relevant. Also, other than the example maps with the tutorial, are any other maps created with this technique available to play on?

(in reply to kipanderson)

Post #: 67

RE: If you could add one feature... - 11/20/2016 5:15:46 PM

CapnDarwin

Posts: 8467
Joined: 2/12/2005
From: Newark, OH
Status: offline

I believe it is QGIS. https://www.qgis.org/

_____________________________

OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!

Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC

(in reply to kevinkins)

Post #: 68

RE: If you could add one feature... - 12/17/2016 11:33:01 AM

MikeJ19

Posts: 3696
Joined: 1/29/2014
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline

I am getting the game for Christmas and looking forward to playing and joining the community. In reading the rules, I did not see any option for "fire planning" with the artillery. I was an artillery officer and this is one of the important skills we practiced a lot. In game terms, it would involve having the ability to plot a number of fire missions with timings - say three different target locations over 15 minutes while an attack is going on.

Is this clear?

I can't wait to start playing...

Post #: 69

RE: If you could add one feature... - 12/17/2016 2:34:23 PM

IronManBeta

Posts: 4132
Joined: 2/25/2002
From: Burlington, Ontario
Status: offline

MikeJ19 - I hope you enjoy the game when you get it!

Yes, you can fine tune your arty impact times to the minute. The default is just to wait a few minutes and then space each barrage at five minute intervals to get the fastest possible delivery but you can change that in the waypoint editor.

Set up 1 to 3 arty target reference points in the usual way and then right-click on any of them to bring up the waypoint editor. A screen shot is show here. You can see the timings of the shots and there is also a voluntary delay cell in the row before each shoot. Click on that gray cell and you can set an extra delay in minutes. If you delay the first shoot by say 5 minutes then it will bump back the second and third shoots by five minutes too. You can play around to your heart's content.

Normally the command of a brigade would not worry about such details but once in a while you really, really want to synchronize a key attack to the n'th degree and this will do it for you!

You can use the same technique for varying the timing of movement waypoints too.

Have fun, Rob C

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to MikeJ19)

Post #: 70

RE: If you could add one feature... - 12/20/2016 1:51:02 AM

IronMikeGolf

Posts: 899
Joined: 3/19/2010
Status: offline

MikeJ19,

The fire support model in this game engine is not very sophisticated. Essentially, you can plot three targets at a time per unit and set the time of impact using waypoint delays, as Rob noted above.

Indirect fire units are basically all in GS with DS response times. The DS mission type does not extend to subordinate units, which is a severe constraint. We are addressing that, among other things, in Southern Storm.

_____________________________

Jeff
Sua Sponte

(in reply to IronManBeta)

Post #: 71

RE: If you could add one feature... - 12/21/2016 1:36:52 AM

MikeJ19

Posts: 3696
Joined: 1/29/2014
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline

Iron Mike Golf,

I was a young artillery officer in 1989 and subsequently taught in the Canadian Artillery School for 6 years over two postings and worked on Canadian Artillery doctrine and NATO artillery doctrine. If I can help let me know.

All the best,

Mike

(in reply to IronMikeGolf)

Post #: 72

RE: If you could add one feature... - 12/25/2016 11:17:14 AM

hawkeye_de

Posts: 51
Joined: 4/19/2009
Status: offline

any change inclunding a battle(scenario) generator ?

Merry Christmas :)

(in reply to MikeJ19)

Post #: 73

RE: If you could add one feature... - 12/27/2016 2:32:47 PM

Mad Russian

Posts: 13256
Joined: 3/16/2008
From: Texas
Status: offline

There will be the ability to get random selection of scenarios into the game. Not sure if it will be a complete random Battle Generator or not.

Good Hunting.

MR

_____________________________

The most expensive thing in the world is free time.

Founder of HSG scenario design group for Combat Mission.
Panzer Command Ostfront Development Team.
Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm Development Team.

(in reply to hawkeye_de)

Post #: 74

RE: If you could add one feature... - 12/28/2016 5:07:21 PM

MikeJ19

Posts: 3696
Joined: 1/29/2014
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline

Good day,

Is there a way to suggest target priorities? The FSCC prioritizes enemy Artillery and HQ units, but in some cases, I would like them to go after enemy bridging capabilities or AD units. Can you add a feature where the player could add to a high payoff target list?

Thanks,

Mike

(in reply to Mad Russian)

Post #: 75

RE: If you could add one feature... - 12/28/2016 6:45:56 PM

CapnDarwin

Posts: 8467
Joined: 2/12/2005
From: Newark, OH
Status: offline

Mike, that is in the planning pipeline for Southern Storm.

_____________________________

OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!

Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC

(in reply to MikeJ19)

Post #: 76

RE: If you could add one feature... - 12/28/2016 11:17:42 PM

MikeJ19

Posts: 3696
Joined: 1/29/2014
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline

Cool!

(in reply to CapnDarwin)

Post #: 77

RE: If you could add one feature... - 1/8/2017 5:27:45 PM

Zakalwe101

Posts: 77
Joined: 12/2/2015
From: UK
Status: offline

The list of suggestions is getting quite long now, I suspect these may have already been suggested or touched upon.
Resupply.
How about units that DID NOT compulsory relocate to resupply retain the mode that they were in prior to commencing resupply and also retain any terrain benefits at the end of the resupply time period. (e.g hold and dug in status that they had prior to commencing resupply ?)

Also ability to select mode the units enters at the end of the resupply function. ?

Preferred stand off distance should be a user defined distance in hexes ? (odd cases where a units preferred standoff distance is greater than the units primary weapon range � e.g Hells crossroad scenario � 4/AT/S/1 Milan 2 range 2000m (4 hexes) preferred standoff distance 5 hexes ?

Engineering
Bridging units equipment represented. I have occasionally come across oddities in respect of what I can only call Bridge spam � e.g airborne units building bridges useable by tanks. So a Soviet Tank company that loses it�s MT55 Can no longer build bridges. (does not lose it�s amphibious ability).

Mine clearance . It strikes me that we have two types of minefield represented in this game, scenario placed minefields (deliberate/dense) and those delivered during the game by Artillery (hasty/localised/sparse). Both require the same time allocation to clear a path through them, but there is also a requirement in respect of equipment. Certainly mine clearance vehicles become a key piece of equipment � and thus key targets. So a Soviet Tank company that loses it�s KMT 5 equipped tank can no longer clear minefields, they can mark a "safe" path but units entering the minefield should be at risk of suffering some losses, also should incur the same time penalty ?.

HELO units
On resupply rather than pathing back to task force HQ for resupply they should path back to their immediate higher HQ unit ( representative of advanced POL/AMMO dump)

AIR SUPPORT - my A10 are equipped with Maverick missiles with a standoff attack range of 23km yet they descend to the target hex to attack and end up being shot at by all and sundry- how about adding the option for air units so equipped to use their stand off range so they are not vulnerable to any oik armed with a sa 7 or sa 18. Once they have used up stand off ammo (perhaps using the artillery special ammunition mechanic ?) they get to come down into the dirt to use the GAU 30. Equally I would not wish them to use the Maverick missiles in a high SAM threat zone given that Mavericks require some altitude, at least at the target acquisition and launch phase. Perhaps permit user defined attack profile, like the artillery mechanic ?
If they must enter the target hex, how about allowing the attack and egress route to be plotted ? Hiding from ground radar behind hills is certainly what the RAF trained, the mid to high altitudes being so dangerous. How would the AI manage this ?

(in reply to kevinkins)

Post #: 78

RE: If you could add one feature... - 2/11/2017 7:55:00 PM

Stimpak

Posts: 632
Joined: 8/23/2015
From: BC, Canada
Status: offline

I know this is rather late to the party, but...

The ability to see where your artillery is landing and if it's scoring hits should be regulated by the presence of units with sufficient Ground Search Radar on the map as opposed to being seen by default - Units like the PRP-4 and SNAR-10 come to mind. The game does an excellent job of modelling electronics systems already, so it couldn't hurt to get a bit more in-depth with regard to the function of these systems, and of course, their vulnerabilities

A trigger system regulating "scripted" AI behavior and reinforcements/withdrawals...
ex
-Reinforcement defined as "D/1-15th Mech Bn" arrives if trigger "Call for Reinforcements" is set... VP cost included
-Enemy AI sends Company X to VP Y if obstacle in hex ZZZZ is breached...
-If enemy casualties reach 50% or more, nuclear weapons are authorized...

Some representation of air-to-air combat...

(in reply to Zakalwe101)

Post #: 79

RE: If you could add one feature... - 3/3/2017 3:32:54 AM

mattdbook

Posts: 4
Joined: 2/12/2015
Status: offline

Hi Chris,

Thanks for your reply. I haven't been on the forum for a while.

I do think the game is excellent in many ways, but I do look forward to any targeting improvements in Southern Storm!

Regards,
Matt

(in reply to cbelva)

Post #: 80

RE: If you could add one feature... - 3/7/2017 5:51:26 PM

Jagger2002

Posts: 674
Joined: 5/20/2002
Status: offline

quote:

The ability to see where your artillery is landing and if it's scoring hits should be regulated by the presence of units with sufficient Ground Search Radar on the map as opposed to being seen by default - Units like the PRP-4 and SNAR-10 come to mind. The game does an excellent job of modelling electronics systems already, so it couldn't hurt to get a bit more in-depth with regard to the function of these systems, and of course, their vulnerabilities

Yes and also would be nice to remove the precise artillery results from the TOC messages in human to human/PBEM games. I like those artillery TOC messages when playing the AI because they are very useful in understanding the combat mechanism. However in PBEM, those messages make artillery the preferred method of reconnaissance. However, IMO, it is Ok if there is a legitimate justification for knowledge on artillery results when firing on unobserved hexes. It wouldn't surprise me if there is justification of which I am not aware. If there is justification, I would be curious to know how the information would be collected-maybe radio intercepts?

Also targeting...a number have mentioned it already. My recent example involved a T-80 company in the woods stumbling into a jaguar platoon adjacent to a jager infantry platoon. The Jaguars promptly knocked out 6 of my 10 tanks at 500 meters. My tanks had time to fire two return volleys before the Jaguars scooted out of sight. Unfortunately, my tank survivors decided to fire those two volleys at the trucks of the infantry platoon instead of the Jaguars. Did manage to knock out one infantry truck as the Jaguars disappeared deeper into the woods. Ummm....

< Message edited by Jagger2002 -- 3/7/2017 6:04:13 PM >

(in reply to mattdbook)

Post #: 81

RE: If you could add one feature... - 3/7/2017 6:10:01 PM

CapnDarwin

Posts: 8467
Joined: 2/12/2005
From: Newark, OH
Status: offline

We ran into the same issue with VP markers. How would you know it was occupied if you can see it. The simple answer is other intel assets in the battle space. There can be other recon units, spec ops, air recon, radio info, etc., that gets forwarded into your command center. We can look at maybe having an option for this "soft" Intel so you can toggle it on/off/realistic (lies to you about stuff).

Targeting can get weird at times and it really becomes a function of the situation. There is a chance that the tanks were surprised by the Jags. Either did not see them or someone saw them just before going boom. At that point a bunch of your comrades have exploded, there is smoke, fire, and debris all over the place. You spot a vehicle (truck) and fire. Not ideal as a commander, but really possibly for that poor pixel tanker.

_____________________________

OTS is looking forward to Southern Storm getting released!

Cap'n Darwin aka Jim Snyder
On Target Simulations LLC

(in reply to Jagger2002)

Post #: 82

RE: If you could add one feature... - 3/15/2017 2:39:05 AM

Jagger2002

Posts: 674
Joined: 5/20/2002
Status: offline

I have had problems with Russian mech Infantry blocking bottlenecks primarily to other large mech infantry units due to stacking limits. If a mech unit is deployed, should it block the roads? I would think the mass of the unit would be deployed off road. So my suggestion is that deployed infantry units should not count towards stacking limits when another unit is passing through the hex in travel mode. In bottlenecks, then a large Russian mech infantry could use roads to pass through another deployed mech unit which is not using the roads.

(in reply to CapnDarwin)

Post #: 83

RE: If you could add one feature... - 4/27/2018 5:35:14 PM

ctcharger

Posts: 96
Joined: 3/12/2017
From: Akron, OH
Status: offline

Not really a feature but an entry on lulu.com where I can order the manual and pretty much everything printable related to Flashpoint Campaigns. They will print it on demand and ship it out. They can create a nice product at a reasonable price. Old fashioned that way I guess.

(in reply to Jo van der Pluym)

Post #: 84

RE: If you could add one feature... - 1/20/2019 12:36:02 AM

ctcharger

Posts: 96
Joined: 3/12/2017
From: Akron, OH
Status: offline

I read through them all and didn't see it so here goes. Apologies if it is there.

Yes there is a minefield, "big surprise" so everyone in the back freaking wait for the guys up front to clear it. I have little experience playing the Soviets and it shows, rookie mistake I know.

So I would like to tell my Soviets to NOT stack unless I say they can or tell them to bypass the stupid minefield. I also didn't check the path of my helicopters and some got zapped. Another rookie mistake.

Hey the Commissar is here, I wonder what he wants?!?!

Had to concede the game, so embarrassing...

< Message edited by ctcharger -- 1/20/2019 3:37:37 PM >

(in reply to ctcharger)

Post #: 85

RE: If you could add one feature... - 1/30/2019 8:27:29 PM

kokovi79

Posts: 5
Joined: 1/28/2019
Status: offline

Instead of fixed time delays I want to be able to set conditions to control start of movement to the next waypoint, like "fight for 5 minutes after contact OR stay until you receive artillery fire, than start deliberate movement to waypoint 2, get into "hold" at waypoint 2; if you receive artillery fire OR fight for 5 minutes after contact, start deliberate movement to waypoint 3, get into "hold" at waypoint 3..." So basically, I want to be able to script unit behavior to be able to properly control defending/delaying/screening actions without everybody just being killed in place by artillery.

I also want units to resume the execution of the original plan after showing local initiative instead of moving one hex, deleting my waypoints and then sitting around uselessly until being killed. And I want them NOT to move towards the enemy lines in road march formation after being shot at. This is even more ridiculous than the instant posture change and then waiting 45 minutes until movement starts because of "order delays". They would start movement earlier even if I would sent my orders by a motorbike messenger!

< Message edited by kokovi79 -- 1/30/2019 8:31:15 PM >

(in reply to ctcharger)

Post #: 86

RE: If you could add one feature... - 1/30/2019 8:33:46 PM

kokovi79

Posts: 5
Joined: 1/28/2019
Status: offline

I would also like to get the possibility to properly prepare the battlefield with improved positions, mines and obstacles.

(in reply to kokovi79)

Post #: 87

RE: If you could add one feature... - 2/13/2019 12:03:34 PM

Zackree

Posts: 1
Joined: 2/12/2019
Status: offline

Like many I first want to say what a great game you have produced. My suggestion is from the perspective of minor improvements. It seems to me that at this scale the lack of unit facing for armored units omits a key element of armored warfare. Maneuvering for shots at weaker flank and rear armor is key to successful armored engagements. This is true for both tanks and infantry. The current model ignores the difference between a long range front shot that has almost no possibility of a kill and a flank or rear shot with a high probability of a kill. This is even more true for infantry against tanks in built up areas. A LAW against the front armor of a T80 has little chance of a kill, but a good one against top or rear armor. I have seen three isolated tanks in built up areas destroy four sections of infantry. In real life they would have difficulty even locating the infantry in buildings let alone destroying them. The infantry on the other hand would easily locate, maneuver and destroy the tanks, i.e. Chechnya. Matching engagement result to existing unit facing with the option of setting stationary unit heading seems like a good idea.

(in reply to kokovi79)

Post #: 88

RE: If you could add one feature... - 2/13/2019 2:39:00 PM

StuccoFresco

Posts: 546
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Italy
Status: offline

Anything that helps build new scenarios would be awesome; mainly some form of a map maker or random map generator. I love modding, every game that can be modded or expanded, i eventually will.

The ability to use engineer units to place/clear minefields/obstacles would be fine.

Stacking different subsequent commands seems to be addressed already.

I concur that tanks seems to be too effective in urban terrain, shooting from 2 hexes away at infantry. Looks and feels strange. But i'm not a veteran player so might have been a casual occurrance.

(in reply to Zackree)

Post #: 89

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Flashpoint Campaigns Series >> Requested Features and Ideas >> RE: If you could add one feature...