PCO Add Ons (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Panzer Command: Ostfront



Message

Firebri -> PCO Add Ons (2/16/2012 7:25:11 PM)

Is there any news yet ?



rickier65 -> RE: PCO Add Ons (2/16/2012 7:44:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerbri

Is there any news yet ?


I'm afraid I don't have anything yet I can share with you. I will say that we have stepped up our work, but we really aren't far enough along to be able to provide more details.

Sorry,
rick



Firebri -> RE: PCO Add Ons (2/16/2012 8:02:20 PM)

Cheers for that Rick. Also are there any plans to make a modern day title ?



rickier65 -> RE: PCO Add Ons (2/16/2012 9:16:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerbri

Cheers for that Rick. Also are there any plans to make a modern day title ?


It's been mentioned in some of the team discusions, but I wouldn't go so far as to say there are any plans. Some others on the team might want to comment on this though.

Thanks
rick



Mad Russian -> RE: PCO Add Ons (2/16/2012 10:16:35 PM)

There are a couple of vehicle models that have been made but I don't think all the rules etc for a modern version are in place yet...of course, with this group you never know. [:D]

Good Hunting.

MR



Mobius -> RE: PCO Add Ons (2/16/2012 10:32:34 PM)

I made a T-54 model but haven't finished the LODs yet. Started an M-48 foir it to play with but got sidetracked. So nothing from me yet.



Firebri -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/9/2012 5:27:01 PM)

Or is there another title planned for the PC series ?



rickier65 -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/9/2012 6:41:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerbri

Or is there another title planned for the PC series ?


Erik is probably in the best position to respond, but the team is still actively working on some things for PCO and are discussing the things we would like to see added in both expansion packs and in the next game in the series.

Thanks
rick



Harriet61 -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/17/2012 3:49:52 AM)

[image]http://www.infoocean.info/avatar2.jpg[/image]I'm afraid I don't have anything yet I can share with you.



Ratzki -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/20/2012 3:50:22 AM)

How about giving us some things to chew on one at a time. Anything that you guys might be working on for the next game in the series. if it was kept to just one thing at a time or so we might like to have some say about it. You guys could be putting alot of thought into something that many of us do not care about or vise-versa. Maybe discuss what we would like to see from the infantry combat model, or whathave you. It would give us all something to chat about and we might just come up with a good idea. We would know that nothing is etched in stone, but I think that it would keep the interest up.



rickier65 -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/20/2012 7:35:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ratzki

How about giving us some things to chew on one at a time. Anything that you guys might be working on for the next game in the series. if it was kept to just one thing at a time or so we might like to have some say about it. You guys could be putting alot of thought into something that many of us do not care about or vise-versa. Maybe discuss what we would like to see from the infantry combat model, or whathave you. It would give us all something to chat about and we might just come up with a good idea. We would know that nothing is etched in stone, but I think that it would keep the interest up.


You make a good point Ratzki. We haven't put anything in stone for the next game yet. We do want to "improve" the infantry model though. We have given some consideration to making some significant changes to the orders system as well. But we haven't made firm design decisions yet.

We're always open to any ideas you, or others might have in those areas, or other areas you think are critical.

Thanks
rick





Ratzki -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/21/2012 3:52:11 AM)

Well, not ever having been in the military, I have a question on infantry orders. What would a Company Commander that was part of a larger formation have control over, more to the point how much leway would he have to modify orders to take an objective as time went on and situations changed? I was just thinking that it might be interesting to be able to say what objectives the player thought that he would be able to take with what Companies/units that he had at his disposal. The player would be acting as the overall Commander at this point. Points would then be based on these objectives being controlled or not with +/- bonuses for each extra flag taken or fewer points for not taking the prestated objectives. Now where I was going was a leveled type orders menu based on rank, Company, Platoon, Section Commander, that would mimic the the appropriate choices each might have to make.

Just a start here, anyone else?



junk2drive -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/21/2012 4:20:50 AM)

For computer games, you have an AI that handles things that you do not control. You tell a unit to move over there and the AI handles the move, plus actionary and reactionary items along the way. If this all happens in a believable way, we are immersed and happy. The farther up the command scale you go, without changing the unit level, the more you need to get from your AI for you vision of orders to act out in a believable manner. I don't think computers are at that level yet.



Ratzki -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/21/2012 7:43:51 AM)

I understand but was not intending on letting the AI handle too much. I will slip into what I did not like about the infantry commands in CM. CM allowed the player control right down to the section level. But I think that the shortfall of going this route is that you lose some of the immersion as each player seemed to be able to react instantly to battlefield situations as they occured, for example; an enemy AT gun would fire on an approaching tank. Within 1 minute, all units able to do so were ordered to fire on the AT gun, often destroying it before any real damage could be done by the AT gun. The player might have been thinking I'll get Co. A over to that hill as quickly as possible, Co. B will stay conceled untill I am ready to lanch an attack when Co. A gets into position. The Enemy AT gun gets off one shot half way through the round and immediately the first player is able to halt all of Co. A and return fire, at the same time, Co. B is quickly ordered to engage the AT gun along with mortar fire and whatever else the player can bring to bare on the enemy gun.
I like the ability to move my platoons and sections, but would feel that some form of Chain of Command restrictions to orders might help with this situation.



rickier65 -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/21/2012 8:02:07 AM)


allowing players just the right amount of control over units is a tough line to walk. each player has there own ideas of where that line should be. And some of us (like myself) change our minds. That is one of the reasons for the way orders are modeled right now.

I do think we want to have some kind of command and control structure, perhaps with wome incentives or penalties if squads are too far from their command unit.

Rick



Mobius -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/21/2012 4:12:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ratzki
I understand but was not intending on letting the AI handle too much. I will slip into what I did not like about the infantry commands in CM. CM allowed the player control right down to the section level. But I think that the shortfall of going this route is that you lose some of the immersion as each player seemed to be able to react instantly to battlefield situations as they occured,
"hear, hear!"



Mad Russian -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/22/2012 3:47:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ratzki

I like the ability to move my platoons and sections, but would feel that some form of Chain of Command restrictions to orders might help with this situation.


An actual working chain of command instead of leaders that just run around cheering on the action is a novel idea in it's own right.

Good Hunting.


MR



Ratzki -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/24/2012 6:45:08 AM)

I think that immersion in the game is important, but there are many ways to become immersed in the action on the screen. Would it not work to have the player(s) take the role of the top tiered commander(s) and assign Companies/Platoons/Squads/Sections to objectives that they figure can be controlled at the end of the battle. This would be the overall battle plan and would have to have more detail with reguards to OOB at different levels. It would also require the player to be able to assign smaller units to fromations. Then when the battle starts, there would be one or more on screen subordinate on screen Commanders that would then command their Companies and give general commands such as moving quickly, or provide covering fire for example. Units within their chain of command would be totally controlled by the player but may have some command options greyed out based on the Co. Commander's orders. So if a unit was ordered to move quickly by the Co. Commander it could still return fire if an enemy was spotted, but might not be able to halt and then shoot for x number of turns. There would be other actions that it could perform but all might be influenced in some way by the orders of the Company Commander.
I know that PC does somewhat address this with the reaction phase, but it still does not feel right to me. On the flip side if the Co. Commander has given a general order like described above, there could be bonnuses given for units that are following the general orders, eg. The unit given the covering fire order might get a bunus for firing at an enemy without the need to reposition/move.
Just talking off the top of my head here.



Ratzki -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/26/2012 1:23:54 AM)

You would have to keep the upper command levels simple so as to not bog down the game play. Or you could have the Co. Commanders only able to give/change orders every so many turns based on Commander experience/skill.



rickier65 -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/26/2012 2:58:20 AM)


Those command level suggestions are interesting. though it would seem that it would restrict a players freedom to direct individual units even more than the current order system. Most of the player feedback i've seen here seems to want to lean in the other direction.

thanks
Rick



Mobius -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/26/2012 4:38:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rick


Those command level suggestions are interesting. though it would seem that it would restrict a players freedom to direct individual units even more than the current order system. Most of the player feedback i've seen here seems to want to lean in the other direction.

thanks
Rick

It would restrict player's freedom but would be more realistic. A player option would solve any problem.



jamespcrowley -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/26/2012 5:05:32 PM)

I can't think of a single PC wargame, or even many board wargames, that provide anything like a realistic approximation of WW2 C&C.

For the most part, a player has a god-like control over all of their forces, irrespective of whether units in that force are in C&C or not. While that may (or may not depending on your PoV) make for a better 'game', it simply does not reflect the reality of the battlefield.

Where exactly are the enemy and, even when found, what is their composition; why is A Company not advancing; where is B Company; why has the artillery barrage not started; why can't we contact Brigade or Division for reinforcements? When have we experienced all of those questions in a game? Almost never and yet those would be common problems in WW2.

It's odd that people will carp on about realism in wargames - this value is wrong, that ammo couldn't do that, the armour is wrong etc etc but seem not to want to have the fundamentals of WW2 battles present in their games.

If a platoon is not in command control how can you give it orders and, equally important, how can you know what it is seeing and doing. Send a runner or get the Company CO over to it to find out. Until then you have no control over it and it will be controlled by the AI .

Probably all pie in the sky but until we get C&C accurate, wargames will remain primarily 'games' rather than realistic simulations.



Mobius -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/26/2012 7:53:03 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: James Crowley
I can't think of a single PC wargame, or even many board wargames, that provide anything like a realistic approximation of WW2 C&C.

For the most part, a player has a god-like control over all of their forces, irrespective of whether units in that force are in C&C or not. While that may (or may not depending on your PoV) make for a better 'game', it simply does not reflect the reality of the battlefield.

Well, is realistic like a light switch, it's either on or off? Either 100% realistic or it is 0% realistic? Or, possibly could a game setting be a little more realistic than another setting? If that then we can talk about things that make it more realistic.



Firebri -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/26/2012 9:30:13 PM)

I know it's been said before, but it would be great if the next game in this series, made more. use of the graphics card. I have no probs with the game play, it's great. but if the graphics were a bit more, Theatre of War / Faces of War. I would be very happy.



Ratzki -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/26/2012 11:21:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: James Crowley

If a platoon is not in command control how can you give it orders and, equally important, how can you know what it is seeing and doing. Send a runner or get the Company CO over to it to find out. Until then you have no control over it and it will be controlled by the AI .

Probably all pie in the sky but until we get C&C accurate, wargames will remain primarily 'games' rather than realistic simulations.


How often do you figure that a squad or platoon would find itself out side of a command radius during a firefight? I would imagine it would depend on what is being shot at it(small arms fire, HE) and what type of terrain it found itself in.
Would it be more realistic to just not let any unit willingly move out of command?



Mad Russian -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/27/2012 3:49:11 AM)

Simple enough to do. Fill out the unit rosters for the leaders and then give them command radius.

A company commander can only affect his company. If he's killed he's replaced by one of the officers from the same company and that officer gets a replacement leader from a random replacement pool.

The player is still a God Leader, but the others would have to play more realistically. They couldn't just run around the battlefield yelling "FIRE", "RALLY" or "RUN" to any and all soldiers near them.

A command structure using command radius isn't that hard to do. It's even been done in board wargames...<Gasp>....

Good Hunting.

MR



Mobius -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/27/2012 2:54:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian
The player is still a God Leader, but the others would have to play more realistically. They couldn't just run around the battlefield yelling "FIRE", "RALLY" or "RUN" to any and all soldiers near them.
[:D][:D][:D]



Ratzki -> RE: PCO Add Ons (4/27/2012 6:51:44 PM)

Yes, a visual command radius could have a toggle button. The command radius would be influenced by several factors like terrain, commander's skill, radios, ect. The Company commander would have to keep his subordinate commanders in command and they would in turn have to keep their units within thier command radius. If a unit finds itself out of command, limit the orders options to a form of movement only untill it is back in command again.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.21875