RE: Wish list (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> John Tiller's Campaign Series



Message


Nebfer -> RE: Wish list (11/11/2005 10:42:29 PM)

Some of the things I would like to see in a updated East front 2/west front would be

1 A better OOB editer, with updated/fixed OOBs (I.e. where are the Headquarter companys of german Panzer battalions? in 44 it had a Pionner ptln, mtcy. scout ptln, scout tank ptln, comunication tank ptln, and a quad 20mm SPAA battery.) and as for some OOB fixs why do german rifle companys have morters in them in there late war upgrade? thy where moved to the weapons company in early 1944, with 2 MMGs beeing subed in there place. (Another thing to add, 2 strangth MG units for the germans, the germans shuld have 2,3,4,& 6 strangth MG units.)

2 A unit editer to create new units.

3 new Units (I.e. Sd.Kfz 251/21 - an AA halftrak with 3x 20mm guns, late war "Storm" Platoons - german infantry platoons that where equiped with the STG-44 rifle, and german Jeeps that ar'nt recon units but transport units.)

--Game play changes--
Faster computer turns (curently it moves one unit at a time)

Better AI (it A. keeps on coming even if you just wiped out half the attacking force... or B. just sits there waitng to die.)

during campaines the AI allways attacks with "fresh" units, it shuld have a random facter from 100% to 75% strangth.

the abilitty to set how long you want you campaine and how many battles you fight, also to chuse between a reguler OOB or a custome Battle grupe.

thats all for now.




pfhokie -> RE: Wish list (11/12/2005 4:46:26 PM)

I would like to see something like what Battlefront (via Hunting Tank) is doing with Combat Mission. Have an operational game that will drop down into a tactical game when any of the forces meet. At the operational level, the commanders would need to account for supply, medical and reserve force considerations.




Dualnet -> RE: Wish list (11/16/2005 1:37:44 PM)

I have continued to play the campaign series ever since they came out, I and two friends of mine play exclusively PBEM games. I have always thought that the AI in games was a bit of a waste of time, humans are much better to compete against, so all the improvements I want have that in mind.

I think that much more could be done with engineers destroying and fixing bridges etc.

PBEM linked campaigns
Tanks moving backwards
Colour coding for organisation
Two or three story buildings with different Hexes available different LOS etc.
Tank vulnerability within towns
Bring all the games up to the same standard as Rising Sun with starshells
Games should have night and day LOS





Bazooka Bob -> RE: Wish list (11/18/2005 5:46:53 AM)

Concur with Dualnet that the night rules, LOS, and starshells of Rising Sun be updated in both WF and EF.

Would like to see in EF a scaling back of SS opponents in the DCG. It seems like I as the Russians am fighting the SS units about 50% of the time. I know the Waffen SS did not make up 50% of the German forces on the eastern front.

Would also like to see as the Russians be upgraded to Guards status. I have two campaigns going where I started in June 1941. I am currently in Jan 1943 and May 1943 respectively commanding a tank brigade and feel an upgrade to Guards status is warranted. It should also lead to more replacements being available in Guards status.




TAIL GUNNER -> RE: Wish list (11/18/2005 7:20:39 AM)

quote:

Concur with Dualnet that the night rules, LOS, and starshells of Rising Sun be updated in both WF and EF.


Night rules and starshells were added to EFII and WF "World at War" compilation.....[8D]




Bazooka Bob -> RE: Wish list (11/18/2005 3:36:18 PM)

I bought the World at War compilation and it doesn't work. Not a big deal.

rm




blackcloud6 -> RE: Wish list (11/19/2005 4:46:33 AM)

Fix artillery to reflect the doctrine of the Army using it. In the current games artillery is way too flexible for the Russians. An ATR team can call it n. In reality, the Russians didn't have Call For Fire like the Western armies.




HobbesACW -> RE: Wish list (11/19/2005 8:51:24 PM)

Units should be able to dig in in a given amount of time. It's too random at the moment.

Vehicles should be able to move backwards/retreat keeping the same facing.

% chance for units to unfix or enter the game should increase each turn. (I don't think it does currently?)

Night fatigue for moving/combat when visibility is 1. At least some sort of fatigue factor.
Be nice to have fatigue and experience level.




HobbesACW -> RE: Wish list (11/19/2005 8:54:49 PM)

"Units should be able to dig in in a given amount of time. It's too random at the moment. "

Having said that scenarios are designed with turns representing from minutes to an hour or longer so it would be nice if this was a value contolled by the scenario designer.







palmdogg -> Time Change (11/23/2005 6:46:03 AM)

Just coming off a game of Rising Sun, it would be nice if you could switch from day to night in the middle of a scenario, so all games wouldn't have to be exclusively day or night. I'd also say Dawn and Dusk, but since Day and Night are already in the game that might be asking too much.




v. Manstein -> RE: Time Change (11/23/2005 3:26:36 PM)

Great news, one of my favorite war games-series in a new edition, cool. One important thing that must be changed is the dynamic campaign balancing. for example, when I play with the germans, the campiagn is too easy, with the russians is it too dificult, because the german ai comes with lot of panthers in 43-44, and with my few t34, there is no chance for me.
hope the balancing will re-designed.
Sorry, my english is bad.




lancerunolfsson -> RE: Time Change (11/26/2005 12:02:00 AM)

quote:

I bought the World at War compilation and it doesn't work. Not a big deal.

Did you try (assuming you are using XP) running the instalation exe in 98 compat mode? I did that and have had no problems on xp though I use one of my 98 computers most of the time to play the games.




Bazooka Bob -> RE: Time Change (11/29/2005 6:28:14 PM)

I do have XP but I didn't know that could be done in 98 compat mode. Maybe sometime later when I get a chance to fool with it, I'll give it a try.




HobbesACW -> Changable Visibility (12/3/2005 7:46:28 PM)

I have said this before but it seems such an important change to me while designing a new scenario. Please allow the designer to change visibility during the scenario.

Many battles kick of at dawn or dusk or run through the night. It would be a major improvement for scenario designers. It would also allow the designer to show changing weather conditions.

It should be a fairly easy change as well!

Thanks, Chris





HobbesACW -> RE: Changable Visibility (12/10/2005 8:46:23 PM)

Allow the players to set global ranges before the scenario starts





magic032 -> RE: Wish list (12/16/2005 3:54:46 PM)

Ok, to begin with...I am completely jazzed to learn the Campaign Series games are getting an XP upgrade and re-release. I continue to wear out my Europe In Flames copies to this day. Even with all the bugs and graphics issues, its still my game of choice! THANK YOU Matrixgames! You have a new fan...one who will be the first to buy the new versions!

Wish list items:
PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE give engineering units the ability to build minefields. Talk about realsim. This would be a much welcomed strategy feature, greatly enhancing game play IMHO. Need to have AIs try to clear minefields as well...I've never seen it happen.

PLEASE add an "al a carte" ability to the OOB. In WWII ground combat it was very common to have "reinforced" (upgraded or specialized equipment) units in company, battalion, regiment, or even division level units. If I choose to start a late 1943 German campaign, I want tigers and panthers, thank you.

PLEASE improve the offensive odds for flamethrower units. As is, they have only a marginal success rate at direct assault range...and ZERO beyond that. While you are at it, you might add infantry flamethrower units too!

PLEASE improve aircraft targeting (maybe provide the ability to target specific units instead of hexes) so that the precious few attacks available aren't wasted on empty troop carriers.

There are a host of other suggestions but this will do for now. Hey, I can wish can't I. After all it is almost Christmas!

Thanks for listening...more to follow,
Magic032





magic032 -> RE: Wish list (12/16/2005 4:02:04 PM)

One more very important thing I forgot to add....

Would love to see the ability to capture and use enemy equipment!




HobbesACW -> RE: Wish list (2/15/2006 10:20:24 PM)

A small one but should be easy to change - only allow artillery delivered starshells to be
used by artillery capable of firing smoke. This may be a problem with small mortars?

An attempt to stop rocket launchers, naval guns etc firing starshells

PLEASE allow visibility changes in a scenario AND night/day changes (as per Rising Sun, Divided Ground)




HobbesACW -> RE: Wish list (2/17/2006 9:24:39 PM)

Engineers can clear 1 wreck per turn. Dozers as well?




HobbesACW -> RE: Wish list (3/1/2006 12:55:15 AM)

Hex sides that are traversable by infantry but not armour.




teleogryl -> RE: Wish list (3/6/2006 12:24:06 PM)

One set of changes that would guarantee my money would be some interface design improvements to allow complete operation without a mouse.

1. A mode where the arrow keys move the hotspotted hex rather than scrolling the map would make it much easier to move around and, for instance, check LOS.

2. Some mechanism to make it easier to select units (hotkeys to rotate through units in hex, or select all in this hex for example) would also make a big difference.

And please, please keep using standard Windows object/menus. I can't use a mouse so I use voice dictation (Dragon NaurallySpeaking) to interact with the computer. The CS games, which don't have their own graphical mode, are the only ones I can play (and it is much easier to simulate keyboard commands than mouse commands, hence the requests).

I realise that is a niche request, but those two improvements would have made the games a smoother experience even when I could use my hands...




dgk196 -> RE: Wish list (3/21/2006 5:10:55 AM)

[:)]Hello,

I'm new to the forum, so if some, or all of this has already been covered....

In no particular order, I would like to see...

1.) That all of three of the games function as one game. This way you could make the russian vs. japan scenario's, among others!

2. A unit editor, where you could assign your own parameters to existing units, or make up your own.

3. A graphics editor, change the colors of units and or camouflage patterns. Create your own units, 2D and 3D.

4. Create your own combat results table.

5. Include parameters for, training, experience, morale, combat capabilities, among others...

6. Make 'waypoint' orders available for units or formations. Assign 'column' positions to units that don't change unless ordered to.

7. Create a map that can be 'scaled' up or down. That is, one level may be 1 hex = 250 meters (5 min turns), the next could be 1 hex = 1 kilometer ( 20 min turn). Also the minimun organizational size would be 250 meters = squads, 1 kiliometer = company. In this way, you could play the game with companies and battalions which would move similar to their basic components. Let the 'scales' and turn times be selectable either from a table or assigned by the player.

8. Include an Organization editor. Decide to 4,5 or 6 tank platoons.... number of platoons in a company... and so on...

9. Variable climate conditions that can be scheduled to change or randomly change...

10. Incorporate variable parameters for unit abilities, such as... communication types and procedures... unit capabilities... Indirect fire, yes/no... transport limitations...

11. Make the program more windows-like in terms of being able to open files... etc.

A little long-winded, I know... but what the heck... I enjoyed playing this game and still do... if improvements can be made this could develope into the best game ever....




Magua -> RE: Wish list (3/28/2006 10:43:23 PM)

Invisible Objective Points.

As I remember it, the AI will direct its units towards the objective points, and will do so with an energy commensurate to the value of the point.

Right before the great "Talonsoft Exodus" I suggested that "invisible objective points" be available for the scenario designers. These would be objective points that designers could place on the map to channel the AI, but would not be visible to the player. In this way, the AI would be able to move with something of a purpose, and yet not have that purpose be transparent to the player.

I was too late, the discs were about to be manufactured. A few weeks later the development team all walked out, and that was that.




kylenapoleon -> RE: Wish list (4/1/2006 8:13:16 AM)

I like the idea of the Japanese being able to fight it out with the soviets. It would be interesting to see how either side would have made out.

I also would like to be able to combine the defeated German forces with the victorious Allies to create a "what if" campaign of the Western powers against the Soviets.




darkentrees -> RE: Wish list (4/15/2006 8:34:22 AM)

The combined German and Allied offensive against the Soviets is one of the best ideas I've heard in a long time for a 'what if' scenario.

Way to go kylenapolean! [:)]




jchastain -> RE: Wish list (4/17/2006 12:41:20 AM)

One of the things I always loved about the Campaign series was the ability to "progress". You earned medals and promotions as you went through the war. In that way, it really combines some of the best elements of wargaming with the progression model of RPGs. The real disappointment was that as you commanded larger units, it was essentially the same game with more pieces on the board. What I would love to see is a series of games that create a true campaign with progression so that I get the feel that I am moving up the chain of command. Why can't I have a tactical squad leader game where I command at the platoon level and can earn medals and promotions. Eventually, I am promoted to command a company and I "import" my character into the next game and continue my progression. Eventually, I might command a battalion or even a division with the subsequent imports. Each game could stand alone by itself, or they can allow you to grow throughout the course of the war or even transfer from one theater to another. Imagine leading a squad through Poland. Then taking control of a company under Rommel, first in France and then in Africa. Perhaps a Battalion in Russia is the next stop before ending up leading a Division or a Corp on the beaches of Normandy.

Now, look at Matrix's stable of titles. CoI, which is really looking for a reason for living. Campaign series, an excellent company level game that can stretch to the Battalion level. TAOW, a wonderful Division/Corp level title. The pieces are largely all there if someone could just find a way to tie them all together. And imagine the hours of entertainment in seeing just how far you could advance over the course of a war. Do you retire with a General's star? Or meet your end on the field of battle somewhere along the way?




33sherman -> RE: Wish list (6/5/2006 9:06:04 PM)

Wow, I just discovered this--I had no idea the Campaign Series would be re-issued.

I agree with many of the items mentioned here, especially adding more variables to the Dynamic Campaign games (they end up being the same battle over and over). I also agree the AI needs improvement, though I understand this is difficult to do.

I also agree heartily with making it more possible for disrupted units to survive assaults, as Mr Petho mentioned.

Finally, MORE huge scenarios with combined operations. I love the big airborne/amphibious invasions of Crete, Malta, etc., and am currently enjoying the big Operation Overlord scenario. The bigger the better (for me)--more maneuvering, more chaos.




tmanmerlin -> RE: Wish list (6/7/2006 8:06:49 PM)

Hi,

I would like to see a smarter tactical AI. I think the AI gets caught up in strategic issues and loses it on the tactical level.

For instance, running troops across the open ground in front of my troops in defensive terrain.

... Does not know how to use transport, it always seems to dump it's riders way to early, the AI does not know how to transport troops, keeping them " behind the line" until they are needed.

... Does not know how to mass tanks at the spearpoint of an attack.

... Does not know how to disrupt the enemy behind the line

... Never seems to outmanuever, sneaky end rounds, flak attacks, etc...

... does not know how to pull back and re-group

just my thoughts on what I would like to se fixed in the AI




RAF -> RE: Wish list (6/8/2006 1:25:36 AM)

Like many, I would like to see a better AI. However, I know how difficult this can be to program. So, I thought that, perhaps some specific options would be useful.

(1) I would like to see an improved starting setup, with units organized into companies and battalions placed together. That is to say, identify a piece of terrain (the crest of a hill, a farm) as "key terrain" then place a company there -- lined up -- facing the advancing enemy. The next company in that battalion gets placed to its right or left, in the next available piece of decent terrain, with entrenchments or trenches forming terrain where needed.

(2) I would like to see combat units advance as units. For example: The computer identifies an objective (not necessarily an official game objective, but a tactical objective), it assigns a group of units to "capture" that objective, and those units all converge on that objective. Perhaps the simplest form of advance would have a majority of the units provide covering fire, while a minority of units advance -- picking a different unit to advance each turn. Also, artillery could be focused on that objective.

(3) I would like to see the computer use something like programmatic waypoints to perform flanking maneuvers; e.g., Objective 1 is Hex 6,32. Objective 2 is then a 90 degree turn to the right to take hex 15,34.

(4) I would like to see the computer AI unload its vehicles under cover, so that loaded units do not get shot at so often. In other words; search for buildings, woods, or ridgelines behind which to move and unload.

(5) I would like to see the computer send forward scouts -- a company on a wide front that moves forward until it spots enemy units, then heads for cover, and calls in a gaggle of artillery or air strikes against visible targets.

(6) I would like to see the computer use a tactical reserve -- a company or two that sits in a nice safe place on a road behind the lines, waits for a threatened enemy breakthrough (indicated by significant losses on a particular part of the line and/or enemy units "sited" as having crossed a particular trip wire -- at which point the reserves are committed and moved to that area.

(7) I would like to see a way for scenario designers to program multiple strategies into a scenario for the computer player. That is, the designer targets particular units (companies) to move on specific locations. This could be done through a set of waypoints objectives and a timetable for reaching those objectives. It would be particularly nice if the designer could program in more than one possible strategy with the computer picking (by means of a random number) which strategy it will use in a given scenario.

Of these, I would like to put particular emphasis on the last one. Artificial intelligence is hard to program. However, players here like to create and implement strategies. So, I would like to suggest a way of putting this to use.

To whatever degree possible, allow players to "write a strategic program" for the computer player and save those computer programs with the scenario. This would be kinda like a general preparing a strategy for a battle, then seeing how well it survives contact with the enemy without any further human intervention. This strategy will tell the units where to go, where to unload, where to advance to after they unload, whether to be "aggressive" or "defensive" (perhaps using different scales), whether to move quickly (do not save points for firing), slowly (save points for firing), or very slowly (1 hex per turn).

I think that would increase the value of the game significantly.





James Ward -> RE: Wish list (6/8/2006 6:44:18 PM)

"1) I would like to see an improved starting setup, with units organized into companies and battalions placed together. That is to say, identify a piece of terrain (the crest of a hill, a farm) as "key terrain" then place a company there -- lined up -- facing the advancing enemy. The next company in that battalion gets placed to its right or left, in the next available piece of decent terrain, with entrenchments or trenches forming terrain where needed."

YES YES YES to this! [:)]

It's the main reason playing a campaign with a unit larger than regiment is not worth the hassle. It can take a few hours just to sort out a Corp!

I like all the other suggestions too. Anything to improve the AI is good with me.




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.847656