What To Change / Improve

The Tactical Art of Combat - This is the title of the next generation of Close Combat. News and updates will be posted here and on the developers and publishers sites. This is the next generation of CC that we have waited so long for. Stay tuned.......

Moderators: KG_Werfer, Sulla

What To Change / Improve

Postby Sulla » Tue Aug 04, 2015 3:35 am

What things would you change?

What things does it do well and what badly?

Any Major changes you would like?

S

Art Of Combat - Forums[TAOC] - The Next Generation Tactical Simulation - Taking over where CC Left Off Coming Soon

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TACKOM LTD - Developer of Art of Combat - Website
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nec amicus officium nec hostis iniuriam mihi intulit, quo in toto non reddidi. - Sulla
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No Better Friend, No Worse Enemy - Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sulla@closecombat.org
Skype - imperator_sulla
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Games I Have Worked On .....

Image
User avatar
Sulla
 
Posts: 3359
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 1:00 pm
Location: UK
Like / Share CSO - Post

Re: What To Change / Improve

Postby Southernland » Sun Aug 09, 2015 2:30 am

i think any form of Cc benefits from some type of strat layer Even cc3/COI could have had a pseudo strat layer whereby your actions affected the greater game or where the greater game affected you.
-maybe you capture a bridge and the army surges forwards
-the army supply routes are attacked, you suffer from resupply failure etc
Southernland
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 12:50 am
Like / Share CSO - Post

Re: What To Change / Improve

Postby ke_mechial » Sun Aug 09, 2015 10:18 am

Ok let's try, please excuse me, if my thoughts are silly or irrelevant, just brainstorming:
1) I actually never understood the logic behind the different columns in CC5 in unit selection screen, I mean "first platoon", "second platoon" and "support teams". In Deployment phase, you place command teams by checking their command circle, by pressing space. There is no importance if the command team of first platoon is near the rifle team of second platoon or a support team, or is there? I would actually like a new approach, where teams were directly assigned to their specific command team, or how it goes in real life in army, or dismiss that column feature at all, it is then just useless and confusing.

2) The Situation of the incapacitated troops after the battle is ambiguous. I mean injured soldiers return to the battle, you recognize them with yellow skulls. However, an incapacitated soldier might also return, in campaign mode probably, maybe if there was a timeline. Let's consider Normandy, take a soldier who was shot on D-Day, he was sent back to Hosiptal in Britain. When would he first return back, in august? or maybe he gets discharged because of an amputated leg or hand? A Dispensary section could be nice to show the situation. And what about, a soldier would automatically try to give medial treatment to an incapacitated or injured comrade during the battle? It would probably effect its battle performance.

3) Scavenging in CC is a nice feature, from enemy or friendly. However, you can't get the scavenged weapon back in the next battle. It could be optional for the soldiers switch back to original or go with it, in the before battle selection screen. It was also discussed before, inside the community, that captured vehicles could be used after.

4) The caliber of the weapons. There are parameters for the effective ranges and steel penetration, however it would not be the same, if you get shot by MP40 9mm and PPSh41 7.62mm, (or HMG, 20mm vs. 7.62 or .50 cal). They are just coded as SMG no difference, other than fire rate. The lethality or ijnjuring capacity of caliber could be added. I mean M16 was meant to injure rather than kill, so more soldiers would be "hors de combat" trying to help injured mate. Like in entry (2).

5) Vehicle Mechanics. It is ok that tanks, rotate to the target direction first and then moves in a straight line, as in real life. But I would like the see cornering of jeeps and trucks.
ke_mechial
Obergerfreiter
Obergerfreiter
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:22 pm
Like / Share CSO - Post

Re: What To Change / Improve

Postby Kanov » Wed Aug 12, 2015 6:52 pm

ke_mechial wrote:Ok let's try, please excuse me, if my thoughts are silly or irrelevant, just brainstorming:
1) I actually never understood the logic behind the different columns in CC5 in unit selection screen, I mean "first platoon", "second platoon" and "support teams". In Deployment phase, you place command teams by checking their command circle, by pressing space. There is no importance if the command team of first platoon is near the rifle team of second platoon or a support team, or is there? I would actually like a new approach, where teams were directly assigned to their specific command team, or how it goes in real life in army, or dismiss that column feature at all, it is then just useless and confusing.


Excellent, more importance on command structure should be noted. How can you let the command unit of second platoon lead the squads of first platoon? If the scope of command by the player is company level as present in CC, then platoons should be self-contained units, in that their command structure is clearly separated and should affect a unit if they are not with their organic command unit.

Pitf and Gtc had some good ideas with the organization structure of units, but it only affected requisitioning, when the battle started every team was for themselves.

This organization should not be too strict though, like in GTC you could end up with several platoons of 1 tank, I should be able to gather my remaining tanks and form a platoon of 5 with the remnants of the others.
Kanov
Obergerfreiter
Obergerfreiter
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:38 am
Like / Share CSO - Post

Re: What To Change / Improve

Postby ke_mechial » Fri Aug 14, 2015 5:30 pm

Thanks, Kanov. I think new game would either simply take the concept of CC3 about command teams (only the effect of command circle) or develop a new one based on real battle tactics by consulting real veterans.
Another thing is mortar teams. In real battlefield, Mortar Teams are indirect fire teams and they normally position themselves behind fireline and get orders from an observer, probably command team. But in game, you have to specify their target manually, if they do not literally see it, which is tedious, so many times you place them in positions where they would have a direct LOS.
On the other hand, direct fire teams can start firing on an enemy team, if another team detects it. Actually I witnessed a few times in CC, that mortar teams fired upon teams which didn't lie in their LOS, spontaneously without my order. I always found that mysterious, however realistic and wondered if that feature was somehow in game. It would be nice to put this feature literally in game.
ke_mechial
Obergerfreiter
Obergerfreiter
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:22 pm
Like / Share CSO - Post

Re: What To Change / Improve

Postby Kanov » Fri Aug 14, 2015 7:10 pm

I would like that command be like in Combat Mission 1. Instead of a "command radius" lines of command should be implemented. If the command unit has no communication radios, these lines could be affected by obstacles since the only way of transmitting orders would be physical like his hands or shouting.

So for example a good command line could be colored green, in this case the subordinate unit will have his morale affected positively (as currently for units inside the command radius), do as commanded with no lag. A mild obstructed line of communication (subordinate unit is out of sight of command unit) could have the penalty that the subordinate unit takes some seconds to execute the command. If the sub-unit is out of command, then they straight up might refuse or take a long while to execute.

This could be a little too hardcore probably, so maybe an in-game option "Grognard command behaviour" y/n? :D
Kanov
Obergerfreiter
Obergerfreiter
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:38 am
Like / Share CSO - Post

Re: What To Change / Improve

Postby ke_mechial » Fri Aug 14, 2015 7:19 pm

In addition to my previos posts, more thoughts part II:

1) In GTC new effects for tracer rounds was nice, a fast moving realistic tracer as it should be, and not aliased like it is drawn in windows paint and moving ridiculously slowly. However, I found it not sufficient. I would like more shiny and apparent tracer lines and custom color for tracer. The Movie "Fury" depicts it well, green traqcer for germans and yellow for Allies. For instance, war of Thunder (I know it is a different manner of game) already implemented the difference, namely you get green tracer for Bf-109 and yellow for spitfire.

2) A separate newly created WP ammo, which can both cause smoke and personnel casualties by burning. (Actually they already implemented the right animation for smoke rounds (spreading out particles of smoke round when first hit) in GTC.) There is an "allegedly" WP option, but it is not noticable nor effective. Furthermore,there is proof in a book about the history of Sherman in WW2 that, it was common among crews they would sometimes fire WP rounds onto panzers, which could knock them out by igniting oil remains on the surface. At least, the crew could become suppressed. Even japs were able to knock down a tank by WP, which is mentioned in the after battle report of 713rd tank battalion in Okinawa. Please work and search a little about that..., it would make your game sell... Just see, How people in Wargaming and warthunder forums are impassioned about WP ammo. Think about that: Until "Saving Private Ryan" people were even not aware of tracers... then they loved it...

"It has been proven that WP has been invaluable as an offensive weapon."
ROBERT C. McCABE,
Lt. Col. 419th Armd FA Bn.
After Action Report

WP has also been used extensively in boccage fighting in normandy by U.S. and against British in Arnhem by germans.

3) cannon recoil for guns. It should not be so hard to implement in 2015. I would like to see how muzzle of a panther or tiger moves back and forth...
ke_mechial
Obergerfreiter
Obergerfreiter
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:22 pm
Like / Share CSO - Post

Re: What To Change / Improve

Postby kweniston » Fri Aug 14, 2015 9:09 pm

A start:
- Full use of modern controllers, i.e. 5 button mouse, scroll wheel
- Ability to remap and bind keyboard shortcuts to all kinds of functions, i.e. select next unit/all units/all armor/all mortar, cycle through all victory locations, zoom in/out, etc
- Making a full range of settings optional in the game, setting them on/off for different playstyle/realism/difficulty
- Option to see the strategic map during the battle, and recognize the important exits. Zoom possibility, resize minimap.
- Some more map/scenery-interaction: add minefield to map, add fortification/roadbloack, blow bridge in advance, vehicle tracks?
- Weather effects. I.e. mud/snow and have a weather report for the battle.
- Easy moddability/map-making, easy scenario editing
- Sounds of moving armor, scary when you don't see the enemy but hear it
- Ability to add escorts to units, i.e. assign infantry squads to automatically staynear and assist a tank
- Finally have an acceptable A.I. Aggressive, patient, smart and stupid at times.
User avatar
kweniston
Obergerfreiter
Obergerfreiter
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon May 25, 2015 5:00 pm
Like / Share CSO - Post

Re: What To Change / Improve

Postby Kanov » Fri Aug 14, 2015 9:58 pm

Victory locations.

I think VL's should be toned down a bit, I realize they are like a measure that helps with many things like counting how much VL you have to determine a winner in battle, op and campaign, they help in determining how much land is lost when battle ends by low morale, determine entry points and map connections, give the AI an objective etc.

Problem is, sometimes the VL's are placed in zones nobody gives a damn :mrgreen:

I see some options here:
-Get rid of VL's completly. Let the battle decide what are the most important landmarks worth fighting for, the places that the player is going to defend or attack based on their tactical importance. AI should be improved though, to know where and when to attack/defend/retreat. I don't want to fight a battle where the AI is forced to one tiny corner and they still do not retreat next turn.
-Or Make them invisible as in CCMT
Kanov
Obergerfreiter
Obergerfreiter
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 3:38 am
Like / Share CSO - Post

Re: What To Change / Improve

Postby ke_mechial » Sat Aug 15, 2015 9:32 am

Thoughts about aircrafts and air support part III:

The game would probably be shaped around wwii, but for modding purposes of modern conflicts in the future, I would suggest implementing Helicopter landing and troops mounting and demounting. It can stay in game engine and then modders can use it later. Helicopter could also provide CAS and reconing for enemy troops and what about UAVs?. They could also be vulnerable to enemy fire from ground, could be shot down, or they could be avoided or suppressed by gorund fire, for instance, could not approach a landing zone.

Furthermore, again for the modding availability: Normally you do not directly control air support, just mark the ground. This is sufficient for wwii, but again for modern conflict modding, air support could take us to a screen where you look through FLIR or weapon station screen of aircraft (can be AC-130, AH-64 or AH-1Z Viper) CC already has topdown view and will probably get isometric view. Just filter the available map to get a infrared or night vision view and put it in a frame, that would be your weapon screen. You get predefined number of shots, say 30 rounds of 25 mm, 1 round of 105 mm howitzer or one tow missile, you freely choose where you want to dispose your weapons. For deploying weapons, first select switch for the weapon: move your mouse over the targets and press the trigger. For example you can spray autocannon over an area, for tow missile you can designate a vehicle/tank and fire.
ke_mechial
Obergerfreiter
Obergerfreiter
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:22 pm
Like / Share CSO - Post

Re: What To Change / Improve

Postby Nembo » Sun Aug 16, 2015 6:05 am

Bring back the CC2 battlemaker with the ability to make operations like in CC3.
User avatar
Nembo
 
Posts: 790
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 3:44 pm
Like / Share CSO - Post

Re: What To Change / Improve

Postby kweniston » Sun Aug 16, 2015 12:30 pm

- Add elevation as a bonus/malus factor when attacking or defending a hill.
- Use weather influences on the movement of infantry/armor/mobilized infantry on the strategic map and battle fields
- On terrain interaction: possibility to purposely destroy buildings/hedges/trees, in order to create line of sight, for example.
- Booby traps/mines/bombs/molotov cocktails, improvisation when ammo supplies dwindle.
- Generate some more focus on well performing individual units. It's nice to see great units perform, and awful to see them die. Reversely, let the opponent know they killed a star tank commander, which is good for their morale.
- Give snipers a more important role, somehow.
User avatar
kweniston
Obergerfreiter
Obergerfreiter
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon May 25, 2015 5:00 pm
Like / Share CSO - Post

Re: What To Change / Improve

Postby ke_mechial » Sun Aug 16, 2015 6:37 pm

kweniston wrote:- Add elevation as a bonus/malus factor when attacking or defending a hill.
- Use weather influences on the movement of infantry/armor/mobilized infantry on the strategic map and battle fields
- On terrain interaction: possibility to purposely destroy buildings/hedges/trees, in order to create line of sight, for example.
- Booby traps/mines/bombs/molotov cocktails, improvisation when ammo supplies dwindle.
- Generate some more focus on well performing individual units. It's nice to see great units perform, and awful to see them die. Reversely, let the opponent know they killed a star tank commander, which is good for their morale.
- Give snipers a more important role, somehow.


Great ideas. I would like to see building destroying, too. Of course, Engineer team concept needs a touch. They could have an option in the menu: "blow up" maybe? and for mine clearing "clear the area" special to these teams. Besides, buildings would be flammable, I mean if you fire flamehthrower on a building, it should not just burn a point. The fire would steadily spread out burn the building as in the reality, even the next-door house could be affected.
I would also like more zoomability and more detail for units, this flash game is a fine model for raiding buildings and close up view:
http://ninjakiwi.com/Games/Action/SAS-Z ... sault.html
Troops could be positioned on the roofs not just inside the buildings. Same is true for multistory buildings. I mean one team on the first floor, other on the second floor, other on the roof. Finally, buildings could be only accessible through the doors and windows or you would have to blow a wall. And when I mean door and window, what about hearing the sound of breaking door or window and soldier has a title in status monitor "breaching" and giving effort like in melee? I mean it is just unrealistic a team is not entering a building, just walking onto an area.
ke_mechial
Obergerfreiter
Obergerfreiter
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:22 pm
Like / Share CSO - Post

Re: What To Change / Improve

Postby KG_Werfer » Mon Aug 17, 2015 2:22 pm

Great ideas. I would like to see building destroying, too. Of course, Engineer team concept needs a touch. They could have an option in the menu: "blow up" maybe? and for mine clearing "clear the area" special to these teams. Besides, buildings would be flammable, I mean if you fire flamehthrower on a building, it should not just burn a point. The fire would steadily spread out burn the building as in the reality, even the next-door house could be affected.
I would also like more zoomability and more detail for units, this flash game is a fine model for raiding buildings and close up view:
http://ninjakiwi.com/Games/Action/SAS-Z ... sault.html
Troops could be positioned on the roofs not just inside the buildings. Same is true for multistory buildings. I mean one team on the first floor, other on the second floor, other on the roof. Finally, buildings could be only accessible through the doors and windows or you would have to blow a wall. And when I mean door and window, what about hearing the sound of breaking door or window and soldier has a title in status monitor "breaching" and giving effort like in melee? I mean it is just unrealistic a team is not entering a building, just walking onto an area.


Those are a lot of things in Combat Mission.. Troops on various levels of a building, buildings that blow up from damage inflicted, ability to zoom in and around a map, along with pare up and down. Those are all good aspects to have in a potential game here.

The sound(s) of breaking glass would be sweet.. Breaking down of doors.. Just how to add might be difficult.

Werf
User avatar
KG_Werfer
Hauptfeldwebel
Hauptfeldwebel
 
Posts: 213
Joined: Tue Feb 25, 2014 1:55 am
Location: Florida, US
Like / Share CSO - Post

Re: What To Change / Improve

Postby ke_mechial » Mon Aug 17, 2015 7:06 pm

Thinking about vehicles and water in game. What about amphibious vehicles and realistic water? Besides River gunboats availability? Until now as I know, there was no water element. There is great potential here. Of course there were also river crossing operations in WWII.
Besides, considering realistic vehicle modelling. This site is great. www.o5m6.de/
I first got acquainted with it through CCS. He makes great artistic illustration of WWII vehicles. Maybe he could provide support for the project for a small fee or just topviews of vehicles for free? Or maybe just even his depictions could give good reference.
ke_mechial
Obergerfreiter
Obergerfreiter
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:22 pm
Like / Share CSO - Post

Next

Return to The Tactical Art of Combat

cron
This site is not affiliated to or has anything relating to the philosophies of any radical, political, racist or fascistic organizations. fight fascism! This site is dedicated and serves as an information-pool to all close combat gamers.

Copyright 2015 -- CloseCombat.Org All Rights are Reserved.