Michael Dorosh
der Spieß des Forums
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2004
- Messages
- 15,733
- Reaction score
- 2,765
- Location
- Calgary, AB
- First name
- Michael
- Country
This thread at BFC was mildly confusing: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=88105
Several minor points of order - I can give a pass to the developers since none of them are native to the UK.
Firstly, the plural of Sergeant Major is Sergeants Major - the 's' comes after 'Sergeant' not 'Major'.
Secondly, a Warrant Officer is not a "senior non-commissioned officer" as some (including self-professed Commonwealth military personnel) are alleging. Senior non-commissioned officers included the ranks of staff sergeant and sergeant. That's it. A warrant officer is a separate class of soldier in the British Army.
This exchange was interesting also
Several minor points of order - I can give a pass to the developers since none of them are native to the UK.
Firstly, the plural of Sergeant Major is Sergeants Major - the 's' comes after 'Sergeant' not 'Major'.
Secondly, a Warrant Officer is not a "senior non-commissioned officer" as some (including self-professed Commonwealth military personnel) are alleging. Senior non-commissioned officers included the ranks of staff sergeant and sergeant. That's it. A warrant officer is a separate class of soldier in the British Army.
This exchange was interesting also
Steve is still not "getting it" re: "pick and choose" forces but pre-battle casualties will be essential to Normandy if for no other reason than no one went into battle at full strength, and for the Commonwealth at least, the Left Out of Battle system was actually built-in so that they went in (often at 60% strength) to major attacks short-handed on purpose.Cpl Steiner: Instead of having everything INCLUDING the kitchen sink in the TO&E, I've often thought BFC should have gone to the other extreme and just given us the building blocks of a TO&E. For the base game we could have had things like "M4 Rifleman", "M203 Rifleman", "M249 Automatic Rifleman", "Fireteam Leader", "Squad Leader", "Stryker ICV" etc. You would then build your TO&E from the bottom up, first putting together fireteams, then squads, then platoons, etc. It would have been more work for the scenario designer but greatly enhanced flexibility too - as you could have non-standard formations, or formations designed to fit into their accompanying vehicles. BCF could have provided some example formations in the editor - or just outlined them in the manual. What I miss more than anything about CMx1 is the ability to have squads short of a few men - which wouldn't be a problem with the bottom-up approach.
hcrof: Having that option would push CM even further into the relms of 'perfect game' for me. It would be an awesome feature!
ScubaSam: Sounds a bit more like what games such as ArmA do in their scenario editors. It doesn't take that long to build a few squads and a platoon HQ in that, with whatever mix of weaponry/soldiers you like.
However, that approach only really works for small amounts of units, and it also relies on the scenario builder knowing the ins and outs of every single formation they want to use. You also lose out on the automatic links between HQs, so the soldier wouldn't recognise he is part of 3rd squad, 2nd platoon, B company, or whatever. That makes the whole C2 simulation pretty much irrelevant.
While it'd be nice to tinker around with the formations now and again for one particular scenario, I think I much prefer the top down approach BFC use
Now, if TOEs were editable/moddable, that would be a different story
Battlefront.com: CM has always been, and will always be, a game which is fundamentally rooted in realism. Having people make up their own TO&E, which is completely unrealistic from real TO&E, is nothing we are interested in explicitly supporting.
Most people, I think, don't want to build their own TO&E because they don't want to have to figure out what works and what doesn't. Most of the TO&E you guys play with, especially in CM:SF, exists because the real military already did trial and error. So I think there's little value in allowing people to make their own TO&Es from the ground up.
Having pre-battle casualties is something we just haven't got around to doing. It will be done and there's no need to change the way TO&E works. Same thing with user created "task forces" (battle groups), which are higher level organizations of standard lower level TO&E elements. It's just that these things take time to implement and we've got some other stuff to get done first. But both will happen and probably soon.