What do you want to see in CM2?

[Dr Zaius]

What do you think needs to be redone, improved or changed for the next version of Combat Mission?

 

[Kraut]

better graphics
more tanks (multi turret for the east front)
more enviroment (more buildings/bunkers/vegetation,...)
better maps (the checkered maps might be easy to design but they are not pleasent for the eye)
More artillery (naval guns, Dora 800mm RR gun)
Better control over the air force (giving priority targets, calling air support on demand (the purple smoke of 'A Bridge to far'))
varying artillery patterns
Indirect fire for on-map guns/mortars
More equipment (landing boats, RR guns, armored trains, gliders, para troopers,..)
more landscape (beach, shallow/deep water, existing patterns should be combinable)
Oh, really important, I hope they finally fix the damn bug that guns /tank, PAK, whatever) tries to shoot at the BASE of an enemy tank/building, thereby missing far more often than realistically possible. A tank is 2m high, a building 4 m, you can misjudge the distance by almost 1000m and still hit. Not so in CM. And if a tank has zeroed in on a gun they shouldn't forget these settings again with the next shell! I often have tanks missing 10 rounds on a target just 50m away... :nuts:

 

[Palantir]

Yea what Kraut said!

And of course the ever popular- "follow the damn road" command button.

I'd also like to see a better "ambush" function- one that when the hidden attacker kills the sole target in his LOS every other enemy unit on the map doesn't immediately know where he is. (or if others do happen to be in his LOS they don't instantly see him & start shooting.)

 

[Kraut]

Righ, almost forgot, no more Borg-spotting, pleeeeze

 

[Redwolf]

No automatic transmission of a spotting report to all units. That doesn't help against the player ordering area fire the next turn, but it would be a big help even within one turn.

Model for turret size, stop punishing the Panzer IV unrealistically.

Artillery pricing for Quickbattles that doesn't make the German player have heavy artillery when the Allied player doesn't (especially bad from Normandy time on onwards).

Fix victory point bugs, e.g. fortifications in CMBB. Crews completely killed inside a vehicle don't count etc.

Make the armor arc fire at all AFVs, not only those with guns. This breaks FOW (you know it doesn't have a gun that way) and it makes scout cars break through ambush lines in unrealistic ways.

%%

The following are items that I think would be needed, but I know some of BFC staff and their beta testers don't think so:

Better zeroing in model. It is much too limited right now, leading to the endless slugfests of 88s and defending Panthers missing shot after shot.

Better tuning of probabilities of friendly fire from CAS.

Better artillery model. At the very least hold fire.

Get rid of the upper half of orders given by the TacAI. Make units stop and lay down under fire, but don't do that nonsense of running to unrealistically chosen places.

More smallarms ammo. SMG squads fire their load faster than even possible with these weapons and typical loadout.

Don't make tank hunters more effective when they run out of molotov cocktails and start throwing grenades.

Don't make concrete pillboxes die faster than wooden ones. Don't make both kinds of MG pillboxes die faster than an infantry MG team. I can't believe the BFC crowd is actually defending this as correct behavior.

When target is in sight - fire! I can't count how many trucks I missed to kill because some random regular or veteran MG would just not fire and sit there with LOS. Read my Mettama AAR from RoW4 to know what I mean.

Same applies for the hull MG in full tanks. Full tanks in CM are actually less better than SP guns due to very limited use and very limited effect of the hull MG. If there's enough ammo left, let loose, often.

Tanks, do not lose sight of a target when buttoning up when you already shot at the target. I can't believe BFC's buddies defend this - isn't it obvious that if the tank already shot at the target the gunner must see it through his optics and buttoning up won't make the gunner lose sight?

The number of AT shots missed at very close range, when shooting at slow or standing targets, is too high.

Infantry movement tires too fast, especially in snow. I will host a competition in New England this winter to establish good values.

Vehicle turn rates are better in CMAK than in CMBB but still way too slow. Somewhere I posted timing of the CM Tiger turning and the one you often see turning on history channel.

And I didn't even re-read my RoW4 AARs.

 

[Lurker]

Closer modeling to ASL. I really miss some of the ASL features. For instance like nationality traits, field promotions and individual squad leaders instead of generic 4 man plt HQs to name a few.

Better to-hit algoritms that actually take advantage of superior optics and gun velocities. In cmbb there's roughly a 1 to 2% to hit difference between German and Russian which doesn't reflect wwii RL too well. In AK there's no difference at all that I've seen. In RL the 88L71 and 75L70 had a high pct of first shot kills but in the game they miss as often as everything else. Again, ASL had a nice model for this.

Follow-the-road and convoy commands.

Realistic hull rotation times for armor. Some German tanks and TDs could pivot on the spot instead of making a series of forward and backard movements.

Improved penetration tables. AK upped the allies penetration ratings considerably over cmbo. I'm not so sure they're very accurate.

Better armor slope and curvature modeling. From cmbb on, the JPIV and V are listed as having 'curved' super structures when there was nothing curved about them at all. If curvature is approximately equivalent to a 30% slope (from every thing I've read) then this seriously waters down the JPs frontal protection.

I'm not sure what can be done about Borg spotting as that seems inherent in every game on the market and once one unit spots something how do you then 'not know' that you've seen it for other units?

And last but not least, a bibliography of the designers sources, as with ASL, so we can check the validity of the modeling when necessary.

 

[Cougar_DK]

A detailed overview of all your units with their most used stats, like morale etc. and "flags" for if they are firing, reciving fire, moving etc. And if I click on a unit the 3D view jumps to it. It works perfect in the Steel Panther series....

I asked for it when CMBO was released but Battlefront kept saying that it was not posibble.... yea right....

 

[Redwolf]

Improved penetration tables. AK upped the allies penetration ratings considerably over cmbo. I'm not so sure they're very accurate.

Well, the Axis penetration stats raised even more and nobody, not even rexford, has any idea where those numbers come from. 75mm L/48 and 75mm L/70 have particulary high numbers in CMAK. The CMBB numbers were lower and in line with e.g. rexford's numbers.

Better armor slope and curvature modeling. From cmbb on, the JPIV and V are listed as having 'curved' super structures when there was nothing curved about them at all. If curvature is approximately equivalent to a 30% slope (from every thing I've read) then this seriously waters down the JPs frontal protection.

The angle distribution of "curved" armor should be in the unit data. As you, I have a feeling it is actually mostly low angles that come out of this.

How anybody can few that tin board on the front of a Jagdpanther as a random collection of angles is bejond me.

"Some people" imply that there is hidden unit data defining an angle distribution for each vehicle with "angled" marked armor. I would be surprised if that was the case. If I'm correct, a late StuG, a Jagdpanzer IV and a Jagdpanther are treated the same.

I'm not sure what can be done about Borg spotting as that seems inherent in every game on the market and once one unit spots something how do you then 'not know' that you've seen it for other units?

You cannot prevent the player from learning the spotting and then directing other units to do area fire or turn into the appropriate direction to spot the thing somebody else spotted.

However, you can give each individual unit one pointer each for every enemy units that this friendly unit spotted. Right now it seems that enemy units are just marked as spotted or not, for all friendly units.

And last but not least, a bibliography of the designers sources, as with ASL, so we can check the validity of the modeling when necessary.

 

[Cougar_DK]

And a option to merge all the actions turns to one movie showing the action of all units on the map. Could be so cool.

 

[Redwolf]

And a option to merge all the actions turns to one movie showing the action of all units on the map. Could be so cool.

You know that the PBEM helper comes pretty close to that if you have a fast enough harddisk?

 

[Cougar_DK]

You know that the PBEM helper comes pretty close to that if you have a fast enough harddisk?

I don't know PBEM helper... can it merge them for real ?

 

[Lurker]

How anybody can few that tin board on the front of a Jagdpanther as a random collection of angles is bejond me.

"Some people" imply that there is hidden unit data defining an angle distribution for each vehicle with "angled" marked armor. I would be surprised if that was the case. If I'm correct, a late StuG, a Jagdpanzer IV and a Jagdpanther are treated the same.

As a youth I use to love to play Panzer Blitz and the JPs were my favorite. How the CMBB/AK designers can claim the very flat 55 and 50 degree front surfaces of the JPV and IV are curved is beyond me. They are listed as 83mm and 80mm curved superstructures while the stug IV and III lates are 80mm curved. Does this mean that the wonderful steep slopes of the JPs are no better then the stugs hap-hazzard front armor with it's many 0 degree surfaces? I was wondering if there were hidden values to each tank but I can't imagine why there would be.

 

[Redwolf]

I don't know PBEM helper... can it merge them for real ?

No, it calls the game engine for you in the background, enters you password for you, so on the surface it looks like you just jumped from one minute to the other.

It is not great, actually pretty horrible, but much better than manual loading of 15 files to find the place you need to screenshot for your AAR.

 

[Redwolf]

As a youth I use to love to play Panzer Blitz and the JPs were my favorite. How the CMBB/AK designers can claim the very flat 55 and 50 degree front surfaces of the JPV and IV are curved is beyond me. They are listed as 83mm and 80mm curved superstructures while the stug IV and III lates are 80mm curved. Does this mean that the wonderful steep slopes of the JPs are no better then the stugs hap-hazzard front armor with it's many 0 degree surfaces? I was wondering if there were hidden values to each tank but I can't imagine why there would be.

Exactly.

Actually it's worse because the Jagdpanther has the bigger silhuette and is hence overall more vulnerable than the StuG - if we are correct that there are no hidden different tables for the angle distribution.

 

[Bogdan]

About map rendering and its design :

The 20 meters tile grid actually looks fine for me, as it can render many topographical details without being to much long and complicated to edit. However, in my humble opinion, some things must be changed / fixed :

- The possibility to create hilly cities and urban areas on a topo relief. For the moment, cities must be flat. It's totally unrealistic in many situations. Also, buildings located on a different elevation tile that the surrounding ones just disappear ! I wonder why this main drawback is still here in CMAK, where maps try to represent mountain and other hilly countryside. Would be nice to see a real 1944 Viller-Bocage 3D map...

- The possibility to have angled buildings, I mean not square. For the moment, houses, buildings, factories just look like boxes, put along the roads... The european theater is full architectural oddities ! I don't mean I want to have them all in the CM editor; in fact, I suggest that buildings could follow every road pattern with 90 and 45° crossroads.

- Thinking about the "Mapping Mission" program, it appears that a map layer, under the CM grid, could be a fantastic tool. In order to reproduce accuratelly the topo of a REAL map, this device would be really nice. Actually, we still have to edit our maps via "Mapping Mission" and export them in the CM editor. A faster and simpler solution may be found ?

- Telephone poles ! Eye-candy, I know, but sweet.

 

[Kraut]

camouflage option for defending units

better fire arc, the half square is nice but sometimes I want to fine tune it a bit to exclude/include specific terrain features.

Better TRP assignment, the attacker should be able to buy TRPs too (to simulate pre-aquired targets) and most defending units (PAK, tanks, guns) should have improved to-hit probabilities because they had some time to learn the landmarks and their distance to their position.

better urban warfare modeling, grenades thrown at defenders inside a building should sometimes bounce back if the thrower misses a window.

Better AI, if a squad panics due to beeing shelled by arty they should cower to the ground instead of jumping up and running away, because thats almost = instant death and most soldiers , even if paniced, should have enough common sense remaining to know that. Maybe one or two men per squad might panic and run, but not the entire squad. And MGs shouldn't try to sneak.

more fortifications (small trenches, deep trenches, fire trenches, dragon teeth, infantry bunkers, tank turret bunkers, cheaper barbe wire, cheaper mines)

resupply during a battle

real-time multiplayer option

campaign modus

improved senario design possibilities (reinforcement during operations, weather control during operations, objectives for the AI, something other than flags to determine victory (you have to capture house X by turn Y to prevent the enemy from destroying important documents)

Better FoW, units should only be able to fire at targets they have spottet themself or were informed of the target by a nearby unit that saw it. That would greatly improve the value of radio equipped tanks. And units in command would perform better.

Better smoke screen, the current solution is just pathetic.

destroyed tanks should provide cover/break LOS

Memory, units shouldn't forget the position of a gun just because they were briefly engaging a different target or lost contact with the original target. They should also zero in a lot better.

maybe civillians in urban warfare

optimized 3D engine, the engine uses far to much CPU time (during the real time planing phase, not the combat calculation)

 

[KGPanzerschrecK]

1} a campaign game. being able to follow your units in multiple battles and ops. with more experience comes more accuracy and improved morale levels. watching your favorite men getting promoted and earning medals, keeping track of kills ect...that was one of my favorite features in Close Combat III.

2} better control in the map editor and more terrain types. instead of "blocking" in of say, a group of trees, be able to "paint" in a line of trees with a paint brush. not unlike a paint program.

3} more unit types (infantry & armored units) and more nationalities. each nationality should have nation specific pros and cons. and on a side note, id love to see US marines and japanese units for pacific battles.

4} on map in air airplane models and more airplane types.

5} more artillery types and a total revamping of the way arty is used in the game. onboard indirect arty from on map sp's and guns and the way smoke is used ect...

 

[ibncalb]

would love to see the pacific, not just new units (especially USMC and IJA) but new terrain, Jungle, Kunai Bamboo etc. Banzai attacks, fanatic defenders. Caves (complexes?) jungle pillboxes.

Proper night actions with trip flares, illuminating rounds and starshells.

Indirect MG fire, "rolepaying" battle hardening of troops, picking up enemy weapons.

A new CG where a chosen kampfgruppe or task force is put through random battles gaining experience.

b e n

 

[AnewNewbie]

No more borg spotting.
The ability to capture and use weapons or vehicles and also being able to re-man machine guns etc.
related to above: abilty to re-supply off the dead.
calvary.

 

[Tim]

Personal weapons for gun or mortar crews so when they run out of ammunition, they can used as infantry.