Talk about how to include the tanks gameplay

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by kestrel79

I think it would be pretty cool to see tanks given the ability to capture cities and airfields. Have a moving frontline.

It's the tank's job to drive to the city, destroy enemy tanks and other enemy strongholds. Once a certain amount of these have been destroyed, it begins to be captured. Then resupply trucks and trains are sent in to resupply the now captured base. All meanwhile you have airplanes flying over head battling it out for air superiority and to destroy the tanks trying to capture the base/city.

good ideas

some additional thoughts ....

I) SMALLER NUMBERS OF TANKS ON SMALLER MAPS

if you just need to direct one tank unit in the 1e person or to be controlled by AI (as designed in the mission) this is not to bad, eg:
- direct tanks to objective, instruct how to act when meeting enemy ground forces (engage if weaker or equal, avoid if they are stronger),
- what to do once objective is reached (hold position, dig in defensively , proceed to next objective etc)

in il2-CoD scenario's i also suspect all tank units need a number of mobile AA guns integrated with the unit (smaller caliber AA, mounted on mobile soft skinned vehicles that move with the tank unit ) because as a flightsim (without infantry being modeled) most threats will come from the air by enemy planes constantly hunting for them. without that minimal protection any tank unit out in the open becomes much to vulnerable and ineffective

once a captured objective has been held for a period of time (and if it has an unbroken supply line) the same sector/area also needs heavy AA guns (and some reenforced defensive ground artillery positions ?) being spawned automatically to reflect what would normally happen when the enemy hold a new position (normally infantry in fortified positions would hold the position with artillery units nearby), eg once captured the position is held, but the tanks stay mobile. most of this could be done with a number of basic commands and some simple automated scripts and doesnt need to be to complex, but you cant expect a tank unit to fill all those roles (be mobile offensive and defensive, and exclusively hold all stationary positions on their own)

if a tank unit captures an area (town, airfield, bridge etc) and that unit becomes isolated from its supply lines, server msg's need to exist that warn the friendly side to have to supply them by air, or instruct it to withdraw (with a particular limited radius of movement until resupplied)

there is also the additional potential problem that a mission on a server might have been carefully designed, but when some n00b teens join the server for a bit of fun they take over control of a specific tank unit in the 1e person, go off on their own joyride and completely change the unfolding battle plan (since there wont be 100's of tanks active on the map, but more likely 20 or so, this could be a major problem). not sure what the solution to this is.


II LARGER NUMBER OF TANKS ON BIGGER MAPS

but to do this in a workable way gets rather complex if you look at the main large maps SoW uses once it deals with land based maps with large front lines. you would need roughly historically correct proportional numbers of ground forces and vehicles on front lines. for example the less able allied tanks cant be matched 1:1 with german tigers, for ex in a normandy (or north africa) scenario where the larger numbers of allied tanks usually overwhelmed the stronger tiger tanks, otherwise the german side would always outperform the allied side (if you give both sides equal numbers of units)

to be able to use the tanks in mission design or a dynamic campaign server with large number of units on a map and a whole front line being populated with tanks and other mobile units, we need to have the right server commands available to control them and give new orders while the dynamic campaign server keeps running its other parts of scripted events (not in a complex mission design method, but some simple AI instructions method from a purpose designed interface console which is also accessible from within in the game itself by the "server command" that setup the mission (who with a pwd can delegate it to his assistants/helpers). this would allow both sides some ability to respond (in a limited way) to unfolding events in a dynamic campaign server.

might be a bit early to think that far ahead, but eventually some of this type of control should become possible as the series evolves


right now at release of some of these new feature of controlling tanks and other ground vehicles, i'd be happy if the guns are accurate over the right distances, we are given some AA mounted on mobile vehicles to protect them from air attack, and we can issue some basic commands to engage/disengage the enemy forces, capture an objective and hold it, and be resupplied by air once low on fuel/munitions

[DroopSnoot]

Great ideas, although a little premature i feel.
I think anyone who has played ArmA will understand how much data has to be shifted back and forth and the issues inherent with it, desync being the biggest issue.
We are most likely going to be running on maps that will be much bigger than Arma Islands as well more detailed if our first map in CLOD is anything to go by.
The developers will need to do something special with the code or it might have similar downsides that Arma has, and that could be problematic for a flight sim.

Needless to say I think its a great angle and i hope they only include it into the game when its fully ready this time.

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by DroopSnoot

Great ideas, although a little premature i feel.
Needless to say I think its a great angle and i hope they only include it into the game when its fully ready this time.

This has been the developments way of business for years. They introduce new features as the system resources allow. Each addon is a approx. a couple of years down the road when the customers average system is stronger and the sim further optimized to allow more demanding features to be introduced as an option for those with systems strong enough to employ them.

[furbs]

I havnt read all of Blackdog's post, but im guessing its more all arms combined tactical warfare 128 players 24 hour online war strategy action COOP dogfight with triggers pipe dreams CLOD fiction.

What ever he said, i hope it comes true.

[Codex]

The best tank sim I played was T34 v Tiger. You might still be able to get a copy on eBay.

Having CloD incorporate a tank sim at that level would be welcome.

It would be cool to play out a Blitzkrieg assault with Ju87s and Tanks working together.

I take csThor points but those same 'play styles' are being played out in IL-2 / CloD in the online world now. This can be controlled some what if they make the tanks with same level of realism as the planes.

For example: The Tiger I, you couldn't just put the foot to the floor and go ( ala WoT - which is as unrealistic as you can get ), the Tiger had to be warmed up and care had to be taken when selecting gears, the gearbox and drive train in the Tigers were very vulnerable and under strength-ed for the tank.

I'm currently reading Otto Carius' book "Tigers in the mud", a very interesting account of Tiger Tanks in combat and the tactics used. Would highly recommend it.

I for one would love to see a driver-able Tiger I in CloD, if they can match the level of realism as the planes. The offline campaigns would be enjoyable at the very least.

[Untamo]

S!

As already said, this will be great for online wars. As a SEOW player, I think it's a much welcomed feature if we are to ever have something like SEOW in CloD. In case all flight slots are taken, there still would be the ground slots (all driveable vehicles) available for the extra pilots. Depending on ground vehicle CloD's AI vehicle skill, humans taking control of tanks etc. could tip the outcome in land battles, which are very important factor in SEOWs. I don't think that many pilots would be anxious to take vehicles that are transiting far from the front, but the ones in the front might be quite tempting distraction.

Originally Posted by CKY_86

...If the enemy vehicles are destroyed, the airfield will return back to use say 5 mins after the last enemy was destroyed. However if the enemy manages to hold & take control of the field, it will turn over into the enemies hands, but will be un-usable untill the front line gets 5-10 km away & stays that way for 5 mins, then it will become an emergency landing ground, allowing for landings only. After say 10-15 mins of control it will turn back to fully operational.

+1

Bit OT: This is also available (implemented with only airplanes though) on old Il-2 server "War-birds-FH". Relevant mod available here: http://www.war-birds.com/

[carguy_]

Originally Posted by zapatista

there is also the additional potential problem that a mission on a server might have been carefully designed, but when some n00b teens join the server for a bit of fun they take over control of a specific tank unit in the 1e person, go off on their own joyride and completely change the unfolding battle plan (since there wont be 100's of tanks active on the map, but more likely 20 or so, this could be a major problem). not sure what the solution to this is.

For the DF servers I do not know and I do not care. BUT, even in generic coops (needless to say online wars), the vast majority of players tend to stay in packs, however disorganised they may be. This means that every coop would need only few people that know what to do, others will follow.
In online wars however, this is a no brainer since no n00b does them anyway (they can`t take the harsh start of being eaten alive - everybody new experiences it, though not many go on).

Mates, remember that most of what you said in this topic was already in IL2 1946. We do not need to step back with this. Online wars had it all worked out, the only difference with CloD being that there would be additional tank/AAA player slots. Moreover, we do not need to have it full scale like furbs has chosen to troll about. Just 5 tanks a side, few heavy armor empacements, few AAAs and we`re ready. IL2`s old online code had it running flawlessly most of the time when people had 6mbit connections at best. Now people have xxxmbit connections and you still see a problem?

All this frontline stuff : red/blue, resources, attaacking airfields, cities limitations, historical, ahistorical - we had it all few years ago. Now what we need to do first is to make a smooth transition.

First we make old coops work, then we get at them 100 player missions when we feel comfortable with it.