Feedback, suggestion and bug thread

[Flanker15]

Cool.

I was more asking about battery fire not single unit fire into an area where no enemies are spotted like a planned barrage before an attack or harassing fire onto an area, or is off map artillery still controlled manually?

Also offtopic a bit:  Do guys ever retreat or rout?  I've seen them suppressed plenty of times but they usually go from that to annihilated or surrendered they don't seem to fall back after extended barrages or fire.

[lavish]

Manual area firing is obsolete feature and will be removed soon.

Even better!

[andrey12345]

I was more asking about battery fire not single unit fire into an area where no enemies are spotted like a planned barrage before an attack or harassing fire onto an area, or is off map artillery still controlled manually?

Offmap barrage has a big price and will be operated manually some time.

Also offtopic a bit:  Do guys ever retreat or rout?  I've seen them suppressed plenty of times but they usually go from that to annihilated or surrendered they don't seem to fall back after extended barrages or fire.

Just do not retreat, and if they lose control then start retreating. At this point, the AI ​​works well as a players forces - retreat, panic etc.
Even in videos in a post above can be seen this moment.

[wodin]

Here is the issue with these new changes..I don't think any AI is anywhere near capable of doing what your asking it to do proficiently. Eventually you'll have a game that plays itself...and there will be no options to intervene or give the AI a helping hand by removing area fire..arty plotting etc etc..

The game though giving you less todo is going up in complexity ten fold.

My fingers are crossed but all this is very worrying. The AI struggles as it is esp Inf at the moment..oh and tanks driving into holes they can't get out of and Tanks in forest wiping out platoons of soldiers when some are stood right next to it..a couple of grenades in the tracks should at least immobilise the tank but they don't do that just hang about until shot, infact many are close enough to drop grenades into the hatches and view slits...yet were giving them all the fire tasks and arty and mortar plotting etc etc and in control of the ai wire men and runners hoping to god they don't get shot up, finally we have no way of knowing if units are within visual\voice command radius either. Your video demonstration looked cool with so few units on a relatively flat terrain..but boy add more enemy shooting your wire men etc worrying.

[andrey12345]

Here is the issue with these new changes..I don't think any AI is anywhere near capable of doing what your asking it to do proficiently. Eventually you'll have a game that plays itself...and there will be no options to intervene or give the AI a helping hand by removing area fire..arty plotting etc etc..

Well, why not?
You can always lend a helping hand to the AI  ​​, even special new orders are added for this. But cheat with direct commands can only be available if have been established communication and all the commanders in the field.

Ie we want in the first place was the planning, as it is in real life, but not desperate attempt to intervene from user in the middle of a battle.

My fingers are crossed but all this is very worrying.

Try alpha.

The AI struggles as it is esp Inf at the moment..

Not exactly. Just the player has a divine super powers like direct targeting to any place. So, against this background, it seems that AI is dumb.

oh and tanks driving into holes they can't get out of and Tanks in forest wiping out platoons of soldiers when some are stood right next to it..a couple of grenades in the tracks should at least immobilise the tank but they don't do that just hang about until shot, infact many are close enough to drop grenades into the hatches and view slits...

If you had to stop tanks with grenades in close combat, you have done something wrong much earlier.
Its not AI 

yet were giving them all the fire tasks and arty and mortar plotting etc etc and in control of the ai wire men and runners hoping to god they don't get shot up,

As in real life, in game signalers do not run directly under fire, but hide and choose the appropriate way.
You can take the alpha version and see what wonder worry  .
Again, if you need to extend a communication under close enemy fire, then nothing to do with AI. This is a mistake of who manages it all, ie - user mistake.

finally we have no way of knowing if units are within visual\voice command radius either. Your video demonstration looked cool with so few units on a relatively flat terrain..but boy add more enemy shooting your wire men etc worrying.

As in real life, If you shout something - you never know whether or not to hear. 
Therefore, the soldiers in the game use different types of communication and possible overlap, well into the heat of battle of course is how it goes.

[wodin]

Just seems your asking alot of the AI..also many battle sin the operations leave you with little to no anti tank weapons..so your only hope is the Inf doing something if the tanks close in..but they don't.

[andrey12345]

Just seems your asking alot of the AI..also many battle sin the operations leave you with little to no anti tank weapons..so your only hope is the Inf doing something if the tanks close in..but they don't.

Run away and hide from the tanks. In the game there is no need to destroy tanks in direct combat. Especially considering the fact that infantry almost has no anti-tank grenades and anti-personel ones may damage tank only as an accident.
But territory controlled by the infantry much better if they had commanders compare to tanks.

[Missouri_Rebel]

I hate where this is going and it saddens me that the game I enjoy the most is regressing. I'll stay tuned, but I do not like what I am hearing.

I want more control, not less!

Let me give my squads a crawl order or take cover or dash for short distances or a sprint for slightly longer. I refuse to play a game where I am merely a spectator, no matter how 'realistic' it is. If I wanted to watch a game play itself I'd watch Command Ops. There is a reason I never spent any more money on that series.


I want a fun game to spend my limited free time with, not a lesson in frustration. I've stopped buying and playing many games in my life. Don't make APOS/GT one of them.

At least put it as an option.

MORE CONTROL NOT LESS

And yes I did try Alpha before I uninstalled the whole game and reinstalled back to where it was.

[Missouri_Rebel]

Run away and hide from the tanks.

The great tank run. Sounds like fun. 

 Where to hide to next as a single tank roams the battlefield unopposed? Sheesh.

[andrey12345]

I hate where this is going and it saddens me that the game I enjoy the most is regressing. I'll stay tuned, but I do not like what I am hearing.

 

I want more control, not less!

This is an arcade way, not simulator or wargame.

Let me give my squads a crawl order or take cover or dash for short distances or a sprint for slightly longer.

These orders already present from long time and will not disappear. So how are recommendations, not mandative.

I refuse to play a game where I am merely a spectator, no matter how 'realistic' it is. If I wanted to watch a game play itself I'd watch Command Ops. There is a reason I never spent any more money on that series.

Not at all pleased. Games with direct control released of a hundred in a year, and there is no reason to make another similar one.

I want a fun game to spend my limited free time with, not a lesson in frustration. I've stopped buying and playing many games in my life. Don't make APOS/GT one of them.

Indirect control basis is switched off in the settings and you can safely play as before.

MORE CONTROL NOT LESS

More control ok, I agree, but this control may not be direct.

[Missouri_Rebel]

The future could be like this;

You are the battalion commander and your only view is a 1 room peasant shack where you get intel reports that there are enemy somewhere. Maybe we can scan a map? A runner comes in the door and they can tell us that a platoon has panicked and we press the 'Go Get Them Somehow Somewhere' button.

Order cup of coffee. More vague reports. Who needs a full 3-d map that the player could zoom around on? A battalion commander cant do that.

Hear more reports. Place dinner order.

End Game

Now that would be realistic.

Who wants to place a pre order?

[andrey12345]

The future could be like this;

You are the battalion commander and your only view is a 1 room peasant shack where you get intel reports that there are enemy somewhere. Maybe we can scan a map? A runner comes in the door and they can tell us that a platoon has panicked and we press the 'Go Get Them Somehow Somewhere' button.

Order cup of coffee. More vague reports. Who needs a full 3-d map that the player could zoom around on? A battalion commander cant do that.

Hear more reports. Place dinner order.

End Game

Now that would be realistic.

Its a wargame of a Dream, yes  But its not for a battalion commander is for a division or Army commander.
And as result its not an our way.

My variant:

1st act: You see map on a table and company commanders - give orders to it and make a battle plans - main and reserve with timings and movements, compare clocks and agree on conditional signals. (Deploy&Initial orders phase)

2nd act: Are you in the dugout at the observation point looking over the battlefield in the telescope and accept reports from subordinates and send orders. Sometimes talking on the phone with the regiment commander and company commanders and supports. See to map is optional.

3rd act: Retreat on a horse/car/or foot if defeat. Or walk on a battlefield and see abandoned enemy tanks and another trophys if victory.

Ie in general as a good realistic movie about the war with the ability to control battle.

P.S. Cup of coffee, or maybe even vodka - it is a good usable feature  .

[wodin]

Tigers Unleashed attempts to be uber realistic and the times you get it working I'm not sure you can say your actually playing a game anymore..esp due to command delay and friendly fow. Honestly it isn't for everybody, infact it appeals to a select few.

Be careful trying to go for uber realism, you'll lose alot of players and the game will no longer be fun but a lesson in frustration and a big lack of control.

I had an idea of an uber realistic game that really was mainly text based command reports both runner and radio with a selection of orders to choose. You'd have a map and you can update your forces and add enemy forces as and when reports come in to tell you where they are...or where they where..runners will get killed aswell so sometimes your runner wont get there or a runner wont get to you. The text would be the immersion side of the game..however you can go to see a unit personally..which will give them bonus\modifiers however during the trip you will be out of the command loop until you get back so although you make a huge difference to the unit you visit you will also be missing out on possible important events. Thats how I'd do a Uber realism wargame. All the battle is going on under the hood but all you really get is reports and the map beig updated as reports come in..if done right it could make an extremely tense game.

[andrey12345]

Be careful trying to go for uber realism, you'll lose alot of players and the game will no longer be fun but a lesson in frustration and a big lack of control.

I totally agree. So as you can see we do not go that way which is like CM or other hardcore wargames. Which can be described as "a player should have to suffer, and the more realistic the more suffering." 
Which results from the fact that the player to hide the beauty in a fog of war  , force him to fight monstrous interface and engage in micromanagement. In my opinion this is a bad way and it pounds the wargames to a standstill for years. What we can observe
Ie here is the "full control" as results in a terrible crap for the player.

I had an idea of an uber realistic game that really was mainly text based command reports both runner and radio with a selection of orders to choose. You'd have a map and you can update your forces and add enemy forces as and when reports come in to tell you where they are...or where they where..runners will get killed aswell so sometimes your runner wont get there or a runner wont get to you. The text would be the immersion side of the game..however you can go to see a unit personally..which will give them bonus\modifiers however during the trip you will be out of the command loop until you get back so although you make a huge difference to the unit you visit you will also be missing out on possible important events. Thats how I'd do a Uber realism wargame. All the battle is going on under the hood but all you really get is reports and the map beig updated as reports come in..if done right it could make an extremely tense game.

Main thing is not to overreact. Watch epic and while realistic battle sometimes interfering with its progress, in my opinion, is better than to "think" about each move for 20 minutes by hand directing all units  .

[Schuck]

Im looking at all the comments here,
 and its a little worrying.
I see the graphics getting better (image of the new Marder is amazing).
And the game play getting much more realistic, especially with the communications.
But the player seems to have less and less to do.
I fear the game is going in the direction of " Give the orders, press one button" and sit back and watch the battle unfold.
And thats not good!
Who wants to be just a spectator?

Im not saying micromanagement where you control every individual soldier is good, i dont believe it is.
But leave the player the option of control at platoon level with direct support fire, dont take it all away from him!

Im with Missouri_Rebel on this, you have the level of control just about right at the moment, dont touch it! Please.

[andrey12345]

But the player seems to have less and less to do.

Use option 4.12 and you get the same with hemorrhoids micromanage as before 

I fear the game is going in the direction of " Give the orders, press one button" and sit back and watch the battle unfold.

No, its not right conception.
Send orders to immediate subordinates instead of all units and watch good realistic interactive war movie on a battlefield .

Who wants to be just a spectator?

Why spectator? Number of different orders that can give a player is growing from patch to patch. Sit back is not necessary. But this does not mean that we should poke by mouse all the time.
Or do you think that if you do not have babysit with all the units right away that there is something bad?

Im not saying micromanagement where you control every individual soldier is good, i dont believe it is.
But leave the player the option of control at platoon level with direct support fire, dont take it all away from him!

No, only a battalion level. In platoon level it completely unrealistic, ie more than gamplay advance from this feature.

Im with Missouri_Rebel on this, you have the level of control just about right at the moment, dont touch it! Please.

We touch it in any patch again and again...and finally touch and remove interface at all. Ok interface may be in the next game

P.S. May be I can not clearly explained, but the concept is not taking away the player's ability to give orders. Concept - leave to the player indirect orders or make direct ones disadvantageous when properly organized command structure is absent.
Ie player will control and manage, but not shooting and driving instead of our units.

[Schuck]

Ah, yes.
Maybe something is lost in the translation.
I do apologise.
It just sounded as though the player would lose the abilitly to order close quarter direct fire on a specified area when covering an advance or attack.
Instead the AI would control this.
I understand off board artillary would still be player controlled for the indirect support fire role. ie to soften up an area before attack. Or to disrupt enemy lines of communication and supply.
And yes, as in real life,  no line of communication = no orders passed on.


A game with no interface: Click "GO" and watch until the end!! 

[Tac Error]

If you guys want a primer on Soviet artillery techniques (something that the game is moving towards with AI artillery commanders), I saved portions of a forum discussion here...

https://docs.google.com/document/d/16WJCxRpC8g58bL9pJwXuolVvQoFo2whxhcv3sxztXIo/edit

[andrey12345]

It just sounded as though the player would lose the abilitly to order close quarter direct fire on a specified area when covering an advance or attack. Instead the AI would control this.

Yes, it right too. You have a choice AI+command lines for free or manually for high price (+high level commander).

I understand off board artillary would still be player controlled for the indirect support fire role. ie to soften up an area before attack. Or to disrupt enemy lines of communication and supply.

Yes but with high price and may be available in automatic manner through AI in the future.

A game with no interface: Click "GO" and watch until the end!! 

Not so simple.
No interface, this means that the buttons on the panels will not be an eyesore, and not something that will not be able to give orders. The interface seems to be one of the main problems for all the wargames - very complicated, very weird, discourages potential players are no worse than the mention of the genre in the game description  .
So make it simple and at the same time keep the level of control and simulation is very difficult, it is best to remove it altogether. What we are going to do in the next game, I guess  .

[Missouri_Rebel]

I hope what I am hearing is more of a misunderstanding andrey. Can you answer a couple of questions to clear some things up.

1) Is this optional?

2)Will we still be able to control the individual squads as far as movements and choosing direct targets?

3) Will we still be able to use the platoon orders?

Because this statement bothers me;

Main thing is not to overreact. Watch epic and while realistic battle sometimes interfering with its progress, in my opinion, is better than to "think" about each move for 20 minutes by hand directing all units  .

But it is exactly this control that I want from a tactical game and ,to be honest, watching a realistic battle is something I do on t.v.. I rarely have to pause the game and most actions are quite quick to implement.

 What makes my opinion of this game so high is the ability to command such a large battle in a very immersive battlefield full of spectacular events with the help of a friendly AI and being able to get down to squad level and help make tactical decisions.

 Please tell me we can still play in what you called 'arcade' mode. It was that play that caused me to buy your game and all of its DLC's.