Order of Battle and Battle Orders.

[=LD=Hethwill]

One of the things that interest me more than anything in most games is the opportunity to go through History and play the "What If..." game. Meaning my actions as a player may alter the entire strategic situation.

 

Not many games depict this, be it for non inclusion of a more in depth "battle evolution" system or by complete disregard of proper OOB and assigned missions.

 

Some games actually have it in place, in follow up "chapters" if you may say so, like a dynamic chain where one link leads to another depending on the outcomes, locally at the sector level, and at the operational level in the whole map.

 

My suggestion comes into place when I would expect a action-consequence system built in. Note: when I say units I am referring to a name in a map. Anyone can select the unit and fly for it.

 

- dynamic phases of battle with historical Order of Battle - units are assigned to sectors & airfields according to historical data

 

- each unit will be assigned missions, according to battle orders, again from historical data.

 

- instead of a ticket system, which is faulty at best, an algorithm that calculates mission success versus casualties rates versus campaign progression would be interesting as it would support a on-going scenario, instead of the sterile "1 map ticket system"

 

 

For example:

 

Order of Battle:

- Medium Bomber Squadron A is based on Airfield A

- Fighter B is based on Airfield A

- Dive bomber group C is based on Airfields A & B

 

- Battle Orders - mission #1:

Squadron A - bomb supply columns at sector BB01CA7

Fighter B - escort Squadron A to sector BB01CA7, then rendez vous with A./Group C at BB01CA12 and escort them back to base.

A. Group C stationed at AF.A - Interdiction of any ground movement near the town Bravo

B. Group C stationed at AF.B - Close support of Armour Batallion at sector BB02BA09

 

Timer for missions must be equal to the maximum fuel time available to the lower range plane in the unit.

 

Upon completion of the mission, by time & by result, a new mission would be issued to the unit after a cool down time. Strategic map would be updated accordingly.

 

On the bonus side a Battle Cryer newspaper could be generated and displayed.

 

 

Sorry if it sounds confusing. I'll try to develop this idea further after another cup of coffee. Welcome to Monday.

[Cybermat47]

I'm confused, but then again I'm really tired as well.

[=LD=Hethwill]

Sorry Cybermat, sometimes i complicate the obvious.

 

Simply said, when you ( and your buddies ) join a airfield and select a unit, you'll have a specific mission for that unit, flying from that airfield, during a period of time.

Missions will change upon completion. Maybe assigned from a pool of dynamic missions.

 

Success and failure accomplishing the mission has consequences on the overall ongoing map situation.

Edited October 28, 2013 by =LD=Hethwill_Khan

[Venturi]

I agree with Hethwill's suggestions here. The multiplayer aspect needs to have incorporated into it interesting and challenging mission goals, which also encompass persistent consequences for completion or failure. This will help to keep the multiplayer community's combat oriented around achieving or preventing achievement of said mission goals, and will keep players interested in co-operation.

[ThudThunder]

Microsoft Combat flight simulator 3 offered a dynamic campaign, where you earn skill points in different ways to advance technology or even suggest an invasion.  The outcome of the war in campaign war was sole dependent on the player.