Not the "Ruse" style infantry

[Bennyy]

I'm sure it'd be fine if the truck and soldiers were separate entities, but watching the stream suggests to me that they are actually one, meaning that "disembarking" actually means the truck transforming into a squad and all its stats changing. If this is the case, then the timeframe/relative unimportance of the issue render the suggestion moot.

 

[XboxTrollen]

It is also annoying me a bit, that the gun is facing in the wrong direction when the truck disappears. It would be able to shoot a lot slower if it were disembarked correctly.

 

[safe-keeper]

Really hoping the game supports modding to allow trucks to not disappear. If APCs remain, that gives me hope that it might be as simple as tagging trucks with "CloakingDevice=0" or something and it'll remain when you dismount. If so it'll be a Day 1 download from Steam Workshop from me for sure. What's next, your fighters teleporting off the map once they've dropped their bombs or fired their rockets?

Again, transport management was "busywork" in Wargame, most of this can be easily solved by tried-and-proven methods like WIC's "Board newarest transport" command for infantry, and second of all, having to keep "off-duty" APCs and trucks safe is part of the depth of the game. They are strategic assets you need to keep safe, but within reach, like logistics vehicles, command units, and artillery. Successfully getting to and destroying enemy transports actually hampers their ability to maneuver.

They disappear to prevent people from using them as cheap suicide recons, and personally I really like it.

There are so many ways to solve this. Someone suggested giving trucks an added "tax" cost that you get back if the truck makes it safely back off the map. Would fix things nicely.

Pocket trucks that magically vanish when you step off of them is just immersion-breaking and ridiculous. In a strategy game like Hearts of Iron 4, you can get away with stuff like troops just being able to transport from port to port by means of transports with a simple right-click, but that can be explained by there simply being transport ships in the port. What's the explanation for trucks magically disappearing?

I think that the transports don't re-appear once the units dismount which is probably a good compromise between wargame and ruse.

That's even worse. So now once troops are deployed you can't redeploy them with trucks? This negates most of the point of having motorised infantry.

 

[UltimateIdiot]

That's even worse. So now once troops are deployed you can't redeploy them with trucks? This negates most of the point of having motorised infantry.

Not all transports disappear. Only unarmed trucks do, and those are mostly used by foot infantry in the first place. I.e: if your division didn't have mechanized infantry in real life, it won't have it in-game either. If it did, you are going to get a transport option that stays in the field and fights with the infantry.

It's a compromise between needing to make foot infantry viable and quick to deploy after the initial purchase (because of the map size, you'd otherwise end up never seeing infantry divisions played as they would simply be too slow to ever react to broken frontlines and lost units), but at the same time bring in the limitation they had which is they're unable to quickly re-deploy them afterwards. Your mileage may vary of course, but for me it wasn't that big of a deal.

What's the explanation for trucks magically disappearing?

I just figured that the battlegroup has a limited number of trucks in the first place, and they are returning back to the division's motor pool for refueling and to haul another group of units to the front.

 

[sam hamwitch]

I think the idea of them becoming uncontrollable and driving off the map once you dismount the infantry is a good one. It still solves all the problems the current system is designed to solve, without looking weird. I think it'd also be cool if there was a 'pickup' command as well: You select a squad and press the pickup button, and the squad becomes uncontrollable while a (also uncontrollable) truck spawns and fast moves to where they are to pick them up. Once they're in the truck they function exactly like they do now, and when you dismount them the truck drives off the map again.

 

[Glapsviðr]

The larger problem of the motorisation of the infantry is that paras when jumping do not have the tactical mobility to go everywhere they want. As stated, they are meant to be encircled. They are meant to jump on an objective, capture it and wait for reinforcement. What we have seen is an "elite" unite brought forward.

Truck or half tracks should be treated like in wargame, it is a transport unit that costs, and might not be cheap, but can bring a huge tactical advantage over a slower opponent.

I fear to see the german ID. being sent forward by opel blitz and supplied with trucks.

 

[Miskyavine]

The larger problem of the motorisation of the infantry is that paras when jumping do not have the tactical mobility to go everywhere they want. As stated, they are meant to be encircled. They are meant to jump on an objective, capture it and wait for reinforcement. What we have seen is an "elite" unite brought forward.

Truck or half tracks should be treated like in wargame, it is a transport unit that costs, and might not be cheap, but can bring a huge tactical advantage over a slower opponent.

I fear to see the german ID. being sent forward by opel blitz and supplied with trucks.

The airborne ingame isnt right after a combat jump its after they have already re-grouped into there main fighting force so they most likely got there transports from anoth division or replacement vehicles. There was a huge number of vehicles dropped off during the Normandy campaign that werent assigned to anyone particular and were in fobs as replacement vehicles for already existing units. They could have gotten the trucks and jeeps from there. But once the Airborne finished there jumps they were pretty much motorised infantry once they regouped and giving as this isnt d-day or right after d-day im assuming spread out and disorganised paras are probably not gonna be a thing.

 

[safe-keeper]

Not all transports disappear. Only unarmed trucks do, and those are mostly used by foot infantry in the first place. I.e: if your division didn't have mechanized infantry in real life, it won't have it in-game either. If it did, you are going to get a transport option that stays in the field and fights with the infantry.

It's a compromise between needing to make foot infantry viable and quick to deploy after the initial purchase (because of the map size, you'd otherwise end up never seeing infantry divisions played as they would simply be too slow to ever react to broken frontlines and lost units), but at the same time bring in the limitation they had which is they're unable to quickly re-deploy them afterwards. Your mileage may vary of course, but for me it wasn't that big of a deal.

A better way to implement this would be to have only a certain number of trucks in your pool, possibly even fewer than you have infantry teams. Once deployed, you could choose to let them be used by the infantry on the front or send them off-map to let them be used by new reinforcements. If an enemy machine gun salvo disables those trucks, tough luck, your next batch of reinforcements will have to march from the map's edge or spawn point.

This is something I missed in Wargame, actually, the ability to call in infantry without transports and vice-versa, and to dismiss obsolete units by means of spawn zones or sending them back off the map's edge to get points refunded.

I just figured that the battlegroup has a limited number of trucks in the first place, and they are returning back to the division's motor pool for refueling and to haul another group of units to the front.

I'm very cautious to not make too many specific historical statements here on these forums due to all the people who know far more than me, but I'm 99% sure the Allies didn't evacuate trucks by means of teleporters .

 

[UltimateIdiot]

A better way to implement this would be to have only a certain number of trucks in your pool, possibly even fewer than you have infantry teams. Once deployed, you could choose to let them be used by the infantry on the front or send them off-map to let them be used by new reinforcements. If an enemy machine gun salvo disables those trucks, tough luck, your next batch of reinforcements will have to march from the map's edge or spawn point.

This is something I missed in Wargame, actually, the ability to call in infantry without transports and vice-versa, and to dismiss obsolete units by means of spawn zones or sending them back off the map's edge to get points refunded.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this isn't a time period where that happened on a regular basis, however. On a tactical level, infantry marched wherever they were going. Yes, divisions, corps, etc. had transport units, but that doesn't mean that every platoon and company commander could just request a truck to deploy Fritz, Hans and their Panzerschreck to the other side of the battlefield.

Being unable to rapidly re-deploy your units is supposed to be the hindrance of foot infantry divisions. Giving them that ability would remove the important gameplay difference between an infantry and a motorised/mechanized division

Your suggestion of a limited pool of transport vehicles, while authentic, would make balancing MP a problem. Some divisions would have more transport capability than others, i.e: they're much more viable. At the same time, calling blind artillery strikes on crossroads/sending recon units in the rear to destroy them would be the best way to limit a division's combat power (because you can destroy their transportation and slow down the flow of reinforcements), rather than actually fighting them. Transports would become the new CV's. The way it is currently set up puts all divisions on a level playing field in terms of deployment speed and getting into the fight, which is why it was done in the first place.

I'm very cautious to not make too many specific historical statements here on these forums due to all the people who know far more than me, but I'm 99% sure the Allies didn't evacuate trucks by means of teleporters .

Well, you never know. And I did say it's not a perfect solution, but I can see why it was done, and adding a RTB function to the trucks would be there for looks only. It's not written in stone it won't be there in release, but I don't see it as necessary either. My immersion certainly wasn't broken by the lack of it, but I do understand why some would want it.

 

[keynes2.0]

While watching the livestream I was surprised to see the motorized infantry when disembarked the vehicle disappear. What I loved about Wargame over Ruse was that when you disembark infantry the transport vehicle remained on the map and still able to move about. In Ruse the vehicles just disappeared when entering combat. Can Eugen please keep their troop carriers in the game? I hate to see this realism and strategic aspect about keeping the vehicles back or supporting attacks taken away from the game. (This also applies to artillery and anti-tank guns).

Detail for the sake of detail isn't the same as realism. Keeping trucks on the map just opens the door to:

1) Unrealistic cheese (suicide recon)
2) Unnecessary micro (gotta move these trucks to keep them out of combat)

While 1 can be fixed, the fix could itself cause problems or lead to unnecessary bloat. And if 2 is fixed the fix would essentially remove the mechanic from the game. So it is in the best case scenario a mechanic that requires no player interaction and has no effect. Such a mechanic should not be in the game.

 

[pras]

What will you want next? Infantry riding on tanks?

This is a good abstraction. Mind you, that a lot of units were marching on foot to this kind of engagements. On foot.

Gameplay wise this is good as well. Unless you want a parking lot simulator.

 

[Baane]

Detail for the sake of detail isn't the same as realism. Keeping trucks on the map just opens the door to:

1) Unrealistic cheese (suicide recon)
2) Unnecessary micro (gotta move these trucks to keep them out of combat)

While 1 can be fixed, the fix could itself cause problems or lead to unnecessary bloat. And if 2 is fixed the fix would essentially remove the mechanic from the game. So it is in the best case scenario a mechanic that requires no player interaction and has no effect. Such a mechanic should not be in the game.

You people keep repeating these memes. It's almost as if you believe that if you keep repeating them enough, they'll come true.

Disappearing trucks is NOT a good abstraction. It's a lazy one.

There have been a half-dozen good suggestions on how to deal with the big issues. Some of my favorites are:

1 - Motorized transport comes at a taxable premium. This premium is refunded to the player upon return of the truck to an extraction zone (for this game's purposes, the same zone as where the trucks came in in the first place.) This allows Infantry units to be potentially more cost-efficient than their armored counterparts (because, simply put, anyone here who knows TO&E is going to know that armored infantry is going to 100% destroy unarmored infantry man-for-man) and eliminates the impetus to use these trucks as suicide units, since you can recycle them into more units.

2 - Just make trucks blind as bats (seeing as how they have no optical equipment, and are crewed by one oe two guys who have to watch the road) and make them unable to influence, or cross, the front line. This makes it physically impossible to scout with them.

3 - Make trucks automatically fast-move to the point where they came into the map upon deploying their cargo. Again, makes it physically impossible to scout with them and removes the need to micro them.

Making trucks some kind of reverse transformer that morphs into a squad of riflemen is lazy. THere's no other way to put it. I just listed three potential solutions to the problem that everyone keeps regurgitating. Stop fanboying this decision as if it was the only way to deal with the issue.

 

[keynes2.0]

You people keep repeating these memes. It's almost as if you believe that if you keep repeating them enough, they'll come true.

I said that adding the trucks would add no player interaction to gameplay. You responded with three suggestions which minimize player interaction so that only one course of action is allowed.

Just take what you are saying and go one more step. "Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."

 

[axnone]

I just find it awkwardly weird that a game focused on realism implemented disappearing trucks.

There's like dozens of solutions to solve both kamikaze trucks and micro-intensive issues, yet they chose a rather lackluster one. Sad...

 

[keynes2.0]

If we were to follow that philosophy in game design,

"A game is a series of meaningful choices."
-Sid Meiers

there'd be zero (0) graphical display and, instead, just numbers.

You're fanboying laziness. Stop it.

"The great thing about putting words in other people's mouth is that you can be completely ridiculous and then attack the straw man you just made."
-You

 

[Baane]

"A game is a series of meaningful choices."
-Sid Meiers

Nothing to do with what is being discussed.

"The great thing about putting words in other people's mouth is that you can be completely ridiculous and then attack the straw man you just made."
-You

No where did I say those words.

Now, are you actually going to support your argument, or are you just going to spit dank memes and out-of-context misquotes?

 

[Dedistrub]

Having unarmed transports be unusable by the player once they've deployed their troops is the right idea, in my opinion, but for a different reason that first came to mind when I watched the stream that I don't think I saw anyone else mention. The "frontline" game mechanic. If you could stack all your unarmed transports along your front line, it'd give the illusion that your forces were much larger than they really are, and force people to go hunting in the woods for a single jeep just sitting there. Alternatively, they could be a massive annoyance if they were used to "encircle" an enemy held town by driving around the town from the other side. Now, all of your soldiers in that town are completely cut off and are going to surrender if you don't retreat... because a single unarmed jeep outflanked you (thinking about it, do supply vehicles in the game as it currently is effect the frontline?). I think that's a lot more gamebreaking and abstract than simply having the transports disappear once they've unloaded their troops, don't you? Of course, the easy way to alleviate this problem would be to have transports which are "empty" not influence the front anymore.

However, if it were up to me, I would have the vehicles become AI controlled and take the shortest route possible back to a deployment zone to leave the map, then be put in that player's logistics as a supply vehicle that can bring reinforcements and ammunition up to the front line. I think that would be more realistic than leaving them on the map, and also satisfies the need to justify spending points on them in the first place. How would you balance that against dedicated resupply vehicles that are going to cost more points? One way you could do it is to make them carry less supplies. Another thing you could do is make it so only transports similar to a resupply vehicle type can be used as a supply unit and they get added to the number of that supply vehicle that can be called in once they leave the map after deploying troops. This would prevent people from not bringing any logistics units at all and relying totally on their transports after they've dropped off units. If you wanted a realistic explanation for that you could argue that adding a logistics unit to a deck signifies that that battalion has a forward operating base nearby ready to provide more ammo and manpower to units fighting on the front.

 

[Harle]

Yeah, I'd much, much rather the unarmed transports became AI controlled and drove themselves back to the call-in area and off the map. Make them basically insubstantial, pointless to destroy, make it clear from their icon that they are unmanned. Make the AI enemy ignore them.

But I just can't say I like the way they disappear.

Heck, I'd even prefer the transport vehicles just stayed where you disembarked and couldn't be driven unless you put troops back in them. Then they couldn't be easily used for exploitative suicide strategies. At least, not without sacrificing an infantry unit.

 

[pras]

Yeah, I'd much, much rather the unarmed transports became AI controlled and drove themselves back to the call-in area and off the map. Make them basically insubstantial, pointless to destroy, make it clear from their icon that they are unmanned. Make the AI enemy ignore them.

But I just can't say I like the way they disappear.

Heck, I'd even prefer the transport vehicles just stayed where you disembarked and couldn't be driven unless you put troops back in them. Then they couldn't be easily used for exploitative suicide strategies. At least, not without sacrificing an infantry unit.

Imagine you mamanged to insert a recon element behind enemy line, and because they aren't careful enough you even manage to drive the squad there. Then you unload them and AI takes the truck through enemy squads. Now even if we take the idea of trucks being just "ghosts" that no one attacks, they will definitely see them. And there goes you sneaky infiltration. Enemy knows that there is something behind his line.

I just find it awkwardly weird that a game focused on realism implemented disappearing trucks.

There's like dozens of solutions to solve both kamikaze trucks and micro-intensive issues, yet they chose a rather lackluster one. Sad...

It does not focuses on realism. It takes certain realistic aspects and employs them in the game that is first of all meant to be enjoyably playable. Regarding the solutions to kamikaze trucks.
I would rather keep Eugen focused on important aspects of the game than wasting their time to think about this.

 

[safe-keeper]

Detail for the sake of detail isn't the same as realism. Keeping trucks on the map just opens the door to:

1) Unrealistic cheese (suicide recon)
2) Unnecessary micro (gotta move these trucks to keep them out of combat)

While 1 can be fixed, the fix could itself cause problems or lead to unnecessary bloat. And if 2 is fixed the fix would essentially remove the mechanic from the game. So it is in the best case scenario a mechanic that requires no player interaction and has no effect. Such a mechanic should not be in the game.

3) trucks being used as trucks, you know, to move troops around later.
4) as I said in another thread, added depth since you need to have one or more places those trucks go. You need to keep them within reach, but also safe.

1 can be easily fixed, yes. 2 isn't exactly a bad case of micro. Even in Wargame, it was as simple as shift+right-clicking some safe spot behind your lines after giving them an Unload command.

I just find it awkwardly weird that a game focused on realism implemented disappearing trucks.

There's like dozens of solutions to solve both kamikaze trucks and micro-intensive issues, yet they chose a rather lackluster one. Sad...

I have a bad feeling this game isn't going to be nearly as focused on realism as was Wargame. I'm hoping to be proven wrong, though, and I'm looking forward to the next streams where they will play more seriously, against each others instead of an east beta AI .

Imagine you mamanged to insert a recon element behind enemy line, and because they aren't careful enough you even manage to drive the squad there. Then you unload them and AI takes the truck through enemy squads. Now even if we take the idea of trucks being just "ghosts" that no one attacks, they will definitely see them. And there goes you sneaky infiltration. Enemy knows that there is something behind his line.

Very good point. Then again, I suppose that for infiltration, you would need to let them walk to their hiding spot, not drive a truck. But yes, excellent point, I can't believe I hadn't thought of that .

What will you want next? Infantry riding on tanks?

Actually happened in WWII, so sure. Not more micro or anything thaninfantry carried in APCs or trucks. Mind telling us why you dislike this instead of just being sarcastic ?

[Gameplay wise this is good as well. Unless you want a parking lot simulator.

Handling off-duty transports is a very small part of the game. The closest thing you get to tedious micro is having to pull them back a bit further if the enemy starts pushing through your frontline. Not exactly time-consuming busywork .