Noncombatants and REMFS in CMx2

[BloodyBucket]

Given the deeper but not so broad nature of the modular system that appears to be in store for CMx2, is there any thought being given to giving some representation of non combat units?

A "Bulge" module would seem to need rear echelon US units, headquarters and ad hoc rifle formations, for example

The 1:1 representation might open up the possibility of wounded needing medical support.

A lot of more modern conflicts revolve around "hearts and minds" issues that would increase the need for representing civilians/refugees in game.

Is this in line with the more detail/less scope philosophy?

[Kurtz]

I don't think non-combatants are really relevant in a "CM-scale battle". The survivors come out of the ruins or woods when the fighting is over, and the refugees clogging the roads affect the time/chance of reinforcements showing up.

REMfs could be represented by lots of different HQs and some scattered conscript rifle squads with low ammo. I see no real need for Combat Mission: cooks, clerks and civilans" :D

[BloodyBucket]

In a WWII setting I agree that the non-combatants on a company scale are probably a non-issue, but in some later conflicts they figure very prominently, and have been objectives or targets.

Since we know CMx2 is likely not limited to WWII (at least down the road) the question of civilians, insurgents, and rear area troops is worth thinking about, as they would present some interesting design and perhaps even some ethical questions.

[Panzer76]

BFC has said that they will NOT include civilians in their games. I do not think this has changed with CMx2.

[hellfish]

One of the reasons I'd like to have a scripting language for scenario designers is so that we can have the flexibility to create REMF-like behaviour. For example, try making an ambush mission in CMBB where patisans ambush a German supply column. In my experience, it's enormously difficult because the AI is always "switched on" - meaning, they don't follow the roads, they're response times are nearly immediate and the infantry is rarely embarked in the trucks or halftracks.

Or likewise, I've tried to make a mission where American paratroopers assault a German artillery battery. The instant the Americans are detected, the supply and support vehicles I've given the Germans take off to the far side of the map, when a more likely course of action might be to have the Germans jump out of their trucks and fight back.

At the very least I'd like to make the AI behaviours a little less expectant of imminent combat and a little more "lazy". I realize this might be beyond the scope of CM - where it's not a fair fight by any means, but it's still fun.

What I'd like to do is set up, at least, terrain objects like destructable empty trucks or command tents or something similar to simulate a command post. The rest can probably be done with what we have now.

[Battlefront.com]

Noncombatants are on our list of things to put into the CMx2 engine. We would have liked to get them into the first release, but it is just one too many things to bite off right now. Agreed that in some settings they are more relevant than others.

The Editor will provide tools to better "script" behavior.

Steve

[BloodyBucket]

Thanks for the bone!

[Aacooper]

I would think noncombatants would be scenery that aren't interacted with, kind of like the background bird noises. Every once in a while, a family would run from building to building. Maybe they would make noise, but not show up as anything shootable.

You could do the same thing with farm animals.

[Sequoia]

I can see noncombatants (assuming Steve meant civilians) important in a Viet Nam game for example. You make contact with humans in the terrain up ahead but you don't know if they're hostile or not until you're close enough to ID them or they open fire. You would also lose points for infilicting civilain casualties.

[SgtMuhammed]

I would love to see noncombatants in the way of Rear area and support troops but I would balk at including civilians as a base unit.

Quite frankly their fate didn't really matter much in WWII. As for later conflicts I can see a need.

One other thing along these lines, will it be possible to place destroyed equipment to simulate old battlefields? This could be especially useful if vehicles count as cover.

[Aacooper]

You know, re-reading my post I didn't mean to equate civilians with farm animals. After all, I am a civilian. For most CMx2-type games I could see, civilians won't make a difference. It's not like we'll play hostage rescue scenarios.

Even though civilian casualties became (to sound blunt) propaganda points in later wars, I believe both sides, on the CMx2 (battalion and smaller) level fired away rather than risk dying. Imagine a Mogadishu scenario. Even though there were plenty of rules of engagement in Somalia, in the sole CMx2 Somalia scenario, it seems as though safeties were off.

[Zalgiris 1410]

I don't want to have to deal with civilians in CMx2, farm animals for scenery may be, but battle debris placed on maps providing cover / object effects definately I would like to have them in CMx2 for sure.

On the subject of REMF, I absolutely would like to be able to have them depicted in CMx2 as some kind of nameable cobbled together rear or alarm ad hoc formation. Also rear and support posts could be modelled to allow for relavently interesting tactical operations.

[lucero1148]

I think having non combatants would make CMX2 more thought provoking as a game. Especially in an operation type battle where if a certain pyschological threshold is breached atrocities against civilians would transform them into partisans in future battles of a operation. That might be pretty complexto do but it would make civilians a wild card in an operation. If one side killed too many civilians than civilians would rise up and bear arms against the offending player. That would work for WWII or modern era wars.

For those that wouldn't want to deal with civilians or noncombatants then the feature could be toggled off.
Patrick