Well I have been reading ArmA CTI and stuff, and things doesnt sound hot enough for me, Im glad that BIS tried to keep things realistic, but steering away from the CTI's core without replacing it with a decent stuff isnt the brightest idea in the rack..
well here is my recommendation to keep both action, realism in place.
my points in suggesting this are,
Class based operatives (crew,pilot,infantry,officer,commando)
Mission templates for operative classes
Realistic base command
Realistic tactical mission conduction
Realistic material and equipment handling
Total and realistic modern warfare
Ways to implement this,
There should be domination areas on the map, like towns or other strategic points but I would recommend map should be "Hex"ed, rather than unbalanced town locations. This should help to maintain a certain Battle Front
These areas should be under command of Garrisons which are to be represented by a field base (few tents maybe) and the area under their control should be guarded by few AAA/SAM units, few mobile MBTs/IFVs. Let say each of this hexes are sized around 5-10 km2
Having mobile and static armoured units will give something to shoot for Allied Helicopters and Armor units, If allied units are just the infantry that has been inserted via APCs or Airborne means, they could move into demolish Garrison Base In this case, Garrison will deploy few infantry squads to fight off. So infantry will have some stuff to deal with.
Damaged Garrisons will need supply trucks to replace the losses, and these trucks should be sent from HQ, so they can be intercepted by the Allied Special Operations units that are operating behind the enemy lines
A Garrison base without enough supplies (this should also reduce the ammo/fuel carried by that garrison's defenders) would be more vulnerable to further attacks and it will collapse, so this garrison will pack and fall back to a hex behind
Now in this case, base commander can "create missions" for the operatives, for example if the HQ has enough amount of supplies to perform an offensive operation, Commander will assign missions to Operatives, missions could be (regarding to supplies and equipment availability)
Motorized Infantry Assault (Infantry offensive)
Mechanized Infantry Assault (Infantry offensive)
Armored Spearhead (Armored offensive to kill enemy units)
Airborne Infantry operations (Tactical Infantry insertion)
Air Cavalry Operations (Tank busting / SEAD / Deep Strike)
When a Offensive Mission operatives (players) suitable for this class will take the mission and will be equipped accordingly, Once they start their operation, they can be supported by other mission operatives if there are any...
Operation commander should be responsible for the tactical planning for the missions assigned to single enemy garrison, while operatives can be other players. So other than Base commander, there could be Lt. Commanders to command squads assigned to that mission (example: 2 groups of Infantry, 1 group of APC/IFVs, 1 group of Support units)
So operatives, usual combatants, could get their squads moving respectively to the orders of Lt.Commander, in case they die, they should GROUP SPAWN so tank and helicopter operations can be kept going on. While Lt.Commander can be travel with the support group (ex. 2 trucks, 1 M113 mobile c2 unit)
Well Lt.Commander can be included if the battle size gets large enough to battle with few enemy garrisons at the same time other wise Commander can command the battle..
During offensive, both operatives and commanders should keep eye on their equipment, if they start to lose too much units, they should pull back their units and re-organize. Tanks and helicopters dont come-by easily as well as the weapons.
If the HQ is low on supplies, they should wait for shipment from mainland which should occur in certain time intervals, if the battle is going in favor, shipped equipment will be more offensive oriented, other wise mainland will send defensive equipment.
And if HQ is still low on supplies, where they cant launch an offensive, Base commander will assign defensive missions to operatives like,
Infantry Area Patrol, (to increase security in controlled territory)
Infantry Area Hold&Support (to intercept enemy offensive ops)
Armored Recon&Scout Operations (limited offensive ops)
Airlift operations (to supply garrisons)
Well both in defense and offense, all operatives (Crew, Infantry and Pilots) will be able to perform operations,
Special Operations teams can be deployed at all times since they dont require much supplies.
Base commanders can be loaded with other strategic options, like setting forthcoming supplies to offensive or defensive, requistition of advanced units (ex: T62 to T72 to T80...) and also they can be put in charge of strategic decisions. placing artillery pieces, calling in airstrikes, paratroopers... reinforcing or re-balancing existing garrisons...
also there will be 3 or 4 garrisons per side (accoring to zone of control) and since they will have certain amount of force (also infantry they have will only go out (appear) when enemy forces are entering their zone) this will keep the existing unit count as low as possible to provide smooth and lagless play...
3 AAA/SAM (per garrison)
2 MBT/IFV patrol
1 Squad of base area guards
2 Squads will be created if attackers are located inside zone of control
this means 3x2 + 2x2 + 1x8 + 2x6 = 18 units/garrison if the area is clear, and will top at 30 units if the garrison is under attack
so, 18x3 (garrisons) +12 (1 garrison is on alert deployment) = 66
so 66 per side is not a very high number in OFP standarts,
attackers size could be
1 group of Infantry
1 group of Support
1 group of MBTs
let say 1x8 + 1x6 + 1x6 = 20 units... is also nothing so total existing units would barely reach at 200 globally including support trucks, base commanders and other misc. units.
will add more I got to go...
Is this what you think BIS should have done, or a mission idea that you've come up with?
Either way, it seems pretty loaded with large and good ideas, but you gotta remember that with a free-to-go-anywhere game like OFP or Armed Assault, your going to have to put up with people that just want to do their own thing.
It would be pretty cool to see this played out on a tournament event or something with people actually on TeamSpeak and working together for the good of the cause, but in a open server I just don't see it happening.
Your idea is pretty good, I would like to give you some suggestions on different things you could do by email if you don't mind.
For BIS has made with their CTI, or from what I've read of it, it sounds like a pretty straight forward, get to the point style mission. You idea would be praised, but the time needed to play and plan stuff out in a mission like that would take some time (this is why I think it would show its true strength in a tournament or competition).
I am interested in hearing more.
yeah and make sure u implement co-op and single player stuff as well
well this is what I think that new CTI should BE, because I dont like tanks and helicopters spawning from buildings, and also Command&Conquer style building placing is not something I like neither.
This should keep the battle in a unified way, so people wont wander pointlessly but they will be conducting their operations on their will according to the outline of the given mission, also this will keep the units in a certain location of the map, rather than scattered units all over the map (like a group consists of 2 tanks and few infantry and they are all over the place... useless)
for example a helicopter team on SEAD mission is supposed to hunt down enemy AAA/SAM units, supposedly support allied airborne insertions. and since garrisons will have set of air defence units, Helicopter pilots will certainly get something to shoot or got shot at, so everything will be in balance and in an organized way
on the other hand, think the battle on this island is a part of a bigger operation, so Homeland will send units and supplies accordingly to the situation. No Chief of Staff would sent valuable set of gunships while all the forces are on full retreat.
so briefly, there will be a chain of command, there will be supply based weapon/equipment/vehicle availability and an organized warfare because of attack/defence mission templates and proper garrison deployment and also special ops like, base supply and infiltration ops.
I will add more, its pretty late around here now, Im a little drunk and got to go... (I made some changes in first post...lower part)
Each Hex is representing an area of apprx. 5.00 Km2 area. In each of these Zone of Controls, A certain amount of Air Defence units and Armored patrols will be active,
Garrison field base should be located somewhere in the center of this hex. And garrison's defensive assets have to be fielded within this area.
If a garrison is completely destroyed, control of that Hex should be given to other side. The defeated side will choose a hex on retreat vector. There are black areas, I added them to squeze the corridor to keep the 3 Garrison area enough, and also those areas doesnt have any strategic value, (city/town...)
Motorized Infantry Assault,
Let say this mission consists of 2 groups of Infantry each equipped with a Truck, and 1 group of support unit equipped with an Ambulance, 2 recce vehicle and C2 jeep/tank, Infantry trucks should have some AT and AA launchers in cargo... Lt. Commander has to perform recon operations, deploy the squads, coordinate actions along with the other missions underway, (like Armored or Helicopter strike packages) to get maximum efficiency. While squad leaders have to deal with local tasks like deploying units, picking targets etc. And also Lt.Commander should be able to ABORT MISSION or CALL FOR REPLACEMENTS according to losses sustained.
In mechanized Infantry, trucks will be replaced with APCs/IFVs to increase mobility and fire power with cost of reduced stealth.
Infantry operations should be the premier operations at all, because they need delicate planning since they are slow and vulnerable but formidable as well. Helicopter and Armored strike packages should perform their operations on their own (without Lt.Com) but an Infantry Lt.Commander should be able to call in Armored/Rotary Wing units on his will.
So Infantry will be handling the main offensive operation while other units (Helicopters,tanks and specOps) will be just giving tactical support to suppress enemy actions. Because it's quite useless to bind these mobile units to a single location...
If the side is unable to perform offensive operations, deploying available units to reinforce Garrison areas could be useful to weaken enemy's ability to fight. Again this group can be consist of 2 Infantry squads with a carrier and a squad of support units. Lt.Commander is again responsible to locate enemy attack runs, and position his available units to cut enemy operations.
While in defence mode, Armored/Rotary Wing units would be grounded, and only support would come from garrisons itself, as AAA/SAM and limited amount of Armored units. So, in defence mode, Lt.Commander should be able to coordinate and position that garrisons defensive assets.
a cool idea but maybe a bit to complex, but if you can pull it off i'll be impressed. I myself like it the way cti works and i liked the way bis descibed their cti version so im open minded about different Cti versions. But the thing is Cti is about fun too and freedom to deploy troops and think "hmm where will we attack now..." Aswell as driving around in a civil car and placing out mines and sniping enemies around randomly
well Im able to script, but things I dont know, how to run a script only server sided, how to put buttons (figuring out right now) and also Im not very experienced in runtime created squad management...
anyways, this should be done by community or BIS, Im just giving the idea that would both provide realistic warfare without loosing the action and freedom sense. CTI is a veerryyy unorganized combat on the other hand it has a great potential to be realized.
I like the hexagon idea, but please for dear god don't leave out the mini islands
Yeah to see a great game as this with the Mass multiplayer wars with no command an control structure, I mean the potential here is unreal, unlike any other game out there.
This idea sounds great, now all that needs to be done is... Everything else
P.S. Love the photoshopped sahrani