Mission Mode Ideas

Have any ideas for mission mode, post them here:
here are a couple I was thinking about:


Escort/”Protect the President”: In his limo, gives fire bonus to surrounding units.
Delta Mission: Terrorist/Hostage rescue scenario
Timed missions: Self explanitory
Find and Capture the Flag: Flag randomly spawns on map, find the flag and bring it home to win.
Briefcase Nuke: Identify, neutralize, disarm.

Great idea

The game models will mainly change depending in the way the map is built (some maps can be used for several kinds of missions).

i think some game modes should iclude buildable structures, only not the rubish ones in ZH that 'train' infantry and 'build' tanks during battle . but using defense structures that are used in real life.

for some defense based missions, instead of just garrisoning your troops in feeble buildings which crumble easily, construction teams can build light fortifacations (nothing extreme like bunkers, only things which can be realistically built during a battle. eg. sandbags, barricades, MG positions AT positions, etc.) to help your troops hold their ground. infantry and armour will still be brought into the field by the usual method.

even though i heard you plan on adding light strucures like sandbags in regular gameplay, there should be a mode that gives a few more construction options to simulate a position being dug-in, and to accomodate ZH players into non-base building gameplay style.

Pyrospastiac wrote:i think some game modes should iclude buildable structures, only not the rubish ones in ZH that 'train' infantry and 'build' tanks during battle . but using defense structures that are used in real life.

for some defense based missions, instead of just garrisoning your troops in feeble buildings which crumble easily, construction teams can build light fortifacations (nothing extreme like bunkers, only things which can be realistically built during a battle. eg. sandbags, barricades, MG positions AT positions, etc.) to help your troops hold their ground. infantry and armour will still be brought into the field by the usual method.

even though i heard you plan on adding light strucures like sandbags in regular gameplay, there should be a mode that gives a few more construction options to simulate a position being dug-in, and to accomodate ZH players into non-base building gameplay style.

i think we will use garissonned cities etc. as our "base" to defense, and there will be some buildable structures, like sandbags etc.

grtz

Pyro Pyro Pyro, You Naive Simple Boy ()

It Is Included (From The Very Start) Pretend You're Holding Positions You Can Fortify Them:

At Start: The Most Basic Fortifications (Which Take The Most Little Time)
Examples: Garrisonible Sandbags, Foxholes Etc... (Which Is Logic, These Are Weak But Very Reliable When Correctly Used)


Later : When You'll Advance On And On In Game You Will Have Access To More Reliable Fortifications
Examples: MG Fortifications, Barbwire, More Sandbags, AT Fort., AA Fort, Barricades, Blocks, Minefields, Traps Etc... (Will Take More Time And Funds)

On And On: You'll Have Access To Really Fortified Positions Like Bunkers, Maybe Gatling Weapons, Heavier AT And AA, Stationary Mortars, Pillboxes Etc... (But These Will Cost You A Lot Of Funds And Time

U Get The Point, Though We Haven't Began Anythin In It, Just A Though The Second Wave Of Forts Will Unlock More Than The Rest, If Ya Have Any Ideas Of Forts, Post It, It May Be New Or Make Us Think Of new Ones Our Selves

Precisely.

Fear not, the defensive player is still capable to put up some fierce defense (we want to make sure both the offensive and defensive players can play by their gaming style).

The new "constructors" will be engineering units.

i have a great idea about "surrender" and "SAR-missions" logics (and something with dogs ), but this i will explain to you guys later on, since i really need to get some sleep now and it is quite a big idea, so i ll have to type lots and lots of words

greetz and good night

Have a good evening

Snake wrote: Precisely.

Fear not, the defensive player is still capable to put up some fierce defense (we want to make sure both the offensive and defensive players can play by their gaming style).

The new "constructors" will be engineering units.

Nice, But Will Ordinary Units Able The Fortify A Position?

so now i will try to explain my idea:

* I think it should be nice if u can surreender units, by just clicking a button, and/or coding a system, if the units are practicly abandonned by the player, or they suffer a terrible amount of losts that they desert you. This would be only by standard army squads, not special forces or marines, since they won't do that, because they are slightly more well trained This can be randomized i think... e.g.: an infantry squad, that normally consists of about 10 units, walked into an ambush. 8 of 10 died, and the only two living are wounded. They don't listen to their commander anymore (you) a,d they just run away, hoping they survive. They walk in an ambush again, but they can find cover. They surrender themselves with a white flag and are taken as prisoners. This makes, according to me, a nice secondairy objective.(Rescue the prisoners). Same thing can be done with ejected pilots, landed deep in enemy territory, behind enemy lines. This can be a campaign mission too, but i would like to see it in skirmish mode too.
This idea is based on Cossacs 2 : napoleonic wars.

*Taking and looking for prisoners can be done on serveral ways (heat seaking scans...). So also with specialized dogs. I think this is something good for Russia, since it's cheaper then the highly advanced scans etc.. This idea is based on Call of duty 4: modern warfare. (The dogs in cod4 can kill you )So if you played call of duty 4, you will certainly recognize it .

so this is basicly it, let me know what do y'all think

greetz

About The POW Idea, We Want To Create A POW System In TAoW, But Some Coding Issues, Though If We Fix It, It WILL DEFIANTLY BE INCLUDED!!!!!!!!!

About The Combat Animals, I Think It's A No Go...

F-16FightingFalcon wrote:so now i will try to explain my idea:

* I think it should be nice if u can surreender units, by just clicking a button, and/or coding a system, if the units are practicly abandonned by the player, or they suffer a terrible amount of losts that they desert you. This would be only by standard army squads, not special forces or marines, since they won't do that, because they are slightly more well trained This can be randomized i think... e.g.: an infantry squad, that normally consists of about 10 units, walked into an ambush. 8 of 10 died, and the only two living are wounded. They don't listen to their commander anymore (you) a,d they just run away, hoping they survive. They walk in an ambush again, but they can find cover. They surrender themselves with a white flag and are taken as prisoners. This makes, according to me, a nice secondairy objective.(Rescue the prisoners). Same thing can be done with ejected pilots, landed deep in enemy territory, behind enemy lines. This can be a campaign mission too, but i would like to see it in skirmish mode too.
This idea is based on Cossacs 2 : napoleonic wars.

I like the POW idea as a secondary objective. It definitely has merit and is a worthy idea to look into. I would also like to see this in skirmish mode as well. Hopefully any coding issues can be resolved on this idea. I always wondered why didn't Westwood go down that path. It seems like they had the idea with the POW truck and the detention center, but never followed through with the idea.

F-16FightingFalcon wrote:*Taking and looking for prisoners can be done on serveral ways (heat seaking scans...). So also with specialized dogs. I think this is something good for Russia, since it's cheaper then the highly advanced scans etc.. This idea is based on Call of duty 4: modern warfare. (The dogs in cod4 can kill you )So if you played call of duty 4, you will certainly recognize it .

Personally, I like the idea of dogs in the mod. I played one of beng's mods, where he had buildable dogs. They had a very wide guard radius and were excellent in guarding my base structures in the game. I don't know if they had any stealth detection, because I didn't play the mod for too long, but it would make sense that I could detect stealth.

I'm Not Saying It's Not A Good Idea, There's A Lot Of Mil. Trained Dogs These Days And Will Continually Be Used.
But There Roles Is Different, They Don't Combat. So It Would Be Cool But Difficult To Include (Coding)

I agree adding dogs would be nice they would be sooooo useful in detecting traps and other nasty surprises

Well Military Dogs Can Be Used To Intimidate An Enemy Garrisoned Or Not
They Can Be Used To Guard POWs
They Used To (Now They Don't) In The Old Days, They Used To Train St. Bernards To Help Fallen Soldier Of The Snow By First Aid.
Though Mine Detection Isn't An Option, There's A Lot Of Stuff hat I Haven't Said Yet, But Trust Me They're One Heck Of An Aid!

James100 wrote:



On And On: You'll Have Access To Really Fortified Positions Like Bunkers, Maybe Gatling Weapons, Heavier AT And AA, Stationary Mortars, Pillboxes Etc... (But These Will Cost You A Lot Of Funds And Time

U Get The Point, Though We Haven't Began Anythin In It, Just A Though The Second Wave Of Forts Will Unlock More Than The Rest, If Ya Have Any Ideas Of Forts, Post It, It May Be New Or Make Us Think Of new Ones Our Selves

im not sure about bunkers simply because they're built before battles, not during them! if TAOW's supposed to be a was sim, bunkers should be on maps at the start or not buildable at all.

as for engineers, you need them, for most of the advanced constuctions, but you shouldn't need them for everything, (i dont think it takes an engineer to put up a sandbag wall ) so basic infantry can build most of the tier 1 and some of the tier 2 defense strucures like sandbags, foxholes, and barbed wire. engineers would be needed for AT positions, mine fields etc...

Pyrospastiac wrote:im not sure about bunkers simply because they're built before battles, not during them! if TAOW's supposed to be a was sim, bunkers should be on maps at the start or not buildable at all.

I'm sure there are military engineers out there that would disagree with you on that point. While there may little construction at the very front of the lines, there would most likely be construction of bunkers and other defenses, support and supply facilities, etc... further back.

Pyrospastiac wrote:as for engineers, you need them, for most of the advanced constuctions, but you shouldn't need them for everything, (i don't think it takes an engineer to put up a sandbag wall ) so basic infantry can build most of the tier 1 and some of the tier 2 defense structures like sandbags, foxholes, and barbed wire. engineers would be needed for AT positions, mine fields etc...

I agree with you totally on this point. If you look at C&C3 that's exactly what they did. Regular GDI infantry could build a sandbag bunker with a fancy top cover, while the engineer went out and captured and repaired crap. (not saying engineer should capture anything in the mod)

so the pow idea is good, u guys think?
The dog-ida was just a very little addon, but maybe after the beta, then i can maybe be included...
And if u have taken prisoners, it would be quite nice to "built" improvised "prisons" or something like that, so that they are guarded etc.
I think this would be a great secondairy object, that depends on the battlefield conditions. So if you have plenty of time to rescue them and u will get a bonus then too(i think) or if u don't have time, and your main priority is Killing the enemy player
then u can always rescue them later.
And maybe if u are winning, the enemy pushes up the presure by executing your prisoners etc.

greetz

F-16 That Was Our First Intention, The POW Idea Is In
But We're Not 100% Sure, Coz Of The Coding Issues, If They're Fixed, Then It Is Definitely In-Clu-Ded

James100 wrote:

Snake wrote: Precisely.

Fear not, the defensive player is still capable to put up some fierce defense (we want to make sure both the offensive and defensive players can play by their gaming style).

The new "constructors" will be engineering units.

Nice, But Will Ordinary Units Able The Fortify A Position?

Yeah, standard infantry units will be able to garrison many kinds of defenses (such as sandbag walls). This time garrisoned infantry will gain more bonuses for being in a safe/fortified location.

F-16FightingFalcon wrote:so now i will try to explain my idea:

* I think it should be nice if u can surreender units, by just clicking a button, and/or coding a system, if the units are practicly abandonned by the player, or they suffer a terrible amount of losts that they desert you. This would be only by standard army squads, not special forces or marines, since they won't do that, because they are slightly more well trained This can be randomized i think... e.g.: an infantry squad, that normally consists of about 10 units, walked into an ambush. 8 of 10 died, and the only two living are wounded. They don't listen to their commander anymore (you) a,d they just run away, hoping they survive. They walk in an ambush again, but they can find cover. They surrender themselves with a white flag and are taken as prisoners. This makes, according to me, a nice secondairy objective.(Rescue the prisoners). Same thing can be done with ejected pilots, landed deep in enemy territory, behind enemy lines. This can be a campaign mission too, but i would like to see it in skirmish mode too.

F-16FightingFalcon wrote:so the pow idea is good, u guys think?
The dog-ida was just a very little addon, but maybe after the beta, then i can maybe be included...
And if u have taken prisoners, it would be quite nice to "built" improvised "prisons" or something like that, so that they are guarded etc.
I think this would be a great secondairy object, that depends on the battlefield conditions. So if you have plenty of time to rescue them and u will get a bonus then too(i think) or if u don't have time, and your main priority is Killing the enemy player
then u can always rescue them later.
And maybe if u are winning, the enemy pushes up the presure by executing your prisoners etc.

greetz

James100 wrote:F-16 That Was Our First Intention, The POW Idea Is In
But We're Not 100% Sure, Coz Of The Coding Issues, If They're Fixed, Then It Is Definitely In-Clu-Ded

Absolutely, we want to include a POW / Surrendering logic as well

It is confirmed that pilots, and other allied troops can be generated as secondary objectives (in order for the player to rescue them for instance), though I'm afraid that probabilities are definitely against us on the Prisoner of War (POW) coding process itself (many modders have tried to include such a system in the past with a very, very limited success so I can't be too optimistic on this one as chances are very sketchy ). Just like James explained, what is separating TAOW from the POW inclusion is a barrage of coding though if we somehow manage to improvise, we'll definitively include it

Tusker2Zero wrote:

F-16FightingFalcon wrote:*Taking and looking for prisoners can be done on serveral ways (heat seaking scans...). So also with specialized dogs. I think this is something good for Russia, since it's cheaper then the highly advanced scans etc.. This idea is based on Call of duty 4: modern warfare. (The dogs in cod4 can kill you )So if you played call of duty 4, you will certainly recognize it .

so this is basicly it, let me know what do y'all think

greetz

Personally, I like the idea of dogs in the mod. I played one of beng's mods, where he had buildable dogs. They had a very wide guard radius and were excellent in guarding my base structures in the game. I don't know if they had any stealth detection, because I didn't play the mod for too long, but it would make sense that I could detect stealth.

James100 wrote:I'm Not Saying It's Not A Good Idea, There's A Lot Of Mil. Trained Dogs These Days And Will Continually Be Used.
But There Roles Is Different, They Don't Combat. So It Would Be Cool But Difficult To Include (Coding)

Pathfinder wrote:I agree adding dogs would be nice they would be sooooo useful in detecting traps and other nasty surprises

James100 wrote:Well Military Dogs Can Be Used To Intimidate An Enemy Garrisoned Or Not
They Can Be Used To Guard POWs
They Used To (Now They Don't) In The Old Days, They Used To Train St. Bernards To Help Fallen Soldier Of The Snow By First Aid.
Though Mine Detection Isn't An Option, There's A Lot Of Stuff hat I Haven't Said Yet, But Trust Me They're One Heck Of An Aid!

I'm afraid that military dogs are too "exotic" for TAOW (at least as directly controlled units).

Dogs themselves are definitely possible as ZH units (several mods included them as playable and buildable units), the trouble is making them look and act realistically alongside the other units plus many coding issues (making them attack realistically, etc.) not to mention that they would require many animations which would take a rather considerable amount of time due to the fact that it's a very different unit. I'd say it's much easier to include subs than realistic dogs in ZH (at least without making them look silly, last time I used a dog in Zero Hour I literally exploded from laughing so much and to compare the creature to a hog ).

One possible application I think might be possible is probably including dogs (and possibly other animals) as environment "objects" (basic animations only, kinda like a neutral and "civilian" unit). About including general attack/recon dogs I'm afraid it's a no-go (a rather miscellaneous unit for TAOW).

Tusker2Zero wrote:I like the POW idea as a secondary objective. It definitely has merit and is a worthy idea to look into. I would also like to see this in skirmish mode as well. Hopefully any coding issues can be resolved on this idea. I always wondered why didn't Westwood go down that path. It seems like they had the idea with the POW truck and the detention center, but never followed through with the idea.

Yeah, they were going to implement a POW system but, just like Naval Warfare, they scraped the idea, possibly because of delays (they probably had to leave these concepts due to release dates and possible EA pressure ).

One thing's for certain, they had clear intentions to include both the POW and Naval logics in Zero Hour (we can see that by analyzing already implemented codes which are also source of certain problems because most of those unfinished logics were hard coded and are generally and effectively locked away from modders ).

The game Act of War (Direct Action and High Treason) had an excellent POW system, enemy soldiers could be wounded and could randomly give up to be taken into custody by the adversary faction (ejected pilots and vehicle crew members could also be captured after their vehicle's destruction), that POW system is a great source of inspiration for us

Pyrospastiac wrote:

James100 wrote:On And On: You'll Have Access To Really Fortified Positions Like Bunkers, Maybe Gatling Weapons, Heavier AT And AA, Stationary Mortars, Pillboxes Etc... (But These Will Cost You A Lot Of Funds And Time

U Get The Point, Though We Haven't Began Anythin In It, Just A Though The Second Wave Of Forts Will Unlock More Than The Rest, If Ya Have Any Ideas Of Forts, Post It, It May Be New Or Make Us Think Of new Ones Our Selves

im not sure about bunkers simply because they're built before battles, not during them! if TAOW's supposed to be a was sim, bunkers should be on maps at the start or not buildable at all.

as for engineers, you need them, for most of the advanced constuctions, but you shouldn't need them for everything, (i dont think it takes an engineer to put up a sandbag wall ) so basic infantry can build most of the tier 1 and some of the tier 2 defense strucures like sandbags, foxholes, and barbed wire. engineers would be needed for AT positions, mine fields etc...

Tusker2Zero wrote:

Pyrospastiac wrote:im not sure about bunkers simply because they're built before battles, not during them! if TAOW's supposed to be a was sim, bunkers should be on maps at the start or not buildable at all.

I'm sure there are military engineers out there that would disagree with you on that point. While there may little construction at the very front of the lines, there would most likely be construction of bunkers and other defenses, support and supply facilities, etc... further back.

Pyrospastiac wrote:as for engineers, you need them, for most of the advanced constuctions, but you shouldn't need them for everything, (i don't think it takes an engineer to put up a sandbag wall ) so basic infantry can build most of the tier 1 and some of the tier 2 defense structures like sandbags, foxholes, and barbed wire. engineers would be needed for AT positions, mine fields etc...

I agree with you totally on this point. If you look at C&C3 that's exactly what they did. Regular GDI infantry could build a sandbag bunker with a fancy top cover, while the engineer went out and captured and repaired crap. (not saying engineer should capture anything in the mod)

Bunkers and other "Heavy Duty" defensive structures won't be able to be built/deployed by players in game. Such structures are an integral part of the map itself (placed by mappers) and can be considered to be a tactical location (usually offering the defensive player some great defensive cover, specially when the structure is carefully placed), plus the variety of bunkers will vary this time.

ZH only had those extremely small sized Bunkers, this time expect a wide bunker variety (various sizes and varying armor levels [some bunkers are much more protected than others, some may be able to be garrisoned in order for occupying soldiers to operate an anti tank weapon, grenade or heavy machine guns, etc.]).

Players will be also able to deploy certain small sized sandbag bunkers with weapons (which can be operated after garrisoning the said structure).

I would like to see a briefcase nuke mission, or maybe taking over a boomer with spec ops. Escort missions are a must. The missions in my mind should really showcase the usefulness of each weapon in a given situation.
For instance, like having a Green Beret unit that can recruit civilians so you can enter a situation with very little forces, recruit and a paradrop of arms later and you have your own personal mass of ground forces.

Excellent suggestions

Even if we aren't fully capable of adapting a complex "game mode" to the skirmishes then we'll either include such missions as campaign missions (normally more complex than a skirmish) or "Special Skirmishes" (special maps, kinda like special themed skirmishes).

I remember there's a POW in GLA campaign in ZH...I think it was the last campaign mission for GLA. maybe it can help in POW concerns in the mod...

Yup, we want to include a similar logic for certain missions.

Let's say the enemy is holding a rebel leader, if the player successfully rescues and extracts that POW to safety then the Rebels will assist the player in the course of the battle (with forces and intel/information).

maybe some type of infiltration missions... where you must sneak and not get caught, but have to steal something valuable. Maybe have units that follow along predetermined paths and if they spot you, will fire on you. Im not exactly talking Metal Gear Solid, or Commandos, but something involving mass scale infiltrations and/or retrievals.