Arlo - Do you all remember the game Close Combat by Microsoft (kinda like Battle Academy for iPads)? Are you thinking is that how they would work for Aces High players? Sort of a commander viewpoint where you control resources?
I suppose I imagine a more automated thing. The player's part in it is really just picking the type of force that would be loaded and dropped. What the troops do, once deployed would be more or less hard-coded into the game. Sure, maybe player direction by point and click could be done but that would entail vanishing C-47s or half-tracks. So, with my original idea, you select a type of squad (or squads if you are flying a formation of 3 C-47s). With the formation option you could mix and match each squad's role. With a capture squad you would have the same AI role as the game has now - 10 guys dropped within range of the map-room, running for the capture. With a rifle squad you have 10 guys landing, whether in the open or in a tree-line or behind a hill, waiting to ambush anything they can (enemy troops via rifles or machine-gun position, enemy vehicles via grenade or bazooka). There was a wish thread asking for a possible forward base of operations feature where temp air fields or vehicle bases could be built (this would be more useful in Pacific settings, I think, when it comes to events) - engineers/sea-bees could be dropped or trucked in.
Now, if players want to participate in a boots on ground role (something I haven't thought be all that good for the game, for the most part) I would recommend a player-commander of troops attaching much like a gunner. This does complicate things a bit right off the bat because now you need a player driver/pilot. But .... I could see this. As already in game, the pilot/driver player selects the load for the vehicle or plane. Either the pilot can announce that there's a troop bus ready and where he's taking off from (probably causing a dozen players to line up to request being a platoon or squad leader - once selected, no more requests pop up and players get the message 'Sorry, this position has been filled') or the system could auto-gen a message. If nobody volunteers, it's all AI (and stays that way once the plane hits the runway). If someone does volunteer then the squad/platoon leader is responsible for that unit of men from drop and deployment on. Now that I think about it, the player troop commander could possibly direct that unit as he sees fit (screen orders to capture, defend, attack with whatever that unit is programmed to use). So that would override the AI mission selection made by pilot/driver. One thing to consider - only one squad can be assigned to capture - once that selection is made, that role cannot be assigned to other squads even by a player leader (unless you change it before the troops drop, as in the 'capture' drone gets popped and no chutes have deployed - then you can change one of the surviving C-47s/squads to the capture role).
Now, the FPS role of the player need not be overly intricate. They would probably be armed with a sidearm and maybe a carbine or submachinegun. The ability to re-arm with another weapon or to collect more ammo may get complex (without an option for infantry re-supplies ... which, well ...). With current FPS WWII games the player may find a weapon 'easter egg' and collect it (or, as many are now doing, switch - a preferable option, to me). But that would entail placing thousands upon thousand of easter eggs all over the map/terrain. Or .... an object (weapon/ammo) could appear the moment an AI soldier is killed, but again, unless the duration is very limited (I would suggest no more than 30 seconds - run, Forrest, run) then the potential for object litter all over the map could be problematic. I do believe the game would naturally become 'Infantry Low' for a period of time.
BUT .... then there would be reason to model ord specifically designed to take out infantry.
I dunno, perhaps a mix of FPS and what we're discussing could be interesting .... IF such could be practically coded for Aces High without losing what we like most about the current game.
(As you can see, from the time this post was started to the last edit, I've reassessed the potential.)
